3 ms·

But… the charges haven’t been released yet? How do you already know they’re baseless? Like, it’s crazy to me that anyone would assert that the charges are base

But… the charges haven’t been released yet? How do you already know they’re baseless? Like, it’s crazy to me that anyone would assert that the charges are baseless or that they’re solid before the charges have even been announced. How do you know they’re baseless? I agree that the number of charges doesn’t make a point one way or another, about the strength of the charges.

A4ET8a8uTh0 4y ago
And yet, NYT is somehow allowed to speculate on what those are without knowing them. I am sure you will agree that the same should extent to mere posters here.
- ncallaway 4y ago
  I’m not saying we can’t speculate about the charges. Was there anything in my question that indicated I thought people here should be prohibited from speculation? I’m asking how someone can be absolutely certain in their speculation about those charges. Is the NYT saying the charges are particularly strong, or are they saying the charges are particularly weak? I haven’t seen that from them, but if they are then I have the same questions. I’m not holding anyone here to a higher level of scrutiny than the NYT. I merely asked where someone’s confidence came from.
  - stuckinhell 4y ago
    Cmon, you are 100% saying we shouldn't. don't deny it. The New York Times thinks this is a huge mistake.
    - ncallaway 4y ago
      I deny it. I said it was crazy to me, and I said it was wild. There are lots of things that are baffling to me, or inscrutable to me, that I don’t think should be prohibited. But, like, no one has answered the question I asked. How did you become confident that the allegations are baseless without seeing the allegations? That’s crazy to me. You’re welcome to do it. It’s a free country, after all. I’m just trying to figure out if it’s rational in some way I don’t understand, or just baseless and overstated speculation. It seems inherently irrational to me to state the strength of the allegations before we’ve seen the allegations (either meritorious or without merit), but I’ve been wrong before. So far no one has stepped up and offered an answer to that question though. > The New York Times thinks this is a huge mistake. “Is it a mistake” is an entirely different question from “are the charges meritorious”? Personally, I think they should be the same question, but lots of people think he shouldn’t be indicted even if he committed a crime, or that he should be indicted even if he didn’t. I think both are wrong, and the only mistake is giving him special treatment. He should be charged if, and only if, the facts and law demonstrate that he broke the law. So, for me “is it a mistake” is a question that we can only start to address once the indictment is unsealed (and fully resolve once evidence by both sides is presented).
      - stuckinhell 4y ago
        It's not the fact its baseless, its the context around it. That's what's crazy. Your irrationality comes from the fact, you are trying to ignore the context around it. Braggs is case is being criticized heavily from the LEFT and the RIGHT. It is unprecedented and to most of the world similar with banana republics and like reeks of a setup. You got the New York Post, the New York Times, The Rolling Stone, ABC, Fortune, Slate, The Hill, NBC, National Review, Daily Beast, Politico and more saying this is a bad idea. Don't you wonder why people more familiar with politics who are democrats AND republicans than you think that is ? So you make America look horrible in the face of - your allies in the elite political circles - your allies internationally - your core base All the while selling Trump on his ultimate brand as the "Rebel", of which he sells T-shirts off. You cannot ignore the context around all of this, which weakens America significantly in already trying time as countries around the world are dropping the reserve currency USD and also belief in American Ideals.
        ncallaway 4y ago
        Well, I’m not going to apologize for my belief that the rule of law should be based on the facts, the evidence, and the law and not politics. Your appeal to the authorities of political figures falls on deaf ears for me. I do not give a single flying shit about the political calculus. That’s what makes it a banana republic decision. Nothing about the decision to charge or not charge should be based on politics. So, fuck the Democrats, fuck the Republicans, and fuck Politico. I don’t give a shit about any of their opinions. Frankly, the appeal to people who know more “about politics” on this topic is anathema to me. Show me the charges, show me the evidence, and show me the law. Everything else is for the birds.
        piva00 4y ago
        What I understand from your take is that Trump shouldn't be indicted because that's a bad view for America. Like... What? Rule of law is completely not considered, at all, Trump should be above the law because he's just too big of a popular figure. That's simply absurd to read.
      - thaumasiotes 4y ago

