Some Extraordinary Revelations In Congress Yesterday 12/7

Lies, damned lies, and statistics.
RCC: Act II
Posts: 538
Joined: Thu Dec 07, 2017 2:56 am
Has thanked: 4 times
Been thanked: 51 times

Re: Some Extraordinary Revelations In Congress Yesterday 12/7

Postby RCC: Act II » Mon Dec 18, 2017 2:40 am

WildCat wrote:
RCC: Act II wrote:Yeah, there is a problem with your sense of proportion seeing who was behind putting the lead prosecutor in there, so a closer comparison would be if a few assistant detectives were shown to be racists.

What if it was the entire top tier and they had just exonerated a white man of a crime despite loads of evidence of guilt?


What if Starfleet, instead of the rebel fleet, showed up at Endor to battle the imperial fleet?


And if this was anyone but Hillary there would have been charged. Ask David Petraeus.


lol

It is funny how people accused of completely different acts are treated differently.

User avatar
Doctor X
Posts: 65453
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2004 8:09 pm
Title: Collective Messiah
Location: Your Mom
Has thanked: 2956 times
Been thanked: 1889 times

Re: Some Extraordinary Revelations In Congress Yesterday 12/7

Postby Doctor X » Mon Dec 18, 2017 4:34 am

Star Fleet wins because the Force does not work on Vulcans.

--J.D.
Mob of the Mean: Free beanie, cattle-prod and Charley Fan Club!
"Doctor X is just treating you the way he treats everyone--as subhuman crap too dumb to breathe in after you breathe out."--Don
DocX: FTW.--sparks
"Doctor X wins again."--Pyrrho
"Never sorry to make a racist Fucktard cry."--His Humble MagNIfIcence
"It was the criticisms of Doc X, actually, that let me see more clearly how far the hypocrisy had gone."--clarsct
"I'd leave it up to Doctor X who has been a benevolent tyrant so far."--Grammatron
"Indeed you are a river to your people.
Shit. That's going to end up in your sig."--Pyrrho
"Try a twelve step program and accept Doctor X as your High Power."--asthmatic camel

WS CHAMPIONS X3!!! NBA CHAMPIONS!! Stanley Cup! SB CHAMPIONS X5!!!!!

User avatar
WildCat
Posts: 13026
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 2004 2:53 am
Location: The 33rd Ward, Chicago
Has thanked: 25 times
Been thanked: 246 times

Re: Some Extraordinary Revelations In Congress Yesterday 12/7

Postby WildCat » Mon Dec 18, 2017 4:59 am

RCC: Act II wrote:
WildCat wrote:
RCC: Act II wrote:Yeah, there is a problem with your sense of proportion seeing who was behind putting the lead prosecutor in there, so a closer comparison would be if a few assistant detectives were shown to be racists.

What if it was the entire top tier and they had just exonerated a white man of a crime despite loads of evidence of guilt?


What if Starfleet, instead of the rebel fleet, showed up at Endor to battle the imperial fleet?


And if this was anyone but Hillary there would have been charged. Ask David Petraeus.


lol

It is funny how people accused of completely different acts are treated differently.

Yes, Petraeus gets a felony for a tenth of what Hillary did. But hey, she didn't intend for classified info to end up on her assistant's pedophile husband's laptop so she skates.

And you'd be howling if a special counsel hired a bunch of documented, rabid anti-Hillary agents for an open-ended investigation of her. But because it's an investigation of an administration you despise and you're a partisan hack you don't see any problem.
Do you have questions about God?

you sniveling little right-wing nutter - jj

RCC: Act II
Posts: 538
Joined: Thu Dec 07, 2017 2:56 am
Has thanked: 4 times
Been thanked: 51 times

Re: Some Extraordinary Revelations In Congress Yesterday 12/7

Postby RCC: Act II » Mon Dec 18, 2017 2:45 pm

WildCat wrote:Yes, Petraeus gets a felony for a tenth of what Hillary did. But hey, she didn't intend for classified info to end up on her assistant's pedophile husband's laptop so she skates.

And you'd be howling if a special counsel hired a bunch of documented, rabid anti-Hillary agents for an open-ended investigation of her. But because it's an investigation of an administration you despise and you're a partisan hack you don't see any problem.


