No, not the case and not the issue, obviously.
True or false to you:
(Academic reputation and tradition) > (the sum of all other "things" about Purdue)
Trumps Florida Home Raided by the FBI
- Thread starter BoilerJS
- Start date
True or false to you:
(Academic reputation and tradition) > (the sum of all other "things" about Purdue)
They only "advise", which I don't think means much with Trump.
I have heard of no evidence they implemented foreign policy like Sec. Pompeo did, interacting with intelligence people, foreign service officers, and all the rest of it. Have you?
The files were asked for, several times, and subpoenaed.
I don't know how you can quantify academic reputation and tradition in relation to other "things." How many "thing" units is academic reputation worth? How many for athletic programs? How many for campus architecture? So, I can't answer whether academic reputation and tradition are greater than the sum of all other things about Purdue. That said, it's not particularly relevant, anyway. The poster used the word "everything," which refers to a quantity of "things." It doesn't matter if one or two of those things are more important (or however you're determining that those two things are "greater than" the sum of all other things) than the rest.
A hypothetical example: "I think most everything about your house sucks. I do like the shelter it provides, though."
These two sentences are not in contradiction. The shelter is, indeed, the most important function of a house (I think this is what you're getting at with academic reputation and tradition being "greater" than all other things regarding Purdue, though correct me if I'm wrong), but it is still only one "thing." I can dislike the location, the size, the materials, the color, the lack of a garage, that it only has one bathroom, that it's on a small lot, and many other "things" about it such that my statement that I think "most everything" sucks can still be true, despite the fact that I might think it succeeds at its primary function.
Given this, your expression above basically amounts to:
True or false, 2 > (X-2) where X is a number larger than 4 (I'm presuming we can both agree there are more than 4 total "things" about Purdue that one could like or dislike)
This expression is clearly false.
Just admit you didn't see the word "most" before you responded, Rachel.
Last edited:
Will be great to see how he handles his first potential criminal case without having the lackeys in Congress to bail him out.
Like I said a few days ago he is more dumb than he is dangerous. He really doesn’t get what he did was criminal.
Lol “potential”
When is anybody going to finally arrest and successfully charge the Don with a crime? It’s so funny that you all keep chasing him and keep whiffing.
I actually think this one where he has been mishandling classified information is the most likely to stick of anything thrown at him since January 2017. He might not get jail time, but he definitely could be fined and prohibited from ever holding office again. The sad thing is that this was completely under his control and could have been avoided if he had just done what he was supposed to do.
Of course this is the only real goal of the leftists. Whether this is anything or not, this has been the goal since he got the nomination in 2016. 6 years of this...
Or, and stick with me here because I'm going waaaaay out on a limb, the goal is to make him accountable for his actions... for once.
But I got to ask - why do people like Bill and Hillary Clinton and their Clintonistas (Podestas, etc.), the Bidens’, and other prominent Ds in politics never seem to be held accountable for their actions? There is an obvious double standard at work here…..
Since you are struggling, an easier example for you:
Most everything about this restaurant sucks, except the excellent food and service.
Are you holding Trump accountable for the strong economy, Abraham accords, and other successes?
Did you get a boner when I responded to your lame ass today. Let the adults have a discussion nerd.
I don't think so. The FBI has so sullied its reputation with corruption in numerous cases - most notably the Russian collusion hoax - that many people are going to understandably suspect any "nuclear secrets" or whatever were planted.
No intelligent person would trust the decision-makers at the FBI after the last decade.
Aside from the constant whataboutism I'm not sure what the Biden's have done that comes close to this (spare me the hunters laptop trope). Hillary lost an election due to her email shit and she actively cooperated with that investigation. If you think everything trump has done is comparable to most of the Dems, we don't have much else to talk about.
Last edited:
Putting aside whether or not I agree with any or all of those things, what does one have to do with the other???
You said, "the goal is to make him accountable for his actions... for once."
Asking you if you think he is accountable for his actions as president that were successful, of which there were many.
Seems like you are the one who is struggling. Food and service are two "things" about the restaurant. Very important things from a qualitative standpoint, sure, but still just two out of any number of other things from a quantitive standpoint. You could like those two things but dislike the location, the prices, the chairs, the table height, the wait times, the ambiance, and the lack cleanliness of the restrooms. In which case, you would think most things about that restaurant suck. It is irrelevant that the food and service are two of the most important things. Your example is, functionally, exactly like mine was and does not represent contradictory statements.
