• Welcome to Christian Forums
  1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

  2. The forums in the Christian Congregations category are now open only to Christian members. Please review our current Faith Groups list for information on which faith groups are considered to be Christian faiths. Christian members please remember to read the Statement of Purpose threads for each forum within Christian Congregations before posting in the forum.
  3. Please note there is a new rule regarding the posting of videos. It reads, "Post a summary of the videos you post . An exception can be made for music videos.". Unless you are simply sharing music, please post a summary, or the gist, of the video you wish to share.

Mueller says messaging apps likely destroyed Trump-Russia evidence

Discussion in 'American Politics' started by FreeinChrist, Apr 19, 2019.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Verv

    Verv Senior Veteran

    +581
    United States
    Eastern Orthodox
    In Relationship
    US-Republican
    Many people perceive the Mueller report as clearing Pres. Trump.

    I am sure we can play word games about this, right.

    ... If someone is not charged in a crime, they are... ??? Cleared? Is that acceptable?

    We are going to end up playing a semantics game where no one wins because we just have different ideologies and you are being stubborn.
     
  2. Allandavid

    Allandavid Well-Known Member

    +5,410
    Australia
    Atheist
    Married
    No, far from it. Mueller explained in detail why he has not attempted to lay charges. It has nothing to do with insufficient evidence...it has solely to do with OLC protocols.
     
  3. Verv

    Verv Senior Veteran

    +581
    United States
    Eastern Orthodox
    In Relationship
    US-Republican
    ... So the President is literally worthy of being charged right now, it's just that uh, you know, stuff is in the way. Protocols. Bureaucracy. The usual stuff.

    I don't believe it.

    Care to make your case?
     
  4. Allandavid

    Allandavid Well-Known Member

    +5,410
    Australia
    Atheist
    Married
    My “case” is that you haven’t read the report.

    If you had, you would understand what is meant by OLC protocols. You would understand why Mueller, on page one, set up an investigative framework based upon those protocols. You would understand why he has not recommended charges for Trump.

    But, because you haven’t bothered to read the report, you understand none of that....
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • List
  5. Allandavid

    Allandavid Well-Known Member

    +5,410
    Australia
    Atheist
    Married
    And yes, he is “worthy of being charged right now”....for any of the TEN obstructive interferences that Mueller lists...!
     
  6. Verv

    Verv Senior Veteran

    +581
    United States
    Eastern Orthodox
    In Relationship
    US-Republican
    I think we have a misunderstanding.

    I wanted you to make a case that he should be charged, or to present some information about why these protocols limit everything.

    I wasn't interested in being told my opinion is irrelevant because I haven't read the Mueller report and have, instead, contented myself with the common & proper interpretations of the experts.

    Why should I believe that American justice is so corrupt and ineffectual that Pres. Trump should be impeached right now.

    Make your case -- or don't. Do as you please. But massaging your ego and implying I am a Philistine while failing to be persuasive at all but giving some quick hot takes is not really the greatest of approaches.
     
  7. KCfromNC

    KCfromNC Regular Member

    +6,891
    Atheist
    Private
    Relevance to this thread?
     
  8. Pommer

    Pommer Autodidact polymath

    +1,116
    United States
    Deist
    In Relationship
    US-Democrat
    This is rich!
    You refuse to read Mueller’s Report, yet the people who have must explain it to you to your satisfaction.
    You’re KNG OF THE FORUMS!
     
    • Funny Funny x 2
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • List
  9. Verv

    Verv Senior Veteran

    +581
    United States
    Eastern Orthodox
    In Relationship
    US-Republican
    The media is full of runaway speculation about this.

    Just look at the quote from the OP:

    "The special counsel’s office “learned that some of the individuals we interviewed or whose conduct we investigated — including some associated with the Trump Campaign deleted relevant communications or communicated during the relevant period using applications that feature encryption or that do not provide for long term retention of data or communication records,”"

    What is this? Continuing to construct scenarios by which we can conclude that they are guilty but just couldn't prove it.

    It's entirely relevant.

    I hope that clarifies it for you.

    So, I am supposed to read 300 pages before I can comment on this, and the people who claim to have read it and say that there is an air tight case that Pres. Trump is guilty can't be bothered to mine the relevant quotations from it and construct their argument before me?

    I think that seems a bit more rich.

    Would you like to take up the burden of proving that Pres. Trump should be charged right now?

    ... Or are you just going to tell me that I have to read 300+ pages to know anything relevant about this.

    Did you read those 300+ pages?
     
  10. Ringo84

    Ringo84 Separation of Church and State expert

    +4,375
    United States
    Baptist
    Single
    US-Others
    That's what gaslighting is: speaking with authority on things you're proudly ignorant about to convince those not paying much attention (or the more gullible of the opposition*) of whatever propaganda you're trying to spout. It's all Donny's supporters have left.