[ ] Felony
[ ] Sane comparison
[x] lol

Question: If an investigation turns up verifiable, objective facts, does it matter whether the investigator was biased?

RCC: Act II
Posts: 538
Joined: Thu Dec 07, 2017 2:56 am
Has thanked: 4 times
Been thanked: 51 times

Re: Some Extraordinary Revelations In Congress Yesterday 12/7

Postby RCC: Act II » Mon Dec 18, 2017 2:50 pm

Doctor X wrote:Star Fleet wins because the Force does not work on Vulcans.

--J.D.


Yes. Also if Star Fleet wants to take it to the streets, the teleporter would be an awesome secret weapon that would make the force look like a parlor trick. Whoops... just teleported your lungs into space. Sorry to make you cry. The rest of you really want to do this?

User avatar
ed
Posts: 31734
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2004 11:52 pm
Title: Rhino of the Florida swamps
Has thanked: 382 times
Been thanked: 645 times

Re: Some Extraordinary Revelations In Congress Yesterday 12/7

Postby ed » Mon Dec 18, 2017 3:00 pm

RCC: Act II wrote:
WildCat wrote:Yes, Petraeus gets a felony for a tenth of what Hillary did. But hey, she didn't intend for classified info to end up on her assistant's pedophile husband's laptop so she skates.

And you'd be howling if a special counsel hired a bunch of documented, rabid anti-Hillary agents for an open-ended investigation of her. But because it's an investigation of an administration you despise and you're a partisan hack you don't see any problem.


[ ] Felony
[ ] Sane comparison
[x] lol

Question: If an investigation turns up verifiable, objective facts, does it matter whether the investigator was biased?


Yes. Because I would question whether facts that would exonerate would be uncovered. And then there are funny gray areas. Do the feds record interviewsinterrogations? No, they take "notes". And if they claim you "lied", what exactly is that based on? Would you trust such a claim from a biased investigator? One that had claimed that you are "a douche,” an “utter idiot,” and a “loathsome human.”? Would you trust such a person?

And before you say that these are opinions that are permissible, let me say that anyone in a position of authority who would put these thoughts out electronically is either unbalanced or stupid and as such words like "objective" and "verifiable" probably are undefined when it comes to their actions.
- new minimalist ethos -

RCC: Act II
Posts: 538
Joined: Thu Dec 07, 2017 2:56 am
Has thanked: 4 times
Been thanked: 51 times

Re: Some Extraordinary Revelations In Congress Yesterday 12/7

Postby RCC: Act II » Mon Dec 18, 2017 5:06 pm

ed wrote:
RCC: Act II wrote:
WildCat wrote:Yes, Petraeus gets a felony for a tenth of what Hillary did. But hey, she didn't intend for classified info to end up on her assistant's pedophile husband's laptop so she skates.

And you'd be howling if a special counsel hired a bunch of documented, rabid anti-Hillary agents for an open-ended investigation of her. But because it's an investigation of an administration you despise and you're a partisan hack you don't see any problem.


[ ] Felony
[ ] Sane comparison
[x] lol

Question: If an investigation turns up verifiable, objective facts, does it matter whether the investigator was biased?


Yes. Because I would question whether facts that would exonerate would be uncovered. And then there are funny gray areas. Do the feds record interviewsinterrogations? No, they take "notes". And if they claim you "lied", what exactly is that based on? Would you trust such a claim from a biased investigator? One that had claimed that you are "a douche,” an “utter idiot,” and a “loathsome human.”? Would you trust such a person?

There is a huge, huge difference between critically scrutinizing an investigation and seeking to entirely discredit is while it is going on because of vague claims that bias will influence it. This is not a coup, no matter how much Fox news wants to say it is. It is a question of possible bias that is going to exist in every investigation.

I might trust the person if he has a history of impartiality and/or the matter being investigated is more objective than subjective. I'd still scrutinize it to a high degree, so trust really makes no difference. What I wouldn't do is run around screaming that the investigator is out to get me while the investigation isn't complete, unless I could show hard proof not that he was falsifying stuff.

His hating me and passing around messages that he really wants to investigate me wouldn't cut it. Depending on the context, as I said before, there could be significant tactical advantage to keeping all of this under my hat.

