Trump is more than an idiot. You make the claim that Schiff is a criminal. Do you admit that Trump is a criminal? Yes or no?
Question for Markk
Question for Markk
Last edited by Nomomo on Mon Apr 04, 2022 12:48 am, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Question for Markk
How in the bejeezus is Schiff a criminal? Trump did nothing well aside from enriching his friends and family during his most recent scam that lasted four years.
"I am not an American ... In my view premarital sex should be illegal" - Ajax18
Re: Question for Markk
Re: Question for Markk
I believe it was criminal for Schiff as the th e head of th e intel committee to tell th e American people that Hunter Biden laptop information was Russian Disinformation after the DOJ, FBI, and HLS said it wasn’t…and we now for sure now it wasn’t. So, in my opinion that is criminal.
-
Morley
- God
- Posts: 1570
- Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 6:17 pm
- Location: Raphael, Saint Catherine of Alexandria, 1507–1509 (detail)
Re: Question for Markk
So, you don't mean 'criminal' in that laws were broken--you mean 'criminal' in that you don't like it.Markk wrote: ↑Mon Apr 04, 2022 1:15 amI believe it was criminal for Schiff as the th e head of th e intel committee to tell th e American people that Hunter Biden laptop information was Russian Disinformation after the DOJ, FBI, and HLS said it wasn’t…and we now for sure now it wasn’t. So, in my opinion that is criminal.
Re: Question for Markk
Markk clearly has a double standard going on here. He's set the bar so friggin low for any Republican that no matter what they do wrong, he goes "Huh whattya mean?" but any perceived wrongdoing by anyone with a (D) after their name is automatically called a "crime"!
Could it be possible that Schiff genuinely believed the ridiculous claims unproven about the laptop originated from Russian disinformation? I mean I already provided the letter from over 50 former Intel officials who worked for four different administrations, including Trump's, stating that they firmly believed this story had all the hallmarks of Kremlin propaganda. But in Markk's mind, there is no room for giving the benefit of the doubt. Schiff is a criminal. Not because he actually committed any crimes, but because he so effectively lambasted Trump during impeachment.
Think about this. Schiff's "crime" is that he lied, which isn't even established. Yet Trump, who has literally lied more than 10,000 times since his initial campaign, isn't called a criminal. He's just an "idiot."
Could it be possible that Schiff genuinely believed the ridiculous claims unproven about the laptop originated from Russian disinformation? I mean I already provided the letter from over 50 former Intel officials who worked for four different administrations, including Trump's, stating that they firmly believed this story had all the hallmarks of Kremlin propaganda. But in Markk's mind, there is no room for giving the benefit of the doubt. Schiff is a criminal. Not because he actually committed any crimes, but because he so effectively lambasted Trump during impeachment.
Think about this. Schiff's "crime" is that he lied, which isn't even established. Yet Trump, who has literally lied more than 10,000 times since his initial campaign, isn't called a criminal. He's just an "idiot."
Last edited by K Graham on Mon Apr 04, 2022 4:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"I am not an American ... In my view premarital sex should be illegal" - Ajax18
Re: Question for Markk
Schiff is a criminal? What????
I am curious now.
I am curious now.
“If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don’t have to worry about the answers.”~Thomas Pynchon, Gravity’s Rainbow
-
honorentheos
- God
- Posts: 3793
- Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2020 2:15 am
Re: Question for Markk
_honorentheos wrote: ↑Sun Feb 16, 2020 3:23 pmThat's true, Markk almost never acknowledges a counterpoint and adjusts his argument accordingly. So it seems I read your comment differently than you intended.
I don't think he is doing what he does from a position of comprehension of how a counterargument is valid and needs dealt with. I'm sure part of it is stubbornness as EA said above. But I also think there is something more fundamental going on where the counterargument isn't being grokked in a way that he sees it subtracting from his argument. At best, he allows for counterarguments to be additive and need explanation. But that is one of the reasons I think he is sincere. He doesn't engage like a subbie or Ajax. More like someone who has built an adamant unassailable position (add: in their own mind.). I don't know. It is frustrating but it doesn't come across as knowing dishonesty. It seems he sees people's frustration with his behavior and interprets it as flailing away at what he believes are the unassailable facts of his original position. So he LOLs when he should be reconsidering.