    Honestly, don't even waste your time and effort on it. Everyone knows Donny's guilty as sin. If he weren't, his supporters wouldn't charge into threads like this to say "nuh uh!" to people's discussion about the Mueller report.
    Ringo


    * Not saying anyone here is gullible. I'm speaking in general terms.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Informative Informative x 1
    • List
  11. Verv

    Verv Senior Veteran

    +581
    United States
    Eastern Orthodox
    In Relationship
    US-Republican
    What would be the proper term for claiming that the Mueller report totally condemns Pres. Trump and he should be charged, but not providing substantial information on it, and just hoping that people who did not read it will assent to your take on it..?

    What would be the proper term for the media heavily reporting on "Russia collusion" but having it be unproven in a court of law, and in fact, not meeting the threshold to be brought to court, and continuing to insist that this is all the definitive truth?

    The President's supporters have the courts.

    The President's detractors, who casually refer to the leader of the free world as "Donny," are the ones that are gaslighting.
     
  12. Ringo84

    Ringo84 Separation of Church and State expert

    +4,375
    United States
    Baptist
    Single
    US-Others
    Not sure, but you're definitely guilty of the same thing you accuse others of doing. You have no clue what you're talking about, and it's obvious. But you keep daring us to """prove""" to you that Donny is guilty.

    You should either do your own research or just stop talking. I can't speak for everyone in this thread, but I'd be willing to bet that they're as sick of this projecting as I am. It's exhausting to have to continually have to reinvent the wheel every time someone Kramers into a thread whining about "total exoneration".
    Ringo
     
    • Optimistic Optimistic x 1
    • List
  13. Verv

    Verv Senior Veteran

    +581
    United States
    Eastern Orthodox
    In Relationship
    US-Republican
    You know what you could do to make me quiet, Ringo?

    Do what the other people in this thread say they can do but they can't actually do.

    And that is show us the evidence that would merit bringing Pres. Trump to a court of law, that is definitive and tight, and not highly speculative.

    There's nothing in the Mueller report that accomplishes this task. If there was, the President of the United States would be standing trial.

    You posture all hard like you can refer to us as "little Donny's supporters" and then bounce back to portraying yourself as a serious, educated debater who sees through me and can call me out for "projection" and accuse me of "gaslighting." Yet... What are you doing?

    Contentless posts insisting that you are absolutely right and Pres. Trump is guilty.
     
  14. KCfromNC

    KCfromNC Regular Member

    +6,891
    Atheist
    Private
    Can you be a bit more clear? Which investigation cleared who of what, exactly?

    If you want me to believe this, I'd like to see some quotes which demonstrate this is happening.
     
  15. KCfromNC

    KCfromNC Regular Member

    +6,891
    Atheist
    Private


    Unless you can demonstrate these things happening, I think the proper term is "off-topic deflection".
     
  16. Verv

    Verv Senior Veteran

    +581
    United States
    Eastern Orthodox
    In Relationship
    US-Republican
    I was actually in the process of calling out people who insisted on the guilt of Pres. Trump.

    Last I checked, the court systems in the West are based on innocent until proven guilty, and you guys were incapable to even assemble the evidence to merit a trial for Pres. Trump or any of his staff concerning something like conspiracy to defraud the American people or treason or anything along the lines that would denote stealing the election.

    Why would the burden be on me to prove his innocence after you have failed to prove his guilt?

    Plus, you cannot prove a negative.

    Which is what this is all about:

    "Maybe his guilt was concealed by secret Telegram chats with auto-self-destruct!"

    And maybe there's a teapot floating around the sun in a perfect orbit just a couple million miles away from us.
     
  17. KCfromNC

    KCfromNC Regular Member

    +6,891
    Atheist
    Private
    Who are you talking about here?

    Who are you quoting here?
     
  18. Belk

    Belk Senior Member Supporter

    +6,888
    Agnostic
    Married

    How would the president be standing trial when it is explicitly stated that they will not indict a sitting president?
     
    • Optimistic Optimistic x 1
    • List
  19. Verv

    Verv Senior Veteran

    +581
    United States
    Eastern Orthodox
    In Relationship
    US-Republican
    Allanwdavid, for instance. Ringo would be another.

    What, do you dispute that there are people who believe the President is still guilty?

    I am referring back to the runaway speculation in the OP, which I have already addressed for you, KC!

    Have I satisfied your questions?

    Do you have any more?

    I feel like you have asked a series of bad questions not because you actually did not understand what I was doing, but just to be passive aggressive.



    But the President can be indicted:

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...eb7d3a2d304_story.html?utm_term=.116b30a62184

    And the President can face impeachment.

    Yet, the evidence doesn't exist to pursue anything like that.
     
  20. Speedwell

    Speedwell Well-Known Member

    +10,555
    United States
    Other Religion
    Married
    Impeachment is not a criminal proceeding. The President can be removed from office for anything that two thirds of the Congress agrees on.
     
    Last edited: Apr 25, 2019
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...