User avatar
Doctor X
Posts: 65453
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2004 8:09 pm
Title: Collective Messiah
Location: Your Mom
Has thanked: 2956 times
Been thanked: 1889 times

Re: Some Extraordinary Revelations In Congress Yesterday 12/7

Postby Doctor X » Mon Dec 18, 2017 5:13 pm

The language shifts prove subtle but significant.

"Vague."

"that he really wants to investigate me"

Neither applies to this situation.

--J.D.
Mob of the Mean: Free beanie, cattle-prod and Charley Fan Club!
"Doctor X is just treating you the way he treats everyone--as subhuman crap too dumb to breathe in after you breathe out."--Don
DocX: FTW.--sparks
"Doctor X wins again."--Pyrrho
"Never sorry to make a racist Fucktard cry."--His Humble MagNIfIcence
"It was the criticisms of Doc X, actually, that let me see more clearly how far the hypocrisy had gone."--clarsct
"I'd leave it up to Doctor X who has been a benevolent tyrant so far."--Grammatron
"Indeed you are a river to your people.
Shit. That's going to end up in your sig."--Pyrrho
"Try a twelve step program and accept Doctor X as your High Power."--asthmatic camel

WS CHAMPIONS X3!!! NBA CHAMPIONS!! Stanley Cup! SB CHAMPIONS X5!!!!!

RCC: Act II
Posts: 538
Joined: Thu Dec 07, 2017 2:56 am
Has thanked: 4 times
Been thanked: 51 times

Re: Some Extraordinary Revelations In Congress Yesterday 12/7

Postby RCC: Act II » Mon Dec 18, 2017 5:26 pm

Doctor X wrote:The language shifts prove subtle but significant.

"Vague."

"that he really wants to investigate me"

Neither applies to this situation.

--J.D.


They are a reasonable, if charitable, interpretation of the comments. He hates Trump, really didn't want him to win the election, and is looking forward to investigating him if he gets the chance. The implication of ill intent to manipulate is not present on the face of the communications.

“I can protect our country at many levels,”

“I want to believe the path you threw out for consideration in Andy’s office — that there’s no way he gets elected — but I’m afraid we can’t take that risk,”

The latter is basically incoherent. Could be about anything from innocent political blather to conspiracy. It is worth it to ask the guy what he meant, but those who want to ask the questions are already saying what the answers are, and that it the problem.

Again, I'm talking about people categorically undermining the credibility of entire FBI as a biased institution based on these texts. Not people that have suspicions. We should always be suspicious of any sort of official investigation.

User avatar
Doctor X
Posts: 65453
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2004 8:09 pm
Title: Collective Messiah
Location: Your Mom
Has thanked: 2956 times
Been thanked: 1889 times

Re: Some Extraordinary Revelations In Congress Yesterday 12/7

Postby Doctor X » Mon Dec 18, 2017 5:34 pm

Your quotation admirably demonstrated how "vague" proved an inappropriate descriptor.

You neglected the "insurance policy" claim and exhortations, however.

--J.D.
Mob of the Mean: Free beanie, cattle-prod and Charley Fan Club!
"Doctor X is just treating you the way he treats everyone--as subhuman crap too dumb to breathe in after you breathe out."--Don
DocX: FTW.--sparks
"Doctor X wins again."--Pyrrho
"Never sorry to make a racist Fucktard cry."--His Humble MagNIfIcence
"It was the criticisms of Doc X, actually, that let me see more clearly how far the hypocrisy had gone."--clarsct
"I'd leave it up to Doctor X who has been a benevolent tyrant so far."--Grammatron
"Indeed you are a river to your people.
Shit. That's going to end up in your sig."--Pyrrho
"Try a twelve step program and accept Doctor X as your High Power."--asthmatic camel

WS CHAMPIONS X3!!! NBA CHAMPIONS!! Stanley Cup! SB CHAMPIONS X5!!!!!

User avatar
ed
Posts: 31734
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2004 11:52 pm
Title: Rhino of the Florida swamps
Has thanked: 382 times
Been thanked: 645 times

Re: Some Extraordinary Revelations In Congress Yesterday 12/7

Postby ed » Mon Dec 18, 2017 6:59 pm

RCC: Act II wrote:They are a reasonable, if charitable, interpretation of the comments. He hates Trump, really didn't want him to win the election, and is looking forward to investigating him if he gets the chance. The implication of ill intent to manipulate is not present on the face of the communications.

