Russia Investigation Heating Up

[time4fun]

Trump once again failing to understand the law (https://www.politico.com/story/2018/08/20/trump-mueller-investigation-790059):


President Donald Trump said on Monday that he could “run” the special counsel’s Russia investigation if he wanted to, but that he had decided to “stay out” for now.

“I can go in, and I could do whatever — I could run it if I want,” Trump told Reuters reporters during an interview in the Oval Office. “But I decided to stay out. I’m totally allowed to be involved if I wanted to be. So far, I haven’t chosen to be involved. I’ll stay out.”

LOL

[Neveragain]

You should include Neveragain's response.

That'll be good for a few fits of laughter from your Facebook friends.

If you insist, here is the response you need to your what if scenario.

Kamala Harris won't be elected in 2020. Your stupid scenario won't and doesn't happen.

Most likely it will be Trump wins in 2020 and we will have to listen to you and the GS rainbow jihad call everyone racists for another 4 years. This is 1000's of times more likely than your political fan fiction scenario.

[time4fun]

If you insist, here is the response you need to your what if scenario.

Kamala Harris won't be elected in 2020. Your stupid scenario won't and doesn't happen.

Most likely it will be Trump wins in 2020 and we will have to listen to you and the GS rainbow jihad call everyone racists for another 4 years. This is 1000's of times more likely than your political fan fiction scenario.

ROFL.

You can't bring yourself to actually deal with the point of the post, and you're doing everything you can to avoid having to.

This is just sad.

Or maybe you have reading comprehension issues, and you honestly don't understand what you read.

[Methais]

Wouldn't that be Matthias though?

I don't know. I never heard of Matthias until after I started playing GS, and it sounded like "Methais" on Life of Brian, which was good enough for me.

Btw I am now recruiting for the People's Front of Elanthia. Not to be confused with the Popular People's Front of Elanthia or the Elanthian People's Front.

We'll teach those splitters a lesson.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xRvCwtLLV6I

[Methais]

Yeah so I just want to do a quick sanity check. We've got several people who are utterly convinced that we should never have started any investigations into Russia or the Trump campaign. So I just want to be sure:

Say in 2020 we are notified by our Japanese allies that the Democratic nominee for US President's campaign (let's say it's Kamala Harris) has had several suspicious meetings with Chinese government officials and cutouts in Asia. Then we find out that China has offered the Harris campaign illegally hacked emails from Donald Trump's campaign and his personal email.

Around the same time, the Harris campaign takes on a new campaign manager whose last major political stint was helping China to install a puppet President in a European country. And that campaign manager agrees to work for the Harris campaign for free despite usually charging millions of dollars for his services. The Harris campaign also appoints a no-name foreign policy adviser who happens to be a known Chinese intelligence asset who has recently been giving speeches in China decrying American foreign policy.

When asked about all of the suspicious contacts with China, the Harris campaign strongly denies that they have had ANY contact with the Chinese government whatsoever- which is an obvious lie. The campaign also swears that they have no financial or business interests in China- even though just a few years prior Harris's own son had been claiming that China was a major source of revenue for them. It's later discovered that during the campaign, Harris was actually working on a major financial project in Beijing that required the Chinese government's approval. It's also later revealed that Harris has several long-standing business relationships with China and that Harris had several injections of much-needed cash from China at critical points in her business career.

Meanwhile, after the new campaign manager starts, the Harris campaign curiously adopts the foreign policy priorities of the Chinese Communist Government- even though they are actually not in America's best interests. And it turns out that China has actually tried to get puppet leaders elected in other European countries- all of whom have adopted the same curious foreign policy positions. Harris also repeatedly praises the Chinese government and talks about how important it is for America to get along with China- despite the fact that China is actively threatening the United States at that time.

Then, we find out that China has been selectively leaking Trump's emails in the most damaging way at exactly the times when Harris needs it most. It's also discovered that China is waging a sophisticated information warfare campaign to discredit Trump through lies told across social media- and repeated in major liberal publications and outlets like MSNBC and Occupy Democrats. Harris repeatedly denies that China has anything to do with the emails or any information warfare campaign- though it's later discovered that Harris's campaign manager, two children, and several other top campaign members were told by the Chinese government via an intermediary that China WAS indeed trying to get Harris elected. We also find out that these people met with a representative of the Chinese government who was promising the Harris campaign dirt on the Trump campaign while also discussing Chinese foreign policy priorities.

Later we find out that shortly after the message was sent from the Chinese government intermediary to Harris's oldest son (stating that they were going to bring Harris's campaign dirt on Trump), Harris announces to the country that she's going to have a major press conference shortly after the proposed meeting date to discuss serious dirt about Trump that no one else knows about. Once it's discovered that this meeting took place, the Harris campaign comes up with several conflicting stories about what's going on- and ultimately maintains that Harris knew nothing about either the meeting nor the fact that the Chinese government has been trying to get her elected.

Now it turns out that she wins!

The first thing she does as President is to try to quietly undo sanctions that Trump has put in place against China to punish them for their election meddling- which Harris still denies ever happened. Fortunately, Congress intervenes.

Harris continues to show an unheard of fondness for the Chinese government- constantly praising them and inviting members of the government into the White House for closed door meetings that no American is allowed into. Pretty soon, it's discovered that her National Security Director (who was a major campaign figure) lied to the FBI about his contacts with the Chinese government during the campaign. The acting AG tells Harris that he is considered to be vulnerable to blackmail from the Chinese government and is a serious national security threat, but Harris refuses to remove him until the media catches win of the situation and begins publishing stories about the whole thing. It also turns out that he had a very tight relationship with the head of the Chinese Communist Party.
Reluctantly, Harris fires him.

Harris then learns that the FBI has been actively investigating the National Security Director's contacts with the Chinese government and repeatedly pressures the head of the FBI to stop the investigation. The head of the FBI refuses, and Harris fires him shortly after Congressional testimony in which the head of the FBI confirms the investigation into Harris's campaign and refuses to say that Harris herself is not under investigation. In a few short hours after the firing, several different reasons are given by the Harris administration: including that the head of the FBI was too mean to Trump (based on decisions that Harris had previously, effusively praised).

Eventually Harris admits on national TV that she was thinking about the investigation into Chinese contacts with her campaign when she fired the head of the FBI. At the same time, it turns out that the Democratic Attorney General that Harris has recently appointed also lied under oath about his contacts with the Chinese government during the campaign, and he is forced to recuse himself from all investigations related to China or the campaign. The Democratic Deputy Attorney General then appoints a Special Prosecutor to take over all of the investigations into Harris's campaign, Harris herself, and Chinese electoral meddling. Meanwhile, the Democratic Senate and Democratic House start their own investigations into Harris and her campaign.

And so:

The official stance of the conservatives of PC is that we should DEFINITELY NOT investigate the Harris campaign NOR the Chinese election interference.

And that the only reason why Harris is being investigated is because the Democrats are really upset that Trump lost.

Asking for a friend

tldr

trdr too

[Methais]

Holy wall of text Batman

On behalf of the paragraph community, I feel compelled to call you out for format appropriation, as a wall of text is typically one giant paragraph.

Reported.

https://orig00.deviantart.net/3f03/f/2010/197/b/0/ya_dun_goofed_by_yadungoofedplz.jpg

[Methais]

If you insist, here is the response you need to your what if scenario.

Kamala Harris won't be elected in 2020. Your stupid scenario won't and doesn't happen.

Most likely it will be Trump wins in 2020 and we will have to listen to you and the GS rainbow jihad call everyone racists for another 4 years. This is 1000's of times more likely than your political fan fiction scenario.

Fun fact: The WWF wrestler Kamala's real life last name is also Harris.

https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-EAdn0PPHp2c/Wp4y70LC4DI/AAAAAAAA2dI/83P0bBpnlpYm-7Sknzb_w3GEaucF5hriQCEwYBhgL/s1600/kamala.jpg

Confirmed Kamala Harris is Kamala the Ugandan Giant.

[Parkbandit]

Yeah so I just want to do a quick sanity check. We've got several people who are utterly convinced that we should never have started any investigations into Russia or the Trump campaign. So I just want to be sure:

Say in 2020 we are notified by our Japanese allies that the Democratic nominee for US President's campaign (let's say it's Kamala Harris) has had several suspicious meetings with Chinese government officials and cutouts in Asia. Then we find out that China has offered the Harris campaign illegally hacked emails from Donald Trump's campaign and his personal email.

Around the same time, the Harris campaign takes on a new campaign manager whose last major political stint was helping China to install a puppet President in a European country. And that campaign manager agrees to work for the Harris campaign for free despite usually charging millions of dollars for his services. The Harris campaign also appoints a no-name foreign policy adviser who happens to be a known Chinese intelligence asset who has recently been giving speeches in China decrying American foreign policy.

When asked about all of the suspicious contacts with China, the Harris campaign strongly denies that they have had ANY contact with the Chinese government whatsoever- which is an obvious lie. The campaign also swears that they have no financial or business interests in China- even though just a few years prior Harris's own son had been claiming that China was a major source of revenue for them. It's later discovered that during the campaign, Harris was actually working on a major financial project in Beijing that required the Chinese government's approval. It's also later revealed that Harris has several long-standing business relationships with China and that Harris had several injections of much-needed cash from China at critical points in her business career.

Meanwhile, after the new campaign manager starts, the Harris campaign curiously adopts the foreign policy priorities of the Chinese Communist Government- even though they are actually not in America's best interests. And it turns out that China has actually tried to get puppet leaders elected in other European countries- all of whom have adopted the same curious foreign policy positions. Harris also repeatedly praises the Chinese government and talks about how important it is for America to get along with China- despite the fact that China is actively threatening the United States at that time.

Then, we find out that China has been selectively leaking Trump's emails in the most damaging way at exactly the times when Harris needs it most. It's also discovered that China is waging a sophisticated information warfare campaign to discredit Trump through lies told across social media- and repeated in major liberal publications and outlets like MSNBC and Occupy Democrats. Harris repeatedly denies that China has anything to do with the emails or any information warfare campaign- though it's later discovered that Harris's campaign manager, two children, and several other top campaign members were told by the Chinese government via an intermediary that China WAS indeed trying to get Harris elected. We also find out that these people met with a representative of the Chinese government who was promising the Harris campaign dirt on the Trump campaign while also discussing Chinese foreign policy priorities.

Later we find out that shortly after the message was sent from the Chinese government intermediary to Harris's oldest son (stating that they were going to bring Harris's campaign dirt on Trump), Harris announces to the country that she's going to have a major press conference shortly after the proposed meeting date to discuss serious dirt about Trump that no one else knows about. Once it's discovered that this meeting took place, the Harris campaign comes up with several conflicting stories about what's going on- and ultimately maintains that Harris knew nothing about either the meeting nor the fact that the Chinese government has been trying to get her elected.

