• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Why were MSNBC et al.. and liberals so wrong about claims of Russian collusion with Trump

whirlingmerc

Well-Known Member
Howard Dean? etc... why were major figures in the DNC willing to believe terminological inexactitudes or did they know all along that the claims were not true but willing to claim it to the American people?

Tucker Carlson on Mueller Report: "The People On TV Have Been Lying To You"; How Can Jeff Zucker Stay At CNN?

Quote
Tucker Carlson warned the goalposts of investigating President Trump for Russian collusion have moved in a monologue he delivered following news that special counsel Robert Mueller has concluded his probe and submitted his report to Attorney General Bill Barr. Carlson also noted, "not a single American citizen has been charged with anything related to Russian collusion."
unquote
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Investigation for one thing, even a failed thing, is still useful for fishing.
Other tarnish-worthy things will come up. And the investigation process
itself keeps negativity thriving. So Democrats have been playing the
game of politics well.
 

whirlingmerc

Well-Known Member
Last edited:

dianaiad

Well-Known Member
So MSNBC and CNN are not news sources but advert machines for the left?

Well, duh.

OK... got it

Hope so. I don't know of a single news source that is NOT heavily biased, politically. All you left wing types are quite firm about how 'right leaning' Fox News is...and you are quite right. It is. CNN and MSNBC are just as biased toward the left and don't ever think they aren't.

Shoot, both of them are right up there with the Huff and Puffington Post and the Washington Post.
 

dingdao

The eternal Tao cannot be told - Tao Te Ching
I would just like to point out that Russia Colluding with Trump leaves Trump innocent. Trump requesting that help shows him guilty.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
I would just like to point out that Russia Colluding with Trump leaves Trump innocent. Trump requesting that help shows him guilty.
Except that only publicly presented request for help looked very tongue in cheek.
If every joke by every politician were taken seriously, this would be interesting.
In any event, what independent evidence of collusion has yet been found?
Without it, the claim is as cromulent as Obama's being a Muslim secret agent.
 

whirlingmerc

Well-Known Member
Except that only publicly presented request for help looked very tongue in cheek.
If every joke by every politician were taken seriously, this would be interesting.
In any event, what independent evidence of collusion has yet been found?
Without it, the claim is as cromulent as Obama's being a Muslim secret agent.

Seems there were about 6 investigations

5 headed by politicians
1 the muller one

seems a bit 'political''
Trump's son was doing competition research... and... so?
 
Last edited:

dingdao

The eternal Tao cannot be told - Tao Te Ching
Except that only publicly presented request for help looked very tongue in cheek.
If every joke by every politician were taken seriously, this would be interesting.
In any event, what independent evidence of collusion has yet been found?
Without it, the claim is as cromulent as Obama's being a Muslim secret agent.
While it appeared tongue-in-cheek, he has managed to paint himself into a corner.
He may have to prove that he never expected the emails.

Technically Muslim is not a nation. Nor is not illegal for a president to convert to Islam.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
While it appeared tongue-in-cheek, he has managed to paint himself into a corner.
He may have to prove that he never expected the emails.

Technically Muslim is not a nation. Nor is not illegal for a president to convert to Islam.
Technicalities, like humor, don't prevent conspiracy theories from taking root in true believers.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Granted the Watergate breaking is not merely researching the competition

but it this that? doesn't seem so
Research should be done legally, of course.
When there's real evidence it's illegal, then prosecute.
But without evidence, one should withhold judgment.
 

Stanyon

WWMRD?
It was kool aid lash!
#koolaidlash

They needed it to be real to help heal their deep emotional wounds after the humiliating loss in 2016.
 
Last edited:

PureX

Veteran Member
Collusion is very difficult to prove.

Let's say there are only two gas stations in a town. One on the east side and the other on the west. And until now, they have both charged the same price per gallon of gas, thinking that if they raise it, their customers will go to the other station for gas. But today, the owner of the eastern gas station decides that this is not the case. He decides that his customers are not going to bother driving all the way to the other station to get their gas if he raises his own gas price by a penny per gallon, because the cost of the drive would erase the savings gained by it. So he does raise his price by a penny. And it turns out that he's right. People don't bother driving across town to save one penny per gallon on their gas.

Now, the owner of the west side gas station sees this, and sees that he has gained no new customers by keeping his gas price a penny lower, so he decides to raise his gas price by two pennies, thinking that if it worked for the west side owner, it'll work for him. And it does! Because even though he has raised his gas price by two cents per gallon, his patrons would still have to pay one cent per gallon more if they drove across town. So all they would be saving themselves is one cent per gallon, and that savings would be eaten up by the extra mileage.So they pay the two cents more for the convenience of not driving to the other side of town for their gas.

Now let's say this little 'price war' goes on for a while, and it results in both station owners charging 10 cents more per gallon for their gas, because the only alternative for their customers is to drive to the next town to buy cheaper gas. And, of course, the drive would just use up ten cent-per-gallon savings on the extra mileage incurred, getting there. So they aren't happy, but they have to pay the overage, because they have to have gasoline for their cars.

OK, so, did these station owners "collude" in price-gouging their customers? If so, how? They never even actually spoke to each other. And yet, together, they clearly did 'mutually agree' to over-charge their customers for gas. In essence, they are guilty of colluding to price-gouge. But in fact, they never agreed legally, or verbally, to do anything. They simply shared the same self-interest, which was to exploit and abuse their customers, using each other's help and approval.
 
Last edited:

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Howard Dean? etc... why were major figures in the DNC willing to believe terminological inexactitudes or did they know all along that the claims were not true but willing to claim it to the American people?

Tucker Carlson on Mueller Report: "The People On TV Have Been Lying To You"; How Can Jeff Zucker Stay At CNN?

Quote
Tucker Carlson warned the goalposts of investigating President Trump for Russian collusion have moved in a monologue he delivered following news that special counsel Robert Mueller has concluded his probe and submitted his report to Attorney General Bill Barr. Carlson also noted, "not a single American citizen has been charged with anything related to Russian collusion."
unquote
It's been a wonderful circus freak side show.

People got to see the real socialist left in action as they really are, right up to the point where they're willing to make anything up in their pathetic attempts to assert authority and dominance through lies and propaganda.
 

dingdao

The eternal Tao cannot be told - Tao Te Ching
Collusion is very difficult to prove.

Let's say there are only two gas stations in a town. One on the east side and the other on the west. And until now, they have both charged the same price per gallon of gas, thinking that if they raise it, their customers will go to the other station for gas. But today, the owner of the eastern gas station decides that this is not the case. He decides that his customers are not going to bother driving all the way to the other station to get their gas if he raises his own gas price by a penny per gallon, because the cost of the drive would erase the savings gained by it. So he does raise his price by a penny. And it turns out that he's right. People don't bother driving across town to save one penny per gallon on their gas.

Now, the owner of the west side gas station sees this, and sees that he has gained no new customers by keeping his gas price a penny lower, so he decides to raise his gas price by two pennies, thinking that if it worked for the west side owner, it'll work for him. And it does! Because even though he has raised his gas price by two cents per gallon, his patrons would still have to pay one cent per gallon more if they drove across town. So all they would be saving themselves is one cent per gallon, and that savings would be eaten up by the extra mileage.So they pay the two cents more for the convenience of not driving to the other side of town for their gas.

Now let's say this little 'price war' goes on for a while, and it results in both station owners charging 10 cents more per gallon for their gas, because the only alternative for their customers is to drive to the next town to buy cheaper gas. And, of course, the drive would just use up ten cent-per-gallon savings on the extra mileage incurred, getting there. So they aren't happy, but they have to pay the overage, because they have to have gasoline for their cars.

