Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
[url=http://www.hannity.com/articles/hanpr-election-493995/clapper-theres-still-no-evidence-of-15813852/]Clapper: There's Still No Evidence of Trump Collusion with Russia | The Sean Hannity Show[/url] Even those who hate Trump still cant come up with the goods.
Apparently you didn't watch the hearing. Let me put it this way:
Prosecutor: Doctor, did you find any evidence that Mr. Jones molested Sally last year?
Doctor: No, not at that time.
Prosecutor: Did you find further injuries that show Sally Jones was abused by her father?
Doctor: I cannot comment at this time, since more tests are being analyzed and DNA is being processed.
This is what I heard.
Graham: Did you encounter a Trump business interest in Russia that gave you concern?"
Clapper: Not in the course of the intelligence community assessment.
Graham: Since? At all? Anytime?
Clapper: Senator Graham, I can’t comment on that, because that impacts an investigation.
I guess that sounds like a definite no to Trump supporters.
AND -- I do think that it is important for these hearings and for Trump and staff to cooperate completely. If they did nothing wrong -- they can't find anything. AND we need to have a clear understanding how and if and when and where the Russians got involved. It's for the integrity of our voting process.
After so many years of "I invoke my right to take the 5th", "I'm sorry but those records and severs were accidentally destroyed" and "I don't recall", do you think we are going to hear any truthful testimony again?
Appears you're not old enough to remember Watergate.
There's no comparison to Watergate. To do so is comparing apples to oranges. In Watergate, a crime was committed and not by Nixon, but by his campaign people.
There's no comparison to Watergate. To do so is comparing apples to oranges. In Watergate, a crime was committed and not by Nixon, but by his campaign people.
Facts and evidence have no sides to pick or place. They are the facts and will always be facts.
Facts fit facts.
Lies don't fit facts. Why lie like that to set your narrative?
Correct. That is why they change the narrative. The facts don't change, so you have to re-write what people are saying, so those same facts fit.
Original claims: Russia interfered with our election, and Trump benefited AND Trump had inappropriate ties to Russia.
New Narrative put out by Trump and Co: Dem's are claiming that Russia *tampered* with the election and that Trump Colluded with them to sway the outcome.
Changing the Narrative to something that likely can't be proven, but also something that was not the original charge. Facts remain constant.
Analogous example:
Mom and dad accuse their kid of drinking, which could be any amount (one sip) of alcohol.
Kid said no, I was not drinking. I got pulled over by police and did a breathalyzer. They let me go.
Kid has changed the narrative. Mom and dad said he was drinking. Did not say he was legally intoxicated. Cop evidence exonerated kid of a crime that was not the original charge. He has not proven he was not drinking, only that he was not legally intoxicated.
For those with enough IQ to understand analogies, this is similar. For the few remaining Trump supporters, "yes, I understand Trump was not pulled over for underage drinking."
Correct. That is why they change the narrative. The facts don't change, so you have to re-write what people are saying, so those same facts fit.
Original claims: Russia interfered with our election, and Trump benefited AND Trump had inappropriate ties to Russia.
New Narrative put out by Trump and Co: Dem's are claiming that Russia *tampered* with the election and that Trump Colluded with them to sway the outcome.
Changing the Narrative to something that likely can't be proven, but also something that was not the original charge. Facts remain constant.
Analogous example:
Mom and dad accuse their kid of drinking, which could be any amount (one sip) of alcohol.
Kid said no, I was not drinking. I got pulled over by police and did a breathalyzer. They let me go.
Kid has changed the narrative. Mom and dad said he was drinking. Did not say he was legally intoxicated. Cop evidence exonerated kid of a crime that was not the original charge. He has not proven he was not drinking, only that he was not legally intoxicated.
For those with enough IQ to understand analogies, this is similar. For the few remaining Trump supporters, "yes, I understand Trump was not pulled over for underage drinking."
That changing the narrative is what the 'liberal media' is accused of while I think that Fox is the master of it....the liberal media learned from them.
And I don't think all liberal media do it.
But this was a good way of explaining how the narrative can change.
There's no comparison to Watergate. To do so is comparing apples to oranges. In Watergate, a crime was committed and not by Nixon, but by his campaign people.
Here, no crime has been committed.
This isn't on a level of Watergate but it's close, firing an FBI director in the middle of an investigation of a foreign power is historic.
Apparently you didn't watch the hearing. Let me put it this way:
Prosecutor: Doctor, did you find any evidence that Mr. Jones molested Sally last year? Doctor: No, not at that time. Prosecutor: Did you find further injuries that show Sally Jones was abused by her father? Doctor: I cannot comment at this time, since more tests are being analyzed and DNA is being processed.
This is what I heard.
Graham: Did you encounter a Trump business interest in Russia that gave you concern?" Clapper: Not in the course of the intelligence community assessment. Graham: Since? At all? Anytime? Clapper: Senator Graham, I can’t comment on that, because that impacts an investigation.
I guess that sounds like a definite no to Trump supporters.
Some people must have watched a different hearing, why is it so difficult to understand the investigation is still in progress.
1. The Trump supporters have successfully changed the narrative, so that the facts will fit their side. The original claim was (and is) that Russia interfered with our election, which has been proven, and re-proven. It is fact that they Affected the election, it cannot be proven if they affected the outcome, as we'll never know what would have happened if they did not interfere. When Trump and his supporters could not disprove this original claim (that Russia interfered) they changed the narrative to say say the charge was Trump Collusion, because that is easier to deny, harder to prove.
2. While it still has not been proven that Trump colluded with Russia to affect the election, it certainly has not been disproven. It has been proven that there were (beyond the norm) communications.
It has been proven that members of his staff lied about it (Flynn is one, not the only)
It has been proven that Trump lied about not having any financial dealings whatsoever with Russia
--so to Point #2, there is still no smoking gun, but there is so much circumstantial evidence that he is up to his eyeballs that it's hard to honestly conclude he is not. Let me be clear, in the US, you are innocent until proven guilty, so by the law, he is innocent. But if you hold him to the same standards that Hillary was held to with Benghazi, or the email fake-scandal, then he is far more guilty than she was. And if you hold her to the standard of the US law, then she is the same as him, innocent.
What I can't understand is why the Trump and his supporters are STILL so obsessed with the election. We voted, he won by the rules in place, it's over. The only reason they are still going on and on is either:
1. They know he cheated his way in, or
B. They know in their hearts that Hillary was the better candidate, and they feel they have to justify it.
Anyway, Hillary's supporters have mostly gotten past it, why can't Trump and his supporters?
That's an awful thin line of reasoning here, very thin.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
