Excitable Adam Schiff: Mueller Couldn’t Prove Collusion, But There’s Lots Of Evidence Or Something

The Russia Russia Russia collusion meme has mostly disappeared from most mainstream news outlets at this point. Nothing in the NY Times or Washington Post, the LA Times in Hollywood #Resistland is bereft of mentions, ABC, CBS, and NBC News all ignore it. Because it’s dead, Jim, just move on. But, this tiny little thing has set the CollusionConspiratists off at some 2nd tier outlets

Trump: Mueller report a ‘total waste of time’ – but it proves no collusion

Donald Trump said on Saturday he has not read Robert Mueller’s report about contacts between his 2016 campaign and Russia, which his Democratic opponents say should be released in full.

“I have not read the Mueller report yet, even though I have every right to do so,” Trump wrote on Twitter. “Only know the conclusions, and on the big one, No Collusion.”

See, it’s that part that has set them in Barking Moonbat Level 4: they’re all asking “how does he know if he hasn’t read it? There must be a conspiracy going on with AG Barr! YEaaaaaaar! Seriously, how would you know that you haven’t committed what you’re being accused of unless you actually read a report on it, right?

Meanwhile, Newsweek continues its stellar writing, the same type that got the rag sold for $1, with a piece by Moonbat Frank Snepp entitled BARR’S MUELLER REPORT SUMMARY IS LIKE WITNESSING A MURDER AND BEING TOLD IT NEVER HAPPENED. Of course, Frank isn’t actually able to offer any evidence that collusion happened, just like Excitable Adam Schiff, who just won’t give up, as we see from the MSNBC transcript

Schiff: I Fully Accept That Mueller Couldn’t Prove Collusion, But “There Is Plenty Of Evidence”

WILLIE GEIST, MSNBC: Do you accept the fundamental conclusion in that four-page letter, that there was no collusion between the Trump campaign and Russians?

REP. ADAM SCHIFF (D-CA): I accept [Robert] Mueller’s conclusion, and I assume Barr wouldn’t misrepresent this, that he could not prove beyond a reasonable doubt the crime of conspiracy. As I said all along, there is plenty of evidence of collusion and corrupt co-mingling of work between the Trump campaign and the Russians. I fully accept that as a prosecutor, that he couldn’t prove beyond a reasonable doubt that crime.

As you know, because I’ve made this distinction on your show, I always said there was ample evidence of collusion in the public record. Whether Bob Mueller could prove the crime of conspiracy beyond a reasonable doubt would be up to him and I’d accept his conclusion, and I do.

GEIST: You said on this show and others that there is direct evidence of collusion. Were you wrong about that, now that you’ve seen the summary of the special counsel’s report?

SCHIFF: No. Because I think what you see in the public record is direct evidence. When the Russians, through an intermediary, offer dirt on the Clinton campaign as part of what’s described as the Russian government effort to help the Trump campaign, and Donald Trump’s son who played a pivotal role in the campaign who says, if it is what you say it is, I would love it, and sets up a meeting to receive it, that is very direct evidence of collusion.

So, then it would be criminal collusion for the Hillary campaign to be working with a British citizen, Christopher Steele, to obtain the “dossier“, right? Or, would that just be typical political dirty tricks in an age of global connectivity thanks to modern technology? Where foreign citizens and governments attempt to sway elections in other countries? Like has been done for a long, long time?

But, if Schiff has any real evidence, let’s see it: put it on the table. Let us judge it. He can’t, because there isn’t. He, and some other Leftards, just cannot move on from this.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

84 Responses to “Excitable Adam Schiff: Mueller Couldn’t Prove Collusion, But There’s Lots Of Evidence Or Something”

  1. Bill Bear says:

    “how does he know if he hasn’t read it?”

    Notice that the same question applies to Porter Good and every one of his Trumpkin commenters.

    How do they know what the report says if they have not read it?

    And not one of them has even attempted to answer that simple question.

    • formwiz says:

      And how do you know he hasn’t read it?

      Maybe Teach knows a place on the Dark Web where an unexpurgated copy lives.

