Did a Mueller Grand Jury Subpoena Trump?

[haymarket]

Actually, that DOESN'T settle anything. I simply made a statement of fact...that Trump's people said something.

Thats right - it settles nothing as the source is a proven serial liar. I was hoping you would see that.

 

[Mycroft]

Thats right - it settles nothing as the source is a proven serial liar. I was hoping you would see that.

No.

It settles nothing because there are no facts.

Only speculation.

 

[haymarket]

No.

It settles nothing because there are no facts.

Only speculation.

You do realize the "settles nothing" refers to your proclamation don't you?

 

[Mycroft]

You do realize the "settles nothing" refers to your proclamation don't you?

My statement was factual. Trump's people DID say this stuff has nothing to do with him.

What isn't settled is what this stuff is about. Nobody knows anything and they are left with speculation. (Or, as I'm doing, waiting for facts.)

 

[haymarket]

My statement was factual. Trump's people DID say this stuff has nothing to do with him.

What isn't settled is what this stuff is about. Nobody knows anything and they are left with speculation. (Or, as I'm doing, waiting for facts.)

Yes - you repeated a claim by the Trump White House. And that is what makes it a statement that settles nothing because it comes from liars who lie for a living each and every day they keep the people house in Washington. Trump and his people saying

Quote Originally Posted by Mycroft View Post
Trump's people have already said this has nothing to do with him.

is something you and everyone should take with a grain of salt as large as the Empire State Building.

And that is why you repeating the White House line settles nothing.

 

[Moderate Right]

Bwahahahaha! As if Trump or his Administration has one iota of cred?

Are you saying that Trump has zero credibility with the left? Who wooda ever thunk.

 

[maxparrish]

Plot twist it was Hannity. He was not on his show Friday Night.

Methinks you are joking - if it were Hannity the Mueller team would have called for live coverage via every known form of communication, up to an including broadcasting to interstellar space and sonar coding to dolphins.

 

[Mycroft]

Yes - you repeated a claim by the Trump White House. And that is what makes it a statement that settles nothing because it comes from liars who lie for a living each and every day they keep the people house in Washington. Trump and his people saying



is something you and everyone should take with a grain of salt as large as the Empire State Building.

And that is why you repeating the White House line settles nothing.

My statement was factual. I never claimed to settle anything.

Does that trigger you?

 

[Common Sense 1]

...and Trump's people are credible how?



...far more likely than what Trump or his people tell us is true...

BTW, the news portion of CNN has a very high rating for factual integrity.

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/cnn/

"....Overall, we rate CNN left biased based on story selection that often favors the left. We rate them Mixed for factual reporting due to misinformation and failed fact checks from guests and pundits. However, CNN’s straight news reporting would earn a High rating for factual reporting...."

Most of what Trump wants to call "fake news" is later found to be true.

https://www.factcheck.org/2018/01/trumps-phony-fake-news-claims/

Occupy CNN protest

On April 3, 2016, hundreds of supporters of Bernie Sanders protested outside of CNN Los Angeles. Sanders supporters were protesting CNN's coverage of the 2016 United States presidential elections, specifically in regards to the lack of airtime Sanders had received. Known as Occupy CNN, protesters claimed that major media networks have intentionally blacked out Sanders' presidential campaign in favor of giving much more airtime to candidates such as Hillary Clinton.[10]
Donna Brazile and Roland Martin

In October 2016, WikiLeaks published emails from John Podesta which showed CNN contributor Donna Brazile passing the questions for a CNN-sponsored debate to the Clinton campaign.[11] In the email, Brazile discussed her concern about Clinton's ability to field a question regarding the death penalty. The following day Clinton would receive the question about the death penalty, verbatim, from an audience member at the CNN-hosted Town Hall event.[12] According to a CNNMoney investigation, debate moderator Roland Martin of TV One "did not deny sharing information with Brazile".[13] CNN severed ties with Brazile on October 14, 2016.[14][15]
WikiLeaks emails

During live coverage of the 2016 elections, CNN anchor Chris Cuomo said that downloading the hacked and stolen Podesta emails from the WikiLeaks website was a violation of law and that only the media could legally do so. The statement drew criticism to the network for being false.[16][17][18]
https://www.epa.gov/newsreleases/fact-checking-seven-falsehoods-cnns-report"]https://www.epa.gov/newsreleases/fact-checking-seven-falsehoods-cnns-report[/URL]

 

[Common Sense 1]

WASHINGTON - Yesterday, CNN published an erroneous report that blatantly mischaracterizes an August 31 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) memo, which continues technical engagement with state environmental agencies in implementing the more stringent 2015 national standard for ground-level ozone.