OK, so, did these station owners "collude" in price-gouging their customers? If so, how? They never even actually spoke to each other. And yet, together, they clearly did 'mutually agree' to over-charge their customers for gas. In essence, they are guilty of colluding to price-gouge. But in fact, they never agreed legally, or verbally, to do anything. They simply shared the same self-interest, which was to exploit and abuse their customers, using each other's help and approval.
Conspiracy on the other hand is easier. Gas stations often conspire without consulting each other. For example a gas war is an unprosecuted conspiracy the benefits the public.
 

esmith

Veteran Member
Conspiracy on the other hand is easier. Gas stations often conspire without consulting each other. For example a gas war is an unprosecuted conspiracy the benefits the public.
First gas stations do not conspire with each other when stations start lowering their price in order to maximize their sales.
Second it is not illegal to set prices lower than anyone else, hence it could not be prosecuted even if some idiot wanted to..
 

dianaiad

Well-Known Member
Investigation for one thing, even a failed thing, is still useful for fishing.
Other tarnish-worthy things will come up. And the investigation process
itself keeps negativity thriving. So Democrats have been playing the
game of politics well.


The problem here is that we aren't supposed to use dicey investigations in order to go on fishing expeditions. It's against the whole idea of the law. I'm not sure it's not downright unconstitutional, frankly.

Something about 'the fruit of the poisonous tree...' where evidence of a crime that is discovered by doing unlawful searches being inadmissible in court?

I know that there are other examples of when this sort of thing turns around and bites the investigators on the behind, but the one that springs immediately to mind with me is the raid on the FLDS compound in 2008. I'm familiar with that because I was taking a class at the time in ...I forget the class, actually. Whatever, I ended up writing a paper on it, doing the research as it happened. Now the FLDS are major embarrassments to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day saints, the church I belong to. It is a polygamous offshoot, with a leader who absolutely is one of the nastiest pedophile creeps on the planet. I don't agree with their doctrine or their practices.

Just wanted to get that out there.

Well, the state of Texas Child Protection Agency got a call from a women who claimed to be calling from inside the FLDS compound, claiming that she was a prisoner and needed rescuing. As it happened, that call was really from a woman in Wyoming who had a habit of making such calls in order to get groups she hated in trouble. Here's the fun and important part: the CPA KNEW that call was phony before they invaded the compound. They knew it almost as soon as they got it. They used it anyway as an excuse to send SWAT teams, tanks, K-9 corps and snipers after the folks in the compound, and carted away all the women and children in Baptist Buses. BTW, that's the part that caught my attention. Over the next weeks and months Texas had the children separated from the mothers, claimed that 22 year old women were really fourteen and victims of child abuse, put those kids in foster care....and they used what they learned in the process to justify keeping the women in detention centers, and to gather evidence against their husbands and sons.

They kept doing that even after the courts told them to turn everybody loose and leave them alone. Their excuse for not doing so was that if they did, they wouldn't be able to fish around for more stuff to use against the group. Eventually, the Texas CPA was forced to turn the women loose and give them back their children, and almost all the evidence gathered through this process was thrown out. The FLDS women are still fighting, because the Texas CPA just doesn't seem to want to give up.

I predict, however, that every man who was indicted and convicted as a result of that raid and the aftermath will end up freed, if they can afford to kick the cases upstairs, and Texas would be in for one heck of a lawsuit. If, of course, the state legislature approves. Texas can't be sued unless the legislature allows it. Somehow I don't think, given the probable outcome, that it will.

This thing with Trump is the same thing. Doesn't matter whether you agree with him or not. Doesn't matter if you like him or not. What is happening is a real miscarriage of justice, and the Dems should think ahead. If they get away with this, someday the Republicans WILL be in the position to do the same thing to their leader. What defense can they make when that happens?
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
The problem here is that we aren't supposed to use dicey investigations in order to go on fishing expeditions. It's against the whole idea of the law. I'm not sure it's not downright unconstitutional, frankly.
It's not right....but it's useful.
Prosecutors aren't held accountable to any great extent.
 
Top