Thoughts on this?

Saucy · Sep 27, 2018

rambot said:
All of Robert Mueller’s indictments and plea deals in the Russia investigation so far
You don't have to like it or agree they are guilty. But let's not mispresent EASILY researchable facts.

I'm willing to be made to look a fool on this but I have catagorically no idea how your statement and the quoted article with its list of indictments and charges can be ignored exception through sheer will power.

Unless your post was sarcasm and I missed it, in which case, I apologize.

Otherwise, what I have read is:
1) Conspiratorial hokum:

2) just....where to start level conspiracy level stuff:...who are HATED by Republicans. Hmmm?
3)Creating a strawman and then dismissing the source outright (with likes and agrees that must also have not read the initial image carefullyThe word "administration"....

4)An interesting and somewhat relevant point raised re:Clinton (thanks @HTacianas)[sidebar: Kinda reminds me of Trump in a way; people falling all around while he gets off].

I'm not sure that TOTALLY calls everything else into question, and NONE of those people work in the government either which was the comparison set out in the initial picture. So again, I would suggest you note the word "administration".

So nobody has either REALLY discredited the lack of charges against Democratic administrations (though friends of one guy got a rough go and he himself CERTAINLY got away with FAR more than he should have), OR provided a good argument against the Republicans indictments or charges yet either.

Both. Because they hired me. I completely fail to see how that is relevant though....

Because the vast majority of them are Russians. They weren't part of Trump's administration. The others maybe were part of the campaign for a short amount of time, but that's it. Not a part of his administration. They were also charged regarding things that have nothing to do with President Trump.

The only fair case you can make is his lawyer, Cohen, but he's not a part of the administration either. Just because Mueller indicted and charged a bunch of people doesn't mean any of it has any connection to Trump. They're all either Russians or charged for things they did/said before Trump even decided to run. It's not fair to lay that all on Trump as if it happened during his administration.

rambot · Sep 27, 2018

Saucy said:
Because the vast majority of them are Russians. They weren't part of Trump's administration. The others maybe were part of the campaign for a short amount of time, but that's it. Not a part of his administration. They were also charged regarding things that have nothing to do with President Trump.

The only fair case you can make is his lawyer, Cohen, but he's not a part of the administration either. Just because Mueller indicted and charged a bunch of people doesn't mean any of it has any connection to Trump. They're all either Russians or charged for things they did/said before Trump even decided to run. It's not fair to lay that all on Trump as if it happened during his administration.

Ok.
Fair enough.
I would accept all of that.
If I wouldn't include Slick Willies 16 whitewater buddies, it's only fair that I can't accept Trumps 24 buddies.

I mean, I'm not sure 120 indictments to 5 is THAT much better and I included this meme because of the historical trends that are suggested by it. But fair play to you.

Saucy · Sep 27, 2018

rambot said:
Ok.
Fair enough.
I would accept all of that.
If I wouldn't include Slick Willies 16 whitewater buddies, it's only fair that I can't accept Trumps 24 buddies.

I mean, I'm not sure 120 indictments to 5 is THAT much better and I included this meme because of the historical trends that are suggested by it. But fair play to you.

I appreciate that. I just imagine the other numbers are a dubious and partisan as the first. Whoever created that meme clearly has the bias to try to minimalize Democrat scandals and maximize Republican. It would be like counting Hillary as an indictment during Obama's administration while she committed her crimes while his Secretary of State, but there's no mention of it on the meme. There were plenty of scandals under Obama, but his supporters like to say there were none.

Belk · Sep 27, 2018

HTacianas said:
There were sixteen convictions of Clinton associates during the Whitewater investigation alone. So I have to say the graphic is inaccurate at best.

Were they part of his administration?

rambot · Sep 27, 2018

Saucy said:
I appreciate that. I just imagine the other numbers are a dubious and partisan as the first

I can say I have fallen prey to that idea with images other people have posted. That's why I was hoping for a robust discussion on the facts of the previous presidents.

Whoever created that meme clearly has the bias to try to minimalize Democrat scandals and maximize Republican. It would be like counting Hillary as an indictment during Obama's administration while she committed her crimes while his Secretary of State, but there's no mention of it on the meme. There were plenty of scandals under Obama, but his supporters like to say there were none.

See but I'm not interested in scandals. Scandals can't be given the same amount of investment as indictments, charges and such. Almost every president has scandals and conspiracy theories.
If we are going to say that to be considered a rapist, you must be found guilty in a court of law, then to be called a criminal or to suggest someone commited crimes (a la Clinton) and was not simply grossly negligent she needs to be found guilty in a court of law as well.

Belk · Sep 27, 2018

rambot said:
I can say I have fallen prey to that idea with images other people have posted. That's why I was hoping for a robust discussion on the facts of the previous presidents.

See but I'm not interested in scandals. Scandals can't be given the same amount of investment as indictments, charges and such. Almost every president has scandals and conspiracy theories.
If we are going to say that to be considered a rapist, you must be found guilty in a court of law, then to be called a criminal or to suggest someone commited crimes (a la Clinton) and was not simply grossly negligent she needs to be found guilty in a court of law as well.