  2. Elwood P. Dowd says:

    Current AG Barr criticized the Mueller investigation in his unsolicited letter to the White House that served as his job application.

    Since there’s nothing in the report that would incriminate Trump why not let Congress have the document? Trump said earlier that he wanted it released. Has he had a peek at the report? Did Barr give Trump a deep briefing?

    Teach ‘essentially’ asks if Trump would lie about collusion or obstruction. Yes, yes he would.

    Trump can put all the ‘nonsense’ to rest by releasing the report.

    • formwiz says:

      Classified stuff and privileged communication.

      But you knew that.

      And, no, he wouldn’t. You’re the one that’s been lying all along.

  3. Kye says:

    The Mueller Report cannot be released to the public until it has been redacted to protect National Security, government information, the persons of informers, innocent contacts, personal information and other things lawyers are now debating. That sounds reasonable since only an idiot would want those things released.

    I realize the radical anti-American left is laying the groundwork to begin the denial of the report because f these very reactions. When you read the comments here nothing but the Romanov Treatment for Trump, Melania, Junior and the rest of his family will do and the total financial destruction of his name, his partners, business associates and probably his suppliers and customers if they can. IOW, a Khmer Rouge style Purge.

    That’s why they have again revived the ridiculous call for him to release his taxes. After all, if one has nothing to hide why wouldn’t one desire to reveal his most personal financials to ta world full of enemies? That’s their immoral and illegal back-up plan. Immoral because the IRS is supposed to determine the truth and accuracy of a persons returns and immoral because using tax law as a political weapon is well, immoral. I know it didn’t stop Obama but there you have it.

    Thanks to a 1924 provision in the Internal Revenue Code, the chairmen of the House Ways and Means Committee and Senate Finance Committee are authorized to request the president’s — or indeed anyone’s — tax returns from the IRS to conduct an investigation.

    She and the Democrats correctly believe that in the voluminous returns, they will find plenty to criticize. It is a given that the sheer complexity of real estate taxation and magnitude of the sums involved will yield something. They know that, and Trump knows it, too. It is a bigger fishing expedition than a planeload of anglers headed to Cabo.

    While there no doubt will be legal action by President Trump’s lawyers explaining that this is an abuse of the oversight function of Congress since it is aimed purely at him, there is a danger of a rogue, Trump-hating judge going along with it and refusing a temporary stay during appeal.

    While the legal avenue ought to be pursued, I have another suggestion.
    Senator Chuck Grassley, chair of the senate Finance Committee, should announce that if the House Ways and Means Committee pursues Trump’s tax returns, it will go after Nancy Pelosi’s tax returns, and for good measure George Soros’s, Tom Steyer’s, Dianne Feinstein’s, and those of the top 20 donors to Democrat super-PACs.

    If using the IRS for lawfare is okay then bring it on. Include AOC and those two Mohammadans too. Let’s make it a national f***fest.

    That, more than anything else, should persuade the Dems that this would be a dangerous precedent. And it is. I don’t believe Trump or anyone else should be above the law but I also don’t believe “investigations” should go on indefinitely because the left are sore losers.

    Trump won the election which should have been enough but it wasn’t. Then he beat the “investigation” which should really be the end of it but it’s not. We just cannot allow this fishing expedition continue for the well being of the Republic.

    Enough is enough, already. Bring in the adults and govern.

    • Bill Bear says:

      Wow.

      Does Kye really have nothing better to do this morning than plagiarize a post from American Thinker?

      Also… he still has not found sufficient courage to answer three simple questions:

      1) What is an “emolument” as the Constitution uses the term?

      2) Why is the emoluments clause included in the Constitution?

      3) What specific documentary evidence was presented to back up the claim that millions of undocumented immigrants voted in the 2016 Federal elections?

      • Liljeffyatemypuppy says:

        Funny that the Bear accuses others of plagiarism. LOL https://www.thepiratescove.us/wp-content/plugins/wp-monalisa/icons/wpml_cool.gif

      • formwiz says:

        You do it all the time and, since you have the answers, why not lay them out?

