Sealed Indictment Granted Against Trump

[Jimmy Higgins]

To me it is starting to look like the Republicans in congress are acting as a dam, while the evidence is piling up behind them. Sure, they can deny firing Comey had to do with the Russian investigation, even in the face Trump saying so. But if Trump is ever brought before a court, then everything behind that dam is going to come crashing down. I've heard people asking why is it taking so long to get rid of him? Well, don't know when it will start, but when it happens it will likely go fast.

A paper wall doesn't come crashing down. All I see the volume turned up but no concrete indicative evidence. This is indicative of possible hysteria as previous attempts have failed. (This last one is just a theory).

Twitter apparently isn't evidence these days.

 

[whichphilosophy]

I am skeptical about the existence of a sealed indictment. There could be something sealed, but not quite an indictment yet instead. If this gets reported in NY Times, Washington Post, or similar, then I'd be more prone to believe it, looking at the evidence.

^^^ that

(but oh boy do I wish it to be true!)

I believe the indictment is reported to have come from the FISA court.
The FISA Court does not issue indictments

http://www.snopes.com/sealed-indictment-president-trump/
Has a 'Sealed Indictment' Been Issued Against President Trump?
The sourcing of a story reporting a sealed indictment has been issued against the president is too vague to corroborate.

CLAIM
A sealed indictment has been granted against President Donald Trump.

RATING (BY SNOPES)
UNPROVEN

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/07/us/in-secret-court-vastly-broadens-powers-of-nsa.html
This article tends to reflects nothing about FISA being able to issue warrents


So it looks more like fake news.

 

[RavenSky]

So it looks more like fake news.

I suspect "sloppy reporting" rather than "fake news", but either way, here's your clue...

Not one person here took the news at face value. Every person here questioned its accuracy and looked for corroborating sources instead of spreading the claim as "fact". This in spite of how much the report would support our "narrative".

Contrast this with Trumpsters who swallow Trump bullshit and vomit it back up everywhere they go.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

So it looks more like fake news.

I suspect "sloppy reporting" rather than "fake news", but either way, here's your clue...

Not one person here took the news at face value. Every person here questioned its accuracy and looked for corroborating sources instead of spreading the claim as "fact". This in spite of how much the report would support our "narrative".

Contrast this with Trumpsters who swallow Trump bullshit and vomit it back up everywhere they go.

And I'd say being reported on Raw Story isn't exactly the 'mainstream media'.

 

[RavenSky]

I suspect "sloppy reporting" rather than "fake news", but either way, here's your clue...

Not one person here took the news at face value. Every person here questioned its accuracy and looked for corroborating sources instead of spreading the claim as "fact". This in spite of how much the report would support our "narrative".

Contrast this with Trumpsters who swallow Trump bullshit and vomit it back up everywhere they go.

And I'd say being reported on Raw Story isn't exactly the 'mainstream media'.

excellent point

 

[Elixir]

.... I'd say being reported on Raw Story isn't exactly the 'mainstream media'.

Of course. I'd place the chance that it's correct somewhere less than the chance of any given Fox Nooz statement being true, and better than the chance that anything from Breitbart is true.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

.... I'd say being reported on Raw Story isn't exactly the 'mainstream media'.

Of course. I'd place the chance that it's correct somewhere less than the chance of any given Fox Nooz statement being true, and better than the chance that anything from Breitbart is true.

I suppose. But the main point by RavenSky was the most in this thread weren't even stand pat on this, but actually more dismissive without collaboration. You rarely see that of the right-wing these days.

 

[whichphilosophy]

A paper wall doesn't come crashing down. All I see the volume turned up but no concrete indicative evidence. This is indicative of possible hysteria as previous attempts have failed. (This last one is just a theory).

Twitter apparently isn't evidence these days.

See Post 22

 

[whichphilosophy]

So it looks more like fake news.

I suspect "sloppy reporting" rather than "fake news", but either way, here's your clue...

Not one person here took the news at face value. Every person here questioned its accuracy and looked for corroborating sources instead of spreading the claim as "fact". This in spite of how much the report would support our "narrative".

Contrast this with Trumpsters who swallow Trump bullshit and vomit it back up everywhere they go.

More like I don't believe the media. FIFA doesn't issue Indictments of any sort so such claims are a logical fallacy. I am just the postman transmitting an obsservation

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Twitter apparently isn't evidence these days.

See Post 22

See posts 5, 6, and 7.

 

[whichphilosophy]

See Post 22

See posts 5, 6, and 7.

I think this one pancaked.