Trump refutes CIA's claim that Russia helped him win the election

[captaincranky]

You have utterly no idea what you are talking about (just like the rest of this thread). As for #1, yes. As for #2, I've worked on a case where a guy was sentenced to 7 years in prison because of 'tearful accusations' where his teenage daughter was the only witness to him raping her (I was an intern at the time -- I only do misdemeanors in my practice). There was no physical proof or testimony by other parties. The people who convicted him were young and old. Black and white. Male and female.

Ignorance and arrogance go together?

See, they should have went for "jury nullification". For example, "she was asking for it....."

But seriously, in cases like this, "he said, she said", the results of polygraph examinations should be allowed as "corroborating evidence". But then you'd have every civil rights organization up in arms against it. And that's even if he were to be exonerated.

So, they should modify the swearing in procedure sic; "do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, as long as it remains convenient for you to do so, so help you Dog"?

 

[cliffordcooley]

Jesus, to add insult to injury, the rape kit came back negative and his wife testified for him.

Yet there seemed to be sufficient evidence to convict, even though you say there were non. The court is not going to convict solely on the testimony of one accusation. If they do they need to be disbarred for malpractice.

 

[captaincranky]

Yet there seemed to be sufficient evidence to convict, even though you say there were non. The court is not going to convict solely on the testimony of one accusation. If they do they need to be disbarred for malpractice.

You're of course correct. But that's not what the current judicial climate is these days. It's more like, "evidence isn't required, an accusation in the media is, on its own merit, grounds for conviction". Plus, pop culture seems to hold that, every father, brother, uncle, nephew, etc., is a potential child molester.

That's convenient because it takes the heat off the ones who seem to be doing the most, "child molesting", the coaches, the teachers, the priests, and then there's that politician, (whose name escapes me ATM), who keeps sending women pictures of his junk.

 

[kapital98]

Jesus, to add insult to injury, the rape kit came back negative and his wife testified for him.

Yet there seemed to be sufficient evidence to convict, even though you say there were non. The court is not going to convict solely on the testimony of one accusation. If they do they need to be disbarred for malpractice.

Sorry to derail the discussion.

Anyways, there are different degrees of certainty necessary for a criminal proceeding to go forward. All you need is for someone to make an accusation that is 51% likely to be sufficient in order to go to trial. The judge decides that. At trial you have a jury and they decide if it reaches "beyond a reasonable doubt." The judge decides the law (ex: Objections) but the jury decides issues of fact (ex: Did the person commit the elements of the crime). Therefore, an accusation is perfectly sufficient to go forward with a criminal proceeding and ultimately convict someone. No additional proof is needed.

With that said: It is the police and district attorney's job to only bring forth cases they see fit. The DA has a quasi-judicial ethical duty (unlike defense counsel) to drop cases they don't believe have merit. Good DA's will do just that. Bad DA's will bring bad cases to trial for all sorts of reasons (political, 'hard on crime', etc). Having the police and DA's choose which crimes to prosecute goes a long way towards alleviating burden on the judicial system and harshly punishing people (ex: Imagine if cops arrested everyone or jaywalking or open containers).

Almost every criminal case is pled out instead of going to trial. The DA will make an accusation and then offer a more respectable plea offer. Based on personal experience, most of my clients are guilty and have bad cases. It makes sense to take the deal. Meanwhile, even people who claim innocence will often not want to risk being convicted and harshly sentenced compared to taking a good deal.

I'll give another example from my current practice. I had a trial set for Wednesday. It's a violation (Harassment 2nd) where you are guilty by merely having "physical contact" (ie, touching) the other person (Penal Law 240.26). There was only one witness with nonhearsay evidence. No camera footage or anything. He claimed my guy lightly punched him on the jaw. It turns out the guy claiming he was punched left town. The DA's office has moved for the case to be dismissed. The only evidence they had of this guy being guilty was the word of the complainant. Nothing more. Without his testimony it is impossible to prove beyond a reasonable doubt the punch occurred.

 

[Bruce Fraser]

Yet another misleading headline in a TechSpot article... are there any editors in this organization?
Look up the definition for the word "refute." It means to prove that a statement is wrong. Laughing at a statement and saying it's ridiculous certainly is a valid response for a really stupid idea. But it also certainly is not "refuting."

 

[learninmypc]

#DUMPTRUMP

 

[captaincranky]

#DUMPTRUMP

Good luck with that....

 

[captaincranky]

Yet another misleading headline in a TechSpot article... are there any editors in this organization?
Look up the definition for the word "refute." It means to prove that a statement is wrong. Laughing at a statement and saying it's ridiculous certainly is a valid response for a really stupid idea. But it also certainly is not "refuting."

But yet you're still here, explain that.

Besides, Trump is "an army of one", if he says something is refuted, it is.

 

[IAMTHESTIG]

I don't think Russia would do this type of thing.... they prefer more use of force rather than backdoor tactics. That being said I said please investigate, I will laugh when they find those on the left were actually the ones hacking and cheating in an effort to get Hillary to win. I'm still laughing at the Michigan recount.

If we did find Russia has hacked our voting system, I would consider that an act of war.

But they could make it up to us by giving us two SU-27 aircraft that most recently came off the production line for our Red Flag exercises, unmolested of course.

 

[davislane1]

#DUMPTRUMP

So brave. Thank you for this.

 

[learninmypc]

So brave. Thank you for this.

We all have our opinions

 

[davislane1]

We all have our opinions

Well, no. Some of you have your opinions. The rest of us are KGB.

Source: The CIA

 

[RustyTech]

Well, no. Some of you have your opinions. The rest of us are KGB.

Source: The CIA

It's sad that we haven't learned from history and thus it's repeating - we're back to the cold war era when every american who doesn't agree with the Establishment is a communist and a ruski spy.

 

[captaincranky]

It's sad that we haven't learned from history and thus it's repeating - we're back to the cold war era when every american who doesn't agree with the Establishment is a communist and a ruski spy.

Oh well, at least to the upside Senator Joe McCarthy is long dead! (y)

 

[billk]

The FBI, CIA, NSA for 3, are agencies that agree the Russians through their military intelligence apparatus (sounds like the GRU) made efforts to help Trump and hurt Clinton. Firing people to stop investigation of it, announcing that Putin (whose ethics include a background as a KGB officer and charges he has had domestic political opponents die under suspicious circumstances) has denied all wrong-doing and that settles that, good enough for Trump, let's move on (hey, maybe to scrutinizing his tax returns) ..... if it wasn't about something as serious as interference in our elections, this stuff makes for great satire that must have scripted by some wickedly clever writers!!! ho ho ho

 

[billk]

Trump has a certain aura to maintain. As an "owner" of a female beauty pageant, he would walk into a dressing room full of young contestants in various stages of undress and say "Don't worry ladies, I have seen it all before" with some actually hoping to cozy up to him for brownie points!!! And only a man of his vision can spot millions of illegal voters that most others, even other Republicans, miss.

 

[captaincranky]

@billk

Trump has a certain aura to maintain. As an "owner" of a female beauty pageant, he would walk into a dressing room full of young contestants in various stages of undress and say "Don't worry ladies, I have seen it all before" with some actually hoping to cozy up to him for brownie points!!! And only a man of his vision can spot millions of illegal voters that most others, even other Republicans, miss.

Do you actually have anything you want say to the members you've been summarily quoting? Your posts are nothing but quotes hanging mid air, erstwhile making little to no sense.

If you want to respond to something I've said, fine, do it. If not, don't quote me. I already know what I said, and I don't give a crap if you agree with it or not.

If you're posting from the front page, feel free to join us in the forum, where you'll have more control, and be able to edit what you've put up.

Thanks.

 

[billk]

I think it is quite obvious that describing the "vision" of something that is quite obviously imaginary ..... Trump's reference to literally millions of voters who he wants to "not exist" because of his ego ..... is an effective way of pointing out the absurdity of his claim ..... and makes plenty of sense, despite your "ad hominem" argument of me leaving things in mid-air. That also goes for the brazen disregard for decency evident in a dominant male walking in on nude females in a changing room because he "owns" the place.

 

[davislane1]

Applicalble segments bolded:

That also goes for the brazen disregard for decency evident in a dominant male walking in on nude females in a changing room because he "owns" the place.

This is why you lost. You have no understanding of how politics works. All of these things you just listed are assets, not liabilities, in politics. It's why no one cares about the great Nothingburger with cheese, the all-important tax returns, or any of this 25th amendment (lol) nonsense outside of the fake news.

A man who shows brazen disregard, dominance, and entitlement wins followers. A man who is careful to maintain the public appearence of his so-called principles at all times gets regarded, at best, as a nice guy.

Have fun eating laser beams for the next 7.5 years.

 

[billk]

Thanks for showcasing the thinking of the Adolf Hitler School of Statesmanship, as sometimes folks forget. Hitler did a good job in concealing his actual beliefs to the German public by actually stating that those who did not espouse Christian ideals had no place in Nazi party ranks. This was early in his political career, but that changed to a God of iron especially pleased by Nazi successes in governing Germany. I usually note the ironic dichotomy of right-wing individuals espousing the natural law of survival of the fittest reflecting governance while refusing to accept its similar use in supporting the fact of human evolution as animals versus their "special creation" alternative characteristic of Republicans as the Party of GOD. Being an independent, I rarely feel I totally lost, especially when the winner of this one had to one or the other of two candidates, both of which had historically high negative ratings. Unfortunately for the Democrats, Clinton crowded out the rest of her field of opponents rather early in the race ..... her age just 2 years under Trump's making it "now or never" for her ..... her tide was cresting. The FBI director's sudden input/retraction late in the election may have been a deciding factor in a close race. And there was no actual "landslide" in the polling results, that fantasy invoked by Trump and Pence as a reflection of a wounded ego. The convenient but factually unsupported invention of millions of "illegal voters" opting for Clinton is QED of that. Las Vegas odds ..... that crowd is usually accurate, monetary profit from the betting take being a key part of their motivation ..... don't agree with your guess of a second term in the cards for the golden haired one. Of course long term projections of that nature are iffier than ones closer in time.

