05-11-2017, 04:13 PM
(05-11-2017, 11:40 AM)hollodero Wrote: Yeah, you're right. Hard to separate though.
It really shouldn't be though. Democrats have been calling for Comey's firing since the letter was sent to Congress detailing the reopening of the Hillary e-mail investigation. The fact that many are lamenting it now is crazy hypocrisy.
Quote: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.
Anyone should be open to persuasion by a cogent, logical and fact based argument. Your posts are very good, people should be subject to persuasion by them.
Quote: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.
The plain truth is that with a guy like Trump it could literally be anything. Ivanka may have dropped a comment about how Comey should go, or someone else whom he trusts said something. Trump strikes me as a guy whose opinion of you can change on a dime if the right person pours poison in his ear. I just think that if Trump were really concerned about Comey's investigation into Russia he would have fired him upon taking office when he had a much better smokescreen for his true motives. Doing it now, for Russia reasons, would be like declaring it in neon. It just doesn't make sense. While Trump is mercurial he's not surrounded by total simpletons.
Quote: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'm not blind to the potentials, I just don't think the argument has nearly as much merit to it as the Dems do. I don't think my point is partisan at all. In the sense that the Dems are currently the ones engaging in hypocritical histrionics I suppose one could try and make the point that I am biased against them. However, when the GOP engages in the same behavior I'll call that out to, and have for years on both this board and the old one. The unfortunate truth is that some people around here demand absolute ideological lockstep purity. If you don't agree with them on every point of every issue then you're with the enemy. Real life is much more nuanced than that, you just would never realize it by the political discourse in this country right now. Note I've made this point about both sides in the very thread.
Quote: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.
I don't get offended by anything on the internets. I will take exception to people who make inane claims or constantly deride my profession, but pointing out that this is being done is not my being offended, it's my pointing out reality. Note I am not accusing you of doing either thing. No worries though and thank you for the apology, I was a little worried you had gone over to the dark side for a moment.
Quote: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.
It absolutely does, but it also leads me to believe that the firing wasn't motivated by that. If it was it was so blatantly obvious that a child could see through it. Trump is not stupid, he is also not surrounded by people who are stupid. If he was worried about the Russia investigation he could have fired Comey long ago with way more cover for doing so.
Quote: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.
I see the point completely, I just don't agree with the conclusion. I suppose you could use Occam's razor against me here, and it would be fair to do so, but I just don't the blatantly obvious is correct in this instance.
Quote: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.
I mention it because I'm mortally sick of the sanctimony coming from people literally dripping with manure. To go from demanding someone be fired for months to being outraged they got fired is a bridge too far for me. Like I said earlier, the Dems aren't dropping the Russia investigation, it's literally their only life preserver in a stormy sea right now. If there is something to find it will be found, Comey or no Comey.