Now it turns out that she wins!

The first thing she does as President is to try to quietly undo sanctions that Trump has put in place against China to punish them for their election meddling- which Harris still denies ever happened. Fortunately, Congress intervenes.

Harris continues to show an unheard of fondness for the Chinese government- constantly praising them and inviting members of the government into the White House for closed door meetings that no American is allowed into. Pretty soon, it's discovered that her National Security Director (who was a major campaign figure) lied to the FBI about his contacts with the Chinese government during the campaign. The acting AG tells Harris that he is considered to be vulnerable to blackmail from the Chinese government and is a serious national security threat, but Harris refuses to remove him until the media catches win of the situation and begins publishing stories about the whole thing. It also turns out that he had a very tight relationship with the head of the Chinese Communist Party.
Reluctantly, Harris fires him.

Harris then learns that the FBI has been actively investigating the National Security Director's contacts with the Chinese government and repeatedly pressures the head of the FBI to stop the investigation. The head of the FBI refuses, and Harris fires him shortly after Congressional testimony in which the head of the FBI confirms the investigation into Harris's campaign and refuses to say that Harris herself is not under investigation. In a few short hours after the firing, several different reasons are given by the Harris administration: including that the head of the FBI was too mean to Trump (based on decisions that Harris had previously, effusively praised).

Eventually Harris admits on national TV that she was thinking about the investigation into Chinese contacts with her campaign when she fired the head of the FBI. At the same time, it turns out that the Democratic Attorney General that Harris has recently appointed also lied under oath about his contacts with the Chinese government during the campaign, and he is forced to recuse himself from all investigations related to China or the campaign. The Democratic Deputy Attorney General then appoints a Special Prosecutor to take over all of the investigations into Harris's campaign, Harris herself, and Chinese electoral meddling. Meanwhile, the Democratic Senate and Democratic House start their own investigations into Harris and her campaign.

And so:

The official stance of the conservatives of PC is that we should DEFINITELY NOT investigate the Harris campaign NOR the Chinese election interference.

And that the only reason why Harris is being investigated is because the Democrats are really upset that Trump lost.

Asking for a friend

So many words for "ZOMG I HATE TRUMP!".

Also, you have set up a beautiful strawman argument since no one has ever said "Don't investigate Russia" and have always stated explicitly when you attempted this same, exact strawman argument in the past, that there was no collusion between the Trump Campaign and Russia that caused poor, poor Hillary to lose the election.

And I'm sure you mean that "the Democrats are really upset that Trump WON".

[Parkbandit]

It's actually pretty scary stuff.


http://www.anabolic-pharma.biz/content/images/thumbs/0000585_alprazolam-05mg-xanax-tablets_300.jpeg

Time for a refill......

[time4fun]

So many words for "ZOMG I HATE TRUMP!".

Also, you have set up a beautiful strawman argument since no one has ever said "Don't investigate Russia" and have always stated explicitly when you attempted this same, exact strawman argument in the past, that there was no collusion between the Trump Campaign and Russia that caused poor, poor Hillary to lose the election.

And I'm sure you mean that "the Democrats are really upset that Trump WON".

Um. You realize Mueller's primary mandate is investigating Russian election interference, right? That also includes determining if they had help from American citizens.

That's the investigation you keep claiming we should shut down.

And you're ignoring the actual question here, but you are implicitly arguing that we should investigate China, but the investigation should not, under any circumstances, involve probing Harris's campaign members.

Are there any other US citizens who should have full immunity and cover in this situation? Or just Presidential campaign members?

Also, your attempt to answer a different question re: motivation for investigation implies that it's reasonable to assume that the Democratic Congress in the Harris scenario is only investigating her campaign because they are angry Trump lost.

[cwolff]

Is he admitting there was collusion but no collusion which caused Hillary to lose?

[Methais]

And you're ignoring the actual question here

This is something you never do. Right?

[time4fun]

Is he admitting there was collusion but no collusion which caused Hillary to lose?

He doesn't have a lot of positions left at this point. I mean, he's already done "Russia didn't interfere in our elections stupid!", 'The Trump campaign didn't have suspicious contacts with the Russians moron!", "The top people in the campaign didn't meet with the Russians- just a few nobodies dummy!", "Okay, they met with ONE lawyer who happened to be Russian, but they didn't talk about anything that mattered paranoid!", "Okay, fine, she was representing the Russian government, but they just talked about adoption..."...

So yes, we're now in the "collusion isn't that big of a deal. It's just a felony, and it didn't matter anyway!" Phase.

[Wrathbringer]

He doesn't have a lot of positions left at this point. I mean, he's already done "Russia didn't interfere in our elections stupid!", 'The Trump campaign didn't have suspicious contacts with the Russians moron!", "The top people in the campaign didn't meet with the Russians- just a few nobodies dummy!", "Okay, they met with ONE lawyer who happened to be Russian, but they didn't talk about anything that mattered paranoid!", "Okay, fine, she was representing the Russian government, but they just talked about adoption..."...

So yes, we're now in the "collusion isn't that big of a deal. It's just a felony, and it didn't matter anyway!" Phase.

9122

[Methais]

9122

https://i.imgur.com/DdcExPi.mp4
https://i.imgur.com/DdcExPi.gif

[Neveragain]

ROFL.

You can't bring yourself to actually deal with the point of the post, and you're doing everything you can to avoid having to.

This is just sad.

Or maybe you have reading comprehension issues, and you honestly don't understand what you read.

I didn't read past "say in". Your post is make believe rubbish

[time4fun]

I didn't read past "say in". Your post is make believe rubbish

Erm, no it's actually not. I literally just repeated some of what happened between the Trump campaign and Russia and switched it from it being the Russians helping a Republican win to it being the Chinese helping a Democrat win.

The actual fact pattern is identical to what happened in 2016.

And the fact that you can't bring yourself to go through it and say- without a doubt- that we should apply the same standard you're applying to Trump to the China/Harris situation tells you everything you need to know.

You can lie to us all you want. But you're also lying to yourself right now.

[cwolff]

Sounds like Cohen in entering a plea today.

[Androidpk]

Sounds like Cohen in entering a plea today.

Cohen plea deal and possible Manafort conviction in the same day.. hehe

[Parkbandit]

Um. You realize Mueller's primary mandate is investigating Russian election interference, right? That also includes determining if they had help from American citizens.

That's the investigation you keep claiming we should shut down.

And you're ignoring the actual question here, but you are implicitly arguing that we should investigate China, but the investigation should not, under any circumstances, involve probing Harris's campaign members.

Are there any other US citizens who should have full immunity and cover in this situation? Or just Presidential campaign members?

Also, your attempt to answer a different question re: motivation for investigation implies that it's reasonable to assume that the Democratic Congress in the Harris scenario is only investigating her campaign because they are angry Trump lost.

I didn’t read your wall of stupid. I can barely get through two of your sentences without feeling so badly that you really are that gullible and emotionally unbalanced.

The Russian collusion case has been an epic failure so far. You got a couple people for unrelated charges and we “charged” a bunch of Russians who will never be brought to trial. In the meantime, idiots like you actually still believe that the reason Hillary lost was because President Trump collided with Russia.

I don’t know a thing about the Chinese/Kamala Harris story you are referring to and certainly wouldn’t take your bullshit as actually having any idea what is really going on. More than likely, you are just regurgitating some alt left source you googled up and now claim this is all your own ideas.

[Gelston]

I honestly have no problem, and I really think they should, investigate every election. At least the Presidential ones. I wouldn't mind if it was just an automatic process. Cap them at a year unless something substantial is found. I think I've said this from the beginning.

[Androidpk]

I honestly have no problem, and I really think they should, investigate every election. At least the Presidential ones. I wouldn't mind if it was just an automatic process. Cap them at a year unless something substantial is found. I think I've said this from the beginning.

Given the vulnerabilities in the voting machines and voter registration databases that's a good idea.

[cwolff]

@jamesoliphant

Interesting phrasing from the president in @Reuters interview today, speaking of Russia probe: "I think it’s a disgrace. And they had played right into the Russians—if it was Russia—they played right into the Russians’ hands."

Trump's still denying Russian interference. He's really quite careful to ensure that he doesn't ever directly accuse them of what his intelligence services are telling him Russia is doing.

[time4fun]

I honestly have no problem, and I really think they should, investigate every election. At least the Presidential ones. I wouldn't mind if it was just an automatic process. Cap them at a year unless something substantial is found. I think I've said this from the beginning.

Agreed in theory. In practice, unfortunately, this is almost impossible to do. The Federal government isn't supposed to investigate campaigns without some reason, and they have very little oversight into State elections where the voting actually happens. The states would have to each volunteer to do their own automatic investigations, and, well, good luck with that.


But that's not actually the point of my post. In 2016, there were A LOT of VERY suspicious things going on with the Trump campaign and Russia. Whether you think it was all circumstantial evidence or not- it was there. It was an extraordinary situation in modern US politics. I don't think we've seen anything like it.

The point here is that if the shoe were on the other foot:

*If it had been the Clinton campaign with a ton of suspicious contacts with the Chinese government (which they repeatedly lied about) while China was actively trying to get them elected and meddling in our election,

*if it had been Clinton who lied about her deep, personal business ties with China (and who was involved in a major business deal with them during the actual campaign)

*Clinton's campaign who met with representatives of the Chinese Communist government to discuss getting help on their campaign in exchange for lifting Chinese sanctions

*If Clinton's campaign were being run by someone whose last stint was installing a puppet leader in a European country on China's behalf (and who volunteered to do it for free)

*If Clinton's campaign had appointed a known Chinese spy to their campaign

*If Clinton's campaign had been advocating for China's foreign policy priorities even when they were bad for the US

*If it had been China who was selectively leaking hacked Trump emails at key moments when Clinton needed a distraction

*If it had been Clinton who got up on International TV and asked China to hack into Trump's campaign (and it turns out they tried that very day)

*If a President Clinton had immediately tried to do the Chinese government a huge favor by lifting US Sanctions levied for election meddling

*If it had been Clinton who repeatedly denied that the Chinese government had meddled in our election (when her campaign had been told the meddling was real by both the US Government AND the Chinese Government),

*If it had been Clinton who fired Comey for refusing to drop the FBI investigation into her campaign...


You would ALL want that investigated. And you would be right

And for the sake of our national security and our ability to decide our own leaders- why on earth would you NOT want that investigated?? First off- the odds of all of that being "just a coincidence" is just ridiculously small. I've worked on the Hill, I've spent years working on various political campaigns, and I learned one thing above all others: There are no coincidences in politics.

Secondly- even if it IS all just one big pile of circumstantial evidence piling around innocent people- NOT investigating it sends a clear message to China and everyone else in the world who wants to meddle in our elections: go for it. There are no consequences.