        Unless, of course, it’s from someplace like TPM or Politico which will indicate it’s all a crock.

  4. Bill Bear says:

    And it is not at all strange that Lil Liar insinuates an accusation for which he has no evidence whatsoever.

    That is what liars do, after all.

    • formwiz says:

      You’re always copying in articles without citing sources.

      Of course, we know it’s not yours, but that still counts as plagiarism.

      That is what Bidens do, after all.

  5. Mangoldielocks says:

    What the left fails to totally comprehend is that we do not CARE at all what Trump has done in the past. Obviously we care if he has done illegal stuff but the only thing the left can point to is he likes women. Silly man.

    The LEFT does not comprehend that the right wants things done.

    Thank You, Tax Reform
    –The Wall Street Journal
    This week, the White House Council of Economic Advisers reported that America’s economy achieved 3 percent growth for the first time in 13 years in 2018. “The American economy is a tremendous engine of prosperity when politicians get out of the way, and for proof look no further than Thursday’s report on fourth-quarter growth,” The Wall Street Journal editorial board writes. “Tax reform and deregulation, take a bow.”

    President Trump Thanks Fiat Chrysler for ‘Coming Back to the USA’
    –Detroit Free Press
    On Tuesday, Fiat Chrysler announced that Detroit, Michigan, “will get a Jeep factory, the Motor City’s first new auto assembly plant in a generation, as part of a $4.5 billion manufacturing expansion that will mean nearly 6,500 new jobs,” Amy Huschka reports. With jobs coming back to the Midwest thanks to the promise of the new U.S.–Mexico–Canada Agreement, President Trump praised the move: “Thank you Fiat Chrysler. They are all coming back to the USA, it’s where the action is!”

    In Hanoi, Trump Won By Walking Away
    –New York Post
    “Sometimes you have to walk, and this was just one of those times,” President Donald J. Trump said as he prepared to leave Vietnam following his summit with North Korea’s Kim Jong Un this week. Good for the President, the New York Post editorial board says. “Just what we expected in noting the other day that ‘his history suggests he’s always willing to walk away from a deal that’s not good enough.’”

    Trumps poll numbers in key states is what is important. He is polling very well in the states he won in 2016. That is all that matters. The left look at his approval rating of 42 percent ignoring polls take into account his horrible polling with more weight in the poll among more populus states like CA, NJ, Ill. etc.

    In the key states of Florida, Texas, MICHIGAN, OHIO, NORTH CAROLINA his numbers remain in the 50 plus range while in his usual base they are in the 60’s.

    Looks like 6 more years for Trump. Sorry Dems that your only agenda will cost America 100 trillion dollars and turn us into Venezuela.

    • formwiz says:

      You did hear about the MI rally where Parscale was able to determine a third of the people there were Demos, just by cross-checking their cell phones against voter registration data.

  6. Bill Bear says:

    “Obviously we care if he has done illegal stuff”

    That is, of course, a lie. We already know that Trump has violated the Emoluments Clause of the US Constitution. Neither Mangoldilocks nor any other Trumpkin to my knowledge has spoken up to object to that transgression.

    “but the only thing the left can point to is he likes women.”

    That is, of course, also a lie.

    • Liljeffyatemypuppy says:

      Funny that the Bear keeps calling others liars. LOL. https://www.thepiratescove.us/wp-content/plugins/wp-monalisa/icons/wpml_cool.gif

    • Prove it. Provide evidence that would stand up in a court of law.

      Otherwise, you’re the liar.

      And I warned people about getting so personal.

      • Elwood P. Dowd says:

        And how would anyone know if the evidence would stand up in a court of law, if the gov’t keeps all the evidence secret? That’s what courts of law are for.

        We currently have little knowledge of what is in the Mueller report or of what is going on in all the other investigations of Trump and Trump Inc., do we?

        It’s assumed that Mr. Mueller did not feel the investigation had enough evidence for an indictment, or didn’t want to indict a sitting president (although Barr claimed the lack of any indictment Wasn’t because of the DOJ opinion).