“I can protect our country at many levels,”

“I want to believe the path you threw out for consideration in Andy’s office — that there’s no way he gets elected — but I’m afraid we can’t take that risk,”

The latter is basically incoherent. Could be about anything from innocent political blather to conspiracy. It is worth it to ask the guy what he meant, but those who want to ask the questions are already saying what the answers are, and that it the problem.

Again, I'm talking about people categorically undermining the credibility of entire FBI as a biased institution based on these texts. Not people that have suspicions. We should always be suspicious of any sort of official investigation.


Wow. This is isn't some jamoke who is talking about knocking over a liquor store, this is a guy who lead, or had a leading role in a number of politically sensitive investigations. I don't think that any benefit of the doubt applies here.
- new minimalist ethos -

User avatar
WildCat
Posts: 13026
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 2004 2:53 am
Location: The 33rd Ward, Chicago
Has thanked: 25 times
Been thanked: 246 times

Re: Some Extraordinary Revelations In Congress Yesterday 12/7

Postby WildCat » Tue Dec 19, 2017 12:48 am

RCC: Act II wrote:
WildCat wrote:Yes, Petraeus gets a felony for a tenth of what Hillary did. But hey, she didn't intend for classified info to end up on her assistant's pedophile husband's laptop so she skates.

And you'd be howling if a special counsel hired a bunch of documented, rabid anti-Hillary agents for an open-ended investigation of her. But because it's an investigation of an administration you despise and you're a partisan hack you don't see any problem.


[ ] Felony
[ ] Sane comparison
[x] lol

Question: If an investigation turns up verifiable, objective facts, does it matter whether the investigator was biased?

Has it turned up any verifiable, objective facts or are they still fishing after a year and a half?
Do you have questions about God?

you sniveling little right-wing nutter - jj

User avatar
WildCat
Posts: 13026
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 2004 2:53 am
Location: The 33rd Ward, Chicago
Has thanked: 25 times
Been thanked: 246 times

Re: Some Extraordinary Revelations In Congress Yesterday 12/7

Postby WildCat » Tue Dec 19, 2017 12:49 am

ed wrote:Wow. This is isn't some jamoke who is talking about knocking over a liquor store, this is a guy who lead, or had a leading role in a number of politically sensitive investigations. I don't think that any benefit of the doubt applies here.

This is actually far worse than Watergate, and partisan hacks like RCC don't care because the criminals are on their side.
Do you have questions about God?

you sniveling little right-wing nutter - jj

User avatar
ed
Posts: 31734
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2004 11:52 pm
Title: Rhino of the Florida swamps
Has thanked: 382 times
Been thanked: 645 times

Re: Some Extraordinary Revelations In Congress Yesterday 12/7

Postby ed » Tue Dec 19, 2017 2:30 am

I really like the word "jamoke". It is almost onomatopoeiaric isn't it? It evokes the thing perfectly. Thats not onomatopoeia though, is it? Is there a word for a word that sounds like what it represents? Not in terms of sound, rather the thing itself. Like "leviathan" sorta. Gotta think on this a bit.
- new minimalist ethos -

RCC: Act II
Posts: 538
Joined: Thu Dec 07, 2017 2:56 am
Has thanked: 4 times
Been thanked: 51 times

Re: Some Extraordinary Revelations In Congress Yesterday 12/7

Postby RCC: Act II » Wed Dec 20, 2017 2:10 pm

[
RCC: Act II wrote:
WildCat wrote:

Question: If an investigation turns up verifiable, objective facts, does it matter whether the investigator was biased?

Has it turned up any verifiable, objective facts or are they still fishing after a year and a half?


Considering the two guilty pleas, I'm gonna go with yes. However, competent investigators keep things under their hat while they are still investigating. At this point, most of it is speculation, but given what I know about federal prosecutors and their behavior to this point, people who will protect the administration at all costs and who have no regard to the welfare of the country probably are best served by trying to paint the FBI as illegitimate. That's the only move left, as evil as it is.

Of course, given these are the same people who in any other context revere law enforcement officers to the point of demonizing those who protest them:

lol

RCC: Act II
Posts: 538
Joined: Thu Dec 07, 2017 2:56 am
Has thanked: 4 times
Been thanked: 51 times

Re: Some Extraordinary Revelations In Congress Yesterday 12/7

Postby RCC: Act II » Wed Dec 20, 2017 2:18 pm

ed wrote:Wow. This is isn't some jamoke who is talking about knocking over a liquor store, this is a guy who lead, or had a leading role in a number of politically sensitive investigations. I don't think that any benefit of the doubt applies here.


