SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : The Trump Presidency
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: i-node who wrote (143275)11/10/2019 5:17:15 PM
From: Lane31 Recommendation

Recommended By
CentralParkRanger

  Read Replies (2) of 359982
 
A couple of things I passed over in my initial reply.

It isn't an "investigation" to call in a few partisan individuals and allow them to read their opinions for a fake record in which public exposure is highly restricted and limited to those who favor prosecution.

In an investigation one gathers evidence and interviews witnesses based on their ability to inform the investigation. You don't interview witnesses who aren't expected to have relevant information; you do interview witnesses who are. If a murder occurred in a room were there were multiple people, you interview those people. The witnesses may not all be perfect. One might not be able to hear well. Another may be a cousin to the victim or the accused. But it makes no sense and would be inappropriate to interview one's great aunt who lives in Paris and has strong opinions on wine that she'd love to share. In this case the witnesses so far have been key people critical to the Ukraine thing. It is not only appropriate to interview them but it would be negligent not to. Now, there are many other likely witnesses who weren't interviewed because, at the direction of Trump, they refused. The investigation is limited by their refusal. But it's absurd to blame the investigators for excluding them because the weren't excluded. Their lack of testimony is a shortcoming that would be easy for Trump to fix and surely welcomed by the investigators.

... justice is an absolute tertiary interest to you.

This is not the criminal justice system. If you want justice, take the matter there.

OK, I assume that by justice you meant fairness. Mostly I was just making another point about your rampant paradigm distortion. You're all over the place, slinging this and that against the wall. I have mostly focused on your conflation of investigation and trial. Another prominent example is the complaint that testimony was secret followed by complaint that it was being made public. Your narrative is just not coherent.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2026 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News