A4ET8a8uTh0 4y ago

And yet, NYT is somehow allowed to speculate on what those are without knowing them. I am sure you will agree that the same should extent to mere posters here.

ncallaway 4y ago
I’m not saying we can’t speculate about the charges. Was there anything in my question that indicated I thought people here should be prohibited from speculation? I’m asking how someone can be absolutely certain in their speculation about those charges. Is the NYT saying the charges are particularly strong, or are they saying the charges are particularly weak? I haven’t seen that from them, but if they are then I have the same questions. I’m not holding anyone here to a higher level of scrutiny than the NYT. I merely asked where someone’s confidence came from.
- stuckinhell 4y ago
  Cmon, you are 100% saying we shouldn't. don't deny it. The New York Times thinks this is a huge mistake.
  - ncallaway 4y ago
    I deny it. I said it was crazy to me, and I said it was wild. There are lots of things that are baffling to me, or inscrutable to me, that I don’t think should be prohibited. But, like, no one has answered the question I asked. How did you become confident that the allegations are baseless without seeing the allegations? That’s crazy to me. You’re welcome to do it. It’s a free country, after all. I’m just trying to figure out if it’s rational in some way I don’t understand, or just baseless and overstated speculation. It seems inherently irrational to me to state the strength of the allegations before we’ve seen the allegations (either meritorious or without merit), but I’ve been wrong before. So far no one has stepped up and offered an answer to that question though. > The New York Times thinks this is a huge mistake. “Is it a mistake” is an entirely different question from “are the charges meritorious”? Personally, I think they should be the same question, but lots of people think he shouldn’t be indicted even if he committed a crime, or that he should be indicted even if he didn’t. I think both are wrong, and the only mistake is giving him special treatment. He should be charged if, and only if, the facts and law demonstrate that he broke the law. So, for me “is it a mistake” is a question that we can only start to address once the indictment is unsealed (and fully resolve once evidence by both sides is presented).
    - stuckinhell 4y ago
      It's not the fact its baseless, its the context around it. That's what's crazy. Your irrationality comes from the fact, you are trying to ignore the context around it. Braggs is case is being criticized heavily from the LEFT and the RIGHT. It is unprecedented and to most of the world similar with banana republics and like reeks of a setup. You got the New York Post, the New York Times, The Rolling Stone, ABC, Fortune, Slate, The Hill, NBC, National Review, Daily Beast, Politico and more saying this is a bad idea. Don't you wonder why people more familiar with politics who are democrats AND republicans than you think that is ? So you make America look horrible in the face of - your allies in the elite political circles - your allies internationally - your core base All the while selling Trump on his ultimate brand as the "Rebel", of which he sells T-shirts off. You cannot ignore the context around all of this, which weakens America significantly in already trying time as countries around the world are dropping the reserve currency USD and also belief in American Ideals.
      - ncallaway 4y ago
        Well, I’m not going to apologize for my belief that the rule of law should be based on the facts, the evidence, and the law and not politics. Your appeal to the authorities of political figures falls on deaf ears for me. I do not give a single flying shit about the political calculus. That’s what makes it a banana republic decision. Nothing about the decision to charge or not charge should be based on politics. So, fuck the Democrats, fuck the Republicans, and fuck Politico. I don’t give a shit about any of their opinions. Frankly, the appeal to people who know more “about politics” on this topic is anathema to me. Show me the charges, show me the evidence, and show me the law. Everything else is for the birds.
      - piva00 4y ago
        What I understand from your take is that Trump shouldn't be indicted because that's a bad view for America. Like... What? Rule of law is completely not considered, at all, Trump should be above the law because he's just too big of a popular figure. That's simply absurd to read.
    - thaumasiotes 4y ago