Can't help but wonder

[LumRaiderFan]

50 minutes ago, Coach Frey said:

I didn't avoid any question. Read above. I answered clearly. No I don't believe Mueller used political leanings as a bias in selection.

You on the other hand seem to be completely okay with an individual who plays both sides. I can't for the life of me see how an individual who claims to be a Republican, a conservative, pro life, pro second amendment, etc. could donate to Clinton, no matter the reason.

First, Trump is not a conservative, but the question wasn’t about him.

I will ask again, you see no bias or the possibility of an agenda with Mueller’s team.

Simple yes or no...don’t chase a Trump rabbit.

[Coach Frey]

27 minutes ago, LumRaiderFan said:

First, Trump is not a conservative, but the question wasn’t about him.

I will ask again, you see no bias or the possibility of an agenda with Mueller’s team.

Simple yes or no...don’t chase a Trump rabbit.

For a third time, no I did not see any bias in Mueller's selections. Not sure how many times I have to answer this question. I see what you are hunting for, but the Mueller Report pretty much showed most leftist notions were false, this was done with a group that had some with Democratic ties......that doesn't help your argument. It shows that the group did their job properly and not based on political leanings.

[Coach Frey]

29 minutes ago, LumRaiderFan said:

First, Trump is not a conservative, but the question wasn’t about him.

I will ask again, you see no bias or the possibility of an agenda with Mueller’s team.

Simple yes or no...don’t chase a Trump rabbit.

4 minutes ago, Coach Frey said:

For a third time, no I did not see any bias in Mueller's selections. Not sure how many times I have to answer this question. I see what you are hunting for, but the Mueller Report pretty much showed most leftist notions were false, this was done with a group that had some with Democratic ties......that doesn't help your argument. It shows that the group did their job properly and not based on political leanings.

You can say that again!

[Englebert]

1 hour ago, Coach Frey said:

I was pretty clear on my view of this. 

I can see you are trying to weave a web here, but I'm not exactly sure what your angle is. 

You are clear on your view of stereotyping. My question is do you think other people hold your same views, and can be trusted to seek unbiased truth towards those that look different or act different. Do you feel that a homogeneous group can pass unbiased judgement on a person that is different than the group? You have stated you don't think Mueller's lawyers were chosen using political leanings. Since the vast majority lean one way politically, do you feel his (homogeneous) selections are/were capable of unbiased judgement in the probe? Would you feel comfortable being investigated by 20 lawyers who you know are not fans of you?

Edit: I just saw your answer to LumRaiderFan's question. Your post to him still does not answer my question though, so I will keep this post as is.

[LumRaiderFan]

18 minutes ago, Coach Frey said:

For a third time, no I did not see any bias in Mueller's selections. Not sure how many times I have to answer this question. I see what you are hunting for, but the Mueller Report pretty much showed most leftist notions were false, this was done with a group that had some with Democratic ties......that doesn't help your argument. It shows that the group did their job properly and not based on political leanings.

It shows Trump was innocent...plain and simple.  This group spent two years investigating a man, not a crime.  This very anti Trump group went in with the presumption of guilt and I have no doubt were very disappointed that they couldn’t fulfill their responsibility of finding Trump guilty.

[Coach Frey]

2 hours ago, Englebert said:

You are clear on your view of stereotyping. My question is do you think other people hold your same views, and can be trusted to seek unbiased truth towards those that look different or act different. Do you feel that a homogeneous group can pass unbiased judgement on a person that is different than the group? You have stated you don't think Mueller's lawyers were chosen using political leanings. Since the vast majority lean one way politically, do you feel his (homogeneous) selections are/were capable of unbiased judgement in the probe? Would you feel comfortable being investigated by 20 lawyers who you know are not fans of you?

Edit: I just saw your answer to LumRaiderFan's question. Your post to him still does not answer my question though, so I will keep this post as is.

2 hours ago, Englebert said:

You are clear on your view of stereotyping. My question is do you think other people hold your same views, and can be trusted to seek unbiased truth towards those that look different or act different. Do you feel that a homogeneous group can pass unbiased judgement on a person that is different than the group? You have stated you don't think Mueller's lawyers were chosen using political leanings. Since the vast majority lean one way politically, do you feel his (homogeneous) selections are/were capable of unbiased judgement in the probe? Would you feel comfortable being investigated by 20 lawyers who you know are not fans of you?

Edit: I just saw your answer to LumRaiderFan's question. Your post to him still does not answer my question though, so I will keep this post as is.

I do believe that group was able to pass an unbiased judgement without regard for political leanings. If they hadn't, Trump would already be impeached. 

[Coach Frey]

1 hour ago, LumRaiderFan said:

It shows Trump was innocent...plain and simple.  This group spent two years investigating a man, not a crime.  This very anti Trump group went in with the presumption of guilt and I have no doubt were very disappointed that they couldn’t fulfill their responsibility of finding Trump guilty.

Well that is your opinion (they were disappointed) not a fact. Now you are the one running from the issue. You made the claim that there was bias. The group came back pretty much clearing Trump. Your argument fell flat on it's face and so your rebuttal to my response that noted that was to say, "oh they were probably mad."  Facts are stubborn things.

[Coach Frey]

2 hours ago, Englebert said:

You are clear on your view of stereotyping. My question is do you think other people hold your same views, and can be trusted to seek unbiased truth towards those that look different or act different. Do you feel that a homogeneous group can pass unbiased judgement on a person that is different than the group? You have stated you don't think Mueller's lawyers were chosen using political leanings. Since the vast majority lean one way politically, do you feel his (homogeneous) selections are/were capable of unbiased judgement in the probe? Would you feel comfortable being investigated by 20 lawyers who you know are not fans of you?