That's my point.

[Tgo01]

"*If it had been Clinton who got up on International TV and asked China to hack into Trump's campaign (and it turns out they tried that very day)"

Wow...way to totally change what happened after I humiliated you the last time you brought this up.

So now Trump asked Russia to "hack into Hillary's campaign" and they did the very same day?

What happened to he asked Russia to hack Hillary's server and they did that day? Oh wait, that never happened either.

Here is exactly what Trump said that day, word for fucking word:

“I will tell you this: Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing. I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press.”

He didn't ask Russia to hack anything, much less Hillary's server or "her campaign."

This is why conservatives largely don't want to agree with Democrats on anything when it comes to the Russian probe, because Democrats are so fucking dishonest about almost nearly every aspect of it. Just look at the way you make up shit to make things look much worse than they are, then you want conservatives to agree with you? Why? As soon as that happens the next step is gonna be "Well, time to impeach! You agreed that Trump committed treason!"

Try being honest first, time4fun, then maybe we can see if there is any common ground. Until then just keep thinking up more conspiracy theories for your echo chamber so you can receive all of those pats on the back you so desperately want.

[Androidpk]

"*If it had been Clinton who got up on International TV and asked China to hack into Trump's campaign (and it turns out they tried that very day)"

Wow...way to totally change what happened after I humiliated you the last time you brought this up.

So now Trump asked Russia to "hack into Hillary's campaign" and they did the very same day?

What happened to he asked Russia to hack Hillary's server and they did that day? Oh wait, that never happened either.

Here is exactly what Trump said that day, word for fucking word:

“I will tell you this: Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing. I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press.”

He didn't ask Russia to hack anything, much less Hillary's server or "her campaign."

This is why conservatives largely don't want to agree with Democrats on anything when it comes to the Russian probe, because Democrats are so fucking dishonest about almost nearly every aspect of it. Just look at the way you make up shit to make things look much worse than they are, then you want conservatives to agree with you? Why? As soon as that happens the next step is gonna be "Well, time to impeach! You agreed that Trump committed treason!"

Try being honest first, time4fun, then maybe we can see if there is any common ground. Until then just keep thinking up more conspiracy theories for your echo chamber so you can receive all of those pats on the back you so desperately want.

It's literally in the OSC's indictment that Russia attempted to hack Hillary on the same day Trump asked Russia to find her emails. There is no conspiracy.

[Neveragain]

Speaking of Chinese and the Clinton's... didn't they give the Chinese American technology back in the 90's in exchange for donations?

[Tgo01]

It's literally in the OSC's indictment that Russia attempted to hack Hillary on the same day Trump asked Russia to find her emails. There is no conspiracy.

"I hope you're able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing" is NOT "Russia hack Hillary's campaign."

Just a minute or two before he said this he said Hillary's server (where her missing emails would be) had probably already been hacked, so his comment was obviously stating he felt Russia already had the emails (because Hillary was negligent with her server) and he wanted them to share the emails.

You are just so incredibly dishonest it's beyond annoying now.

[Androidpk]

"I hope you're able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing" is NOT "Russia hack Hillary's campaign."

Just a minute or two before he said this he said Hillary's server (where her missing emails would be) had probably already been hacked, so his comment was obviously stating he felt Russia already had the emails (because Hillary was negligent with her server) and he wanted them to share the emails.

You are just so incredibly dishonest it's beyond annoying now.

Trump asks Russia for Hillary's emails and soon after her servers, domains and staffers working for the campaign are hacked by Russian military hackers. Total coincidence, right? And BTW, Hillary's server was actually well protected and the hackers weren't able to penetrate it. They did succeed in hacking other people working the campaign.

[Methais]

Reading is very hard for me.

Yes.

[Tgo01]

Total coincidence, right?

By all means show me the evidence that the two are in any way related. Even the indictment that YOU mentioned earlier says there is no link.

Also stop moving the goal posts on time4fun's behalf and hold her accountable for the absolute bullshit she is making up right now. Oh right, you won't even hold yourself responsible for calling her a racist and a sexist and pretended it just never happened, guess you're doing that here again too ;)

[Androidpk]

This is one of the reasons why the special counsel investigation exists, to find out if they're linked.

[Methais]

This is one of the reasons why the special counsel investigation exists, to find out if they're linked.

Purely out of curiosity, why did you start scrubbing your older really stupid posts that have already been quoted 432704 times?

[Tgo01]

This is one of the reasons why the special counsel investigation exists, to find out if they're linked.

Oh spare me. This been going on what, 2 years now? Trump farts and the information gets leaked. What sort of "collusion" so far has been shown?

Mueller gets a few people on totally unrelated charges and indicts a few Russians he thought would never stand trial so he would never have to show the evidence and you all go crazy and act like it's already a done deal and we are just counting down the days until Trump is arrested and impeached. What a complete joke.

[Tgo01]

Purely out of curiosity, why did you start scrubbing your older really stupid posts that have already been quoted 432704 times?

I was just joking earlier about him and time4fun banging but now I'm beginning to wonder.

I have never seen a grown ass man go to such lengths to curry favor from a woman before. He's acting like a love stricken teenager.

[cwolff]

Talking about truth today because of Rudy's interview with Chuck Todd. Here's what he said about the meeting:

"She didn’t represent the Russian government, she’s a private citizen. I don’t even know if they knew she was Russian at the time. All they had was her name,".

What's the response to this from the right? We all know about the emails to Don Jr. to set up the meeting. How does the trump supporter reconcile that with Rudy's words?


Oh spare me. This been going on what, 2 years now? Trump farts and the information gets leaked. What sort of "collusion" so far has been shown?

Mueller gets a few people on totally unrelated charges and indicts a few Russians he thought would never stand trial so he would never have to show the evidence and you all go crazy and act like it's already a done deal and we are just counting down the days until Trump is arrested and impeached. What a complete joke.

Did they collude? Was the trump tower meeting collusion? Is rudy lying, were the emails doctored? What's going on here?

[Androidpk]

Oh spare me. This been going on what, 2 years now? Trump farts and the information gets leaked. What sort of "collusion" so far has been shown?

Mueller gets a few people on totally unrelated charges and indicts a few Russians he thought would never stand trial so he would never have to show the evidence and you all go crazy and act like it's already a done deal and we are just counting down the days until Trump is arrested and impeached. What a complete joke.

1 year for the OSC.

[Methais]

Oh spare me. This been going on what, 2 years now? Trump farts and the information gets leaked. What sort of "collusion" so far has been shown?

Mueller gets a few people on totally unrelated charges and indicts a few Russians he thought would never stand trial so he would never have to show the evidence and you all go crazy and act like it's already a done deal and we are just counting down the days until Trump is arrested and impeached. What a complete joke.

'Fake law': Russian company accused of election interference vents rage at Mueller


A Russian company indicted for allegedly funding attempts to meddle in the 2016 presidential election tore into special counsel Robert Mueller Thursday, calling him "unlawfully appointed" and accusing him of chasing a "make-believe electioneering case."

The searing court document was filed in response to Mueller's request that a judge grant certain protections to the mountain of evidence in that case.

A lawyer for Concord Management and Consulting urged the judge to deny Mueller's request and submitted a different proposal to be considered.

Concord is one of three Russian entities and 13 Russian people accused by the special counsel of breaking the law in order to interfere with U.S. elections.

That lawyer argued that Mueller's proposal was "unprecedented" in its breadth and was based on irrelevant legal precedent.

"In short, fake law, which is much more dangerous than fake news," Concord's lawyer said.

Mueller's plan would include barring any of the defendants from reviewing the evidence found until they appear before a U.S. court.

In that request, Mueller also warned that "uncharged individuals and entities" are still engaging in election interference operations.

In its response filed on Thursday, a lawyer for Concord described Mueller's position as a "hysterical dithyramb about the future of American elections."

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/06/14/russian-company-accused-of-election-interference-vents-rage-at-mueller.html

Mueller: These guys did it! Indict them!

Russians: Ok. Here we are, where's the evience?

Mueller: https://media.giphy.com/media/gdKAVlnm3bmKI/giphy.gif

Russians: No for real, let's see it.

Mueller: Judge, please bar the defendants from reviewing the evidence against them!

:shrug:

[Androidpk]

I was just joking earlier about him and time4fun banging but now I'm beginning to wonder.

I have never seen a grown ass man go to such lengths to curry favor from a woman before. He's acting like a love stricken teenager.

You are completely delusional.

[Methais]

Why is Robert Mueller's last name pronounced "Muller" but Ferris Bueller's last name is pronounced "Byooler"?

What the fuck? Over.

[Androidpk]

Because Germany

[Methais]

Because Germany

https://static.fjcdn.com/pictures/Jeez_f9e819_3013968.jpg

[Androidpk]

Cohen is now in FBI custody.

[cwolff]

Cohen is now in FBI custody.

Apparently this will have influence the stay on the Stormy Daniels lawsuit and Avenatti thinks he'll be able to depose trump under oath now. I doubt that will happen but we'll see.

[Androidpk]

Yup, he just admitted to breaking campaign finance laws. Yikes, not a good day for Trump.

[Ardwen]

He admitted to doing so at the direction of a candidate for federal office, directly implicating Trump.

[Androidpk]

He admitted to doing so at the direction of a candidate for federal office, directly implicating Hillary Clinton.

fixed

[Ardwen]

lol

[time4fun]

I wonder how many things Trump has thrown at people in the last two hours.

[Ardwen]

Manafort now convicted of multiple federal charges is still a good person, and Trump feels sorry for him. Expect a pardon is coming in his future, Cohen is very unlikely to get one after directly implicating Trump.

[cwolff]

Manafort now convicted of multiple federal charges is still a good person, and Trump feels sorry for him. Expect a pardon is coming in his future, Cohen is very unlikely to get one after directly implicating Trump.

Isn't it odd? He feels real bad for Paul. Really sad for him. It's a shame what happened to him. He's losing sight of the fact that his Department of Justice succeeded in a bringing a criminal to justice.

[Androidpk]

Manafort now convicted of multiple federal charges is still a good person, and Trump feels sorry for him. Expect a pardon is coming in his future, Cohen is very unlikely to get one after directly implicating Trump.

"He's a good man, treated unfairly, Democrat jurors Very Conflicted. Why didn't the jury charge Crooked Hillary with anything!?"

[Androidpk]

The only reason why Trump isn't being charged alongside Cohen right now is because he's POTUS. But for now he'll have to make do with being listed as an unnamed co-conspirator. Anyone still think he'll be winning in 2020?

[Ardwen]

DOJ: "Rep Duncan D. Hunter and his wife, Margaret E. Hunter, were indicted by a federal grand jury today on charges that they converted more than $250,000 in campaign funds to pay for personal expenses and filed false campaign finance records with the Federal Election Commission"

When it rains, it pours crooked members of the GOP.