The original post said nothing about the relative importance of various aspects of Purdue, so the fact that academic reputation is, perhaps, the most important thing about it is irrelevant. You adding that to the discussion merely shows either that you didn't understand what the actual words the poster used meant or that you had to include it post hoc as a way to avoid admitting that your claim of contradictory sentences was incorrect. In your initial response, it may have been better to comment that you thought it was funny that the poster respects Purdue's academic reputation and tradition because those are two of the things that matter the most about a university. However, you chose to make a definitive statement about the truth value of the sentences, instead, about which, you are incorrect.
This has been fun, but I'm sure you'll continue to disagree with me, so probably best we table the discussion there and stop interrupting these nice folks' argument about Trump. 🤣
There is a double standard because Trump himself raised the bar. He made mishandling of classified information a felony and barred the person to hold any office as a way to rub it in on Hillary. The law is not retroactive, and therefore, how the crime is treated now is understandably different.
As for Hillary, I do think Comey's reopening of her case days before election cost her the presidency. I think that's the punishment for her, although I can see why some may think that is still not enough.
Ironically, it now seems that Trump is the one mishandling classified information. Yet, there are idiots still defending him. If you wanna talk about double standard ...
So you agree they communicate with the President, and thus are informed of executive level information. Good. We agree, then. Good talk.
Executive level is not the same as Dept of State classified communications. You know that.
Do you have any idea why you feel you can mindread and assume you know that I feel a need to explain things for gr8?
Anyway, I notice your playbook is to keep distracting from the topic when you have no argument, and try to muddy the water. I summarize your interaction with gr8 to show how you were just sidetracking the discussion, where his point was both HRC and Ivanka / Kushner had access to sensitive information and thus should subject to the same scrutiny, which you never addressed. I used to appreciate listening to your thoughts, even if (or especially because) they are contrary to mine, because it allows me to see from a different angle. Unfortunately, this thread has been grossly disappointing because you didn't bring anything meaningful, just insulting those who do add value and expertise and push them away.
Why not? Even though there wasn’t evidence of direct collusion, there was plenty of knowledge, expectation, and links between Russian and Trump campaign sources. Was it worth investigating? Probably, considering if something HAD been found proving collusion it would undermine the election.
We just spent all kinds of money investigating claims of fraud that didn’t exist. But you get bent about this one which definitely showed… what’s the word you guys like… “irregularities.”
Kushner played a key role in negotiating the Middle East deal:
Kushner on 'historic' Middle East agreement, Trump's pandemic response
Jared Kushner, a senior adviser to President Trump as well as his son-in-law, played an instrumental role in negotiating the normalization of Israel’s relations with Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates. What does it mean for the Middle East more broadly? Kushner joins Judy Woodruff to discuss...
www.pbs.org
Of course, he also benefits from it:
WSJ News Exclusive | Jared Kushner’s New Fund Looks to Profit From His Middle East Diplomacy
The former president’s son-in-law and senior adviser has met in the last two months with the crown princes of Saudi Arabia and Abu Dhabi, sovereign-wealth fund, oil and investment officials, and senior bankers.
www.wsj.com
That’s correct.
And DOS classified is not the same as no
-shit TS/SCI found in your private home either… which was the point of this entire stupid discussion.
You know that.
Because you were explaining things for gr8nt. You did so without feeling a need to?
I applaud you for speaking for yourself, no matter how muddled your thinking is.
Mueller actually made it very clear that his investigation did not exculpate Trump for the acts he allegedly committed. There wasn't enough evidence to charge him. So yeah, there were "irregularities", but not enough to press charges.
Mueller refutes Trump’s ‘no collusion, no obstruction’ line
‘We focused on whether the evidence was sufficient to charge any member of the campaign with taking part in a criminal conspiracy. It was not.’
Thanks for the laugh - "plenty of knowledge, expectation, and links..."
Regarding irregularities, see June 3, 8, 22. Trump was cooperating.
Timeline: The Justice Department criminal inquiry into Trump taking classified documents to Mar-a-Lago | CNN Politics
The federal criminal investigation into former President Donald Trump's potential mishandling of classified documents ramped up this week in significant and unprecedented fashion, with the FBI executing a search warrant at Trump's home at his Mar-a-Lago resort.
I was not explaining things for gr8. You can keep saying that till your face turns blue, but it doesn't make it so.
I was summarizing the interactions between you two and expose how you were deflecting and sidetracking, like you are doing now.
Nice job though, I must say. It's like two boxers, one getting beat up badly, so he just tried to hug and hold on to the other guy. That's actually a fairly effective tactic for someone whose counter was laughably weak.
Similar threads
