The hypocrisy of dismissing claims based upon the political alignment of the claimant.

Discussion in 'Political Opinions & Beliefs' started by robini123, Oct 10, 2019.

  1. Esperance

    Esperance Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2017
    Messages:
    5,151
    Likes Received:
    4,379
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The entire Mueller Special Counsel investigation took place without any evidence of, "probable cause," that Trump colluded with the Russians.

    But the kicker is that there was plenty of evidence of, "probable cause," that Clinton did collude with foreign governments.

    And now we have a Dem initiated House impeachment inquiry that is void of due process and also lacks evidence of, "probable cause."

    Slavery is the purest form of Socialism... And the House is being run by Fascists...

    The ideology of the Left continues to drive the phony narrative. It has been reported that the whistleblower went to Schiff first... Schiff is now a fact witness, and yet he remains un-recused?
    If that is true, it amounts to nothing more than an effort for the whistleblower to try to gain immunity.
    Every single Dem pressed Maguire on the subject of immunity... It was simply obvious what they wanted.

    So this situation is more of an attempt to cover up illegal behavior.
     
    Last edited: Oct 14, 2019
    Captain Obvious likes this.
  2. Esperance

    Esperance Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2017
    Messages:
    5,151
    Likes Received:
    4,379
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Nothing in the call has to do with foreign intelligence... The IG was correct in taking it to the DOJ...

    Hearsay can't be used in an Impeachment trial so the whistleblowers will probably get their immunity and we won't hear from them again unless they committed other crimes in the first place.
     
  3. robini123

    robini123 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2004
    Messages:
    13,614
    Likes Received:
    1,506
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    It is predictable that whether or not there is probable cause all depends upon the political alignment of the observer. What probable cause was there to investigate the Biden’s? The answer to that all depends upon the political alignment of those who answer the question. In politics, right and wrong are decided by where one’s political loyalty lies.
     
  4. robini123

    robini123 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2004
    Messages:
    13,614
    Likes Received:
    1,506
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    The transcript of the call showed that Trump asked a foreign leader to investigate a political rival. My position is that those with a vested interest in the outcome of an investigation should have no part in said investigation. This is why I stand against Trump playing a part in investigating the Biden’s and why I agree with Trump that the impeachment is a kangaroo court. As for your claim about heresy, saying it cannot be used in an impeachment does not prove that it can or cannot be used in an impeachment.
     
    AZ. likes this.
  5. Lil Mike

    Lil Mike Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2011
    Messages:
    51,276
    Likes Received:
    22,662
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Or he (or she) might not be vetted at all.

    Schiff: Whistleblower testimony might not be necessary

    He's basically done his job and gotten this moved to an "impeachment" inquiry so he's not needed anymore.
     
  6. robini123

    robini123 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2004
    Messages:
    13,614
    Likes Received:
    1,506
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    If the transcript released by Trump backs the claims made by the whistleblower I see no need for him or her to testify. Would be interested in the Trump supporter view of this though.
     
  7. Silver Surfer

    Silver Surfer Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2013
    Messages:
    6,871
    Likes Received:
    2,233
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Absolutely. Furthermore, the idiots calling themselves democrats have no clue about the damage they've caused by literally spying on the president of the USA and releasing private conversations to the public. No foreign leader will ever want to talk to the U.S president, whomever that might be, in the future. No one will trust the American authorities again.
     
  8. Lil Mike

    Lil Mike Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2011
    Messages:
    51,276
    Likes Received:
    22,662
    Trophy Points:
    113
    As far as I can tell, the transcript contradicted WB #1's claims, that Trump asked for some sort of quid pro quo to get political intelligence on an opponent. But his claims served their purpose, just as the Steele dossier served it's purpose and was discarded.
     
    Silver Surfer likes this.
  9. robini123

    robini123 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2004
    Messages:
    13,614
    Likes Received:
    1,506
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    When I read the transcript the Ukraine leader asked about some defensive arms to which Trump said something to the effect of “I need a favor”. Either way it matters not to me as even in the absence of a quid pro quo I still stand against any American President having any involvement in investigating a political rival.
     
  10. Silver Surfer

    Silver Surfer Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2013
    Messages:
    6,871
    Likes Received:
    2,233
    Trophy Points:
    113
    He has never said "me", he said ,us'. I don't think do me a favour and do us a favour are the same. Context....He continued talking and said that the USA has been through a lot since 2016 because of false accusations regarding Russian collusion and Ukraine could help shed light on the whole case.Biden publicly bragged about firing the state prosecutor by blackmailing the Ukrainian president so he brought it onto himself. Also the now fired U.S ambassador walked into new Ukrainian prosecutor office and handed him a list of people NOT TO BE PROSECUTED. Of course, without any consultation with the WH.
     
  11. Lil Mike

    Lil Mike Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2011
    Messages:
    51,276
    Likes Received:
    22,662
    Trophy Points:
    113
    "Something to the effect." You can drive a tractor trailer through that loophole.

    Well if I missed you criticizing the Obama administration investigating a political rival, I apologize, but I'm pretty sure this is a brand new principle.
     
  12. vman12

    vman12 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2015
    Messages:
    66,645
    Likes Received:
    46,476
    Trophy Points:
    113
    No, that's not why.