        Regarding the report: Congress accesses classified information every day. I suspect if the DOJ does not make the report available to Congress, someone in the Mueller orbit may leak parts of it, much as Edward Snowden did.

        • formwiz says:

          We currently have little knowledge of what is in the Mueller report or of what is going on in all the other investigations of Trump and Trump Inc., do we?

          We know Mule Ears has nothing indictable.

          It’s assumed

          You know what happens when you assume…

          Congress accesses classified information every day.

          And leaks like the Titanic on Tax Day. Nobody in his or her or pick an alternative reality trusts them with anything.

          I suspect if the DOJ does not make the report available to Congress, someone in the Mueller orbit may leak parts of it

          Much like Mule Ears and his blockbuster report, if they had it, it would be out by now.

          You lose.

      • Bill Bear says:

        “Prove it. Provide evidence that would stand up in a court of law.”

        There is little point in discussing this with Porter Good.

        1) Good’s website is not a court of law.

        2) It is an established fact that Good rejects any facts that he finds inconvenient.

        3) Good does not engage in good faith discussions.

        “And I warned people about getting so personal.”

        Let us be clear: What Porter Good means is that he has warned those who dare to disagree with him and his groupies. His groupies are themselves allowed to get as personal as they like, and Good will do nothing.

    • Kye says:

      Sorry, Bill Bear but “we don’t already know” any such thing. If you do kindly lay out your evidence for us to see and review.

      The “Emoluments Clause” as you call it is Article 1, Section 9 of the Constitution and contains much, much more than emoluments. The part which mentions emoluments reads: “No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince or foreign State.” That’s fairly clear except what did the Founders refer to as an “emolument”?

      The Constitutional Dictionary defines an emolument as: “emolument n [ME, fr. L emolumentum, lit., miller’s fee, fr emolere to grind up] : the product (as salary or fees) of an employment Source: NMW”

      Has President Trump received any salary or fee outside the normal financial operation of his life, family or business that any reasonable man could conceive as an emolument?

      It’s here, Bill Bear where you can stop with the archaic “emolument” and just come out and say you believe President Trump to either be taking bribes or is in the employ of a foreign government. Stop pretending.

      Frankly, I and most of us here most likely believe his election to the Office of President did more harm than good to his businesses, his family’s businesses and their overall finances. But we could be wrong about that too. Since the man refuses to take his Presidential Salary and rather donates it to charities I see no reason to think he would view handouts from other people, companies or countries any more appealing. But you go ahead and cite for us the people, places and things which President Trump accepted as emoluments (bribes) and don’t for get the names, dates and amounts of such bribes.

      If you have such evidence then so does the DoJ and as we all are aware of if they had one uncrossed T or undotted I on Trump he’d be at trial as we type.

      We know you hate President Trump but you need to get over that hate, Bill Bear. Having your entire political life swirl around seething hate is not a good way to live. Especially when you pour it out in your comments at this blog. You are being consumed by Trump.

      • Bill Bear says:

        “the product (as salary or fees) of an employment Source”

        Of course, that is not what the term ’emolument’ means as used by the Founders. Perhaps Kye needs a little help educating himself.

        “Having your entire political life swirl around seething hate is not a good way to live.”

        Hmmm.

        Does the word “Mohammedans” sound familiar to Kye? Having his entire life swirl around seething hatred for billions of his fellow humans is not a good way to live.

    • formwiz says:

      We do?

      According to whom?

    • formwiz says:

      Again, according to whom?

      Such a thing would be an impeachable offense.

      For those interested

      No title of nobility shall be granted by the United States: and no person holding any office of profit or trust under them, shall, without the consent of the Congress, accept of any present, emolument, office, or title, of any kind whatever, from any king, prince, or foreign state.

      You do realize the Ozarks violated that constantly. Where’s the outrage over that.

      PS The Foreign Gifts and Decorations Act of 1966, on the other hand, enumerates several elected positions in its definition of “employees” who may not accept any gift of more than minimal value without congressional approval.

      The law, however, is a tad fuzzy. George Washington did not seek or obtain congressional consent for foreign gifts.

