|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,494
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: dumpy wants to adjourn congress to appoint his cronies [Re: Seriously_trippin]
#26608650 - 04/17/20 05:27 PM (3 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Roger Stone hasn't been pardoned.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
vinsue
Grand Old Fart



Registered: 02/17/04
Posts: 17,953
Loc: The Garden State(NJ)
|
Re: dumpy wants to adjourn congress to appoint his cronies [Re: Enlil]
#26608664 - 04/17/20 05:33 PM (3 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
--------------------
"All mushrooms are edible; but some only once." Croatian proverb. BTW ... Have You Rated Ythans Mom Yet ?? ... ... HERE'S HOW ... (be nice) . ...
|
Seriously_trippin
Cosmic Guru Ganesh



Registered: 07/12/13
Posts: 14,470
Last seen: 1 minute, 2 seconds
|
Re: dumpy wants to adjourn congress to appoint his cronies [Re: Enlil]
#26608666 - 04/17/20 05:34 PM (3 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said: Roger Stone hasn't been pardoned.
Sorry his sentence was reduced thanks to him I was thinking of Arpiao crazy ass Trump
-------------------- R.I.P Zombi3, Blue Helix Modest Mouse Zappa Slothie That Kid With The face ShLong Le Canard split_by_nine & Big Worm Forever Etched in the sands of time in the shroomery and ever so beloved and deeply missed by many
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 21 days
|
Re: dumpy wants to adjourn congress to appoint his cronies [Re: Enlil]
#26608670 - 04/17/20 05:40 PM (3 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said:
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said: You see absolutely no value in proving election interference?!? Are you fucking joking? 
Strawman fallacy: I never said that.
You said you saw no value in prosecuting the case. So I explained the value to you. Now do you understand why the case shouldn't have been dropped?
Quote:
Enlil said:
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said: If the company in charge is exonerated, you don't understand how the people who act on behalf of that company aren't?
Again, use just a little logic and common sense. I don't care if the case is still legally open and if Mueller put in a few lines to confuse people like you.
No. Please explain it. Obviously, my logic and common sense are lacking.
If I work for a company that makes a questionable product, and that company is then exonerated for making that product, do you think the employees of the company should still be found guilty for making it? I know you get this argument, but I don't get the game you're playing.
Quote:
Enlil said:
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said: It has nothing to do with the other case; you're the only one who keeps saying it does.
So, you admit that there is an open felony prosecution against 12 Russian agents for crimes related to election interference and that those 12 Russian agents have not been exonerated? That's some progress, I suppose.
It's progress for you now that you understand.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 21 days
|
Re: dumpy wants to adjourn congress to appoint his cronies [Re: Seriously_trippin] 1
#26608683 - 04/17/20 05:44 PM (3 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Seriously_trippin said: That's just the thing using the adjective dubious shouldn't be your end all proof you can hang your hat on it's an opinion from a clearly pro Russian or far right opinionist.
I agree. And I never used the word 'dubious' to prove anything I said.
Quote:
Seriously_trippin said: You never presented any proof and demand it from others.
Burden of proof ALWAYS falls on the person making a claim.
Quote:
Seriously_trippin said: I'm saying that Facebook confirmed it happened on a large scale, looked at the numbers saying Our best estimate,” Facebook’s Colin Stretch testified to Congress in October 2017, “is that approximately 126 million people may have been served one of these [IRA] stories at some time during the two year period” between 2015 and 2017.
They know their numbers while terifying and that's a fucking massive amount of Russian troll posts to interfere with the election.
So the 1 in 23,000 was correct. That's not a lot, actually.
Quote:
Seriously_trippin said: Enlil is right that it makes a lot more sense to charge the individuals because being a compny already just in America they'd get fined but when you charge the individuals justice can be more attainable.
I get that. But the main goal of the US was to prove election interference, not to put some nobody Russian kid in jail, and that opportunity may now be lost forever.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
Edited by Falcon91Wolvrn03 (04/17/20 05:51 PM)
|
Seriously_trippin
Cosmic Guru Ganesh



Registered: 07/12/13
Posts: 14,470
Last seen: 1 minute, 2 seconds
|
Re: dumpy wants to adjourn congress to appoint his cronies [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
#26608699 - 04/17/20 05:54 PM (3 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
Seriously_trippin said: That's just the thing using the adjective dubious shouldn't be your end all proof you can hang your hat on it's an opinion from a clearly pro Russian or far right opinionist.
I agree. And I never used the word 'dubious' to prove anything I said.
ST: Yes but your link did
Quote:
Seriously_trippin said: You never presented any proof and demand it from others.
Burden of proof ALWAYS falls on the person making a claim.
ST: Exactly you're the one making a claim that the evidence isn't there burden of proof is on you in this one logically
Quote:
Seriously_trippin said: I'm saying that Facebook confirmed it happened on a large scale, looked at the numbers saying Our best estimate,” Facebook’s Colin Stretch testified to Congress in October 2017, “is that approximately 126 million people may have been served one of these [IRA] stories at some time during the two year period” between 2015 and 2017.
They know their numbers while terifying and that's a fucking massive amount of Russian troll posts to interfere with the election.
So the 1 in 23,000 was correct. That's not a lot, actually. ST: 126 million posts during an election from a foreign power isn't a lot that's horse shit
Quote:
Seriously_trippin said: Enlil is right that it makes a lot more sense to charge the individuals because being a compny already just in America they'd get fined but when you charge the individuals justice can be more attainable.
I get that. But the main goal of the US was to prove election interference, and that opportunity may now be lost forever.
ST: There's plenty of proof they interfered as indicated by the indictments and court cases the first of their kind I might add they made their cases and provided more details then we will ever know. You just say the parent corporation didn't get charged so none of it happened and that it's somehow a fact when it just isn't
-------------------- R.I.P Zombi3, Blue Helix Modest Mouse Zappa Slothie That Kid With The face ShLong Le Canard split_by_nine & Big Worm Forever Etched in the sands of time in the shroomery and ever so beloved and deeply missed by many
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,494
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: dumpy wants to adjourn congress to appoint his cronies [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
#26608705 - 04/17/20 05:57 PM (3 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said: You said you saw no value in prosecuting the case. So I explained the value to you. Now do you understand why the case shouldn't have been dropped?
No, I didn't say that. You said I said it. That's a strawman. I said that I see more value in prosecuting the individuals than the company.
And since you asked, no, I don't understand why you believe the case shouldn't have been dropped. I understand completely why it was dropped, and I believe the prosecutors made the right call. To continue prosecuting would have required revealing classified information. There would have been no one punished from the prosecution. That is a net loss for the government.
Frankly, I see this all the time. It happens in cases that have undercover officers or CIs. The government has to make a choice between prosecuting and keeping the UC or CI. For a low-value conviction, they aren't going to give up their assets. Concord is a much lower value conviction than the individuals.Quote:
If I work for a company that makes a questionable product, and that company is then exonerated for making that product, do you think the employees of the company should still be found guilty for making it? I know you get this argument, but I don't get the game you're playing.
You think Concord was being prosecuted for a product they make? That's silly. This is about conduct...not manufacturing. I'm not even sure what the fuck you're trying to say here.
A company CAN be liable for the criminal conduct of the employees, but it's not automatic. It's very rare, actually. On the other hand, the employees are absolutely criminally liable for their own conduct, regardless of whether they were acting at the direction of their employer. This is the fatal flaw in your whole argument. If the employees had been dismissed, the company would have to be. The company being dismissed does absolutely nothing to the criminal liability of the employees, however.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 21 days
|
Re: dumpy wants to adjourn congress to appoint his cronies [Re: Seriously_trippin] 1
#26608731 - 04/17/20 06:13 PM (3 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Seriously_trippin said: There's plenty of proof they interfered as indicated by the indictments
I keep asking you to share this evidence that you know exists. Pretty please? With a cherry on top???
Quote:
Seriously_trippin said: You just say the parent corporation didn't get charged so none of it happened and that it's somehow a fact when it just isn't
If the parent company is exonerated of election interference, that means the people who worked on behalf of the parent company are too. I didn't see different charges in the indictment against the employees. Maybe you or Enlil can point these out? Pretty please?
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 21 days
|
Re: dumpy wants to adjourn congress to appoint his cronies [Re: Enlil]
#26608763 - 04/17/20 06:30 PM (3 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said: No, I didn't say that. I said that I see more value in prosecuting the individuals than the company.
I understand. Do you think they'll prosecute the individuals now that they dismissed the case against the parent company?
Quote:
Enlil said: I understand completely why it was dropped, and I believe the prosecutors made the right call. To continue prosecuting would have required revealing classified information.
The classified information may have been that they had no evidence. Can you offer a better guess?
Quote:
Enlil said: There would have been no one punished from the prosecution. That is a net loss for the government.
Finding a Russian entity guilty of election interference would have been a HUGE win. Now we've got nothing, and likely never will.
Quote:
Enlil said: For a low-value conviction, they aren't going to give up their assets. Concord is a much lower value conviction than the individuals.
What's so valuable about a lowly Concord employee? The value is proving a Russian company guilty of election interference for the millions of people who don't blindly trust our Government, like me.
Quote:
Enlil said: A company CAN be liable for the criminal conduct of the employees, but it's not automatic. It's very rare, actually. On the other hand, the employees are absolutely criminally liable for their own conduct, regardless of whether they were acting at the direction of their employer. This is the fatal flaw in your whole argument. If the employees had been dismissed, the company would have to be. The company being dismissed does absolutely nothing to the criminal liability of the employees, however.
Once again, you CLEARLY don't seem to know what this case is about. It's not about rogue employees doing bad things. It's about employees doing exactly what the company hired them to do. I'll quote the indictment again: (Concord employees) "worked in various capacities to carry out Defendant ORGANIZATION’s interference operations"
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
Edited by Falcon91Wolvrn03 (04/17/20 07:03 PM)
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,494
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: dumpy wants to adjourn congress to appoint his cronies [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
#26608869 - 04/17/20 07:13 PM (3 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
I understand. Do you think they'll prosecute the individuals now that they dismissed the case against the parent company?
If they can get them to the U.S., definitely. If not, maybe.
Quote:
The classified information may have been that they had no evidence. Can you offer a better guess?
That wouldn't make sense. They didn't prosecute because they didn't want to turn over evidence they didn't have? A better guess is that information was gathered using technologies and/or assets that they don't want revealed.Quote:
Finding Russia guilty of election interference would have been a HUGE win. Now we've got nothing, and likely never will.
Concord isn't Russia, though. Prosecuting Concord wouldn't be finding Russia guilty of anything. The Russian agent prosecution would be far closer to implicating Russia than a Concord conviction.Quote:
What's so valuable about a lowly Concord employee? The value is proving a Russian company guilty of election interference for the millions of people who don't blindly trust our Government, like me.
I think you're confused. Concord isn't a company owned by Russia. It's owned by a private individual. A conviction of Concord wouldn't be a conviction of Russia, the nation. All that would happen is that the company would never do business in the U.S., and they'd never suffer any consequences whatsoever.Quote:
Once again, you CLEARLY don't seem to know what this case is about. It's not about rogue employees doing bad things. It's about employees doing exactly what the company hired them to do. I'll quote the indictment again: (Concord employees) "worked in various capacities to carry out Defendant ORGANIZATION’s interference operations"
I get that. That doesn't mean the individuals aren't responsible for their actions, though. I don't know how many ways I can say it.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 21 days
|
Re: dumpy wants to adjourn congress to appoint his cronies [Re: Enlil]
#26608935 - 04/17/20 07:40 PM (3 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said:
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said: The classified information may have been that they had no evidence. Can you offer a better guess?
That wouldn't make sense. They didn't prosecute because they didn't want to turn over evidence they didn't have?
