3
- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Jack Smith Tracked Trump's Lawyers' Phone Calls
Posted on 10/5/26 at 1:05 pm to kilo
Posted on 10/5/26 at 1:05 pm to kilo
quote:
You absolutely have trotted out "I'm a lawyer" or at the very least, rely on that common knowledge while being dead wrong at times.
Common knowledge as in posting controlling laws?
Or getting into discussions over legal issues specifically (which I"m typically right about, mind you)?
Neither are appeals to authority. You're mis-using it.
If you disagree something another says, and they say, "you're wrong because a lawyer said something different" (as the only substance of the retort), then that is an appeal to authority.
If you disagree with an attorney and the attorney can then show you how you're wrong, with evidence, then that is not an appeal to authority. That's just being wrong.
Posted on 10/5/26 at 1:07 pm to SlowFlowPro
doing the work of the Lord! Posted on 10/5/26 at 1:11 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
That's just being wrong.
Are you ever wrong when posting on this board?
Posted on 10/5/26 at 1:12 pm to kilo
quote:
Are you ever wrong when posting on this board?
I made a factual error about 2 weeks ago that I admitted to and did not edit the post after admitting that my fact was wrong.
The error didn't change any of the substance but, naturally, everyone just wanted to bring up the error over and over again and it kind of ended the discussion.
Posted on 10/5/26 at 1:13 pm to SlowFlowPro
Do you ever conflate opinion with fact?
Posted on 10/5/26 at 1:14 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Telling someone they are wrong isn't an appeal to authority.
Typical SFP.
Right about words.
Bankrupt with morality.
Posted on 10/5/26 at 1:17 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
ended the discussion.
Far too often, that’s the goal.
Posted on 10/5/26 at 1:19 pm to SlowFlowPro
What are the things about Jack Smith that you don’t particularly care for?
Posted on 10/5/26 at 1:20 pm to Y.A. Tittle
He’s not going to answer that. It’s a fools errand to have a serious discussion with a dishonest actor.
Posted on 10/5/26 at 1:25 pm to Wednesday
quote:
I care about none of this unless he is disbarred and criminally prosecuted
Then you don’t care.
The system isn’t capable of preventing or punishing this.
Posted on 10/5/26 at 1:30 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
DOJ policy is they can't prosecute a sitting President. Smith followed that policy and dismissed the federal cases against Trump.
…that’s because his endeavor failed and pushing forward was going to expose him further.
His intent was to harm his candidacy.
Posted on 10/5/26 at 1:34 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
He said he has never met John Brennan.
"His team" meeting with Brennan doesn't make that untruthful
This is another case of SFP confusing truth with legally provable.
It’s a real blind spot.
This post was edited on 10/5/26 at 1:36 pm
Posted on 10/5/26 at 1:42 pm to moneyg
He doesn’t confuse them.
He doesn’t believe in truth. Only in legality. It’s why he sounds crazy to normies.
He doesn’t believe in truth. Only in legality. It’s why he sounds crazy to normies.
Posted on 10/5/26 at 1:43 pm to kilo
quote:
He's tied up currently defending Canada/Chinese relations.
He's also been on the soccer board saying he's cool with commiting fraud if you don't like the rules.
Posted on 10/5/26 at 1:51 pm to the808bass
quote:
He doesn’t confuse them. He doesn’t believe in truth.
Only in legality. It’s why he sounds crazy to normies
I disagree. I think he gets lost in the difference often.
I guess it’s impossible to know but I think he truly confuses the two often. Now, admittedly, when you point it out, he ignores it. He never acknowledges it. So to that degree it’s intentional.
But I’ve paid attention to it long enough to believe it’s a weakness of his.
Posted on 10/5/26 at 1:52 pm to SlowFlowPro
I am right!
Why was Jack tracking attorneys communications?
You see anything wrong with that?
Why was Jack tracking attorneys communications?
You see anything wrong with that?
Posted on 10/5/26 at 1:53 pm to moneyg
quote:
His intent was to harm his candidacy
Bingo
After the election he packed it in.
Probably destroyed information as well
Posted on 10/5/26 at 1:55 pm to Jbird
quote:
Why was Jack tracking attorneys communications?
They got info on Suzie Wiles. They weren’t targeting attorneys. But you’d have to first get past the clickbait thread title to understand that.
Posted on 10/5/26 at 1:56 pm to Decatur
Thanks piss dossier queen
Posted on 10/5/26 at 1:57 pm to Jbird
quote:
Bingo
After the election he packed it in.
Probably destroyed information as well
Correct. SFP is trying to use the DOJ policy to explain away his obvious intent.
Page 6 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News