      Ha ha.

      • Elwood P. Dowd says:

        formwiz typed: Such a thing would be an impeachable offense.

        And the only way to discover if Trump committed impeachable offenses is by investigating. Mr. Mueller was not evaluating whether Trump committed impeachable offenses – that’s a political determination. The House has to decide that.

        Has Trump committed acts that would even offend Republicans? Don’t know. Did he lie on his written documents to Mueller?

        Who’s investigating Trump paying off Stormy Daniels to keep her quiet before the election?

        • Liljeffyatemypuppy says:

          Guilty until proven innocent?
          Doesn’t work that way. https://www.thepiratescove.us/wp-content/plugins/wp-monalisa/icons/wpml_cool.gif

        • formwiz says:

          Hate to tell you, but an impeachable offense is a high crime (felony) or misdemeanor.

          Real simple, and the Supremes would have to determine about the Emoluments clause, you see it’s never been adjudicated, so Trump could be railroaded by a Democrat Congress, but exonerated by SCUS.

          Now that would be cool.

          Ha ha.

  7. david7134 says:

    After three years of intensive investigation there has not been any evidence that Trump has committed any crime or any evidence of wrong doing. We know this as it would be leaked or the Dems would be running to court.

    But on the other hand there is ample evidence of multiple crimes by Hillary, Obama and the major players in the DNC. But investigations have been a farce and these people have clearly been laced above the law.

    It is time to let Trump do his job and to rectify the damage by Obama and to continue his efforts to improve our wealth and well being and to put Hillary and group in jail.

    • Liljeffyatemypuppy says:

      Yep. https://www.thepiratescove.us/wp-content/plugins/wp-monalisa/icons/wpml_cool.gif

    • Elwood P. Dowd says:

      david,

      According to Teach you can’t accuse someone of a crime without evidence that would hold up in a court of law, under penalty of being banned from commenting.

      Or that rule might only apply to certain commenters.

      • Kye says:

        Elwood, one can accuse anybody of anything but without actual evidence it remains a hollow accusation. Especially if it’s been repeated a million times and has become but a din. I would figure after over two years of investigation there comes a point to move on. We’re past that point.

        I believe you’re aware that Teach is telling everybody to cut out the “liar” crap. I think that’s reasonable.

        • Bill Bear says:

          “one can accuse anybody of anything but without actual evidence it remains a hollow accusation.”

          Ah.

          Then Kye’s accusations that every single one of the billions of people on the planet who follow the religion of Islam are “blood thirsty”, “barbarians”, “all want us dead”, “all bad” are all entirely hollow acusations — because he has no actual evidence.

          • david7134 says:

            If you read their literature you find that it is much similar to David Duke and the KKK. Their religion, or cult, is ok with terrorist activity. Japan will not allow them in the country, China has a million in reeducation camps. Only western nations can not see the threat.

          • formwiz says:

            Last I looked, Kye wasn’t the issue.

            If you’re talking the law, Kye has it right. Sorry, but there’s no Lavrenti Beria you can run to.

            Denouncing people to the NKVD is yet another of your Lefty wet dreams.

      • david7134 says:

        Jeff,
        I refer you to the numerous crimes listed by Comet prior to the election. That is just for starters as there are even more crimes listed by other authorities. Coney would not pass this investigation to Lynch as he had been told not to as Lynch had a meeting with big Bill, a highly inappropriate undertaking that allows us to speculate on the illegal actions that Lynch subsequently under took. Comet a statement that a lawyer would not take the case on Hillary and that she did not intend to commit a crime was not his call. I am surprised that you desire to allow these people to assume royalty status as you always picture yourself as for the little guy.

        • david7134 says:

          Jeff,
          This is well documented in two books. The Russia Hoax and Spygate.

          I can’t speak for Teach, but I assume he is referring to Bill calling everyone a liar, without foundation. And you call everyone white supremacist, members of the KKK, white nationalist and all the other inappropriate statements that you make. I myself am guilty of some actions and realize that your rhetoric is designed to make people upset and mad rather than to carry on a decent conversation.