[cwolff]

DOJ: "Rep Duncan D. Hunter and his wife, Margaret E. Hunter, were indicted by a federal grand jury today on charges that they converted more than $250,000 in campaign funds to pay for personal expenses and filed false campaign finance records with the Federal Election Commission"

When it rains, it pours crooked members of the GOP.

They've got depth at all positions. This guy was the 2nd congressman to endorse trump. The 1st was Chris Collins.

https://twitter.com/DafnaLinzer/status/1032029000908959744

[cwolff]

Michael Cohen’s lawyer is suggesting President Donald Trump should face criminal charges for directing his longtime “fixer” to make hush-money payments to two women to influence the election.

Lawyer Lanny Davis tweeted on Tuesday: “If those payments were a crime for Michael Cohen, then why wouldn’t they be a crime for Donald Trump?”

Davis’ comments came after Cohen pleaded guilty to charges including campaign finance fraud.


Shots fired. I bet trump has some choice tweets for Cohen on the way.

[time4fun]

The only reason why Trump isn't being charged alongside Cohen right now is because he's POTUS. But for now he'll have to make do with being listed as an unnamed co-conspirator. Anyone still think he'll be winning in 2020?

There's actually more grey area on this than crimes committed while acting as the head of the Executive. If anyone were ever going to finally challenge the notion that you can't indict a sitting President- this would be the Case to do it with.

Having said that, the legal realities and the political realities diverge considerably here. It would likely need to be the State of NY who brought the case as it's unlikely the Federal Prosecutors would get the sign off on this.

In other words- you're totally right, but it's fun to play what-if? ;)

[time4fun]

Shots fired. I bet trump has some choice tweets for Cohen on the way.

Do we know what the statutes of limitations on these crimes are?

[Androidpk]

Republicans made damn sure Obama wasn't allowed to pick a supreme court justice because he had under a year left in office. It only makes sense that Trump not be allowed to pick a judge since he's now complicit in a federal crime that was committed to help him win the election.

[time4fun]

Republicans made damn sure Obama wasn't allowed to pick a supreme court justice because he had under a year left in office. It only makes sense that Trump not be allowed to pick a judge since he's now complicit in a federal crime that was committed to help him win the election.

Your logic has no place in the US Senate

[Gelston]

Your logic has no place in the US Senate

Except Pence would probably keep the same nomination.

[Methais]

The only reason why Trump isn't being charged alongside Cohen right now is because he's POTUS. But for now he'll have to make do with being listed as an unnamed co-conspirator. Anyone still think he'll be winning in 2020?

Yup. Can't wait to see your meltdown the day after.

[time4fun]

Except Pence would probably keep the same nomination.

Seems like you're rebutting something I didn't actually say.

But I will say that there's a good chance he would pick someone else in the impeachment scenario you're implying. Trump's pick is conservative, but he was also clearly picked for his extreme deference to the Executive. Plus he would be tainted in an impeachment scenario.

Pemce would pick someone else. Someone much worse.

[time4fun]

Burr is saying that his committee recently reengaged Cohen in their investigation of the Trump Tower incident. Looks like Cohen may have had advanced knowledge of it. (Remember all those emails the Feds just got?)

[cwolff]

Burr is saying that his committee recently reengaged Cohen in their investigation of the Trump Tower incident. Looks like Cohen may have had advanced knowledge of it. (Remember all those emails the Feds just got?)

Cohen's also implicated other trump campaign officials but we don't know who. It could be just some people like the accountant he mentions in the tape but I'd be willing to be that Jared and Don Jr. were involved also. Who knows. We'll find out in due time so this is probably just wishful thinking on my part.

[time4fun]

Last week Burr went on record emphasizing that the Senate Intel committee wasn't closing its investigation into Trump and Russia because he didn't want a situation where they missed something and had to explain to future generations how they had missed it.

It stood out to me as an odd thing for a Republican Senator to say. I suspect that they found quite a bit in Cohen's files.

[cwolff]

Last week Burr went on record emphasizing that the Senate Intel committee wasn't closing its investigation into Trump and Russia because he didn't want a situation where they missed something and had to explain to future generations how they had missed it.

It stood out to me as an odd thing for a Republican Senator to say. I suspect that they found quite a bit in Cohen's files.

Nunes has sure been quiet. What are the chances his committee re-opens their investigation? I'm saying it's a chance between 0 and Nil.


I am encouraged that the message from the senate side was bi-partisan with Burr and Warner standing side by side to make their statement and take some questions.

[Androidpk]

Jealousy, just what rich people do, blame CNN and liberal elite. Come on man. Get real. Paying hush money to a pornstar weeks before the election is the type of thing a nation of laws should investigate. Maybe its all ok and that's alright too, but for God's sakes you can't reasonably argue that its not worthy of review.


What law was broken exactly?

You're retarded.

How's that crow taste.

[time4fun]

Nunes has sure been quiet. What are the chances his committee re-opens their investigation? I'm saying it's a chance between 0 and Nil.


I am encouraged that the message from the senate side was bi-partisan with Burr and Warner standing side by side to make their statement and take some questions.

It hasn't always been bipartisan during all of this, but yes, they're definitely doing better than the House Intel committee.

Nunes isn't going to touch this if he can help it. There's too much to lose either way. He's up about 5-6 points over his Democratic opponent, and right now he's so clearly tied to Trump that every inch Trump sinks is an inch he's going to sink. And if he does anything to cover Trump right now, he'll enrage liberals and independents- which could quickly close that gap.

[time4fun]

How's that crow taste.

Has he been right about anything? LOL

[time4fun]

Cohen's lawyer is on TV right now saying that Cohen knows a LOT about the Trump/Russia situation and specifically alluded to the idea that Trump knew in advance about the hacking of the DNC and Clinton's email servers.

[cwolff]

How's that crow taste.

LMAO


It hasn't always been bipartisan during all of this, but yes, they're definitely doing better than the House Intel committee.

Nunes isn't going to touch this if he can help it. There's too much to lose either way. He's up about 5-6 points over his Democratic opponent, and right now he's so clearly tied to Trump that every inch Trump sinks is an inch he's going to sink. And if he does anything to cover Trump right now, he'll enrage liberals and independents- which could quickly close that gap.


Ya, he's doing a good job keeping his head down and riding this thing out.


Cohen's lawyer is on TV right now saying that Cohen knows a LOT about the Trump/Russia situation and specifically alluded to the idea that Trump knew in advance about the hacking of the DNC and Clinton's email servers.

Oh I got to see that. I fell asleep during the commercial break between Avenatti (who was talking shit about Dershowitz trying to put lipstick on this big pig) and Dershowitz.

[Candor]

How's that crow taste.

Save some crow for me. I have been saying that Trump will win in 2020 (mostly due to Democrats underestimating his support base). What do I have to say about that now...?


<crickets chirping>

[Androidpk]

He'll be lucky enough to finish his term. If the blue wave does indeed hit in November he's gone.

[time4fun]

He'll be lucky enough to finish his term. If the blue wave does indeed hit in November he's gone.

I'm not entirely convinced on this one. But he's not getting elected again if they do. The open hearings they'll hold will destroy him and the GOP

[time4fun]

Also worth noting: with the Cohen trial clearly indicating that Trump has no problems violating campaign laws, it really becomes harder and harder to justify the stance that he would never have broken them by colluding with Russia for an advantage in the election.

[Androidpk]

Cohen indicating Trump and saying he knew about the Trump Tower meeting and the hacks in advance means he's part of the crime and can't pardon Manafort or others involved.

[~Rocktar~]

Also worth noting: with the Cohen trial clearly indicating that Trump has no problems violating campaign laws, it really becomes harder and harder to justify the stance that he would never have broken them by colluding with Russia for an advantage in the election.

As you are so fond of pointing out in defense of your beloved Hillary and other Democrat shitbags, 'circumstantial evidence isn't proof' or 'correlation is not causation'.

You are so filled with hate, I am surprised you haven't developed Sith powers yet.

[Tgo01]

Cohen indicating Trump and saying he knew about the Trump Tower meeting and the hacks in advance means he's part of the crime and can't pardon Manafort or others involved.

I swear you and time4fun are in a competition to see who can make up the biggest lie and see if cwolff swallows said lie whole and asks for more.

But you've got to step up your game if you want to do better than time4fun.

Just yesterday she told these whoppers:

Mueller can take Trump to court if he uses his constitutional power to pardon Manafort.
An acquittal is "an official verdict of innocence."
And that a person can be tried for the exact same crime after being found not guilty if the prosecution finds new evidence to try the person with.

You got a LONG ways to go, pk. Start dropping more big lies!

[Methais]

I swear you and time4fun are in a competition to see who can make up the biggest lie and see if cwolff swallows said lie whole and asks for more.

I think you might be onto something here, and time4serious and pk are really grandmaster trolls having fun with cwolff.

10/10 would witness again

[Androidpk]

Tgo doing anything possible not to acknowledge what happened yesterday :lol:

[Tgo01]

I think you might be onto something here, and time4serious and pk are really grandmaster trolls having fun with cwolff.

10/10 would witness again

It actually makes sense. The only person who hangs on every word of those two is cwolff, and most of their posts are just outright lies that a simple Google search could prove wrong, yet cwolff still keeps asking to be lied to.

[Methais]

Tgo doing anything possible not to acknowledge what happened yesterday :lol:

But he already did acknowledge you scrubbing your old shitty posts yesterday. :shrug:

[cwolff]

Tgo doing anything possible not to acknowledge what happened yesterday :lol:

It's wild to watch it play out before your eyes isn't it? They'll do anything to avoid recognizing reality. Even if you still support trump one has to see that this ain't good. That it's serious and there are real issues being brought up. If this thing blows up and trump is removed from office in shame they will claim that they never liked him anyhow and were just trolling us.

[time4fun]

As you are so fond of pointing out in defense of your beloved Hillary and other Democrat shitbags, 'circumstantial evidence isn't proof' or 'correlation is not causation'.

You are so filled with hate, I am surprised you haven't developed Sith powers yet.

ROFL

You routinely accuse liberals of murder, genocide, slavery, being rapists, etc. You may want to look in the mirror at the hate-filled face you'll find there. You've been filling your head with poison for so long that you don't recognize reality anymore.

And, for the record, after someone looks at a Judge and- under penalty of perjury- accuses a sitting president of having directed their felony campaign finance violations that the president repeatedly lied about in every possible way...it's absolutely reasonable and responsible to ask yourself what else they lied about. I hate to break it to you, but in this instance there's actually A LOT of evidence. Or Cohen wouldn't have been in that situation in the first place.

So just stop it already. You voted for a crook. He is surrounded by crooks who were doing felonious things on his behalf. A 6 year-old could see what that means for Trump.

Try to be smarter than a 6 year old.

