First Former President to Accuse FBI of Planting Information
- Thread starter nsacpi
- Start date
Its cute when people like the lecturer and mqt ignore recent history.
Tapate50
Well-known member
Qft
I’ve steadfastly said I’m not just going to blindly accept any of the speculation so far. However, I’m also not willing to blindly accept Trump’s word that evidence has been planted.
It does lead me to wonder what was supposedly found there. If Trump says it’s *not* about nuclear documents, but also talks about evidence being planted in the same post, it begs the question of if that reporting is at least accurate. I’ll believe it when I see it, but it’s interesting to me.
It's only interesting to you because you want there to be something and ignore the last 6 years of the Liberal World Order trying to stop Trump at all costs.
We get it - Don't sit here and pretend its anything else because a rational person would look at the last 6 years and not believe a word that comes from these scum agencies.
I’d argue a rational person would wait for all information to come out and look at all the data before coming to a conclusion on something they know nothing about.
I find it fascinating that you don’t believe you’re also being lied to. I think it should be a baseline assumption that pretty much anybody at that level of power is lying to you more often than not.
There’s an incredible circular logic going on here where you’re repeating the assertions that your side has not been lying to you to affirm that my side unequivocally has been every time.
nsacpi
Expects Yuge Games
Looking forward to the evidence that the FBI planted info at Mar-a-Lago.
Should be noted that the thread title is silent on the question of whether the accusation is factually grounded or not. Obviously different people will have different priors on this. As evidence is produced (or not produced) those who are rational will adjust those priors accordingly.
Should be noted that the thread title is silent on the question of whether the accusation is factually grounded or not. Obviously different people will have different priors on this. As evidence is produced (or not produced) those who are rational will adjust those priors accordingly.
Last edited:
You didn't enjoy the first time with Russian Collusion?
Lets call it a pre-emptive warning.
And then of course Trump never said they 'did' plant evidence only that a rational person would look at the recent past and think thats a very realistic and most likely outcome.
That didn't work for you countless times the last 6 years.
Forgive me if I'm not holding my breath for you to play this on the straight and narrow.
The problem is that you’re claiming with minimal evidence that your interpretation of each of those examples are definitely the reality, which is where the circular logic comes from. You claim to be thinking critically instead of being a sheep, but you’re just accepting the inverse of what people on the Left are accepting. In reality, there are a ton of unanswered questions and some nuance that neither side is willing to accept. If you believe Russian collusion was 100% disproven and Trump and his team did nothing improper, you’re ignoring evidence. If a Leftist thinks Putin and Trump personally colluded to win the 2016 election, they’re ignoring evidence as well. We’re talking about situations that are somehow both complex and vague, yet everyone is convinced they have the full story and the other side is lying.