      • formwiz says:

        Jeffery, like his Mocha Messiah, hates the idea we have a Constitution in this country.

    • Bill Bear says:

      “After three years of intensive investigation there has not been any evidence that Trump has committed any crime or any evidence of wrong doing. We know this”

      No, you do not. It is something you believe without evidence — which covers great many of the dearly held beliefs of Trumpkins.

      • david7134 says:

        Bill,
        If there was a hint of wrong doing it would be all over the fake news.

        Why exactly don’t you like Trump? He is being the country back from the damage caused by Obama. He is establishing peace in areas thought impossible. Manufacturing is returning to the US,something thought impossible by Obama. Much more could be done except the Dems and media fight him at every turn.

      • formwiz says:

        And you have no more knowledge than david.

        How do you know if there’s any more evidence, other than your own immaturity and wishful thinking?

        Since Mule Ears said no more indictments, that pretty much kills it.

        I think you’ll find the american people see it that way about 16 months from now.

        • Bill Bear says:

          “And you have no more knowledge than david.”

          Correct. Like david7134, I have not seen the report.

          That means that, just like david7134, I do not know what is in the report.

          Unlike david7134, I acknowledge that not knowing what the report says means not knowing what the report says — as opposed to pretending I do know what it says.

          “How do you know if there’s any more evidence”

          I do not know if there is any more evidence.

          Neither does david7134.

          If formwiz asks again, I will do him the favor of typing more slowly, so that he might at last comprehend the meaning.

          “Since Mule Ears said no more indictments, that pretty much kills it.”

          No indictments is not the same thing as no evidence. I am certain that someone as wise as formwiz can look up the meanings of the words.

  8. Bill Bear says:

    “If there was a hint of wrong doing it would be all over the fake news.”

    And since david7134 declares any fact he does not like to be “fake news”, he would ignore those facts even if they were revealed — which, to date, they have not been.

    Basically, the playbook goes like this:

    NEWS MEDIA: (silent on the actual published contents of the Mueller report)
    TRUMPKINS: See! See! There can’t be anything bad in the Mueller report!

    NEWS MEDIA: (eventually publishes the contents of the Mueller report)
    TRUMPKINS: FAKE NEWS! FAKE NEWS! MAGA! MAGA! BUT BUT BUT HER EMAILS! BENGHAZI BENGHAZI BENGHAZI BENGHAZI!!!

    Why exactly does david7134 bother to post his dreck when it is so very easy to prove just how uninterested in good faith discussion he truly is?

    • david7134 says:

      Bill,
      I take that as an unnecessary personal attack. I suggest you review fake news, several recent books cover the issue.

      • Bill Bear says:

        “I take that as an unnecessary personal attack.”

        Awwwww…. did I hurt his widdle fee-fees?

        Awwwww.

        Too bad. If david7134 does not like his usual bad faith behavior being called out, there is a simple solution:

        He can change his behavior.

        • david7134 says:

          Bill,
          I prefer to act as an adult. Since you have come on this blog, you have called everyone a liar, even the owner of the web site, mostly because they have a different opinion or have superior knowledge. I don’t care for personal attacks, everyone else here feels the same.

        • formwiz says:

          OK, that’s it.

          You call people liars, racists, white nationalists, sexual harrassers, but when they come at you, we hear, “Is that a threat?”, “When are you sending us off to the camps?”, “how often do you fantasize about murdering Liberals”, and on and on.

          I’m making a request to Teach to ban you. You don’t believe in civil discussion, you don’t care about facts. You are nothing but a fifth-rate Alinskyite who couldn’t debate successfully to save your life.

          • Bill Bear says:

            “but when they come at you, we hear, “Is that a threat?”, “When are you sending us off to the camps?”, “how often do you fantasize about murdering Liberals””

            I have said none of those things, of course.

            This is why formwiz is referred to (correctly) as a liar — because he lies.

            “I’m making a request to Teach to ban you.”

            Ask away. I am certain that the protection of the delicate feelings of his devoted yet sensitive groupies is of utmost importance to Porter Good.

