Reformed1689
Well-Known Member
If you can't comprehend how that is different I'm not going to waste my time.
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Waiter, another order of crow.........
- Thread starter Revmitchell
- Start date
- Status
RighteousnessTemperance&
Well-Known Member
Of course not just the Dems, but the Dems are not legitimately questioning its integrity, but rather attempting to use its rightly redacted, classified information to continue to try to crucify someone they politically loathe, just as they’ve used the deep state dossier, just as they’ve used the broken Cohen’s testimony, just as they’ve used and continue to use the pretense of investigation, just as they’ve used and continue to use every available platform to repeatedly deceive from every possible angle throughout the entire affair, which they never want to see end until, like witches on a witch hunt, they have their intended victim burning at the stake.
Looks like the "you're too ignorant to understand Calvinism" refrain has made it to the political forum.
Reformed1689
Well-Known Member
Ad hominem. And, as usual, not adding anything to the discussion but rather trolling to incite a response.
After I posted my one sentence response I went back in to edit it and was composing a lengthy response when it just vanished. I will attempt to reconstruct it.
---
Looks like the "you're too ignorant to understand Calvinism" refrain has made it to the political forum.
From the outset Trump supporters opposed the Mueller investigation (or ANY investigation) into collusion with the Russians. They slammed it, made fun of it, opposed it, attacked Mueller's integrity, and called it a witch hunt. Now here comes the investigation's report and it largely exonerates Trump. Now Trump supporters are giddy, happy with the investigation. Suddenly it was a fair, complete investigation. There is a bit of hypocrisy here. I believe that is the point Use of Time was making.
Personally, I was in favor of a collusion investigation and couldn't understand how/why anyone would oppose finding out whether or not Russia tampered with our elections. I was roundly booed on this board, accused of hating Trump, you know, the usual. But after a year or so, when nothing was forthcoming I started to call it a witch hunt myself and called for the investigation to end.
Looks like you fell for it.
Reformed1689
Well-Known Member
Because it was an investigation that was a fishing investigation. There was no evidence to suggest that an investigation into Trump (which is differeant than investigating Russia) was warranted.
Again, if it was just an investigation of Russia that would have been one thing, but it wasn't. It was to try an nail the President without cause for an investigation.
Yes, we are happy the report is complete and blew up in the Democrat's face. We are happy that their tactic did not work. That's not hypocrisy.
Again, there should not have been a collusion investigation because there was never any evidence of collusion to warrant it. That is not the same as investigating whether Russia tampered or attempted to interfere with our process and to what degree.
Tell me, UoT, why does the military so hate General Flynn? Why didn't they just court-martial him themselves?
There you go again. Why do you say things like that?
"There was no evidence that an investigation into Trump was warranted".
In other words, don't investigate something because we already know without an investigation that there's nothing there. This is just silly. If the Russians tampered with our elections, and since Trump won, Trump's campaign would be a suspect.
How can you have a complete investigation into election tampering if you don't look at the campaigns involved?
<Boggles>
Twenty-two months chant: "Mueller investigation BAD! BAD!"
Now: "That was awesome!"
Wait a minute. So George Papadopoulos, foreign policy advisor on the Trump campaign, didn't meet a Russian who said the Russians had a bunch of Clinton emails that would be damaging to her campaign? Papadopoulos kept suggesting that the Trump campaign send him to Moscow to get these emails. That wasn't worth investigating?
In order for an investigation to be legitimate there has to be evidence of a crime. Since there is no evidence the investigation is nothing more than a fishing expedition. In other words lefties want a crime to exist, but not knowing that there is they "investigate" to dig a crime up not otherwise known.
Last edited:
There doesn't need to be evidence of a crime to have an investigation.
Reformed1689
Well-Known Member
No that is not true. If I am tampering without your involvement and there is no evidence of your involvement then there is no reason for you to be a suspect much less the center of the investigation.
Ah yes, a common error. Papadopoulos was told by FBI INFORMANTS of the emails. So no, it wasn't worth investigating. It was a setup.
The American government is now as crooked as the Mexican government and as inept as the governments of Europe. We have robbed an American General because he knows how corrupt the military is at the top and how Obama was involved in spying on Trump during the campaign.
Please enlighten us as to where you get this information that FBI informants told him about Clinton's emails the Russians possessed.
And BTW, an FBI informant is not the same thing as the FBI.
Well, as you know, I'm dumb. So you'll have to copy-and-paste the relevant part of that article that says Papadopoulos got the information about Russians having Clinton emails from an FBI informant.
Probably because he was a criminal.
Weird how the “fishing expedition”actually produced guilty charges for some isn’t it.
- Status