Are no democrats smart enough too...

do you possess any reading comprehension at all?

You are missing a very important part.. Barr specified ‘collusion to commit crimes’ And he specified the crimes he was alluding to. Yes, conspiring to commit a crime IS the same as colluding to commit a crime. The one lying is you, for lying about what Barr said. Barr, for the last time, made 3 statements about collusion to commit specific crimes..

Collusion to commit a crime = as conspiring to commit a crime. Get this through your skull

Read and focus..

 

Invalid arguments all over and completely irrelevant.

Barr based his conclusions on mueller report, FACT.

If you want to argue he made wrong conclusion, go ahead, this is a different argument altogether.

 

But not colluding to commit a crime is not the same as not colluding.

Ok. Your arguments are growing ridiculous again.

I have sent the evidence that, according to the Mueller report, there was collusion. And the reasons why there was no criminal charges.

Can't do anything more than that for you.

 

Well invalid ... irrelevant... or not... those are Mueller's arguments and conclusions. And not what Barr said.

Therefore, Barr lied.

 

You can’t read so why do i bother? Barr specifically mentioned colluding to commit crimes, not just collusion. VERY different and fact remains that not colluding to commit a crime = not conspriring to commit a crime. Colluding = conspiring, coordinating, cooperating..

I have systematically torn to bits your core arguments and now you are rambling.

 

You said it: Barr did... But Mueller did not. And yet, Barr attributed it to Mueller. That's what they used to call "a lie" before Trump's post-truth era.

Even though Mueller very explicitly said that...

... well... I have quoted the text so many times you probably memorized it by now

Bottom line.

It would be accurate to say:
"Put another way, the special counsel found no conspiracy with any Americans in IRA's illegal activities"

It is a lie to say
"Put another way, the special counsel found no collusion by any Americans in IRA's illegal activities"

For two reasons: One is because Mueller, not only doesn't say that.... but specifically states that he's not going to say anything about "collusion". And Second because it just so happens that he did find collusion.

 

I didn't make any arguments. I didn't have to. You made the arguments. All I did was quote the text.

You say: "Barr based his conclusions on the Mueller Report" FACT

Mueller says (full quote above): That, due to departamental rules (not to impeach a sitting President), he would not include or do anything "that could potentially result in a judgment that the President committed crimes". FACT

Barr says: His conclusion that the President did not commit any crimes "...was made without regard to, and is not based on, the constitutional considerations that surround the indictment and criminal prosecution of a sitting president." LIE

You did all the work. You found Barr's lie and you proved that Barr lied. All I did was quote....

 

Are no democrats smart enough too...

You cold have left it at "Are no democrats smart."

 

No it’s NOT a lie!

Look up definition of collusion, you will find that conspiracy is a SYNONYM!

It’s like you claiming person B lied because:

Person A stated ‘mike12 murdered golem’ and person B stated ‘ in other words, mike12 assassinated golem’

Person b is not lying!

Barr DID NOT LIE.

 

It certainly does, If you had any argument

Quoted for truth.

 

So far you have shown your complete lack of logic and reason. So it was expected that you would sooner or later also use the "Appeal to the Dictionary" Fallacy.

https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFallacies/27/Appeal-to-Definition

 

Barr didn’t lie, get over it. What he said was true.. trump campaing didn’t collude with russia to commit any crimes! Same thing as not conspiring with russia to commit crimes.

You LOSE. Move on. Be man enough to accept. Real men accept defeat.

 

Apparently they do because they are not on board to pass new legislation to stop it. Or to pass new legislation to do away with sanctuary cities. And some of the dems running for President want to give illegals health care, for free. While citizens working and paying taxes get no health care.

You Democrats are not very smart, unless you don't have a job and are leaving off the Government and I and others that pay tax are supporting you. Enough is enough.

 

Neither are republicans.

That would require an amendment.

My understanding is they want universal care for all.

You republicans aren’t very smart. I’m not a democrat, and I more than likely make more money than you do.

 

I presented facts, videos, references, direct quotes from the Mueller report and contrasted them to Barr's lies, ....

You presented logical fallacies, smokescreens, Barr's lies over and over as if they were fact, and many many claims in large bold all-caps about having "won".

And yet, despite all of that... I did lose. Because I still ended up with a President who is a criminal. We all lost. At least all of us who care for this country.

 

Nice job, Golem.

It's apparent that none of our trumpublicans have actually read the Mueller Report, and the 400+ damning pages.

 

The fact remains that Trump campaign didn’t collude with russia to commit any crimes and there is nothing you can find in the mueller report that points to collusion with russia to commit crimes. Barr is right.

In the end:

Collusion = coordination, conspiracy... same thing.

Again, fact remains mueller report did not find any evidence of trump campaign colluding with russia to commit crimes. You have 0 facts on your side and basing your arguments on a false premise that when someone says collusion is cannot and can never mean the same as conspiracy/coordinating when they are used intercheangeably all the time, these words are synonyms everywhere you look. If i conspire and coordinate with x to commit a crime, it is same as colluding with person x to commit a crime. Same darn thing... To me this is final... nothing you can say proves otherwise.

 

Hi Mike,

The only Democrat I can think of who fits the bill is Tulsi Gabbard. She seems to focus on real issues rather than personal attacks and division.

 

...

 

The key thing for you to understand is that conspiracy is more of a legal term used often in prosecutions of crimes. This is why Mueller used it. If we compare conspiracy to collusion, with no further context, yes, they are not exactly the same (similar, not the exact same). Conspiracy typically is used in the context of committing a crime, collusion is more broadly used. Notice the key point? 'crime'. Get it now? so we are not arguing that conspiracy and collusion are exactly the same thing without linking both to crimes. BIG, BIG DIFFERENCE and this is my point, all along. Barr said 'collusion to commit crimes' and this is pretty much the same thing as conspiracy to commit crimes. When you link collusion and conspiracy to a crime, IT IS THE SAME.

 

funny you mention that, i was thinking about this a few weeks back, i like her. She has refused to play the nasty identity politics of the others, has parted ways with the radical left's divisive agenda. She's a combat vet (was deployed in Iraq i think) and a person that seems honest and of strong character. I was thinking to myself, she's by far the best democrats has to offer, i love how she is not afraid to criticize the nonsense the left spews and agree with Trump when Trump does something good, this is character and fearlessness. She says it how it is... But she's very young and i haven't heard her stance on several issues. The left i think is afraid of her so media tried not to give her too much airtime. I hope she does well during primaries..

 

democrats are many and each pushing their own ideas, the voters will decide during the primaries which to pick

will republicans be smart enough to not pick Trump again? if not, they are sure to lose in 2020.....

 

while I do not approve of grammar police normally, when the tile is as such.... it's fitting

 

grammar police is not your main area of expertise, unless used as a diversion (as some do). Your area of expertise is more on the speech police front, suppression of speech.

 

Please acquaint yourself with Pete Buttigieg.