“Prove a negative!” Hey, Chris Cuomo, did you really pass law school? It’s the responsibility of those pushing the narrative to show there’s evidence, not the other way around.

You’ve slandered everyone associated with the Trump campaign for months treating it as a proven fact as opposed to a question with no evidence yet produced.

(05-20-2017 01:17 AM)usmbacker Wrote:  



“Prove a negative!” Hey, Chris Cuomo, did you really pass law school? It’s the responsibility of those pushing the narrative to show there’s evidence, not the other way around.

You’ve slandered everyone associated with the Trump campaign for months treating it as a proven fact as opposed to a question with no evidence yet produced.

No kidding. Unfortunately, in the court of public opinion (where most of politics is played), it's often guilty until proven innocent. Gets more clicks and views that way......

Lack of evidence of a conspiracy is proof that the conspiracy exists.

Prove a negative is the new unhinged liberal hotness.

Dumb as a bag of rocks.....

if there's nothing, not one piece of evidence, showing Trump and Russia Collusion...you can say just that. The congressman almost choked when this guy said "I know you aren't talking about this network". Well yeah, he was talking about CNN being one of the new outlet that is drumming the Trump and Russia Collusion.

This guy is a full blown idiot

What evidence did they have on Nixon? It was his obstruction that brought him down. Nixon didn't have a FoxNews and right wing radio though. Same events were not reported as to have two different realities. Impeachment is in the political realm. Just know if these exact set of circumstances happened to Hillary these same voices would be SCREAMING IMPEACHMENT.

(05-20-2017 08:49 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  What evidence did they have on Nixon? It was his obstruction that brought him down. Nixon didn't have a FoxNews and right wing radio though. Same events were not reported as to have two different realities. Impeachment is in the political realm. Just know if these exact set of circumstances happened to Hillary these same voices would be SCREAMING IMPEACHMENT.

He says even as many of the lefts leaders are walking back that particular narrative. Why? Because they know they are coming across as little more than a shite show and it's damaging their brand.

(05-20-2017 08:49 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  What evidence did they have on Nixon? It was his obstruction that brought him down. Nixon didn't have a FoxNews and right wing radio though. Same events were not reported as to have two different realities. Impeachment is in the political realm. Just know if these exact set of circumstances happened to Hillary these same voices would be SCREAMING IMPEACHMENT.

What evidence they had on Nixon was that the Watergate break-in happened, and the investigations were to determine why. There was an actual event to which other facts could be related.

Here there is no event. There is this massive effort to take a factoid here and a factoid there and try to cobble them together to create some nefarious result, but the problem is that there's nothing to tie them to. There is no there there.

It's like there's a whole bunch of dots but no lines. You need some lines to tie the dots together, but there are no lines.

As special prosecutor was appointed two days ago. I would hold back on heaping praise on Democarats saying let's wait for some evidence. You have three realms where this can go. The obstruction route. The money laundering out. The collusion of the campaign route. I do agree that the collusion route will be the hardest to find inculpatory evidence on.

More proof here that those that toss around watergate dont really know nixons role in it. Lol

Cuomo needs to provide proof he never effs chickens otherwise we will assume he does.

Owl,

Please. The event of the DNC hack. Is the exact same as breaking into Watergate. We have plenty of smoke around that to. You had another country's intelligence apparatus do the deed. How much did Trump know and when did he know it is one realm. Him obstructing us finding that is a whole other realm. That is where he will be brought down. The only thing saving him is a Republican House and Senate.

This is something like the telephone game kids played in grade school...

you tell one person something and they tell someone and on and on. By the time it gets to the end of the line it's something totally different.

The only difference is the media is using headlines to get people to spread something totally different than what is in the actual article. It seems like 6 out of the 7 articles that's on yahoo each day about President Trump leads with a bold headline..."Trump gave Russians secret docs" or something like that. But in the article they walk it back to either not being true or he did nothing wrong.

But they know the headline is what people are going to remember and talk about....not the actual facts in the article

WOW! To some of the nonsense a couple people on this board post. hell it's like dreamland...wow

The loudest voices in this thread would be screaming impeachment if this were HILAREEEEEE!

Lock her up lock her up. I get the playbook. Now Trump just can't obstruct investigations. I think you can tie three peopl into getting fired when they started looking into Russia. Not a good look my friends. Just imagine Trumps shenanigans were from a D. That should help you to understand.

(05-20-2017 09:06 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Owl,

Please. The event of the DNC hack. Is the exact same as breaking into Watergate. We have plenty of smoke around that to. You had another country's intelligence apparatus do the deed. How much did Trump know and when did he know it is one realm. Him obstructing us finding that is a whole other realm. That is where he will be brought down. The only thing saving him is a Republican House and Senate.

You do know the bold part is complete fiction? Something made up totally in your mind. At some point you really need to give a link to facts that even hints to backing you up.

No, not a jester on twitter but some actual facts...not opinions

(05-20-2017 09:14 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  The loudest voices in this thread would be screaming impeachment if this were HILAREEEEEE!

Lock her up lock her up. I get the playbook. Now Trump just can't obstruct investigations. I think you can tie three peopl into getting fired when they started looking into Russia. Not a good look my friends. Just imagine Trumps shenanigans were from a D. That should help you to understand.

Sure...People would scream at Hillary and the outcome would emerge....nothing.

read the comments about this on his Facebook page if you really want to see how stupid the left is.

Sent from my SM-J700T using CSNbbs mobile app

(05-20-2017 09:06 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Owl,
Please. The event of the DNC hack. Is the exact same as breaking into Watergate. We have plenty of smoke around that to. You had another country's intelligence apparatus do the deed. How much did Trump know and when did he know it is one realm. Him obstructing us finding that is a whole other realm. That is where he will be brought down. The only thing saving him is a Republican House and Senate.

Except we don't have that.

We have certain information leaked by wikileaks.

Where did they get it? We don't know. Could have been a hack. Could have been a thumb drive smuggled out by a disgruntled staffer. The US intel bosses speculated that it was the former, wikileaks says it was the latter. What I find to be particularly damning is the the democrats won't let anyone look at the servers that were allegedly hacked. Why not? My guess is that it was the guy they killed, but that's just my guess.

If there was a hack, who did it? Could've been the Russians. That's what the US intel bosses speculated. Could've been someone else. We certainly don't know that anyone "had another country's intelligence apparatus do the deed." Were Russians attempting to hack? Absolutely, they have for decades, as have we to them. But that in no way signifies that anyone outside the Russian intelligence apparatus conspired with them to do anything. Russian hacking was always going on, and it was always going to go on regardless of any action by the Trump campaign.

How much did Trump know? About what? What was there for him to know about? If thee's something there, maybe there is an obstruction violation. If there's nothing there, there isn't. In order to obstruct, you have to have something to obstruct. The something to obstruct is what's missing here.

Again, to me the most remarkable thing is that when Russian hacking might have (and in all likelihood did) lift US national security secrets off Hillary's rogue server, that was no problem to democrats, but Podesta's emails are a national crisis. I think those priorities should be reversed.

We know of a crime. And they damned well better be investigating it. I want to know who illegally unmasked and leaked Flynns name. The investigation better start and end there.

(05-20-2017 01:17 AM)usmbacker Wrote:  “Prove a negative!” Hey, Chris Cuomo, did you really pass law school?

Wiki says he went to Yale for undegrad then law school at.. Fordham.

Doesn't exactly sound like he set the world on fire.

Any credible link to where Russians hacked Hillary's server? That's a new one.