[Tgo01]

ROFL

You routinely accuse liberals of murder, genocide, slavery, being rapists, etc. You may want to look in the mirror at the hate-filled face you'll find there. You've been filling your head with poison for so long that you don't recognize reality anymore.

And, for the record, after someone looks at a Judge and- under penalty of perjury- accuses a sitting president of having directed their felony campaign finance violations that the president repeatedly lied about in every possible way...it's absolutely reasonable and responsible to ask yourself what else they lied about. I hate to break it to you, but in this instance there's actually A LOT of evidence. Or Cohen wouldn't have been in that situation in the first place.

So just stop it already. You voted for a crook. He is surrounded by crooks who were doing felonious things on his behalf. A 6 year-old could see what that means for Trump.

Try to be smarter than a 6 year old.

Explain to me the legal doctrine you are referring to that suggests Mueller can take Trump to court if he pardoned Manafort. I do love a good fiction story.

[Methais]

Explain to me the legal doctrine you are referring to that suggests Mueller can take Trump to court if he pardoned Manafort. I do love a good fiction story.

In b4 "U HAVE GOOGLE USE IT!"

[Wrathbringer]

ROFL

You routinely accuse liberals of murder, genocide, slavery, being rapists, etc. You may want to look in the mirror at the hate-filled face you'll find there. You've been filling your head with poison for so long that you don't recognize reality anymore.

And, for the record, after someone looks at a Judge and- under penalty of perjury- accuses a sitting president of having directed their felony campaign finance violations that the president repeatedly lied about in every possible way...it's absolutely reasonable and responsible to ask yourself what else they lied about. I hate to break it to you, but in this instance there's actually A LOT of evidence. Or Cohen wouldn't have been in that situation in the first place.

So just stop it already. You voted for a crook. He is surrounded by crooks who were doing felonious things on his behalf. A 6 year-old could see what that means for Trump.

Try to be smarter than a 6 year old.

9125

[~Rocktar~]

ROFL

You routinely accuse liberals of murder, genocide, slavery, being rapists, etc. You may want to look in the mirror at the hate-filled face you'll find there. You've been filling your head with poison for so long that you don't recognize reality anymore.

And, for the record, after someone looks at a Judge and- under penalty of perjury- accuses a sitting president of having directed their felony campaign finance violations that the president repeatedly lied about in every possible way...it's absolutely reasonable and responsible to ask yourself what else they lied about. I hate to break it to you, but in this instance there's actually A LOT of evidence. Or Cohen wouldn't have been in that situation in the first place.

So just stop it already. You voted for a crook. He is surrounded by crooks who were doing felonious things on his behalf. A 6 year-old could see what that means for Trump.

Try to be smarter than a 6 year old.

Calling out factual crimes that people have committed is not "accusing". It is a statement of fact. You profess a belief system that factually, historically has led to 100+ million people being murdered, not to mention all the dead from wars committed by those governments adhering to that belief system. You claim to be benevolent yet ignore genocides going on in the recent past and being waged now in Africa and Asia. You ignore direct conspiracy to influence the election by the Obama IRS and cry about this. There is more factual evidence that these things have gone on as opposed to verbal testimony of someone that is trying to save their own skin.

[time4fun]

Calling out factual crimes that people have committed is not "accusing". It is a statement of fact. You profess a belief system that factually, historically has led to 100+ million people being murdered, not to mention all the dead from wars committed by those governments adhering to that belief system. You claim to be benevolent yet ignore genocides going on in the recent past and being waged now in Africa and Asia. You ignore direct conspiracy to influence the election by the Obama IRS and cry about this. There is more factual evidence that these things have gone on as opposed to verbal testimony of someone that is trying to save their own skin.

*facepalm*

[Tgo01]

*facepalm*


Explain to me the legal doctrine you are referring to that suggests Mueller can take Trump to court if he pardoned Manafort. I do love a good fiction story.

*facepalm*

[Wrathbringer]

*facepalm*

Post your boobs.

[Methais]

Post your boobs.

Dear god no.

[Astray]

Dear god no.

I'm with you on this, man.

[cwolff]

Prosecutors in court filings released Tuesday said that President Trump relied on “sham” invoices from longtime personal attorney Michael Cohen to authorize reimbursement payments to the lawyer for hush money paid to adult-film star Stormy Daniels and former Playboy model Karen McDougal.

Sham invoices to hide the payments. Looks like the prosecutors have it. Can't wait to see how this whole thing plays out as trump live tweets his feelings at each new development.

http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/402983-prosecutors-trump-used-sham-invoices-to-mask-payments-to-cohen

[Parkbandit]

Post your boobs.

https://media0.giphy.com/media/3o7TKAd9iYpRgNJnKo/200.gif

Why would you want to harm us like that?? What have we ever done to you??

RUDE

[Neveragain]

Tgo doing anything possible not to acknowledge what happened yesterday :lol:

Are you talking about how an illegal alien murdered a 20 year old US college student?

Literally nobody is talking about the Manafort trial here today except the media and the alt-left who have blood on their hands. The wall just got 100's of feet taller.

[cwolff]

Are you talking about how an illegal alien murdered a 20 year old US college student?

Literally nobody is talking about the Manafort trial here today except the media and the alt-left who have blood on their hands. The wall just got 100's of feet taller.

Oh I believe that. From the state that keeps electing King this is like the greatest news you've ever heard. Thank God she wasn't killed in school by a white dude with an AR-15. If that happened you'd have to wait until some undefined point in the future before politicizing it.

[Methais]

Thank God she wasn't killed in school by a white dude with an AR-15. I'd be fucking ecstatic if she was though!

:shrug:

[Neveragain]

Oh I believe that. From the state that keeps electing King this is like the greatest news you've ever heard. Thank God she wasn't killed in school by a white dude with an AR-15. If that happened you'd have to wait until some undefined point in the future before politicizing it.

Oddly enough, Iowa is very gun friendly and in my life I don't recall any school massacres in my entire life here. Of course in small town Iowa murder is unheard of...until the illegals settled in.

Now let's be honest and admit that this is not the first innocent to be murdered by an illegal alien. It really does show how the alt-left doesn't give two fucks about human life, it's why they support killing innocents in the womb. <- this is why King keeps getting elected.

[cwolff]

Oddly enough, Iowa is very gun friendly and in my life I don't recall any school massacres in my entire life here. Of course in small town Iowa murder is unheard of...until the illegals settled in.

Now let's be honest and admit that this is not the first innocent to be murdered by an illegal alien. It really does show how the alt-left doesn't give two fucks about human life, it's why they support killing innocents in the womb.

trolls gonna troll but at least you got a little attention today.

[Neveragain]

:shrug:

It totally matches his "Good news! white people are dying off." belief.

[Neveragain]

I'm happy a 20 year old girl was murdered.

Obviously.

[cwolff]

Obviously.

It's pretty sick to make things up the way you guys do. It's one thing to argue a point of view but you ought to reconsider the flagrant lying. I know you won't and that you'll keep doing it. If you had any sense of integrity you would though.

[Tgo01]

It's pretty sick to make things up the way you guys do. It's one thing to argue a point of view but you ought to reconsider the flagrant lying. I know you won't and that you'll keep doing it. If you had any sense of integrity you would though.

The guy celebrating white baby boomers dying thinks he has the moral authority to talk about integrity.

Like I've said before time4fun could just be the most masterful troll to ever grace the PC, but you? You're just a useful idiot for the far left.

[cwolff]

It's pretty sick to make things up the way you guys do. It's one thing to argue a point of view but you ought to reconsider the flagrant lying. I know you won't and that you'll keep doing it. If you had any sense of integrity you would though.


The guy celebrating white baby boomers dying thinks he has the moral authority to talk about integrity.


Case in point. For the life of me, I will never understand how you reconcile with the way you lie. Is it a trolling thing? Ends justifies the means? How do you rationalize this? Probably just lie to yourself I guess.

[Neveragain]

It's pretty sick to make things up the way you guys do. It's one thing to argue a point of view but you ought to reconsider the flagrant lying. I know you won't and that you'll keep doing it. If you had any sense of integrity you would though.

What's being made up here in your "Great news! white people are dying off." mind?

You support a party that is pushing for open borders. Now you're throwing women under the bus to support easy votes and slave labor.

[time4fun]

It's pretty sick to make things up the way you guys do. It's one thing to argue a point of view but you ought to reconsider the flagrant lying. I know you won't and that you'll keep doing it. If you had any sense of integrity you would though.

The funny thing is they get called out on their lies again and again, and they just keep repeating them.

And they've just been so dead wrong on virtually everything.

Somehow they don't see the connection.

[cwolff]

The funny thing is they get called out on their lies again and again, and they just keep repeating them.

And they've just been so dead wrong on virtually everything.

Somehow they don't see the connection.

Ya, they're running 100% on feelings and emotions. I don't know what it will look like when it all comes crashing down but at some point they have to realize that they've been fed a steady diet of lies for the past 20 years.


This article doesn't say, but I'd be willing to bet that they are the ones threatening this Lang guy.


MONTEZUMA, Iowa (AP) — The Latest on a man who is accused in the kidnapping and killing of an Iowa college student (all times local):(backslash)
3:40 p.m.
The manager of a dairy farm that employed the man charged with killing an Iowa college student says he has received dozens of threatening phone messages and other contacts in the last 24 hours, including death threats.
Dane Lang, manager of Yarrabee Farms in Brooklyn, Iowa, says one person threatened to kill his dog and another said he would burn down his farm buildings. Lang says, "this is a really scary situation."

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/the-latest-farmer-says-he-has-received-death-threats/ar-BBMdWdE?ocid=spartandhp

[cwolff]

Dershowitz is on Anderson Cooper with Jeffrey Toobin trying to spin the campaign finance law thing. He's saying that it's all just incredibly confusing blah blah blah. His former student is breaking it down for him though.

[time4fun]

Dershowitz is on Anderson Cooper with Jeffrey Toobin trying to spin the campaign finance law thing. He's saying that it's all just incredibly confusing blah blah blah. His former student is breaking it down for him though.

He NEEDS to just stop talking.

He has utterly destroyed his credibility. Cooper and Toobin are both laughing at him with good reason.

He's also on here pretending like he didn't say things he clearly said.

[Androidpk]

The same goes for Rudy.

[cwolff]

The same goes for Rudy.

Indeed. I don't get it. Maybe it's the intoxication of being close to power that is driving these guys off the deep end. Their careers were made, their legacies set and at the end of their time in the public eye they will leave a trail of head scratching quotes for posterity. Dershowitz was ranting like a crazy old man. And I understand his friend on Martha's Vineyard won't sit with him at dinner anymore. LOL

[Tgo01]

He NEEDS to just stop talking.

He has utterly destroyed his credibility. Cooper and Toobin are both laughing at him with good reason.