Edit: I just saw your answer to LumRaiderFan's question. Your post to him still does not answer my question though, so I will keep this post as is.

I also question your statement "would you be comfortable being investigated by 20 lawyers who you know are not fans of you." I'd like to see the link of all these individuals who were not fans of Trump. Merely being a Democrat doesn't mean you are out to get Trump. If that is the case, as your argument seems to present, you have a lot of explaining to do as to why our Republican president donated to Democrats.

[LumRaiderFan]

54 minutes ago, Coach Frey said:

Well that is your opinion (they were disappointed) not a fact. Now you are the one running from the issue. You made the claim that there was bias. The group came back pretty much clearing Trump. Your argument fell flat on it's face and so your rebuttal to my response that noted that was to say, "oh they were probably mad."  Facts are stubborn things.

They didn’t clear Trump...he was innocent all along.  My argument is backed up by all the crooked deep state players and the Democrats that were trying to impeach him on garbage they were guilty of.

You seem to think that these were fine non partisan folks just because they did Trump the favor of not finding him guilty...or they “cleared” him as you put it.

They tried for two years (ridiculous in itself) and could find nothing no matter how hard they tried.

My argument is solid...the group was bias and on a witch hunt...just nothing for them to find, even though they stretched it out two years. 

 

[Englebert]

1 hour ago, Coach Frey said:

I also question your statement "would you be comfortable being investigated by 20 lawyers who you know are not fans of you." I'd like to see the link of all these individuals who were not fans of Trump. Merely being a Democrat doesn't mean you are out to get Trump. If that is the case, as your argument seems to present, you have a lot of explaining to do as to why our Republican president donated to Democrats.

I didn't say the lawyers on the Trump probe where not his fans. I asked if you would be comfortable with knowing people investigating you were not fans of yours. Based on the fact that the Mueller team where Democrat donors, the perception of a biased team was apparent.

Having to endure all of the pathetic rhetoric flung Trump's way, especially from Democrats, to have 20 high-priced lawyers that donated to Clinton must have been unsettling for him, and for a lot of people. It would be like a Black man on trial with 12 card-carrying KKK members as the jurors. Or a White man on trial with 12 antifa members as the jurors. Maybe they would be fair, maybe not. The perception is not favorable to that outcome. That was my whole point. Why did Mueller choose a team with most, if not all, Clinton donors? If he thought these were the best, so be it. But the perception is that such a partisan looking team would probably not be fair. Why bring that element into the equation? And the report does not provide evidence whether they were biased or not. Since you have indicated you are okay with the Mueller team, are you okay with other homogeneous groups in charge of investigating/judging others who are not like them? Are perceived partisan groups okay in all situations, or just when it involves Trump?

Your question of my posts makes your last statement mute. But even if my interpretation was as you guessed, I would not have a lot of explaining to do. Trump donated to both sides, in my opinion to curry favor. Did the lawyers donate to Hillary (and just Hillary/Democrats) in an attempt to gain favoritism? And even if Trump donated to Democrats only, considering he lived in New York that would not be a big deal. Trump has never been a true Conservative. 

[LumRaiderFan]

4 hours ago, Coach Frey said:

You can say that again!

I’ve said it many times, but he sure does pick justices and govern like a conservative.

[stevenash]

2 hours ago, Coach Frey said:

Well that is your opinion (they were disappointed) not a fact. Now you are the one running from the issue. You made the claim that there was bias. The group came back pretty much clearing Trump. Your argument fell flat on it's face and so your rebuttal to my response that noted that was to say, "oh they were probably mad."  Facts are stubborn things.

Sorry, but the presence of bias does not guarantee a guilty of collusion conclusion.

[Coach Frey]

15 hours ago, LumRaiderFan said:

I’ve said it many times, but he sure does pick justices and govern like a conservative.

Except he doesn't.

[LumRaiderFan]

1 hour ago, Coach Frey said:

Except he doesn't.

Apparently you haven't kept up with many of the policies he has put through...or you refuse to acknowledge them because you really don't like the guy.

That you seem to think the Mueller process was respectable and above board simply because they couldn't hang something on him and "cleared" him says enough.

 

[PhatMack19]

18 hours ago, Coach Frey said:

Well that is your opinion (they were disappointed) not a fact. Now you are the one running from the issue. You made the claim that there was bias. The group came back pretty much clearing Trump. Your argument fell flat on it's face and so your rebuttal to my response that noted that was to say, "oh they were probably mad."  Facts are stubborn things.

2 of them(that we know of) were actively trying to overthrow the duly elected President of the United States.  They should be tried for Treason.  I’m not sure how that’s non biased 

[LumRaiderFan]

17 minutes ago, PhatMack19 said:

2 of them(that we know of) were actively trying to overthrow the duly elected President of the United States.  They should be tried for Treason.  I’m not sure how that’s non biased 

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

[Bobcat1]

Does anyone have a list that shows who made donations to democrats that were on Muller's team?  

[LumRaiderFan]

43 minutes ago, Bobcat1 said:

Does anyone have a list that shows who made donations to democrats that were on Muller's team?  

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

From the article:

Duffy says Mueller "has brought in Democrat campaign donors at a very high level" on his team of lawyers.

Six of the 15 lawyers who have been publicly identified have not made campaign contributions to any political campaigns at the federal level. But among the lawyers who did make contributions, a total of $62,043 went to Democrats and $2,750 to Republicans, according to the special counsel’s office.