This might be useful.

List of American federal politicians convicted of crimes - Wikipedia

TerranceL · Sep 27, 2018

rambot said:
So I found this graphic and I have a couple questions:

1) Is this FACTUALLY accurate? I'm not an American and so I don't know the history as well.

Working on the assumption that it IS factually accurate, a few other questions pop into my head. I'd love to hear the answer for any of them:

2) What does this say about people in power and those they choose to hire in the republican party?
3) Does the graphic lead you to believe that the justice system is skewed for Democrats (ie....are you going conspiratorial because you don't like the information)

Meme's like this are really great for reinforcing ones own beliefs. The problem with nearly all of them is they never have any sources. And thus to use a quote from the late great Christopher Hitchens, "That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence."

Also you better be careful, I hear those pesky Russians used political memes to mess with the election. Once second you're posting a meme about criminals in the government the next your writing love letters to Putin.

rambot · Sep 27, 2018

TerranceL said:
Meme's like this are really great for reinforcing ones own beliefs. The problem with nearly all of them is they never have any sources. And thus to use a quote from the late great Christopher Hitchens, "That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence."

Also you better be careful, I hear those pesky Russians used political memes to mess with the election. Once second you're posting a meme about criminals in the government the next your writing love letters to Putin.

But again Terrance, these are quantifiable facts that can be researched or, the right person would actually know (or be able to find).
In my post I felt like I was being fair enough in terms of whether or not this was all true. The whole PURPOSE of the thread was that I wanted to hear some informed, intelligent opinions on the data presented. I was, and am willing to dismiss the whole thing out of hand if sufficient countering evidence is presented. I assert nothing; I was asking/looking for confirmation or critique.

rambot · Sep 27, 2018

Belk said:
This might be useful.

List of American federal politicians convicted of crimes - Wikipedia

That's fantastic! Thanks! When I can pull a bit of time out of my keester, I'll take a look.

I would assume I'd only be looking into the Executive branch of malfeacenses, right?

Belk · Sep 27, 2018

rambot said:
That's fantastic! Thanks! When I can pull a bit of time out of my keester, I'll take a look.

I would assume I'd only be looking into the Executive branch of malfeacenses, right?

Correct. Executive would be the administration of each president.

essentialsaltes · Sep 27, 2018

Another helpful Wiki page.

Arcangl86 · Sep 27, 2018

Saucy said:
Because the vast majority of them are Russians. They weren't part of Trump's administration. The others maybe were part of the campaign for a short amount of time, but that's it. Not a part of his administration. They were also charged regarding things that have nothing to do with President Trump.

The only fair case you can make is his lawyer, Cohen, but he's not a part of the administration either. Just because Mueller indicted and charged a bunch of people doesn't mean any of it has any connection to Trump. They're all either Russians or charged for things they did/said before Trump even decided to run. It's not fair to lay that all on Trump as if it happened during his administration.

There is Flynn. But he's the only administration official I can think of.

rambot · Sep 27, 2018

Nope. Not counting scandals.

BUT, I did figure I don't need sleep TOO bad and I've went through the Wiki list of convictions in Executive branches. The FIRST column is from the meme. The second column is from wiki.
Organized by party (too lazy)
Dems:
Obama 0 1
Clinton 1 2
Carter 0 0
Johnson 0 0
Kennedy 2 0

Dem's Wiki Total: 3

Trump ? 1
GW Bush 16 5
GHW Bush 1 1
Reagan 16 6
Ford 1 1
Nixon* 55 10
(*The Nixon entry states "The cover up of the affair by President Richard Nixon (R) and his staff resulted in 69 government officials being charged and 48 pleading guilty, including 7 for actual burglary." So it can't be exactly which of those 69 can/should be included)

Republican Wiki Total: 24
I mean let's be real, Nixon certainly had the most ridiculously, over the top charges and, take him out of the equation and it's a different picture but still; his actions reflect.

So my take on all this personally: While I don't understand the discrepency on either side (those CERTAINLY much more pronounced against the Republicans), there is still a valid and statistically significant different of 3 to 24 in my mind.

I think another VERY interesting tally of that would be ALL the legislative charges and sentences (not including presidential pardons cause....seriously?)
...wait...what the heck! Gimme a minute:
_______________
Ok. I guess I REALLY didn't need sleep.

So from just a straight up tally list without consideration to however many whatever in whatever when:

40 Charged+ sentenced Democrats
23 charged+sentenced Republicans
(generally, Reagan's years were messy messy eh?!)

So I don't know how all of this falls into the "leftist are in control of everything" narrative".

Looks like there is dirt everywhere. It's almost like....you know, it's almost like politicians are like people and there are bad guys on all sides.. At least in terms of courts of law.
_______________
Edit!: I put this section in between lines because when I compare the list on "essentialsaltes", it is FAAAAAAAR more extensive (in dealing with the Legislative branch) than the one Belk gave.

So I wouldn't hold too much onto the data about the legislative provided above (but no, I'm not gonna erase it....too much of my good time!

)

So perhaps someone wants to go through essentialsaltes list? Frankly, I don't think you do though. It's also a list showing how so many politicians are essentially reprobates (and there are a LOT)

Saucy · Sep 28, 2018

rambot said:
Nope. Not counting scandals.