He's also on here pretending like he didn't say things he clearly said.

OMG! This Democrat who puts the constitution and law above partisan politics needs to shut up!

That really does sum up your entire world view doesn't it.

[cwolff]

OMG! This Democrat who puts the constitution and law above partisan politics needs to shut up!

That really does sum up your entire world view doesn't it.

<YAWN> More blathering from the trolls

[Androidpk]

Indeed. I don't get it. Maybe it's the intoxication of being close to power that is driving these guys off the deep end. Their careers were made, their legacies set and at the end of their time in the public eye they will leave a trail of head scratching quotes for posterity. Dershowitz was ranting like a crazy old man. And I understand his friend on Martha's Vineyard won't sit with him at dinner anymore. LOL

They're making the mistake of trusting what Donald tells them.

[cwolff]

We need to organizes these thoughts.

Have we agreed that there was indeed collusion between trumps campaign and the Russian government yet? Is that at least one point on which we all agree?

Let's get this part of the talking points figured out. I think that we all have agreed at one time or another that there was collusion. Is that the case or are some still saying, "No collusion"?

[Parkbandit]

Let's get this part of the talking points figured out. I think that we all have agreed at one time or another that there was collusion. Is that the case or are some still saying, "No collusion"?

You continue to say this.. with no evidence or anything of the like. Even the Mueller team has indicated that there is no evidence.. but that doesn't stop you! You just continue to hope and pray there IS collusion, so you wouldn't look like the biggest idiot falling for the biggest scam.

But you've always been the biggest idiot :(

[Methais]

Ya, they're running 100% on feelings and emotions.

Jesus Christ your self awareness has reached a new low, which I honestly thought was no longer possible.

[cwolff]

I saw this on Seth Abramsons twitter feed today. It's some good background to remember where we are and what can happen. In January trump was riding high in part because he was so sure Manafort would never "flip" on him.


WASHINGTON — Donald Trump is telling friends and aides in private that things are going great — for him.


Some reasons: He's decided that a key witness in the Russia probe, Paul Manafort, isn't going to "flip" and sell him out, friends and aides say. He believes Robert Mueller, who heads the investigation, can be crushed, if necessary, without being fired. Sweeping tax and regulatory cuts will juice the economy and get him re-elected in 2020, he is predicting. He thinks he's learned how to handle the dysfunction of Congress. And he's even come to like the White House, the bad plumbing and drafty halls notwithstanding. "I love this place!" he told one friend.
…[and later in the article (https://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/2018-state-of-the-union-address/state-donald-trump-he-thinks-it-couldn-t-be-better-n842501)]
Instead, as is now becoming plain, the Trump strategy is to discredit the investigation and the FBI without officially removing the leadership. Trump is even talking to friends about the possibility of asking Attorney General Jeff Sessions to consider prosecuting Mueller and his team.

"Here's how it would work: 'We're sorry, Mr. Mueller, you won't be able to run the federal grand jury today because he has to go testify to another federal grand jury,'" said one Trump adviser.

A few weeks ago he was discussing pardons for Manafort:


By Carol D. Leonnig
(https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-sought-his-lawyers-advice-weeks-ago-on-possibility-of-pardoning-manafort-but-they-counseled-against-it-giuliani-says/2018/08/23/17dce5c6-a70a-11e8-8fac-12e98c13528d_story.html)August 23rd at 2:03 PM

President Trump asked his lawyers for their advice on the possibility of pardoning his former campaign chairman Paul Manafort several weeks ago, his lawyer said Thursday.
The subject of pardoning Manafort came up while he was on trial for multiple counts of bank fraud and tax evasion and the president was expressing his anger at how federal prosecutors had “beat up” and mistreated Manafort, Trump attorney Rudolph Giuliani said in an interview.

The point Abramson is making is that trump is scared shitless Manafort could "flip" on him. We are also seeing approval of Muellers investigation has gone up by about 11 points in polling this Summer so trumps strategies aren't working out and there's no telling what he's going to do.


The January article ends with this tidbit from a friend of trumps who was interviewed: "You have to understand that you are dealing with a guy whose most fundamental, minute-by-minute fear in life is of boredom," said a friend. "He's decided that the presidency is the best way in the world not to be bored."

EDIT: And as Sam Stein points out- Let’s just cut through the bullshit here. Rudy has just told Manafort he’s getting a pardon when the Mueller investigation is done. That’s nutty

EDIT2: Mueller seems to have anticipated this and put one of his guys on researching the pardon power of the President. We will see who can win this legal argument if/when trump pardons Mueller, but until then we're left to wonder if trump just shot himself in the foot by telegraphing his intention to pardon Manafort pending the outcome of Muellers investigation.

From Bloomberg Oct. 2017 (https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-10-03/mueller-tasks-adviser-with-getting-ahead-of-pre-emptive-pardons?cmpid=socialflow-twitter-business&utm_content=business&utm_campaign=socialflow-organic&utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social)
Mueller’s all-star team of prosecutors, with expertise in money laundering and foreign bribery, has an answer to that. He’s Michael Dreeben, a bookish career government lawyer with more than 100 Supreme Court appearances under his belt.

Acting as Mueller’s top legal counsel, Dreeben has been researching past pardons and determining what, if any, limits exist, according to a person familiar with the matter. Dreeben’s broader brief is to make sure the special counsel’s prosecutorial moves are legally airtight. That could include anything from strategizing on novel interpretations of criminal law to making sure the recent search warrant on ex-campaign adviser Paul Manafort’s home would stand up to an appeal.

[time4fun]

The biggest issue with an improper Pardon is going to be standing. There aren't really that many Pardon cases out there, and the ones I can think of all involved the person receiving the Pardon going to Court. It's sort of unclear who has standing to sue if a Pardon is given.

Mueller's team *should* have standing, I think? Also Congress in their role as oversight on the Executive. I keep meaning to go look this up, and I never get around to it.

On the plus side, the Courts have repeatedly ruled that Presidential powers exercised for the personal benefit of the President aren't owed the same deference as actions taken for the good of the country.

[Tgo01]

The biggest issue with an improper Pardon is going to be standing. There aren't really that many Pardon cases out there, and the ones I can think of all involved the person receiving the Pardon going to Court. It's sort of unclear who has standing to sue if a Pardon is given.

Mueller's team *should* have standing, I think? Also Congress in their as oversight on the Executive. I keep meaning to go look this up, and I never get around to it.

On the plus side, the Courts have repeatedly ruled that Presidential powers exercised for the personal benefit of the President aren't owed the same deference as actions taken for the good of the country.

Are you still trying to claim that Mueller is going to take Trump to court if he pardons Manafort? Come on.

And now you're saying Congress can do something about it? Please stop, you're going to cause me eye strain with all of this eye rolling.

"Improper pardon." Almost as funny as cwolff's "it's complicated!"

[Tgo01]

There aren't really that many Pardon cases out there, and the ones I can think of all involved the person receiving the Pardon going to Court.

Your sentence here is ambiguous. Are you saying you can't think of someone who received a presidential pardon before they went to court?

How about Richard Nixon?

[Androidpk]

Pardoning Manafort and others currently being looked at by the OSC would be investigated for obstruction of justice and put in the report for Congress.

[Tgo01]

Pardoning Manafort and others currently being looked at by the OSC would be investigated for obstruction of justice and put in the report for Congress.

Your and time4fun's ability to just make up shit that sounds good to you is amazing.

[Neveragain]

Your and time4fun's ability to just make up shit that sounds good to you is amazing.

Reading their shit is like white noise.

Their biggest fault is not being able to understand what the average voter cares about and what the average joe and jane are thinking about. These trials have become so convoluted that it's exhausted any political meaning for the average voter.

Simply put, they're terrible at converting their rhetoric into votes.

[time4fun]

ROFL

I hate to break it to you two, but you've been wrong EVERY step of this process. EVERY. SINGLE. STEP.

We've been right.

So maybe it's time you stop tuning out the white noise and start listening.

[Tgo01]

ROFL

I hate to break it to you two, but you've been wrong EVERY step of this process. EVERY. SINGLE. STEP.

We've been right.

So maybe it's time you stop tuning out the white noise and start listening.

Tell us more about Mueller bringing Trump to court if he pardons Manafort, and more about this so called "improper pardon." And oh yeah, how no one has ever received a pardon before going to court first.

[cwolff]

Oh boy, I guess the WH has been watching the news because now Rudy's "clarifying" his remarks. He didn't actually talk to trump about pardoning Manafort a few weeks ago. They only talked about the pardon Kim Kardashian wanted.


“Let me clarify: only conversation about a pardon was a generic one that occurred around the time of the commutation for the woman recommended by Kim Kardashian," Giuliani said in a statement reported by multiple outlets.

"Originally I thought it was 4 or 5 weeks ago but it turns out it was in early June. The conversation came about because there had been several pardons and the press kept asking about pardons and I wanted to give one answer,” Giuliani added.

http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/403390-giuliani-clarifies-trump-and-i-discussed-pardons-in-june-not-about

[Androidpk]

Rudy keeps accidentally throwing Trump in front of the bus. :lol:

[Parkbandit]

And they've just been so dead wrong on virtually everything.

https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/41clv9wFE6L.jpg

[Neveragain]

This article doesn't say, but I'd be willing to bet that they are the ones threatening this Lang guy.


MONTEZUMA, Iowa (AP) — The Latest on a man who is accused in the kidnapping and killing of an Iowa college student (all times local)backslash)
3:40 p.m.
The manager of a dairy farm that employed the man charged with killing an Iowa college student says he has received dozens of threatening phone messages and other contacts in the last 24 hours, including death threats.
Dane Lang, manager of Yarrabee Farms in Brooklyn, Iowa, says one person threatened to kill his dog and another said he would burn down his farm buildings. Lang says, "this is a really scary situation."

What does this tell you about what the voters are thinking when it comes to electing officials that support illegal aliens?

I know, but Manafort

[Parkbandit]

ROFL

I hate to break it to you two, but you've been wrong EVERY step of this process. EVERY. SINGLE. STEP.

We've been right.

So maybe it's time you stop tuning out the white noise and start listening.

Specifically, what have we been wrong with where you have been right?

Let's start with the election results.

Then move right to collusion.

You're starting 0-2. Please continue.

[Neveragain]

Specifically, what have we been wrong with where you have been right?

Let's start with the election results.

Then move right to collusion.

You're starting 0-2. Please continue.

Don't forget the supreme court decision on their attempt at blocking the travel ban.

0-3

[time4fun]

Specifically, what have we been wrong with where you have been right?

Let's start with the election results.

Then move right to collusion.

You're starting 0-2. Please continue.

Oh that's hilarious.

