|
Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today. |
20th May 2020, 02:44 AM | #361 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 32,124
|
|
__________________
I don't trust atoms. They make up everything. |
|
20th May 2020, 06:56 AM | #362 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 56,422
|
|
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law |
|
20th May 2020, 07:19 AM | #363 |
Maledictorian
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 22,556
|
Zig, you basic point seems to be that you, from the amount of information you have access to don't think that there is a case against Flynn.
I think you are not accounting for the fact that you are probably not a trained counter-intelligence officer and certainty don't have access to all the facts. What Flynn did was enough for Investigators, Prosecutors and two Judges to have a case against him. Why do you think you, or me for that matter, know more than they do? |
__________________
“Don’t blame me. I voted for Kodos.” |
|
20th May 2020, 07:32 AM | #364 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 56,422
|
No, that's not my point. But people keep trying to invent new crimes for Flynn to have committed, such as a Logan act violation during his phone call. Even the original prosecutor never made that allegation.
Quote:
Quote:
No, that's not really fair of me to say. You only make that assumption if they're acting against Trump. You're perfectly willing to get skeptical when anyone acts in a way that might benefit Trump. |
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law |
|
20th May 2020, 08:17 AM | #365 |
Maledictorian
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 22,556
|
Pure Bayesian Statistics tells you to be skeptical about anything Trump has said and done.
|
__________________
“Don’t blame me. I voted for Kodos.” |
|
20th May 2020, 08:19 AM | #366 |
Papa Funkosophy
Join Date: May 2002
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 34,263
|
|
__________________
"There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact." -- Sherlock Holmes. "It’s easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled." -- Mark Twain, maybe. |
|
20th May 2020, 08:19 AM | #367 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 56,422
|
|
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law |
|
20th May 2020, 08:24 AM | #368 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 56,422
|
Flynn isn't exercising any power right now, because he has no power. When he was working for Trump, talking to the Russian ambassador was appropriate. You will have to be more specific about what exercise of power you're talking about with respect to Trump and Barr for me to give a meaningful answer.
|
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law |
|
20th May 2020, 08:31 AM | #369 |
Papa Funkosophy
Join Date: May 2002
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 34,263
|
Then you will have to be more specific as well, because you have not presented anything about the FBI abusing their power either. I know you've fallen down the right wing conspiracy theory hole, but not all of us are that blinded by partisanship.
And, frankly, I would pit the FBI's reputation and professionalism against Trump's, Flynn's, and Barr's any day of the week. |
__________________
"There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact." -- Sherlock Holmes. "It’s easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled." -- Mark Twain, maybe. |
|
20th May 2020, 08:47 AM | #370 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 56,422
|
This isn't a contest of reputations, that isn't how it works. The FBI's reputation has to stand on its own, if you want to defend the prosecution of Flynn on that basis. But the FBI's reputation, taken on its own terms, is actually pretty bad. Even confining ourselves just to the Trump-related investigations, we've got the FISA abuses to launch unjustified spying on US citizens, we've got McCabe not only leaking to the press but also lying about it under oath, we've got conflicts of interests with senior FBI agents tied to the Clinton campaign, we've got the FBI not only continuing its unjustifiable policy of not recording interviews but actually losing the original 302 that's the basis for the charges against Flynn.
Why you think this is a reputation worth staking anything on is beyond me. |
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law |
|
20th May 2020, 08:52 AM | #371 |
Papa Funkosophy
Join Date: May 2002
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 34,263
|
|
__________________
"There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact." -- Sherlock Holmes. "It’s easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled." -- Mark Twain, maybe. |
|
20th May 2020, 08:59 AM | #372 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 56,422
|
Yes. And the "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard means it's not a situation where you just go with whoever you find marginally more believable.
Quote:
|
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law |
|
20th May 2020, 09:01 AM | #373 |
Papa Funkosophy
Join Date: May 2002
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 34,263
|
|
__________________
"There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact." -- Sherlock Holmes. "It’s easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled." -- Mark Twain, maybe. |
|
20th May 2020, 09:09 AM | #374 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 56,422
|
I did respond. It's not evidence, it's a procedural move. Just like a not guilty plea isn't evidence. A guilty plea bypasses the need for the court to evaluate evidence. That's why a guilty plea doesn't go to the jury. The jury, not the judge, are the ones who have to weigh competing evidence.
|
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law |
|
20th May 2020, 09:12 AM | #375 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 462
|
Perhaps because they're falling for your false suggestion that the FBI can only investigate crimes.