I don't agree at all. Investigations are investigations. People don't get special rights for being rich and powerful.

Plus, I'm not saying all is just spiffy, just that bias needs to be considered in context. If evidence can be shown to be tainted, toss it out.

Given Trump has gone on record decrying the rights to those accused of crimes, I have no sympathy for any of these complaints. The one situation I allow myself a warm heaping bowl of schadenfreude is when some rich and powerful prick who complains criminals have too many rights finds himself in the soup and starts to whine.

RCC: Act II
Posts: 538
Joined: Thu Dec 07, 2017 2:56 am
Has thanked: 4 times
Been thanked: 51 times

Re: Some Extraordinary Revelations In Congress Yesterday 12/7

Postby RCC: Act II » Wed Dec 20, 2017 2:19 pm

WildCat wrote:This is actually far worse than Watergate, and partisan hacks like RCC don't care because the criminals are on their side.


lol

I guess if you think the Watergate was a liberal plot and all lies, then I guess that fits. Otherwise, again

lol

User avatar
Doctor X
Posts: 65453
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2004 8:09 pm
Title: Collective Messiah
Location: Your Mom
Has thanked: 2956 times
Been thanked: 1889 times

Re: Some Extraordinary Revelations In Congress Yesterday 12/7

Postby Doctor X » Wed Dec 20, 2017 3:39 pm

"lol" proves as trite and embarrassing as "UR a fag" and a serious commentary upon another's mother.

In the rain.

--J.D.
Mob of the Mean: Free beanie, cattle-prod and Charley Fan Club!
"Doctor X is just treating you the way he treats everyone--as subhuman crap too dumb to breathe in after you breathe out."--Don
DocX: FTW.--sparks
"Doctor X wins again."--Pyrrho
"Never sorry to make a racist Fucktard cry."--His Humble MagNIfIcence
"It was the criticisms of Doc X, actually, that let me see more clearly how far the hypocrisy had gone."--clarsct
"I'd leave it up to Doctor X who has been a benevolent tyrant so far."--Grammatron
"Indeed you are a river to your people.
Shit. That's going to end up in your sig."--Pyrrho
"Try a twelve step program and accept Doctor X as your High Power."--asthmatic camel

WS CHAMPIONS X3!!! NBA CHAMPIONS!! Stanley Cup! SB CHAMPIONS X5!!!!!

User avatar
ed
Posts: 31734
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2004 11:52 pm
Title: Rhino of the Florida swamps
Has thanked: 382 times
Been thanked: 645 times

Re: Some Extraordinary Revelations In Congress Yesterday 12/7

Postby ed » Wed Dec 20, 2017 3:51 pm

RCC: Act II wrote:
ed wrote:Wow. This is isn't some jamoke who is talking about knocking over a liquor store, this is a guy who lead, or had a leading role in a number of politically sensitive investigations. I don't think that any benefit of the doubt applies here.


I don't agree at all. Investigations are investigations. People don't get special rights for being rich and powerful.


https://youtu.be/3RT5YwvcbNo
- new minimalist ethos -

User avatar
ed
Posts: 31734
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2004 11:52 pm
Title: Rhino of the Florida swamps
Has thanked: 382 times
Been thanked: 645 times

Re: Some Extraordinary Revelations In Congress Yesterday 12/7

Postby ed » Wed Dec 20, 2017 3:54 pm

RCC: Act II wrote:[
RCC: Act II wrote:
WildCat wrote:

Question: If an investigation turns up verifiable, objective facts, does it matter whether the investigator was biased?

Has it turned up any verifiable, objective facts or are they still fishing after a year and a half?


Considering the two guilty pleas, I'm gonna go with yes.
lol


Let me ask you a serious question.

If the feds wanted to get you do you think they could? I mean, do you think you could survive an FBI "interview" without being caught in a lie? Could anyone? And if they said you lied and you didn't, how exactly would you go about proving it? Ask for the tapes? :roll:
- new minimalist ethos -


Return to “Politics & Social Issues”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: CCBot [Bot] and 0 guests