BUT, I did figure I don't need sleep TOO bad and I've went through the Wiki list of convictions in Executive branches. The FIRST column is from the meme. The second column is from wiki.
Organized by party (too lazy)
Dems:
Obama 0 1
Clinton 1 2
Carter 0 0
Johnson 0 0
Kennedy 2 0

Dem's Wiki Total: 3

Trump ? 1
GW Bush 16 5
GHW Bush 1 1
Reagan 16 6
Ford 1 1
Nixon* 55 10
(*The Nixon entry states "The cover up of the affair by President Richard Nixon (R) and his staff resulted in 69 government officials being charged and 48 pleading guilty, including 7 for actual burglary." So it can't be exactly which of those 69 can/should be included)

Republican Wiki Total: 24
I mean let's be real, Nixon certainly had the most ridiculously, over the top charges and, take him out of the equation and it's a different picture but still; his actions reflect.

So my take on all this personally: While I don't understand the discrepency on either side (those CERTAINLY much more pronounced against the Republicans), there is still a valid and statistically significant different of 3 to 24 in my mind.

I think another VERY interesting tally of that would be ALL the legislative charges and sentences (not including presidential pardons cause....seriously?)
...wait...what the heck! Gimme a minute:
_______________
Ok. I guess I REALLY didn't need sleep.

So from just a straight up tally list without consideration to however many whatever in whatever when:

40 Charged+ sentenced Democrats
23 charged+sentenced Republicans
(generally, Reagan's years were messy messy eh?!)

So I don't know how all of this falls into the "leftist are in control of everything" narrative".

Looks like there is dirt everywhere. It's almost like....you know, it's almost like politicians are like people and there are bad guys on all sides.. At least in terms of courts of law.
_______________
Edit!: I put this section in between lines because when I compare the list on "essentialsaltes", it is FAAAAAAAR more extensive (in dealing with the Legislative branch) than the one Belk gave.

So I wouldn't hold too much onto the data about the legislative provided above (but no, I'm not gonna erase it....too much of my good time! )

So perhaps someone wants to go through essentialsaltes list? Frankly, I don't think you do though. It's also a list showing how so many politicians are essentially reprobates (and there are a LOT)

I do appreciate you looking objectively at this. It's enough to prove the meme wrong, which is the point of this thread lol.

rambot · Sep 28, 2018

Saucy said:
I do appreciate you looking objectively at this. It's enough to prove the meme wrong, which is the point of this thread lol.

Thanks. Honestly, I'm almost always open to this. But DEFINITELY with memes. I know how unreliable they are and more than a few pass through my facebook feed that seem a bit specious. I would hope that members of both political parties would be willing to spend time researching but...prolly not.

But yup. I agree that as presented, it does prove the meme wrong. I'm not sure I understand the "lol". I have no problem at all with being wrong. Do you have a problem with being wrong?

But it does not alleviate the discrepency of convictions between executive branches of government of the political parties which was a bit of my underlying question (though indirect).

Saucy · Sep 28, 2018

rambot said:
Thanks. Honestly, I'm almost always open to this. But DEFINITELY with memes. I know how unreliable they are and more than a few pass through my facebook feed that seem a bit specious. I would hope that members of both political parties would be willing to spend time researching but...prolly not.

But yup. I agree that as presented, it does prove the meme wrong. I'm not sure I understand the "lol". I have no problem at all with being wrong. Do you have a problem with being wrong?

But it does not alleviate the discrepency of convictions between executive branches of government of the political parties which was a bit of my underlying question (though indirect).

I didn't mean anything by the lol. I certainly wasn't laughing at you. Just a friendly lol I reckon. I'm glad we can agree on something!

Thee Librarian · Sep 28, 2018

rambot said:
Both. Because they hired me. I completely fail to see how that is relevant though....

One party is more focused on personal wealth and gain, the other is more focused on public wealth and gain. If it's true that Reps are more corrupt, that might be a reason.

Thee Librarian · Sep 28, 2018

HTacianas said:
There were sixteen convictions of Clinton associates during the Whitewater investigation alone. So I have to say the graphic is inaccurate at best.

On this list, Dems win with more numbers.
List of United States federal officials convicted of corruption offenses - Wikipedia

Thee Librarian · Sep 28, 2018

rambot said:
So I found this graphic and I have a couple questions:

1) Is this FACTUALLY accurate? I'm not an American and so I don't know the history as well.

This list is much more accurate, but you have to draw your own associations to a sitting president.
List of American federal politicians convicted of crimes - Wikipedia

On the other hand, which is better, higher prosecutions for crimes, or not prosecuting crimes?

AirPo · Sep 28, 2018

Belk said:
How can you get a biased answer of factual data?

If you're a FOX News watcher.

Thoughts on this?

King of CF

Senior Member

King of CF

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Sarcasm is kind of an art isn't it?

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Stranger in a Strange Land

Newbie

Senior Member

King of CF

Senior Member

King of CF

Active Member

Active Member

Active Member

with a Touch of Grey

Similar threads