Despite spending nearly two hours with EPA Clean Air Act experts on the phone and receiving numerous pages of email responses, CNN failed to report virtually any of the facts provided in detail. This is a great disservice to the public who now believe EPA is ordering states to “pollute more.“”

Due to the numerous errors in the article, we have fact-checked seven errors found in the report so that the public may better understand the nature of the memo and EPA's collaboration with state environmental regulators in addressing cross-border pollution.

More fake news from CNN:
In fact, the email to Mr. Trump was sent a day after the documents, stolen from the Democratic National Committee, were made available to the general public. The correction undercut the main thrust of CNN’s story, which had been seized on by critics of President Trump as evidence of coordination between WikiLeaks and the Trump campaign.

It was also yet another prominent reporting error at a time when news organizations are confronting a skeptical public, and a president who delights in attacking the media as “fake news.”
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/08/business/media/cnn-correction-donald-trump-jr.html

Glenn Greenwald: This Is CNN's Most Humiliating Moment, "Can't Admit They Lied... To The Entire World"
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2018/08/29/glenn_greenwald_cnn_has_major_credibility_issue_after_lanny_davis_backpedlaing.html

 

[Common Sense 1]

Glenn Greenwald: This Is CNN's Most Humiliating Moment, "Can't Admit They Lied... To The Entire World"

On Date August 29, 2018

'The Intercept' founder Glenn Greenwald joined FNC's Tucker Carlson Tuesday night to discuss the anonymously sourced CNN report several weeks ago that claimed Trump knew about the "Trump Tower meeting" ahead of time. Michael Cohen's lawyer Lanny Davis has since admitted that he was the source and he was wrong to imply he could prove such a thing. CNN is standing by its reporting, however.

Greenwald said he found the whole incident "to be… one of the most humiliating moments and scandalous moments in the entire media behavior of the Trump-Russia saga."
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2018/08/29/glenn_greenwald_cnn_has_major_credibility_issue_after_lanny_davis_backpedlaing.html



(Just a little of their poor performance!!)

 

[haymarket]

My statement was factual. I never claimed to settle anything.

Does that trigger you?

At this point, I have absolutely no idea what you are arguing about. Your initial statement about the Trump denial come from people who are serial liars and means nothing. That is why it settles nothing. That is why it was worthless when issued and worthless to even cite as being issued as any sort of evidence of fact.

What about that so befuddles and confuses you?

 

[Mycroft]

At this point, I have absolutely no idea what you are arguing about. Your initial statement about the Trump denial come from people who are serial liars and means nothing. That is why it settles nothing. That is why it was worthless when issued and worthless to even cite as being issued as any sort of evidence of fact.

What about that so befuddles and confuses you?

I'm not confused, though your making stuff up could indicate that you are confused.

I didn't identify any "people"...except that they were "Trump's people". Yet you seem to think I did and you've labeled them as serial liars. Who, exactly, is a liar? Hmmm?

On the other hand...it quite possible...even likely...that you are NOT confused at all. That you are playing your usual forum rhetoric games.

In either case, further conversation is pointless.

You are dismissed.

 

[haymarket]

I'm not confused, though your making stuff up could indicate that you are confused.

I didn't identify any "people"...except that they were "Trump's people". Yet you seem to think I did and you've labeled them as serial liars. Who, exactly, is a liar? Hmmm?

On the other hand...it quite possible...even likely...that you are NOT confused at all. That you are playing your usual forum rhetoric games.

In either case, further conversation is pointless.

You are dismissed.

Not one thing you attempted to say there changes anything and you are right back where you started when you offered some lame statement from Trumps people as if it were the last word on the matter when in reality it came from serial liars who are not to be believed nor trusted.