I had no argument. I had a question. Are you for or against the Patriot Act?
I’m gonna have to say, Phil, that your refusal to answer debate questions is looking like trolling.
Please actually debate or I’ll close this.
Allow me:
“Yes.”
If by “blew that entire narrative out of the water” you mean “provided evidence of over one hundred separate instances of coordination between Russia and the Trump campaign”, sure. I know this because of the information I digested by reading the Mueller Report.
Well sure, but reading is soooooooooooooooooooooooo hard. It is much easier to let right-wing media sources tell me what to think.
Donald Trump said that the Mueller Report showed “No obstruction, no collusion!”. AG Barr said that the Mueller Report showed “No obstruction, no collusion!”. FoxNews said that the Mueller Report showed “No obstruction, no collusion!”. The Mueller Report…showed ten instances of attempted obstruction of justice by Donald Trump and over one hundred instances of coordination between his campaign and Russia (and mostly individuals connected to the Russian government).
And Trump supporters continue to side with what Trump, Barr and FoxNews said about the Mueller Report rather than what the report itself says. And in a similar vein, now they’re all chanting “Read the Transcript!” while not actually reading the transcript themselves, a transcript which doesn’t actually exonerate Trump at all. It’s almost as if some people don’t care about the actual evidence.
Sounds like a perfect warrant.
Resolved: if the Trump campaign had nothing to hide, it had nothing to worry about.
That’s how that works, right?
You know, or at least should know, you pretty much don’t post about anything else. Since I don’t doubt your sincerity, failing to know this isn’t good. I would consider looking into it.
[ol]
[li]FISA warrants have always been overreaching forms of surveillance, but they have been problematic for everyone, not just Carter Page.[/li][li]The IG determined that the motivation for the investigation, nevertheless, was not politically motivated. The overreaching was not political.[/li][li]Using the term “spying” to describe surveillance, IS ITSELF POLITICALLY MOTIVATED. Barr used that term because he is politically motivated to lick Trump’s ass.[/li][li]Starting another investigation is also just more politicization, for the same reason–pandering to Trump.[/li][/ol]So, by using this language, Barr is using a classic Trump technique–just accusing others of exactly what he himself is doing. This is a well-calculated disinformation technique, and by starting this thread, the OP is clearly failing for it and perpetuating it.
This is not an attempt at debate–just perpetuation of propaganda.
Does this same topic really need a third EasyPhil thread?
Too bad for you none of that is at all relevant to the topic of the OP; I won’t discuss the accuracy or non-accuracy of your posts on other subjects than the OP in this thread. That seems to just be you attempting to distract from the fact that you made a terrible appeal to authority in your previous post.
I have no idea why this is still in Great Debates: there’s no topic for debate in the OP or in subsequent posts and the person who started the thread has not declared a position on anything, even when explicitly asked to do so.
Against!
Sure, it’s not a debate if you agree with me.
Whether you love Trump Hate Trump or Don’t care about Trump, this misuse of the FISA warrants should At the least cause worry.
I’m gonna say that doesn’t count as debating.
I’m closing this. Easy Phil, no more threads on this topic until 2020. Then, you need to actually debate if you open them in Great Debates.