• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Dossier fails the test of time; Trump-Russia collusion claims now called 'likely false'

azgreg said:
It's been less that 20 months. Rosenstein appointed Mueller on 5/17/17. Other special council investigations have been much longer.
Click to expand...

The point is, NevertrumpGOP lied when he said Watergate lasted 8 years.
 
apdst said:
The point is, NevertrumpGOP lied when he said Watergate lasted 8 years.
Click to expand...

What's that have to do with what I posted? Maybe you should bring that up with him.
 
azgreg said:
What's that have to do with what I posted? Maybe you should bring that up with him.
Click to expand...

I was getting you on the right page, because your post was irrelevant to the sub-conversation.
 
apdst said:
I was getting you on the right page, because your post was irrelevant to the sub-conversation.
Click to expand...

I had nothing to do with NevertrumpGOP. I was responding to hanger4's incorrect post. Besides, I'm always on the right page.
 
azgreg said:
I had nothing to do with NevertrumpGOP. I was responding to hanger4's incorrect post. Besides, I'm always on the right page.
Click to expand...

That's why I got you back on track.
 
NeverTrumpGOP said:
The Watergate investigation lasted 8 years. Keep on keeping on.
Click to expand...

But Republicans should just move on and sheddup about Hillary's email and Obama's cabal corruption, right?
 
Gaugingcatenate said:
Seeing as you clearly admit you do not understand, seems to me you are arguing from ignorance, correct?
Click to expand...

That was a dumb response.

Everyone of the items covered in the OP said "no public evidence yet" basically. Thus, the OP is arguing from a position of "absence of evidence" which is an argument from ignorance.
 
Airyaman said:
That was a dumb response.

Everyone of the items covered in the OP said "no public evidence yet" basically. Thus, the OP is arguing from a position of "absence of evidence" which is an argument from ignorance.
Click to expand...
Yes, yours WAS a very dumb response, we agree on that.

Acknowledging that it was itself coming from an obvious position of ignorance. Doesn't matter where the ignorance started, its still arguing from ignorance. You trapped yourself in your own fallacy... too funny. And...

Undeniable.
 
Airyaman said:
Yes. What of it? That is not the thread premise.
Click to expand...

Yes it is. Those claiming collusion must provide the evidence for it. Just like those who claim Bigfoot is real must provide the evidence for it.
 
hanger4 said:
So far it's 30 months, 2 1/2 years of patience, reckon Mueller can continue producing nothing on Trump / Russian collusion / conspiracy till 2020 ??
Click to expand...

Huh. That you have to pretend that Mueller has produced 'nothing' just exposes your utter lack of genuine interest in the subject.
 
Maccabee said:
Yes it is. Those claiming collusion must provide the evidence for it. Just like those who claim Bigfoot is real must provide the evidence for it.
Click to expand...

Still not the thread premise. The thread premise is that the Steele dossier is faulty. Yet the evidence for such faultiness is the lack or corroborating publicly available evidence thus far.

Argument from ignorance.

At best you can only claim that the dossier is unproven.
 
Airyaman said:
Still not the thread premise. The thread premise is that the Steele dossier is faulty. Yet the evidence for such faultiness is the lack or corroborating publicly available evidence thus far.

Argument from ignorance.

At best you can only claim that the dossier is unproven.
Click to expand...

Fair enough.
 
NeverTrumpGOP said:
Because I want to know what happened and I am willing to wait. Not jump to conclusion saying no evidence
Click to expand...

That's a change of heart, before you libs stated it was a fact that Trump and Russia colluded.
 
NeverTrumpGOP said:
The Watergate investigation lasted 8 years. Keep on keeping on.
Click to expand...

It did? The break in was June 7 1972. Nixon resigned August 9, 1974. Thats 2 years, not 8. As a point of reference, the infamous Trump tower meeting took place June 9, 2016. Its now Jan 1, 2019. More time has elapsed since that event than the entire Watergate scandal and as of yet we have no indictments, no trials, no resignations. But you just keep dreaming...
 
Born Free said:
That's a change of heart, before you libs stated it was a fact that Trump and Russia colluded.
Click to expand...

NeverTrump was the guy who predicted Trump would be gone in the second quarter of 2018. Now he doesnt want to 'jump to conclusions.':lamo These guys are too much.
 
Airyaman said:
Still not the thread premise. The thread premise is that the Steele dossier is faulty. Yet the evidence for such faultiness is the lack or corroborating publicly available evidence thus far.

Argument from ignorance.

At best you can only claim that the dossier is unproven.
Click to expand...

Thats not an argument from ignorance. Believing something to be true that is unproven is ignorant. Cohen denies being in Prague. And as of yet there is ZERO evidence to suggest otherwise. Quite frankly, I have uncovered evidence that YOU were in prague in 2016 working with the Russians to undermine our democracy. I think we need to take my findings seriously since they have not been disproven.
 
Fletch said:
Thats not an argument from ignorance. Believing something to be true that is unproven is ignorant. Cohen denies being in Prague. And as of yet there is ZERO evidence to suggest otherwise. Quite frankly, I have uncovered evidence that YOU were in prague in 2016 working with the Russians to undermine our democracy. I think we need to take my findings seriously since they have not been disproven.
Click to expand...

https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFallacies/56/Argument-from-Ignorance

The assumption of a conclusion or fact based primarily on lack of evidence to the contrary. Usually best described by, “absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.”

Thread title:

Dossier fails the test of time; Trump-Russia collusion claims now called 'likely false'
 
Airyaman said:
https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFallacies/56/Argument-from-Ignorance

The assumption of a conclusion or fact based primarily on lack of evidence to the contrary. Usually best described by, “absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.”

Thread title:

Dossier fails the test of time; Trump-Russia collusion claims now called 'likely false'
Click to expand...

So it would be argument from ignorance to conclude that you were not aiding the Russians in Prague then because there is no evidence that you werent
 
Fletch said:
So it would be argument from ignorance to conclude that you were not aiding the Russians in Prague then because there is no evidence that you werent
Click to expand...

Yes. Not sure what that has to do with anything, but yes.
 
Airyaman said:
Yes. Not sure what that has to do with anything, but yes.
Click to expand...

I just dont think its a fallacy to dismiss an arbitrary statement out of hand.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom