*

Offline Lord Dave

  • *
  • Posts: 7653
  • Grumpy old man.
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #1060 on: March 31, 2017, 06:17:33 AM »
Wow, I really can't think of a reason why someone would offer testimony in exchange for immunity from prosecution unless they feel they did something they would be prosecuted for. Hm.

TTIOH, please rationalize this from the perspective of a Trump supporter. I can always use a good laugh.
He's probably afraid the democratic maj-


Oh wait, nevermind.
If you are going to DebOOonK an expert then you have to at least provide a source with credentials of equal or greater relevance. Even then, it merely shows that some experts disagree with each other.

*

Offline Lord Dave

  • *
  • Posts: 7653
  • Grumpy old man.
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #1061 on: March 31, 2017, 07:35:03 AM »
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/mar/30/trump-russia-fake-news-senate-intelligence-committee

Well... that's interesting news... I mean, not like we didn't already KNOW it but still... good to know that Trump was helping Russia, one way or another.
If you are going to DebOOonK an expert then you have to at least provide a source with credentials of equal or greater relevance. Even then, it merely shows that some experts disagree with each other.

*

Offline Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 16073
  • (◕˽ ◕ ✿)
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #1062 on: March 31, 2017, 04:22:06 PM »
Wow, I really can't think of a reason why someone would offer testimony in exchange for immunity from prosecution unless they feel they did something they would be prosecuted for.
I can think of one very easily, although I'm not suggesting this is the case:

The current Polish government has recently been quite trigger-happy with prosecuting media outlets and individuals for "spreading misinformation" about government activities. Sometimes it actually is misinformation, but more often it's just dissenting views. Naturally, not many of these cases actually lead to a conviction, but they're still very damaging to people's livelihoods. Combine that with the fact that the two governments aren't all that dissimilar and, welp, there's a possibility.
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Twitter and Facebook!

If we are not speculating then we must assume

*

Offline Lord Dave

  • *
  • Posts: 7653
  • Grumpy old man.
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #1063 on: March 31, 2017, 05:03:52 PM »
Apparently Trump is encouraging him to do this and testify.

And the Senate has said "Nope, not gonna let you"

So I'm all sorts of confused.  But maybe Trump honestly believes their "I don't wanna be witch hunted" story.  Or it's reverse psychology.
If you are going to DebOOonK an expert then you have to at least provide a source with credentials of equal or greater relevance. Even then, it merely shows that some experts disagree with each other.

*

Offline Roundy

  • Abdicator of the Zetetic Council
  • *
  • Posts: 4183
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #1064 on: March 31, 2017, 05:51:12 PM »
The current Polish government has recently been quite trigger-happy with prosecuting media outlets and individuals for "spreading misinformation" about government activities. Sometimes it actually is misinformation, but more often it's just dissenting views. Naturally, not many of these cases actually lead to a conviction, but they're still very damaging to people's livelihoods. Combine that with the fact that the two governments aren't all that dissimilar and, welp, there's a possibility.

This is not what I asked for.  I wasn't looking for a reasonable person's evaluation. >:(

But seriously, my own imagination has been running wild with seemingly plausible possibilities since I posed the question.

Apparently Trump is encouraging him to do this and testify.

And the Senate has said "Nope, not gonna let you"

So I'm all sorts of confused.  But maybe Trump honestly believes their "I don't wanna be witch hunted" story.  Or it's reverse psychology.

This isn't unusual for Trump.  He always does what he doesn't think you're going to expect him to do.  He thinks he's throwing his opponents off-balance (he's right sometimes, of course).

As for the Senate, idk.  Some people don't think this was a serious offer.  It still superficially casts Flynn in a negative light (something that can't help but damage his reputation) which seems unusual for him to do without a good reason to me.
Dr. Frank is a physicist. He says it's impossible. So it's impossible.
My friends, please remember Tom said this the next time you fall into the trap of engaging him, and thank you. :)

Re: Trump
« Reply #1065 on: March 31, 2017, 07:21:02 PM »
Wow, I really can't think of a reason why someone would offer testimony in exchange for immunity from prosecution unless they feel they did something they would be prosecuted for. Hm.

TTIOH, please rationalize this from the perspective of a Trump supporter. I can always use a good laugh.

I don't even know if this is real or fake news. I'm going to reserve my judgement until this is verified as true. With the media salivating for any story they can get their hands on regarding Russia, it's not reasonable to expect them to do their due diligence before publishing a story. I've read the release by his lawyer and the word immunity never comes up. I'm not a lawyer, so I'm not qualified to read between any lines.

If he feels that an insignificant, non committal phone conversation with a Russian Ambassador who has met and spoken with many figures in the US from both sides of the aisle amount to treason in the eyes of a politically motivated congressional committee, than I guess it makes sense for him to try to protect himself.

Re: Trump
« Reply #1066 on: March 31, 2017, 07:21:54 PM »
It is exactly what it is described as, a witch hunt. Still no evidence has been disclosed.

*

Offline Lord Dave

  • *
  • Posts: 7653
  • Grumpy old man.
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #1067 on: March 31, 2017, 08:21:07 PM »
Wow, I really can't think of a reason why someone would offer testimony in exchange for immunity from prosecution unless they feel they did something they would be prosecuted for. Hm.

TTIOH, please rationalize this from the perspective of a Trump supporter. I can always use a good laugh.