    • formwiz says:

      You can tell how inept and out of the loop he is.

      Trumpkins went out with most trolls on 11/9/16.

  9. Bill Bear says:

    “Manufacturing is returning to the US,something thought impossible by Obama.”

    Really?

    Kindly cite the specific, in context quote from anything Obama said or wrote during his terms in office in which he indicated that he believed it impossible to increase manufacturing jobs in the United States. Be sure to include a citation.

    I’ll wait.

    • david7134 says:

      Bill,
      Sorry, I don’t run around and get readily available information for people that don’t want to believe. If you think you have won something, that is your problem.

      • Bill Bear says:

        “Sorry, I don’t run around and get readily available information”

        Translation: david7134 has not one single solitary crumb of evidence for his assertion. He knows this, and this is his laughably feeble excuse for not providing any supporting facts.

        Once again, he has done me the great favor of demonstrating that he has absolutely zero interest in a good faith discussion of the facts.

        • david7134 says:

          Bill,
          Once again an unnecessary persona,l attack. The information is readily available on any business news channel .

          • Bill Bear says:

            “The information is readily available on any business news channel.”

            Then it will be exceptionally easy for david7134 to find and present that information… except that he cannot.

            Once again david7134 proves that he has absolutely zero interest in a good faith discussion of the facts. He is able only to hurl fact-free accusations, and then making ridiculous excuses for his utter lack of evidence for said accusations.

          • david7134 says:

            Bill,
            This is the most basic of knowledge available to an investor. I don’t do your leg work. My statements stay as truth. Now, understand that I have zero respect for you and will not participate in your little game.

    • formwiz says:

      Magic wand ring a bell?

    • formwiz says:

      Donald Trump ring a bell?

    • Mangoldielocks says:

      @Bill Bear Demanded: Kindly cite the specific, in context quote from anything Obama said or wrote during his terms in office in which he indicated that he believed it impossible to increase manufacturing jobs in the United States. Be sure to include a citation.

      was asked in June 2016 about the Carrier Corp jobs in Indiana.

      “When somebody says like the person you just mentioned who I’m not going to advertise for, that he’s going to bring all these jobs back. Well how exectly are you going to do that? What are you going to do? There’s uh-uh no answer to it. He just says. “I’m going to negotiate a better deal.” Well how? How exactly are you going to negotiate that? What magic wand do you have? And usually the answer is, he doesn’t have an answer.

      From Five-Thirty-Eight.

      A plea to presidential candidates: Stop talking about bringing manufacturing jobs back from China. In fact, talk a lot less about manufacturing, period.

      It’s understandable that voters are angry about trade. The U.S. has lost more than 4.5 million manufacturing jobs since NAFTA took effect in 1994. And as Eduardo Porter wrote this week, there’s mounting evidence that U.S. trade policy, particularly with China, has caused lasting harm to many American workers. But rather than play to that anger, candidates ought to be talking about ways to ensure that the service sector can fill manufacturing’s former role as a provider of dependable, decent-paying jobs.

      Interview with 60 minutes:

      “What is a danger is that we stay stuck in a new normal where unemployment rates stay high, people who have jobs see their incomes go up, businesses make big profits, but they’ve learned to do more with less, and so they don’t hire,” he said.

      • Bill Bear says:

        The quotes from Obama from June 2016 and 60 Minutes do not indicate that Obama believes that it is impossible to increase manufacturing jobs in the United States.

        The quote from 538 is irrelevant, since it did not come from Obama.

        Kindly cite the specific, in context quote from anything Obama said or wrote during his terms in office in which he indicated that he believed it impossible to increase manufacturing jobs in the United States. Be sure to include a citation.

        • Mangoldielocks says:

          I pointed out to you that he implied he had no idea how to get manufacturing jobs back. Because you choose to interpret it in your own way is entirely up to you. The fact is he said it. Pure and simple. His quote on 60 minutes implied that he believed himself and his administration incapable of bringing down unemployment to the current levels we see under Trump.

          The fact you do not believe his own words means you do not believe the science behind semantics and are therefor a denier. Now that we know your a denier we can discount anything you have to say about the subject.