You were wrong about the following:

1) Trump having extensive Russian ties
2) The Trump Campaign having dozens of contacts with the Russian government
3) Russia interfering with our elections
4) Coney's firing being serious enough to warrant an investigation
5) Clinton not being indicted for anything
6) Trump self-dealing and breaking numerous laws with his foundation
7) The Trump Tower meeting involving a meeting with a Russian government representative and a conversation about both sanctions and the Russian government offering help to the campaign (i.e. Collusion)
8) The Mueller investigation being legitimate and actually leading to indictments
9) Flynn actually having lied about his own Russian contacts
10) Comey having been fired specifically over the Russia investigation
11) Democrats being heavily favored to win back the House
12) The first two Muslim bans being illegal (how quickly they forget)
13) The tax bill causing inflation to rise
14) Several parts of the Steele Dossier having been corroborated
15) The Steele Dossier not being what started the Russia investigation
16) Carter Page being a Russian spy
17) The Carter Page FISA warrant application not being based on the Steele Dossier
18) The Carter Page FISA warrant application did mention the Steele Dossier was a piece of opportunities research

The list goes on and on.

And here's why you people are always so incredibly wrong: you listen to people who lie to you over and over again. And you're so deeply stupid that you keep going back for more

[Methais]

ROFL

I hate to break it to you two, but you've been wrong EVERY step of this process. EVERY. SINGLE. STEP.

We've been right.

So maybe it's time you stop tuning out the white noise and start listening.

Protip: If someone starts their post with ROFL it means the poster must really know what they're talking about!

https://media3.giphy.com/media/d2YVk2ZRuQuqvVlu/giphy.gif

[Methais]

What does this tell you about what the voters are thinking when it comes to electing officials that support illegal aliens?

I know, but Manafort

Hey now, leave the dog alone he's a good doggo.

[cwolff]

And here's why you people are always so incredibly wrong: you listen to people who lie to you over and over again. And you're so deeply stupid that you keep going back for more

Ya, that's true. Even the dimmest bulb can see that trump is a flat out liar. Why these guys choose to go out of their way believing his b.s. is beyond comprehension

[Androidpk]

Cause cult of personality.

[time4fun]

Ya, that's true. Even the dimmest bulb can see that trump is a flat out liar. Why these guys choose to go out of their way believing his b.s. is beyond comprehension

And yet over 80% of Republicans think he tells the truth most or all of the time.

But when you get all of your news sources from disreputable outlets with clear partisan goals and no particular concern about misleading the consumers...that's what happens. They've been taught that every non-partisan source is secretly partisan, and that fact checkers are secretly partisan. But that self-identified partisan conservative outlets are actually completely unbiased. PK's use of the word "cult" is really apt.

The conservative media uses some pretty classic cult-strategies. "You can't trust anyone else but me" "Everyone else is secretly lying to you" "Don't believe your own eyes- believe only what I tell you" "Everyone else is evil and murderous and intentionally trying to destroy you and your beloved country!"

It's pretty scary stuff.

[cwolff]

It's been going on since when? Mid 90's? The first exposure I had to the fake news right wing media was Rush. I bet it has to do with Clinton winning the presidency. The right lost it's collective mind then. Newt came out with his "contract with America" bullshit and it all dovetails into Fox News starting up and being led by a Nixon man.


Social Media Giants are silencing millions of people. Can’t do this even if it means we must continue to hear Fake News like CNN, whose ratings have suffered gravely. People have to figure out what is real, and what is not, without censorship!


Now we have a president who's been the champion of the National Enquirer (we know why now) and can't survive if people don't listen to his fake news. That line about "People have to figure out what is real," is his way of saying please don't take away my ability to feed lies to the American public.


Could you imagine if he had to do an honest interview either under oath or in a debate format with fact checkers.

[time4fun]

It's been going on since when? Mid 90's? The first exposure I had to the fake news right wing media was Rush. I bet it has to do with Clinton winning the presidency. The right lost it's collective mind then. Newt came out with his "contract with America" bullshit and it all dovetails into Fox News starting up and being led by a Nixon man.




Now we have a president who's been the champion of the National Enquirer (we know why now) and can't survive if people don't listen to his fake news. That line about "People have to figure out what is real," is his way of saying please don't take away my ability to feed lies to the American public.


Could you imagine if he had to do an honest interview either under oath or in a debate format with fact checkers.

Honestly, after Trump anyone hosting a Presidential debate NEEDS to have Fact checkers there tweeting live fact checks.

And I'm trying to remember when that myth of the liberal media stuff came about. I feel like it started with that U of Indiana study years ago (It actually might have been the 90s) that showed there were more journalists identifying as Democrats than as Republicans. It was grossly misrepresented. Republican identification was like 10%, but Democratic identification was only like 25%. Half of journalists identified as independents. This also plays into the conservative narrative that being liberal or a Democrat effectively taints you- you can't possibly be objective at that point. But being conservative, of course, is always treated as an objective lens.

The whole narrative, on its face, is utterly ridiculous. But they do buy into it, and it's been decades in the making. I would guess a lot of it is rooted in the Evangelical takeover of the GOP (which, again, started to truly gain ground around the 90s). You have this group of people who are absolutely willing to take anything on faith- as long as it's what they want to hear, of course. They're used to dismissing science and facts. That perspective on the world just seemed to spread among conservatives, and it gave rise to this huge conservative media complex that the Russians were very easily able to manipulate.

[cwolff]

Honestly, after Trump anyone hosting a Presidential debate NEEDS to have Fact checkers there tweeting live fact checks.

And I'm trying to remember when that myth of the liberal media stuff came about. I feel like it started with that U of Indiana study years ago (It actually might have been the 90s) that showed there were more journalists identifying as Democrats than as Republicans. It was grossly misrepresented. Republican identification was like 10%, but Democratic identification was only like 25%. Half of journalists identified as independents. This also plays into the conservative narrative that being liberal or a Democrat effectively taints you- you can't possibly be objective at that point. But being conservative, of course, is always treated as an objective lens.

The whole narrative, on its face, is utterly ridiculous. But they do buy into it, and it's been decades in the making. I would guess a lot of it is rooted in the Evangelical takeover of the GOP (which, again, started to truly gain ground around the 90s). You have this group of people who are absolutely willing to take anything on faith- as long as it's what they want to hear, of course. They're used to dismissing science and facts. That perspective on the world just seemed to spread among conservatives, and it gave rise to this huge conservative media complex that the Russians were very easily able to manipulate.

Yup. There was sea change in the GOP between Reagan/Bush and even W. Bush. George H.W. Bush wanted to tackle climate change for example. By the time his son lost the popular vote to become president they were denying it as liberal media hysteria.

[Parkbandit]

Oh that's hilarious.

You were wrong about the following:

1) Trump having extensive Russian ties
2) The Trump Campaign having dozens of contacts with the Russian government
3) Russia interfering with our elections
4) Coney's firing being serious enough to warrant an investigation
5) Clinton not being indicted for anything
6) Trump self-dealing and breaking numerous laws with his foundation
7) The Trump Tower meeting involving a meeting with a Russian government representative and a conversation about both sanctions and the Russian government offering help to the campaign (i.e. Collusion)
8) The Mueller investigation being legitimate and actually leading to indictments
9) Flynn actually having lied about his own Russian contacts
10) Comey having been fired specifically over the Russia investigation
11) Democrats being heavily favored to win back the House
12) The first two Muslim bans being illegal (how quickly they forget)
13) The tax bill causing inflation to rise
14) Several parts of the Steele Dossier having been corroborated
15) The Steele Dossier not being what started the Russia investigation
16) Carter Page being a Russian spy
17) The Carter Page FISA warrant application not being based on the Steele Dossier
18) The Carter Page FISA warrant application did mention the Steele Dossier was a piece of opportunities research

The list goes on and on.

And here's why you people are always so incredibly wrong: you listen to people who lie to you over and over again. And you're so deeply stupid that you keep going back for more

Talk about lying.

Can you show me any actual quotes of me stating these 18 things?

Protip: You can't claim I'm wrong if I've never stated it.

I'll wait until you actually prove your case instead of throwing out as much shit as possible and hoping something sticks.

So far, you are 0-3. Come on.. at LEAST bring it to 3-3 so you don't look like the gigantic dumb cunt you always do.

[Tgo01]

Oh that's hilarious.

You were wrong about the following:

1) Trump having extensive Russian ties
2) The Trump Campaign having dozens of contacts with the Russian government
3) Russia interfering with our elections
4) Coney's firing being serious enough to warrant an investigation
5) Clinton not being indicted for anything
6) Trump self-dealing and breaking numerous laws with his foundation
7) The Trump Tower meeting involving a meeting with a Russian government representative and a conversation about both sanctions and the Russian government offering help to the campaign (i.e. Collusion)
8) The Mueller investigation being legitimate and actually leading to indictments
9) Flynn actually having lied about his own Russian contacts
10) Comey having been fired specifically over the Russia investigation
11) Democrats being heavily favored to win back the House
12) The first two Muslim bans being illegal (how quickly they forget)
13) The tax bill causing inflation to rise
14) Several parts of the Steele Dossier having been corroborated
15) The Steele Dossier not being what started the Russia investigation
16) Carter Page being a Russian spy
17) The Carter Page FISA warrant application not being based on the Steele Dossier
18) The Carter Page FISA warrant application did mention the Steele Dossier was a piece of opportunities research

The list goes on and on.

And here's why you people are always so incredibly wrong: you listen to people who lie to you over and over again. And you're so deeply stupid that you keep going back for more

Lot of words from someone who can't even explain which legal theory she is going by that suggests Mueller can take Trump to court if he pardoned Manafort.

Or that no one has ever received a presidential pardon before they went to court.

Or that an acquittal is an official verdict of innocence.

Or that someone can be tried for the exact same crime after being found not guilty if the prosecution finds new evidence.

That last one is probably the best of all, the woman who pretends to be such an expert on law and order can't even get the very basics right.

[Fortybox]

Talk about lying.

Can you show me any actual quotes of me stating these 18 things?

Protip: You can't claim I'm wrong if I've never stated it.

I'll wait until you actually prove your case instead of throwing out as much shit as possible and hoping something sticks.

So far, you are 0-3. Come on.. at LEAST bring it to 3-3 so you don't look like the gigantic dumb cunt you always do.

Reported for assuming gender.

[Parkbandit]

So..... 0-3 time4fun is still 0-3.

Shocker.

[time4fun]

Talk about lying.

Can you show me any actual quotes of me stating these 18 things?

Protip: You can't claim I'm wrong if I've never stated it.

I'll wait until you actually prove your case instead of throwing out as much shit as possible and hoping something sticks.

So far, you are 0-3. Come on.. at LEAST bring it to 3-3 so you don't look like the gigantic dumb cunt you always do.