I don't even know if this is real or fake news. I'm going to reserve my judgement until this is verified as true. With the media salivating for any story they can get their hands on regarding Russia, it's not reasonable to expect them to do their due diligence before publishing a story. I've read the release by his lawyer and the word immunity never comes up. I'm not a lawyer, so I'm not qualified to read between any lines.

If he feels that an insignificant, non committal phone conversation with a Russian Ambassador who has met and spoken with many figures in the US from both sides of the aisle amount to treason in the eyes of a politically motivated congressional committee, than I guess it makes sense for him to try to protect himself.
It... it IS confirmed.
Like everywhere.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/03/31/trump-backs-flynn-says-ex-adviser-should-seek-immunity-amid-witch-hunt.html

See?  You trust Fox, right?
If you are going to DebOOonK an expert then you have to at least provide a source with credentials of equal or greater relevance. Even then, it merely shows that some experts disagree with each other.

*

Offline Snupes

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 1957
  • Counting wolves in your paranoiac intervals
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #1068 on: March 31, 2017, 09:36:42 PM »


?????????
There are cigarettes in joints. You don't smoke it by itself.

*

Online honk

  • *
  • Posts: 3347
  • resident goose
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #1069 on: March 31, 2017, 09:47:35 PM »
Dinner with someone of a different gender always leads to sex.
ur retartet but u donut even no it and i walnut tell u y

Re: Trump
« Reply #1070 on: April 01, 2017, 04:18:44 PM »
I have visited from prestigious research institutions of the highest caliber, to which only our administrator holds with confidence.

*

Offline rooster

  • *
  • Posts: 4139
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #1071 on: April 01, 2017, 04:20:50 PM »
I always end up having sex with my good guy friend after we have lunch together.

*

Offline Roundy

  • Abdicator of the Zetetic Council
  • *
  • Posts: 4183
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #1072 on: April 01, 2017, 04:41:35 PM »
It's just the polite thing to do.
Dr. Frank is a physicist. He says it's impossible. So it's impossible.
My friends, please remember Tom said this the next time you fall into the trap of engaging him, and thank you. :)

*

Offline Lord Dave

  • *
  • Posts: 7653
  • Grumpy old man.
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #1073 on: April 02, 2017, 06:38:27 AM »
TTIOH seems to have run.  Me thinks he's finally realizing how wrong he's been.
If you are going to DebOOonK an expert then you have to at least provide a source with credentials of equal or greater relevance. Even then, it merely shows that some experts disagree with each other.

*

Offline Lord Dave

  • *
  • Posts: 7653
  • Grumpy old man.
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #1074 on: April 04, 2017, 01:22:23 PM »
https://www.google.no/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2017/03/30/politics/senate-intelligence-committee-hearing-russia/index.html




Well....looks like Trump was right.  There's a ton of fake news out there and it helped him win.
Maybe he knows what's going on and is trying to alert us?  To tell us what to look for without showing he knows himself.



If you are going to DebOOonK an expert then you have to at least provide a source with credentials of equal or greater relevance. Even then, it merely shows that some experts disagree with each other.

*

Offline Ghost Spaghetti

  • *
  • Posts: 908
  • Don't look in that mirror. It's absolutely furious
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #1075 on: April 05, 2017, 02:20:14 PM »
Dinner with someone of a different gender always leads to sex.

Sometimes the same gander. It's why I never eat with any other people.

Re: Trump
« Reply #1076 on: April 05, 2017, 03:55:33 PM »
TTIOH seems to have run.  Me thinks he's finally realizing how wrong he's been.

Does anyone here care about Susan Rice's unmasking of Trump associates for political purposes?

No?

That's why I'm not engaging in this dishonest conversation anymore.

*

Offline Roundy

  • Abdicator of the Zetetic Council
  • *
  • Posts: 4183
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #1077 on: April 05, 2017, 04:00:31 PM »
And I for one would like to thank you for that, dripping with irony as your statement is.
Dr. Frank is a physicist. He says it's impossible. So it's impossible.
My friends, please remember Tom said this the next time you fall into the trap of engaging him, and thank you. :)

Re: Trump
« Reply #1078 on: April 05, 2017, 04:07:17 PM »
And I for one would like to thank you for that, dripping with irony as your statement is.

Are you talking to me? I fail to see any irony in my statement.

This whole thread is just a circle jerk and all any of you actually care about is having your biases confirmed.

Please... please, OH FUCKING PLEASE, tell me how the NSA Director spying on a political opponent is something you want to see more of in the future.

*

Offline Lord Dave

  • *
  • Posts: 7653
  • Grumpy old man.
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #1079 on: April 05, 2017, 04:47:11 PM »
TTIOH seems to have run.  Me thinks he's finally realizing how wrong he's been.

Does anyone here care about Susan Rice's unmasking of Trump associates for political purposes?

No?

That's why I'm not engaging in this dishonest conversation anymore.
1. Did anyone bring it up?  No.  You sure as hell didn't.  Maybe you should have.
2. You should answer the other stuff we've thrown out.
3. Do you even CARE that their names were in such reports TO BE UNMASKED?!  No?  Didn't think so.
If you are going to DebOOonK an expert then you have to at least provide a source with credentials of equal or greater relevance. Even then, it merely shows that some experts disagree with each other.