The NSA misrepresenting conversations with Russian officials, to the VP, is a legitimate basis investigation. If you ever get bored attacking weak-man arguments, feel free to try to deal with that fact. |
20th May 2020, 09:25 AM | #376 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 462
|
There is something to what he's saying. The plea process basically skips the whole "evidence" weighing process, and is generally not admissible if the plea is somehow withdrawn.
Originally Posted by Fedeal Rules of Evidence
That said, there is an explicit exception for using the plea as evidence for perjury. I don't believe a dismissal with prejudice will protect Flynn from later perjury charges. |
20th May 2020, 09:25 AM | #377 |
Maledictorian
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 22,556
|
"reasonable doubt" becomes "reasonable suspicion" in the counter-intelligence.
|
__________________
“Don’t blame me. I voted for Kodos.” |
|
20th May 2020, 09:36 AM | #378 |
Papa Funkosophy
Join Date: May 2002
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 34,263
|
To which I responded with
A conviction by guilty plea is identical to a conviction by jury trial. IANAL, but I take that to mean that if someone pleads guilty to a murder, the plea and thus conviction from that trial may be used as evidence if someone else in a different trial is being accused of the same murder. |
__________________
"There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact." -- Sherlock Holmes. "It’s easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled." -- Mark Twain, maybe. |
|
20th May 2020, 09:55 AM | #379 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 56,422
|
|
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law |
|
20th May 2020, 09:58 AM | #380 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 56,422
|
|
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law |
|
20th May 2020, 10:13 AM | #381 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 462
|
The way I understand it, if someone pleas guilty. The plea is...
Not evidence for the plead charges if the plea is withdrawn. Potentially evidence for another trial involving false statements included in the plea. Definitive evidence of guilt in future proceedings after the conclusion of the plead proceedings. Evidence of guilt in ordinary life, but such that one keeps in mind that some innocent people do plead guilty to avoid a worse fate (e.g. Alvarez v. Brownsville). |
20th May 2020, 10:23 AM | #382 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 462
|
I'm not falling for it. You're leading people in circles over this "crime" business when the FBI was investigating him over counter intelligence.
Originally Posted by Ziggurate, post 314
|
20th May 2020, 10:57 AM | #383 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 56,422
|
|
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law |
|
20th May 2020, 12:07 PM | #384 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 462
|
Interlocutor 1: We should use more pesticide because we're losing all our crops! Interlocutor 2: But there's a horrible drought going on that is the cause of the crops losses. Pesticide won't help. Interlocutor 1: Pesticide has been shown to be extremely effective at selectively killing the kinds of pests who attack our crops. Interlocutor 2: That really doesn't address the drought issue. Interlocutor 1: No one has ever shown a downside to pesticide. Interlocutor 3: Pesticide causes early onset alzheimers disease. Interlocutor 1: There's no evidence of pesticide causing early onset alzheimers! Interlocutor 3: Yes there is. Interlocutor 1: Why does everyone keep making up lies about pesticide? Interlocutor 2: Perhaps you bear some responsibility because you keep pushing pesticide in order to avoid discussing the drought? Interlocuter 1: That doesn't mean that pesticide alzheimers! We all know pesticide doesn't cause alzheimers! One can be "right" while very much in the wrong. |
20th May 2020, 12:19 PM | #385 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 56,422
|
This is ridiculous.
In your hypothetical, it presumably matters what the "interlocutors" talk about because presumably they have to take action, since it's "our" crops so they're really farmers and not just "interlocutors". Prioritization is important for them because they must act fast enough. But we don't have to do anything, and there is no time pressure. Frankly, we can't do anything. So it doesn't matter which of the various topics we choose to address. Addressing something that someone else doesn't want to address isn't wrong, in any sense of the word. tl;dr: stop trying to be a topic Karen. |
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law |
|
20th May 2020, 01:08 PM | #386 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 462
|
Yeah, you don't know anything about steering the conversation.