    The reason we dismiss it is for the same reasons we dismissed the Jussie Smollet hoax: logic.
     
  13. Spim

    Spim Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2016
    Messages:
    7,664
    Likes Received:
    6,183
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I "dismissed' the claims of the Russian thing because If I was influenced in any way to vote It was to vote against trump not for him, and I didn't vote for him, I was bombarded with anti trump stuff on FB, it was overwhelming. Every person that I know that did vote for him made their mind up way early in the campaign and didn't deviate.

    I "dismissed" the Ukraine thing because I read the complaint and the transcript and formed my own opinion, (not a big deal) and since I don't wear blue tinted glasses or watch cnn/msnbc daily my mind hasn't changed.

    I "dismissed" the "fine people" crap because I saw the context and didn't flip out because although my candidate lost the election, I was over the surprise in about 30 minutes, not my problem if others can't just accept a loss, maybe i'm just better at it since I've been a cubs fan my whole life :)

    I've "dismissed" so many little things that they left has been outraged over, but I haven't dismissed the criticism I've received for not jumping on the hate trump, bandwagon, that was personal and directed at me, That part I won't forget anytime soon.
     
    Last edited: Oct 15, 2019
  14. robini123

    robini123 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2004
    Messages:
    13,614
    Likes Received:
    1,506
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I have no problem with Biden being investigated. I do however think that those with a vested interest in the outcome of an investigation should not have any part in said investigation as to do otherwise is to invite bias into the investigation. This is why I am against Trump in terms of his taking part in an investigation of the Biden’s.
     
    AZ. likes this.
  15. Belch

    Belch Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2015
    Messages:
    16,275
    Likes Received:
    4,479
    Trophy Points:
    113
    So who has the jurisdiction to investigate Biden's Ukrainian dealings? He is on record stating that he used our tax dollars hostage to get rid of a judge in Ukraine who was investigating a company his son was getting paid a whole lot of money. His son did get a job that he has no experience with, so from where I'm sitting, he used his position as VP using tax money.

    but my original question stands. who should investigate this?
     
  16. robini123

    robini123 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2004
    Messages:
    13,614
    Likes Received:
    1,506
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Bias is always logical in the mind of the biased. In the moment bias and objectivity are indistinguishable from one another. Out of all the biases I have uncovered, mitigated or removed, I was always oblivious to their existence previous to their discovery. Human bias blindspots are well known to psychology and sociology.
     
    Last edited: Oct 15, 2019
  17. Phyxius

    Phyxius Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2015
    Messages:
    15,965
    Likes Received:
    21,593
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Unless you have, like, a transcript of said convo - provided by the accused - that agrees with said hearsay.

    Then it's no longer hearsay, it's corroborated fact.
     
  18. Robert E Allen

    Robert E Allen Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2018
    Messages:
    12,041
    Likes Received:
    5,750
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    All claims should be assumed false until proven true regardless of any political bias.
     
  19. vman12

    vman12 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2015
    Messages:
    66,645
    Likes Received:
    46,476
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ipso facto logic is bias.

    It doesn't take much logic to see what Democrats and the MSM have been up to these last few years.

    You can attribute that to bias if you'd like. Perhaps that's your bias speaking.
     
  20. Starjet

    Starjet Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2009
    Messages:
    5,805
    Likes Received:
    1,678
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Wise words, indeed.
     
    robini123 likes this.
  21. robini123

    robini123 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2004
    Messages:
    13,614
    Likes Received:
    1,506
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    The DOJ, NSA, CIA and State Department.
     
  22. robini123

    robini123 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2004
    Messages:
    13,614
    Likes Received:
    1,506
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    The objective see the games, hypocrisy and bias on both sides and point it out. The biased only see or are willing to take issue with the side they dislike. My advantage is that I have no political loyalty and support no politician which leaves me free of partisan political loyalty. We will not agree here but I appreciate your giving me your perspective.
     
  23. vman12

    vman12 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2015
    Messages:
    66,645
    Likes Received:
    46,476
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Unless you have no opinions on any topic such as immigration, gun control, and abortion you have as much political bias as anyone else.

    I don't support politicians. I support their platform, and evaluate them based on their efforts towards those goals.
     
  24. Captain Obvious

    Captain Obvious Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2014
    Messages:
    512
    Likes Received:
    241
    Trophy Points:
    43
    It
    Its not hypocrisy to dismiss the claim based on party affiliation, but it would be irresponsible to consider the claim and claimant prima facia. How many false claims from the left have we heard so far?
    When people stopped believing the boy who cried wolf were they lacking objectivity? Or did they consider their actions based on probability?
    The left takes a lot of pride being collectivists and are masters at conjuring the tribalistic nature of their people. The down fall is that one idiot speaking up drags them all into the muck. Especially when its bullshit.
     
  25. robini123

    robini123 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2004
    Messages:
    13,614
    Likes Received:
    1,506
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    The little boy who cried wolf applies to Trump as well. A lack of objectivity would be pointing out the dishonesty of the side we dislike while being mute on the lies of those we support. I stand against the dishonesty on both sides and say that the left and right are rotten to the core with bias and corruption.
     
    AZ. likes this.

Share This Page