If this was a make believe, like WMDs in Iraq, the Government wouldn't want people to know that.
Quote:
Enlil said: A better guess is that information was gathered using technologies and/or assets that they don't want revealed.
That's the official story. Kind of like Iraq has WMDs was the official story. It was a very bad guess though.
Quote:
Enlil said:
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said: Finding Russia guilty of election interference would have been a HUGE win. Now we've got nothing, and likely never will.
Concord isn't Russia, though. Prosecuting Concord wouldn't be finding Russia guilty of anything. The Russian agent prosecution would be far closer to implicating Russia than a Concord conviction.
Concord employees aren't Russia either.
Quote:
Enlil said:
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said: What's so valuable about a lowly Concord employee? The value is proving a Russian company guilty of election interference for the millions of people who don't blindly trust our Government, like me.
I think you're confused. Concord isn't a company owned by Russia. It's owned by a private individual. A conviction of Concord wouldn't be a conviction of Russia, the nation. All that would happen is that the company would never do business in the U.S., and they'd never suffer any consequences whatsoever.
So a conviction of a Concord employee WOULD be a conviction of Russia?
Quote:
Enlil said:
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said: Once again, you CLEARLY don't seem to know what this case is about. It's not about rogue employees doing bad things. It's about employees doing exactly what the company hired them to do. I'll quote the indictment again: (Concord employees) "worked in various capacities to carry out Defendant ORGANIZATION’s interference operations"
I get that. That doesn't mean the individuals aren't responsible for their actions, though. I don't know how many ways I can say it.
For maybe the seventh time now, I KNOW THAT LEGALLY THE CASE AGAINST THOSE OTHER DEFENDENTS WASN'T DROPPED. I've been asking you to use a little common sense to understand that if the case against the parent company was dropped, it should be obvious that the case against employees acting on behalf of the parent probably isn't too strong either. Unless they were rogue employees doing things the parent company didn't want them doing. But I missed that in the indictment.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,494
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: dumpy wants to adjourn congress to appoint his cronies [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
#26608947 - 04/17/20 07:43 PM (3 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
No, a conviction of the employees wouldn't be a conviction of Russia. As I said before, Russia is a sovereign nation. There is no mechanism to convict it.
As to your last rant, there's no reason to believe the case against Concord was dropped because it wasn't a strong case. Similarly, there's no reason to believe the case against the individuals isn't a strong case. Prosecutors rarely bring weak cases.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 21 days
|
Re: dumpy wants to adjourn congress to appoint his cronies [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
#26608968 - 04/17/20 07:53 PM (3 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
I think at this point, we're probably just going in circles. Ultimately, we have zero evidence of wrongdoing, and this boils down to whether we have blind faith in our Government or not.
As a reminder, however, "the investigation did not establish that the Campaign coordinated or conspired with the Russian government in its election-interference activities" and the case against Concord was dismissed.
Quote:
Enlil said: Prosecutors rarely bring weak cases.
Unless they think the defense won't show up. But if they do, then it appears they'll have to drop weak cases.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,494
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: dumpy wants to adjourn congress to appoint his cronies [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
#26608972 - 04/17/20 07:55 PM (3 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
That's why it went before a grand jury. They did see the evidence, and they indicted.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 21 days
|
Re: dumpy wants to adjourn congress to appoint his cronies [Re: Enlil]
#26608983 - 04/17/20 07:59 PM (3 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Again, at least one person who saw the grand jury evidence said the Russia probe was started 'without any basis'.
Blind faith vs a desire for evidence.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,494
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: dumpy wants to adjourn congress to appoint his cronies [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
#26608987 - 04/17/20 08:00 PM (3 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Well, if one person said it, the 24 person grand jury must be wrong.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 21 days
|
Re: dumpy wants to adjourn congress to appoint his cronies [Re: Enlil]
#26608996 - 04/17/20 08:05 PM (3 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
There's a whole criminal investigation going on being led by John Durham and team. I suspect they're more qualified than a grand Jury full of paranoid koods and Seriously Trippins?
