Michael

The biggest mark against him is that Agustino is coming to his defence. ;) On the other hand, Sapientia seems to like him to. Colour me conflicted.

You say we learn the word "pain" by associating it with certain behaviours, and so therefore these behaviours have something to do with the meaning of...

This seems like saying that the meaning of "Aristotle" gets a foothold in textbooks, given that none of us have ever met the man. The word refers to t...

... always carry a gun?

I'm sure almost all of us will say that the word "pain" refers to the sensation, not to the public expression. That's why we can talk about people fak...

Let's say that the thing inside my box is blue, and nothing else in the world is blue. I coin the term "blue" to refer to the unique colour of the thi...

Or let's say that I'm able to look inside another person's box, and what I see is nothing like what I see in mine. I would probably say that what's in...

Let's say that we all have a box with a thing inside which we call a "beetle". We can never see what is in another person's box, only what is in our o...

Presumably you're in a particular circumstance. So what, exactly, are you asking when you ask "am I in circumstance A or circumstance B"? Are you aski...

How do we determine in which circumstances it is correct to use certain words and phrases? It's not that the meaning comes first, and we then try to d...

So you keep saying, but people with more knowledge of the situation say otherwise. Your supposed reason for denying that it didn't happen - McGahn did...

Ending an investigation into you because you claim to be innocent is obstruction of justice.

Of course not. There are lawyers for the defense, too. The primary problem is the matter of intent, which is hard to prove. Why did Trump try to fire ...

I believe the point is that whatever is going on right now, the correct thing to say is "this is a hand", in the same way that whatever the animal we ...

We're talking about what crimes, if any, have been committed. It is the legal technicalities that matter, not your pragmatism. Whether or not it's "pr...

Case closed? Yes, case closed; it isn't treason. Furthermore, they can disobey. They'll just be punished for it, were Trump willing. And finally, arti...

No, you're just making it up.

Article 90 isn't the crime of treason. It's the crime of "Assaulting or willfully disobeying superior commissioned officer."

What the hell are you talking about? I ask you for your source that shows that it is treason to disobey the President and you provide me a link to an ...

Treason isn't mentioned there at all.

Again, you're fabricating legal knowledge. What are your sources?

I already provided you with a link to an article on what it means to give aid and comfort to an enemy of the United States. Disobeying the President i...

No it isn't.

No it isn't. Treason is "whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comf...

Again, of course it can be refused. Orders don't have some magical power of compulsion. Trump would be free to punish someone for disobeying, and havi...

The process begins with Trump telling a subordinate what to do. That subordinate refused.

That's why they called in "the secret society".

They were talking about Fight Club.

This was the text: "Are you even going to give out your calendars? Seems kind of depressing. Maybe it should just be the first meeting of the secret s...

And again, even Fox News confirmed these reports. Hannity, no less, as shown in that amusing video I posted.

The news that reports the facts. That those facts always seems to show Trump doing something wrong isn't their fault.

I'm not spinning anything. I'm repeating what the news has reported. Whereas you're fabricating knowledge of what Trump did (or didn't) do in an attem...

The action taken was telling McGahn to have Mueller fired. What exactly would it take for you to accept it as an action/order? Must Trump personally h...

And regarding "corruptly endeavours", this overview of obstruction law states (page 18):

Besides, the law doesn't even use the term "order". It just states: "whoever corruptly... endeavors to influence, intimidate, or impede..." Trump aski...

Again, the reports are there for you to read. I trust them more than you. You don't even know the law.

It's not treasonous (or a crime at all) to disobey an illegal order, which is what this would have been. In fact, it's not treasonous to disobey a leg...

You might not be willing to fire me, just as Trump clearly wasn't willing to fire McGahn. You're playing ridiculous word games here. This is what I me...

Of course an order can be disobeyed. What are you talking about? You're my boss. You order me to make you a cup of tea. I refuse. I've disobeyed your ...

What do you mean by he couldn't do? Orders don't have some magical power to force obedience. Trump told him to do something, and he said "no", and thr...

It's a good thing you're not a lawyer.

The reports are there for you to read. Again, you're free to call them "fake news", but they have more knowledge - and credibility - than you. And as ...

Here's the original report: It's since been corroborated by others, including the Washington Post and even Fox News. You're free to think it "fake new...

You're making me dizzy with so much spin.

Whoever ... endeavors. Obstruction need not be successful. See United States v. Tackett, 113 F.3d 603, 611: "Although the omnibus clause of §1503 requ...

It isn't a normal interaction between two people. It's the President ordering an investigation into him be ended. This is likely the relevant statute:...

He ordered the firing of the person investigating him, and within just a few weeks no less. You have to be willfully ignorant to not see the problem w...

He ordered McGahn, the White House Counsel, to fire him. McGahn refused and threatened to resign, so Trump backed down.

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x6dqbxn Hannity: "NYT trying to distract you with fake news!" Hannity, later: "OK, so it isn't fake news, but I'm goi...

I can imagine a possible world without a God, and so God can't be necessary. It's ridiculous to think that you can just define him to be, just as it w...