It's Draft Time: Impeachment Edition

[hollodero]

(05-11-2017, 10:55 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: In my very first post in this thread I took great pains to point out that I was not commenting on the merits of the Comey firing, merely pointing out the Dems insanely hypocritical reaction to it.

Yeah, you're right. Hard to separate though.

(05-11-2017, 10:55 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Not quite sure why you felt the need for such sarcasm, but ok.

Wasn't directed against you. I would expect no one to be persuaded by me. In fact, I'd have a hard time if anyone actually did.

(05-11-2017, 10:55 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: So you admit your position on this issue is based on 100% speculation of what you believe to be in Trump's head.  This is an odd admission given your claim later in this post.

Yes, I freely admit that, it's the truth. I don't know exactly, maybe the Ghost of election past really persuaded Trump that Hillary was treated badly by Comey and needs to be revenged. I just think that or similar explanations are quite unlikely, and it's reasonable to believe that the uber-obvious explanation is the most likely one. My point would be, even if you disagree, you have to give that some consideration if you're serious about it.

And what really happens with the investigation is not a good counterpoint. Trump doesn't need to know that. There are tons of signs he doesn't know too much.

(05-11-2017, 10:55 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Above, in this very post, you admitted that this is all speculation on your part.  That's fine and fair enough.  However, it doesn't exactly jive with your insult that all I am doing is blaming and deflecting.  I didn't call you stupid, I didn't even imply it.  Intellectual dishonesty is not synonymous with stupidity.  I am giving my opinion on the subject, the same as you.  I feel the reaction is hypocritical and hysterical.  You feel differently.  We have both explained our positions.

That's right. I never intended to insult you. I just don't sugercoat my opinion. For the rest, see my paragraph above. Sorry for not addressing every point, but debates get very exhausting when splitted up too much. Here's the point I think is important: I said intellectual dishonesty, because I do not think you're stupid, that's the exact point. There's a part of you that knows exactly that you deliberately ignored the chronology of events to make a fuzz about Democrat's behavious. And yet you chose to follow through with that flawed line of logic to take a partisan stance. I can not wrap my head around that. What you said to me here has some merit and I tend to think about things, if I overdid it and offended you it was not my intention, just if I underdo it I get no responses usually, and I wanted one. But I addressed you as kind of a substitute for the FOX crowd, and that wasn't entirely fair. Sorry for that.

If you allow me to put things in my perspective: Your president just fired the FBI director that led an investigation against him. That sentence is factually correct, and it alone demands attention. The fact that it was out of the blue and immediately before the surprising act, said director requested more funds for the investigation that obvioulsy caught steam, adds to the smelly picture. You can't ignore this smell without showing deep bias, you simply can't, considering all circumstances. Democrats play no role in that smelly picture, to focus on them is the wrong reaction, and I'm astonished you can not see this point entirely. Even if they were the most awful hacks (which in general they probably are, in this case I think that's not fair to say, but even if), what does it matter? Why the mention? Trump mentions them out of deflection, just why do you follow his lead there. Using a very flawed narrative of left-wing hypocrisy, which honestly does sound a bit hysteric too. I don't get that.