          • Bill Bear says:

            “I pointed out to you that he implied he had no idea how to get manufacturing jobs back.”

            That is also a false statement — just like attributing a 538 article written by someone else to Obama was a false statement.

            “The fact you do not believe his own words”

            Oh, I am quite aware that Obama made the two (not three) statements in Mangoldielocks’ earlier comment.

            I am also quite aware that Mangoldielocks is misrepresenting the meaning of those statements.

  10. Bill Bear says:

    david7134 wrote:

    “Japan will not allow [Muslims] in the country”

    Oh for crying out loud.

    Really,it’s not that hard to find out the facts before posting that kind of nonsense.

    (Of course, I already know what the response will be: MYAHHH SNOPES ANNENBERG POLITIFACT SOROS FAKE NEWS MAGA MAGA MAGA MAGA MAGA MAGA MAGA MAGA MAGA MAGA MAGA MAGA MAGA MAGA MAGA MAGA MAGA MAGA MAGA MAGA MAGA MAGA MAGA MAGA MAGA MAGA MAGA MAGA MAGA MAGA MAGA MAGA MAGA MAGA MAGA…)

    • david7134 says:

      Bill, Don’t know what you are referring to. Maybe I have more information on Asian countries from being there and working with many of them. Travel and education opens up whole worlds.

      • Bill Bear says:

        “Don’t know what you are referring to.”

        On the contrary. david7134 knows exactly what I am referring to.

        His claim about Muslims in Japan is a blatant lie, and he knows it.

        “Travel and education opens up whole worlds.”

        And these repeated shows of deliberate mendacity demonstrate that no matter how much travel and education david7134 may have indulged in, he has absolutely zero interest in a good faith discussion of anything.

        • formwiz says:

          Oh, yeah. You’re Jeffery and so is the guy in the bunny suit.

          Same arguments, same cliches, same rimshots.

          You need better writes.

      • david7134 says:

        Bill,
        Again calling people liars who possess superior knowledge. Again personal attacks.

      • david7134 says:

        Oh,
        I forgot.

        Winning, MAGA.

    • formwiz says:

      Japan has some of the most stringent immigration anywhere.

      There is, f’rinstance, no naturalization process. If you’re not born a Nip, flying all the kamikazes (or Kama Sutras) won’t make you one.

      Japan also doesn’t take refugees. They accept only .3%.

      And use somebody more reliable than Snopes.

      • Bill Bear says:

        “And use somebody more reliable than Snopes.”

        Bingo!

        Lying regressives always attack the source when they cannot discuss the facts.

  11. Bill Bear says:

    “This is the most basic of knowledge available to an investor.”

    Then david7134 should have no problem producing that information.

    But he won’t — because he can’t.

    “I don’t do your leg work.”

    This is a favorite tactic of low-info regressives:

    1) Make a claim.

    2) When challenged on the veracity of the claim that they made, pretend it is someone else’s job to back it up with facts.

    That’s a supreme act intellectual cowardice, as well as the well-known burden of proof fallacy.

    “My statements stay as truth.”

    False. david7134’s statements stay as fact-free allegations for which he refuse to take the slightest responsibility.

    • david7134 says:

      Winning

      MAGA

      All of your assessment are wrong. You need help, bad.

      • Bill Bear says:

        “All of your assessment are wrong.”

        This is the usual retort of a regressive when cornered on his failure to provide supporting evidence for his claim: screech “NUH UH IS TOO I WIN!”, grab the ball, and run home.

        “You need help, bad.”

        It is a certainty that Porter Good will react not at all to a personal attack launched by one of his own groupies.

    • formwiz says:

      Clearly, that information is something you don’t want people to know.

      Put up or shut up.

  12. Bill Bear says:

    “Clearly, that information is something you don’t want people to know.”

    Clearly, that information is something david7134 will not and cannot supply.

    “Put up or shut up.”

    That is a challenge best directed to david7134, who made the allegation in the first place.

Bad Behavior has blocked 8211 access attempts in the last 7 days.