3 ms·

There have been legal cases where convincing evidence has been presented, it’s well-documented. Your presumption that people aren’t looking at these things with

There have been legal cases where convincing evidence has been presented, it’s well-documented. Your presumption that people aren’t looking at these things with suspicion is obnoxious and indicates that you are forming your opinion based on poor information and just not considering one side’s arguments at all because they’re “establishment or deep state.”

coldtea 6y ago
The "one side arguments" are a dime a dozen, and they have a historical track record of lying, and a mission statement that is all about lying, misinformation, covert operations, and so on in the first place. The "convincing evidence" has been of the kind "let's prosecute this guy involved in big politics selectively for stuff that everybody else has been doing on the side for decades, and pretend like he is some rare exception, and hope that people wont see that it doesn't really prove anything about our greater point". Or the kind "yeah, our guys totally have seen these people attacking that system, and they can't be anything but X, would we ever lie? Here's a report".
- hamsterOnWheel 6y ago
  You are just spewing talking points and narrative, meanwhile Stone is putting shit like “anything to save the plan - Richard Nixon” in writing in his emails to co conspirators. You are not being smart. Just look at the evidence, they coordinated with Wikileaks and Russians and got caught. Saying “well others do it” is not a defense, Trump has loyal prosecutors who can make the case if they can.
- hamsterOnWheel 6y ago
  Yeah but we can look at the evidence and evaluate it for ourselves using our critical thinking. We can look at the evidence and evaluate for ourselves whether people are lying to us. I have done that, and you OBVIOUSLY have not. Do you get it? You are just expressing bias again and again.

3 ms·

There have been legal cases where convincing evidence has been presented, it’s well-documented. Your presumption that people aren’t looking at these things with

by hamsterOnWheel 6y ago

coldtea 6y ago
The "one side arguments" are a dime a dozen, and they have a historical track record of lying, and a mission statement that is all about lying, misinformation, covert operations, and so on in the first place. The "convincing evidence" has been of the kind "let's prosecute this guy involved in big politics selectively for stuff that everybody else has been doing on the side for decades, and pretend like he is some rare exception, and hope that people wont see that it doesn't really prove anything about our greater point". Or the kind "yeah, our guys totally have seen these people attacking that system, and they can't be anything but X, would we ever lie? Here's a report".
- hamsterOnWheel 6y ago
  You are just spewing talking points and narrative, meanwhile Stone is putting shit like “anything to save the plan - Richard Nixon” in writing in his emails to co conspirators. You are not being smart. Just look at the evidence, they coordinated with Wikileaks and Russians and got caught. Saying “well others do it” is not a defense, Trump has loyal prosecutors who can make the case if they can.
- hamsterOnWheel 6y ago
  Yeah but we can look at the evidence and evaluate it for ourselves using our critical thinking. We can look at the evidence and evaluate for ourselves whether people are lying to us. I have done that, and you OBVIOUSLY have not. Do you get it? You are just expressing bias again and again.