"Prosecutors rarely bring weak cases" so I guess we'll see where this goes.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 21 days
|
Re: dumpy wants to adjourn congress to appoint his cronies [Re: Seriously_trippin]
#26609345 - 04/17/20 11:33 PM (3 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
Seriously_trippin said: There's plenty of proof they interfered as indicated by the indictments
I keep asking you to share this evidence that you know exists. Pretty please? With a cherry on top???
***CRICKETS***
Did I not ask nicely enough?
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Seriously_trippin
Cosmic Guru Ganesh



Registered: 07/12/13
Posts: 14,470
Last seen: 1 minute, 2 seconds
|
Re: dumpy wants to adjourn congress to appoint his cronies [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03] 1
#26609497 - 04/18/20 03:05 AM (3 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
Seriously_trippin said: There's plenty of proof they interfered as indicated by the indictments
I keep asking you to share this evidence that you know exists. Pretty please? With a cherry on top???
***CRICKETS***
Did I not ask nicely enough?
It's useless to prove your conspiracy theory wrong when courts above your head and a lawyer here are tearing your arguments apart. I'm not the one trying to convince people of something and no matter what I say to you you're not going to believe anything else. So if you want to believe Russia is awesome, all those people wanted to be annexed in Kiev to Crimea or that the Russians didn't deliberately interfere with our election that's your prerogative.
-------------------- R.I.P Zombi3, Blue Helix Modest Mouse Zappa Slothie That Kid With The face ShLong Le Canard split_by_nine & Big Worm Forever Etched in the sands of time in the shroomery and ever so beloved and deeply missed by many
|
Brian Jones
Club 27



Registered: 12/18/12
Posts: 12,340
Loc: attending Snake Church
Last seen: 3 hours, 9 minutes
|
Re: dumpy wants to adjourn congress to appoint his cronies [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
#26609586 - 04/18/20 04:38 AM (3 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
Seriously_trippin said: You're alone in the belief that nothing at all was found. It's a fairytale land where Russia was exonerated which just did not happen.
First of all, I was correct in my signature bet that the Mueller Report would find no evidence of Trump colluding with the Russian Government. The Mueller Report specifically said that "Ultimately, the investigation did not establish that the Campaign coordinated or conspired with the Russian government in its election-interference activities."
Then you, koods, and a few others insisted that the Mueller Report DID find evidence of Russian election interference, as evidenced by the indictments. So I then made another signature bet that Concord would either win or the case would have to be dropped due to a lack of evidence. I won that bet as well.
I find it odd that after being right on this (and so many other things like the Douma chemical attacks), you guys still make believe there's something there.
Quote:
Seriously_trippin said: We've all gone through this conversation before
Yes, the conversation where I ask for specific evidence, and you tell me it's buried somewhere in the Mueller Report, and if I would only read the whole thing I might be the first person in the wide world to find it.
I'll ask again, what specific evidence do you have? I won't play make believe, as you and koods should know by now.
Whether Trump knowingly conspired and whether there was evidence of Russian interference are different issues. That Russia interfered is a known fact. To what extent it made a difference is open to interpretation.
Everyone keeps repeating themselves here, so I'll repeat myself again. I was found not guilty of a DUI with a BAC of .23%. I don't see the decision on Concord as being any different. A case being dropped due to lack of evidence, does not make that make believe.
Look at the allegations against George W Bush who was in the Texas Air National Guard during the Viet Nam War, and disappeared for a couple years when a drug test was scheduled. When 60 Minutes exposed this, Dan Rather's career was temporarily ruined and the journalistic career of his Peabody winning producer Mary Mapes was completely destroyed. Were they wrong about the facts. Nope. But there were procedural errors in the investigation.
Technicalities and procedural errors are a completely different animal than make believe.
-------------------- "The Rolling Stones will break up over Brian Jones' dead body" John Lennon I don't want no commies in my car. No Christians either. The worst thing about corruption is that it works so well,
|
|