 

[davislane1]

Thanks for showcasing the thinking of the Adolf Hitler School of Statesmanship, as sometimes folks forget. I usually note the ironic dichotomy of right-wing individuals espousing the natural law of survival of the fittest reflecting governance while refusing to accept its similar use in supporting the fact of human evolution as animals versus their "special creation" alternative characteristic of Republicans as the Party of GOD. Being an independent, I rarely feel I totally lost, especially when the winner of this one had to one or the other of two candidates, both of which had historically high negative ratings. Unfortunately for the Democrats, Clinton crowded out the rest of her field of opponents rather early in the race ..... her age just 2 years under Trump's making it "now or never" for her ..... her tide was cresting. And there was no actual "landslide" in the polling results, that fantasy invoked by Trump and Pence as a reflection of a wounded ego. The convenient but factually unsupported invention of millions of "illegal voters" opting for Clinton is QED of that. Las Vegas odds ..... that crowd is usually accurate, monetary profit from the betting take being a key part of their motivation ..... don't agree with your guess of a second term in the cards for the golden haired one. Of course long term projections of that nature are iffier than ones closer in time.

This may be the first time I've encountered a baloon pilot who talks politics on tech forums.

 

[billk]

This may be the first time I've encountered a baloon pilot who talks politics on tech forums.

At least spell the key word of your metaphor correctly. Perhaps I could respond in a ever-increasing ad-hominem exchange by switching the two o's in the misspelling "baloon" to e's, likening you to a baleen whale competing with other cetaceans for krill for nutrition. But, nah, you would certainly have the imagination to characterize your own input as part of a political discussion on a tech forum.

 

[davislane1]

At least spell the key word of your metaphor correctly.

Misidentifying a typo as a misspelling after making a historically inaccurate Hitler comparison with improper paragraph formatting. Not particularly original, but I'll give you points for trying to punch up.

I reiterate for the forum...

This is part of why Trump won (like him or hate him): Moderates and independents like this guy. They are preoccupied with the most trivial of details (whether you spell things correctly all the time, whether you have proper social ettiqute, etc.) and denounce anything that voilates these sensibilities as indicative of intellectual deficiency or a prelude to The Final Solution 2.0.

If you doubt it at all, just look at how the fine folks over there at NRO and other conservative and indepentent outlets dance like puppets to every tweet on the timeline of @realdonaldtrump.

This is why Trump is a two-term president. Not because he will necessarily do anything grand, but because the Democrats and Republicans don't have anyone to run against an unapologetic, dominant male with no respect for conventional decorum. The effect is that while they all call him a dangerous clown, they get duped into looking like murderous fools (see: Antifa, CNN blackmail, etc.).

You don't have to have great policies to be re-elected when all of your opponents compete to stick the best landing on the fainting couch:

That also goes for the brazen disregard for decency evident in a dominant male walking in on nude females in a changing room because he "owns" the place.

7 out of 10 from the Russian judge. Glenn Beck gifts a bag of Cheetoes.

 

[captaincranky]

At least spell the key word of your metaphor correctly. Perhaps I could respond in a ever-increasing ad-hominem exchange by switching the two o's in the misspelling "baloon" to e's, likening you to a baleen whale competing with other cetaceans for krill for nutrition. But, nah, you would certainly have the imagination to characterize your own input as part of a political discussion on a tech forum.

Let me see, did you really join a Tech forum, to resurrect a 7 (seven) month old thread to start, (restart), a political discussion we've all tired of long ago? You know all of the other buffoonish tactics of internet trolling, why would I expect a necrobump would be beneath you?

And then you're going to start displaying the old, "you're attacking me ad hominem", make believe self pity ploy. Which goes like this, "oh, poor, poor me, I have the right opinion about every thing, nobody can see that, nobody is willing to listen to reason".

And then We're told, "I'm an independent". Well, bully for you, and "good luck with that", especially in today's political climate.

After which, you start in on the "grammar Nazi tactics". See look, I can spell "balloon". I can spell "douche bag", plus a whole lot of other things I learned during my youthful tenure in the public school system, most of which I could manipulate into descriptors of you.

But the funny, and truly inept part of an amateur troll's repertoire, is when they start taking our lord saviour and martyr Hitler's name in vain.

If you want an example of a true sociopath with paranoid delusions of grandeur, you need look no further than North Korea's Kim Jong Il.

So relax "Techspot Rookie", Hitler is dead, he can't hurt you, and shouldn't scare you anymore. It's time to bring your poison pen and yourself, out from under your bed, or out of the closet, whichever is applicable. There's nobody here but us really nice guys who are eager to, "win friends and gain confidences", especially with you. Because after all, look who you are.

 

[davislane1]

But the funny, and truly inept part of an amateur troll's repertoire, is when they start taking our lord saviour and martyr Hitler's name in vain.

I admit, this made me laugh out loud.