Doesn’t Matter Who Wins the K Race; We’re All the Same

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

You ignore this statement from Comey:

"Everyone has opinions about political issues and religious issues and sports issues. You can't bring them to work and have them affect your work. There have to be severe consequences."

The "work" of Strzok and Page being discussed by Comey is the Trump investigation.

I'll leave you to look up "affect."

You're pretending Comey agrees with your conservative talking points, and we both know it isn't true.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

You're pretending Comey agrees with your conservative talking points, and we both know it isn't true.

No, I'm not. I'm offering you his exact quote.

You're not a fool. TM and Adder can use the conservative talk point angle. You can read what Comey wrote and develop a better response than an ad hominem.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Adder

I hope you said that to the headhunter.

No, but I will after this transaction is complete. Right now I want the headhunter to be selling the candidate on us, so I'm being very nice.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Seriously, why are you acting like such an idiot. You said there was no evidence. Adder's point was, that's not what Mueller said. Mueller said there wasn't enough evidence to bring charges. If you weren't so committed to being contrarian here, you wouldn't argue with this.

I thought Mueller said he was not considering whether or not there was evidence to bring charges, since there was a policy of not charging.

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

You're pretending Comey agrees with your conservative talking points, and we both know it isn't true.

What is truly amazing, is he can extrapolate from a text calling Trump a fucking fool a whole conspiracy against the man (who is obviously a true fool) and a ton of devious intentions. But when asked about the AG, who interviewed for a job by sending a love letter that said "Presidents can't ever be prosecuted," and then tried to spin a report before releasing a redacted version, just as every right wing pundit prick is telling us again and again, it's all about that man's integrity.

TM

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

I thought Mueller said he was not considering whether or not there was evidence to bring charges, since there was a policy of not charging.

That's on the obstruction, no?

TM

[Adder]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

I thought Mueller said he was not considering whether or not there was evidence to bring charges, since there was a policy of not charging.

Not on collusion, and he would have charged non-Trump colluders if he had the evidence to do so.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

That's on the obstruction, no?

TM

yes, sorry, was I not keeping up with the conversation I was only half following? that is right.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

What is truly amazing, is he can extrapolate from a text calling Trump a fucking fool a whole conspiracy against the man (who is obviously a true fool) and a ton of devious intentions. But when asked about the AG, who interviewed for a job by sending a love letter that said "Presidents can't ever be prosecuted," and then tried to spin a report before releasing a redacted version, just as every right wing pundit prick is telling us again and again, it's all about that man's integrity.

TM

Trump is indeed a fool.

There is no conspiracy against him. There are numerous people who all share a dislike for him working against him.

But, people could conspire against a fool. Seems unnecessary, but I'm not aware of any rule against it.

I was wrong about Barr. I admitted it. I'm in good company, as you're often wrong.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Factually, this fails for a variety of reasons so large it would take forever to unpack. But put that aside, because more interesting, you realize you sound like Barr's defense of Trump here, right?

I wasn't really defending Clinton, whom I believe acted stupidly -- I was pointing to the difference between the extreme deference you give here to Republicans and the way you have credulously accepted conservative talking points about her.

I guess the difference between us is that I distinguish between the problems with what Clinton did and with what Trump has done, and you equate them, as politically motivated allegations.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Adder

I hope you said that to the headhunter.

Jesus. This exchange takes the cake. I feel like I'm listening to Duckie from Pretty in Pink talking to himself.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

I wasn't really defending Clinton, whom I believe acted stupidly -- I was pointing to the difference between the extreme deference you give here to Republicans and the way you have credulously accepted conservative talking points about her.

I guess the difference between us is that I distinguish between the problems with what Clinton did and with what Trump has done, and you equate them, as politically motivated allegations.

I have not accepted talking points about her. I worked in white collar crime and for politicians. Folks don't permanently erase private servers, using programs that make recapture impossible, entirely by accident. Even Comey called it "extremely careless."

Would you greenlight the erasure of a server under those circumstances? Of course not.

Ah, but she gets the benefit of every doubt from you. As does everyone on the Democrat side, particularly since Trump's election. If I did a meta analysis of this board we'd find that you give a pass to the Ds while assailing the Rs for similar behavior exactly as much as you accuse me of doing the opposite. And you know it.

This place, and almost any analogue of it anywhere else, where people argue about politics, proves just how much the two party system, and probably our entire adversarial system, needs to be overhauled. Picking sides damages people's thinking.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

No, I'm not. I'm offering you his exact quote.

You're not a fool. TM and Adder can use the conservative talk point angle. You can read what Comey wrote and develop a better response than an ad hominem.

What is wrong with you? Yes, I read what Comey said. You and I and Comey all agree that Strzok screwed up. Comey and I do not think that discredits Mueller's work, or suggests that the investigation was politically motivated. You do. You can't quote Comey agreeing with you on that point because he didn't say that and doesn't agree with you. You are being such a fucking idiot.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

I hate Trump because of his policies and racism and ignorance and sexism and stupidity and greed and corruption. In short, I hate him because of what he is and what he does. That is not a bias, you fucking jackass. Your stupid ass response is the same as if I held you down and fed you a skunk shit sandwich, and when you threw up and got angry, I said, "You hate skunk shit sandwiches because you hate skunk shit and you prejudge the sandwich based on that bias.

I don't care why you hate Trump. All I was saying was you hate Trump. And all you've done in your last few overheated, moronic replies, is demonstrate how that hatred can overtake your brain's circuitry.

A low rent r/e developer from Queens, with shit for brains, gets you in a lather. Who's the sucker at that table?

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

I have not accepted talking points about her. I worked in white collar crime and for politicians. Folks don't permanently erase private servers, using programs that make recapture impossible, entirely by accident. Even Comey called it "extremely careless."

Would you greenlight the erasure of a server under those circumstances? Of course not.

No, I wouldn't, and I've been very clear about that. My point was about you, not her. As always, you would rather pretend I said something else instead of respond to what I did say.