Message from @caykoh

Discord ID: 534585890903687168


2019-01-15 03:52:11 UTC  

He should approach the matter by steel manning the arguement hes competing against

2019-01-15 03:53:36 UTC  

But hes consistently arguing against incomplete and or the weaker arguements

2019-01-15 03:53:49 UTC  

tim is kinda doing what he can aford to do right now, he talks about doing more but i and others assume he isint ready yet. a year or 2 ago he did a lot more on the ground coverage but i dont know what the finacial differences are now and then

2019-01-15 03:55:22 UTC  

For sure, we will all have some constraints. But my criticism is more directly trusted towards his model of rhetoric.

2019-01-15 03:55:36 UTC  

Trusted=thrust

2019-01-15 03:55:48 UTC  

whats his rhetoric?

2019-01-15 03:57:30 UTC  

Lay the premise of the matter to favor his conclusion, often by trim away details that are not favorable to his conclusion

2019-01-15 03:57:55 UTC  

In the russia narrative video from today

2019-01-15 03:58:00 UTC  

tim has conclusions?

2019-01-15 04:00:10 UTC  

His conclusion is that the activity and pursuit of the matters are unwarranted and is a device being wielded by those who need a narrative to weaponize against the president

2019-01-15 04:01:00 UTC  

i think you might be getting tim and sargon confused, they have very similar formats but the difference is that tim though he shares his opinion doesent hold that as being whats important in his videos. he really only hits hard on his opinion when hes frustrated (usually with storys hes covered for a while that he thinks should be over) or the premise is rediculuous

2019-01-15 04:01:33 UTC  

And cites the prosecutions up to now as one area to consider, asserting that the violations on their part are not russia related stuff, like money laundering

2019-01-15 04:01:47 UTC  

tims opinion on the russia case has been building up over like 50 videos hes done on it for the last 3 years

2019-01-15 04:02:49 UTC  

what you see in his last video is basicly the colmination of him formulating his opinion based on so many events that have occured in the trump/russia story over that time

2019-01-15 04:03:29 UTC  

so citation needed would be like a 2 hour long video

2019-01-15 04:04:44 UTC  

Of course, I'd expect just that, but he is failing to factor in the Rick gates and manafort conspiracy to defraud the us charges, in his statements about all the wrong doing is unrelated to the core investigation

2019-01-15 04:07:00 UTC  

And by doing so, and rolling with 'it's all unrelated' set of info, he doesn't have to collide with details inconvenient to his conclusion

2019-01-15 04:10:27 UTC  

Itd be a superior job of opinion forming on his part to take stock of matters of fact that are available to him

2019-01-15 04:11:15 UTC  

personally dont know much about that, but from everything ive heard about the trump/russia investigation i havent seen anything like a smoking gun, not even the smoke from a gun. theres been tons of bs that have popped up around it with people questioning trumps actions, other tangential accusations that have nothing to do with trump/russia simply to defame him, ect. id think if anything were actually released that gave anyone a reason to believe the trump/russia connection, tim would have mentioned it and i think i would have heard about it by now. thing with muellar is that he can potentially not share any information he has uncovered in his investigation and may be holding some kind of smoking gun until he can find finger prints on it, but so far things have been incredibly slow and uneventful in the investigation. people have investigated less and found more by this point in other conspericys

2019-01-15 04:12:58 UTC  

Fair opinion, especially considering the blizzard of details to fog up our field of view

2019-01-15 04:13:28 UTC  

In your judgement, what would a "smoking gun" or just compelling evidence, look like for you ?

2019-01-15 04:14:21 UTC  

i think that the best evidence that news media only care about the russian collusion story because it sells is the actual fact that we really havent gotten anything legitimently good on this story yet, but its still the number 1 story they push.

2019-01-15 04:14:36 UTC  

you need something that establishes collusion, not simply conversation

2019-01-15 04:16:30 UTC  

you need actual evidence that someone from trump with knowledge by trump tried to have some interaction with russia that exchanged the right information that could have any impact at all on the election with intent to impact the election.

2019-01-15 04:17:40 UTC  

Quid pro quo

2019-01-15 04:18:11 UTC  

i dont think your going to get anything remotely that satisfying at this point, which is to say that muellar cant find something that leads to some kind of legal case, however the problem is that if you dont have something that conclusive for whatever happens after the report then whatever case brought against the president will be lacking evidence even if it is full of motivation

2019-01-15 04:19:16 UTC  

most people dont actually care what mueller finds, they only care that he finds enough to get someone to try and throw trump out, even the media doesent care because anything russia/trump drama is good for them even if it eventually goes nowhere

2019-01-15 04:19:43 UTC  

Right, so material evidence, not circumstantial or testimony, but documentary material evidence explicitly demonstrating conspiracy

2019-01-15 04:20:07 UTC  

your talking about a president of the united states

2019-01-15 04:20:33 UTC  

Yes correct

2019-01-15 04:21:39 UTC  

a trial could be had on circumstantial or testimony, but for the presidental seat, i cant imagine a world where you would successfuly try with only that

2019-01-15 04:23:14 UTC  

I doubt that effortwould be brought forward in that case, its disruptive to do so even with overwelmjg compelling evidence and I imagine the preferred resolution would be a political one

2019-01-15 04:24:35 UTC  

i have no clue what people will actually do in case of any form of evidence, though i actually dont think anyone cares about disruption, if that was a consern of this government shit would be quite different and we probably wouldent be having this conversation

2019-01-15 04:25:39 UTC  

Lol yes if it were simpler dynamics, but I think the group dynamics are those of atleast several hundred people

2019-01-15 04:25:43 UTC  

the united states is polerized now, possibly without resolution, in that situation youll never disrupt your base by going after their percieved enemy unless you lose

2019-01-15 04:26:26 UTC  

trump is unlikely to be impeached but presidents have been threatened with less

2019-01-15 04:28:27 UTC  

trump/russia collusion would be on the scale of watergate in the perception of modern america, in reallity to any sane person what many people might even call collusion probably shouldent be called that so its posible what they deside he did will likely be much more benign that watergate was

2019-01-15 04:28:42 UTC  

we dont live in a sane country though

2019-01-15 04:28:57 UTC  

What if the president and his team, when the report is finalized, fight the release?

2019-01-15 04:29:34 UTC  

fight the release?

2019-01-15 04:30:43 UTC  

If there indeed is no wrong doing to be found through investigation, and thus the final report informs us of the absence of wrong doing...would trump fight the public disclosure of the final report?