Originally Posted by Ziggurat
Whether or not there was an appropriate basis to the investigation is the crux of the DoJ's motion to dismiss and an underlying assumption in Zig's argument that the documents were Brady material. I'm happy to discuss it with anyone who is interested. |
20th May 2020, 01:08 PM | #387 |
Papa Funkosophy
Join Date: May 2002
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 34,263
|
I was re-reading Flynn's under oath transcript when he made his guilty plea for another reason when I found these parts relevant to the current discussion.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
__________________
"There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact." -- Sherlock Holmes. "It’s easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled." -- Mark Twain, maybe. |
|
20th May 2020, 01:18 PM | #388 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 21,398
|
|
__________________
Gunter Haas, the 'leading British expert,' was a graphologist who advised couples, based on their handwriting characteristics, if they were compatible for marriage. I would submit that couples idiotic enough to do this are probably quite suitable for each other. It's nice when stupid people find love. - Ludovic Kennedy |
|
20th May 2020, 02:46 PM | #389 |
Papa Funkosophy
Join Date: May 2002
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 34,263
|
I've been doing far more reading about this than I probably should have. I haven't found any place where Flynn is arguing to withdraw his guilty plea because he is actually innocent of the crime.
|
__________________
"There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact." -- Sherlock Holmes. "It’s easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled." -- Mark Twain, maybe. |
|
20th May 2020, 02:50 PM | #390 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 56,422
|
|
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law |
|
20th May 2020, 02:50 PM | #391 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 462
|
|
20th May 2020, 03:48 PM | #392 |
Papa Funkosophy
Join Date: May 2002
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 34,263
|
|
__________________
"There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact." -- Sherlock Holmes. "It’s easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled." -- Mark Twain, maybe. |
|
20th May 2020, 04:01 PM | #393 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: US of A
Posts: 16,613
|
|
20th May 2020, 04:15 PM | #394 |
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 6,556
|
|
20th May 2020, 06:05 PM | #395 |
Master Poster
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 2,530
|
So Flynn is as ignorant as some poor, uneducated hoodlum from off the street, and his lawyers are equally eager to go along with the prosecutors. You really think a fighter like a General would be such a pushover if he believed himself innocent? Between a world-wise mover and shaker like Flynn, and his high-priced help, you sure do like the "easily bamboozled goober" gambit.
You know, the simpler explanation might just be that they saw how bad it was for Flynn, and leapt to the far more amenable lying charge, knowing how lucky he was to get such light treatment. |
20th May 2020, 06:15 PM | #396 |
Papa Funkosophy
Join Date: May 2002
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 34,263
|
What, the one who was fired and whose alteration was found to have no barring on the warrant’s approval? Or was there another one?
|
__________________
"There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact." -- Sherlock Holmes. "It’s easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled." -- Mark Twain, maybe. |
|
20th May 2020, 06:21 PM | #397 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 56,422
|
The judge's insistance on him being guilty before accepting the plea doesn't show that being not guilty is a reason to withdraw the plea. Quite the reverse: it is because you cannot withdraw a guilty plea on the basis of later claiming innocence that it's a problem to let innocent defendants plead guilty. The grounds for withdrawing a guilty plea are fairly limited, which is why the motion to withdraw his guilty plea does not contain any assertion of his innocence: that simply isn't relevant to the motion.
And yes, I'm sure of that. Go look it up, if you don't believe me. |
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law |
|
20th May 2020, 06:31 PM | #398 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 56,422
|
You have that wrong.
http://cdn.cnn.com/cnn/2020/images/0...79..200123.pdf "The Court understands the government to have concluded, in view of the material misstatements and omissions, that the Court's authorizations in Docket Numbers 17-375 and 17-679 were not valid." |
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law |
|
20th May 2020, 07:54 PM | #399 |
Papa Funkosophy
Join Date: May 2002
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 34,263
|
That’s the government’s conclusion about the Court’s authorization, not the Court’s conclusion. This section is merely explaining the government’s position. The actual purpose of this document appears to be instructions to the government on what it needs to do next to make or further its case, which is at the end.
|
__________________
"There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact." -- Sherlock Holmes. "It’s easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled." -- Mark Twain, maybe. |
|
20th May 2020, 08:16 PM | #400 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 56,422
|
|
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law |
|
Thread Tools | |
|
|