So you didn't argue that Clinton was going to be indicted? And you didn't argue vehemently against the notion that Russia was responsible for meddling in our elections? And you never once argued that Comey's firing wasn't a big deal and was so obviously legal there was no need for an investigation? And you didn't argue that the lawyer in the Trump Tower meeting was "just a lawyer who happened to be Russian"?

And you didn't repeatedly call the Steel Dossier completely fictional and unverified? You didn't claim that the Carter Page FISA warrant was completely based on the Steel Dossier, or that they didn't actually mention it was opposition research?

And you didn't repeatedly say that the Muslim bans were ALL legal? (There were three sweetie, and two were struck down by the Courts)

Let me help you out- You argued ALL of that. And so much more. You laughed and jeered at those of us who pointed out what was really going on. You called outlets like Washington Post, CNN, and The New York Times "fake news" for the stories they broke on these 18 subjects (and more)- which all ended up being true.

You and I have disagreed on every single one of these 18 topics and more. And I was right about all of them. So in order for your revisionist history trick to be right- we'd all have to believe that you and I have been in agreement on these subjects. And, well, THAT'S some fake news.

And let's be really clear on this- I've had hundreds upon hundreds of political posts over the last two years on virtually every subject that has come up. The only things you were able to come up with were the election (totally correct...also 2 years ago), 1 out of 3 Muslim Bans (you were wrong on the other two), and your fake claim that there was no collusion between Trump and Russia- which isn't a fact no matter how you slice it. That's just you repeating some silly talking point.

So if that's all you could come up with, and you and I haven't been on the same side of any of these discussions- then honey, you have been nothing but wrong for 2 straight years.

[cwolff]

Yo, T4F, have you seen any reports about Weisselberg being granted complete immunity from prosecution vs. transactional or use immunity and does that mean anything?

[Tgo01]

So you didn't argue that Clinton was going to be indicted?

From what I recall Parkbandit didn't say Hillary was going to be indicted, not because he thought she was innocent, but because people like her always get away with this shit.

The only person I can remember saying Hillary was going to be indicted was your new boy toy Androidpk.

[time4fun]

Yo, T4F, have you seen any reports about Weisselberg being granted complete immunity from prosecution vs. transactional or use immunity and does that mean anything?

So transactional immunity actually IS complete immunity from prosecution. (I know- it's weird because it makes it sound like it's a "lesser" immunity) Use immunity is possible, but I'm not sure that's likely given how much other stuff is going on right now. (There's not a lot of incentive for Weisselberg to agree to use immunity under the circumstances)

One of the things that has been driving me crazy about the reporting on this is everyone keeps saying he got immunity "In the Cohen case". But the thing is- the Cohen case clearly implicates Trump Org in a wide variety of crimes- so "Cohen case" is sort of a nebulous concept right now. Does that just mean Cohen's part of the SDNY Case? Does that count all of the Trump Org pieces too?

The Trump Foundation case also directly implicates Weisselberg- literally in the indictment. He had his hands in EVERYTHING

It's totally possible that these are all being looked at separately- they're definitely being tried by different jurisdictions at this point. But in Federal plea bargain deals, for example, it's typical to include a cooperation clause that applies to local/state investigations if there are any. So it would actually be really strange for SDNY to grant immunity to this one thing and not be thinking about what's going on with the Manhatten DA and the New York State AG office.

All of this honestly gets into the practical pieces of investigations, which tend to go beyond my academic knowledge of law. But if were to make a stab at what's going on, I would say that there's a larger plea deal Weisselberg is involved in that includes some culpability for him and also a lot of cooperation.

But that's just a guess right now.

[Parkbandit]

So you didn't argue that Clinton was going to be indicted?

No. Not because she wasn't guilty beyond a shadow of a doubt.. but because she is a Clinton and they have always been able to do some shady ass shit and get away with it.


And you didn't argue vehemently against the notion that Russia was responsible for meddling in our elections?

No. You keep saying this, even after being corrected time and time and time again... I'm beginning to believe you really do have a learning disability. There is a difference between Russian meddling (Spoiler alert: All countries do it) and President Trump colluding with Russia to fix the election which is the reason Hillary lost.


And you never once argued that Comey's firing wasn't a big deal and was so obviously legal there was no need for an investigation?

Yes. The head of the FBI works at the pleasure of the President and can be terminated at anytime. The reason why there is an investigation now is because of politics, plain and simple. I realize this hurts your world view, but it's the truth.


And you didn't argue that the lawyer in the Trump Tower meeting was "just a lawyer who happened to be Russian"?

No.


And you didn't repeatedly call the Steel Dossier completely fictional and unverified?

It's opposition research... mostly unverified and mostly fictional. Even the author has stated as much.


You didn't claim that the Carter Page FISA warrant was completely based on the Steel Dossier, or that they didn't actually mention it was opposition research?

Cite a source? Don't honestly remember. Fuck, I'll even give this gift to you... let's call it 1-4.


And you didn't repeatedly say that the Muslim bans were ALL legal? (There were three sweetie, and two were struck down by the Courts)

I stated that it's not a surprise that the 9th Circuit Court wrongly stopped the travel bans from some countries... something the SCOTUS later overturned. You were wrong on this, as I pointed out that SCOTUS would overturn it. 1-5


Let me help you out- You argued ALL of that. And so much more. You laughed and jeered at those of us who pointed out what was really going on. You called outlets like Washington Post, CNN, and The New York Times "fake news" for the stories they broke on these 18 subjects (and more)- which all ended up being true.

You and I have disagreed on every single one of these 18 topics and more. And I was right about all of them. So in order for your revisionist history trick to be right- we'd all have to believe that you and I have been in agreement on these subjects. And, well, THAT'S some fake news.

Sometimes laughing at you and stating that you are indeed a fucking dumb cunt isn't arguing against anything. It's literally stating a fact.


And let's be really clear on this- I've had hundreds upon hundreds of political posts over the last two years on virtually every subject that has come up. The only things you were able to come up with were the election (totally correct...also 2 years ago), 1 out of 3 Muslim Bans (you were wrong on the other two), and your fake claim that there was no collusion between Trump and Russia- which isn't a fact no matter how you slice it. That's just you repeating some silly talking point.

Wait.. you are taking credit for the 9th circuit court decisions that were overturned? I literally stated that if they go to the SCOTUS, they would NOT be upheld. Sorry.. I don't give partial credit for really stupid responses. STill 1-5


So if that's all you could come up with, and you and I haven't been on the same side of any of these discussions- then honey, you have been nothing but wrong for 2 straight years.

In your head.. you probably really believe this. Reality has been a harsh mistress to you and when you actually wake up, you'll realize you're still 1-5 (and that 1 is me giving it to you)

[Parkbandit]

From what I recall Parkbandit didn't say Hillary was going to be indicted, not because he thought she was innocent, but because people like her always get away with this shit.

The only person I can remember saying Hillary was going to be indicted was your new boy toy Androidpk.

Shhhhh! Don't bring facts into this! She's 18-0 in her head!!

[Androidpk]

He still thinks this is a vast left wing conspiracy.. :lol2:

[Fortybox]

No. Not because she wasn't guilty beyond a shadow of a doubt.. but because she is a Clinton and they have always been able to do some shady ass shit and get away with it.



No. You keep saying this, even after being corrected time and time and time again... I'm beginning to believe you really do have a learning disability. There is a difference between Russian meddling (Spoiler alert: All countries do it) and President Trump colluding with Russia to fix the election which is the reason Hillary lost.



Yes. The head of the FBI works at the pleasure of the President and can be terminated at anytime. The reason why there is an investigation now is because of politics, plain and simple. I realize this hurts your world view, but it's the truth.



No.



It's opposition research... mostly unverified and mostly fictional. Even the author has stated as much.



Cite a source? Don't honestly remember. Fuck, I'll even give this gift to you... let's call it 1-4.



I stated that it's not a surprise that the 9th Circuit Court wrongly stopped the travel bans from some countries... something the SCOTUS later overturned. You were wrong on this, as I pointed out that SCOTUS would overturn it. 1-5



Sometimes laughing at you and stating that you are indeed a fucking dumb cunt isn't arguing against anything. It's literally stating a fact.



Wait.. you are taking credit for the 9th circuit court decisions that were overturned? I literally stated that if they go to the SCOTUS, they would NOT be upheld. Sorry.. I don't give partial credit for really stupid responses. STill 1-5



In your head.. you probably really believe this. Reality has been a harsh mistress to you and when you actually wake up, you'll realize you're still 1-5 (and that 1 is me giving it to you)

Brah...you’re spending WAY too much responding to her. Waste of time but entertaining nonetheless.

[Androidpk]

Andrew Miller has been granted immunity by the feds in exchange for his cooperation. This is the guy that Mueller has been trying to get in front of a grand jury but he's been fighting it. Credico's due to appear in front of the grand jury two weeks from now too.

[cwolff]

Andrew Miller has been granted immunity by the feds in exchange for his cooperation. This is the guy that Mueller has been trying to get in front of a grand jury but he's been fighting it. Credico's due to appear in front of the grand jury two weeks from now too.

For real? I just saw a thing about him today saying what libertarian he is and he was going to fight it all the to the Supreme Court. Apparently Roger Stone doesn't know his buddy as well as he thought.

[Androidpk]

For real? I just saw a thing about him today saying what libertarian he is and he was going to fight it all the to the Supreme Court. Apparently Roger Stone doesn't know his buddy as well as he thought.

Stone was just saying earlier that Miller would never talk to the feds :lol:

[cwolff]

Stone was just saying earlier that Miller would never talk to the feds :lol:

Saw this floating around today too:

Rep. Ted Lieu says the reason President Trump would want to pardon Paul Manafort "is because he doesn’t want Paul Manafort to flip on him and give information to the government -- that would also be obstruction of justice."


Short of a full and open accounting about his actions it will be very difficult for trump to prove that he didn't obstruct justice if those charges are brought. For one thing, we've seen him tamper with witnesses going back to Sally Yates and we've seen him bitch out his AG for not killing the investigation into Russian interference.

[Fortybox]

Saw this floating around today too:

Rep. Ted Lieu says the reason President Trump would want to pardon Paul Manafort "is because he doesn’t want Paul Manafort to flip on him and give information to the government -- that would also be obstruction of justice."


Short of a full and open accounting about his actions it will be very difficult for trump to prove that he didn't obstruct justice if those charges are brought. For one thing, we've seen him tamper with witnesses going back to Sally Yates and we've seen him bitch out his AG for not killing the investigation into Russian interference.

Isn't going to happen. Next topic: soybeans for soywolf

[cwolff]

Isn't going to happen. Next topic: soybeans for soywolf

No soybeans. Apparently there's a tariff? Anyway it's fucking up progress on NK. Who knew global affairs could be so complicated

BTW: 2 f's in soywolff

[Fortybox]

No soybeans. Apparently there's a tariff? Anyway it's fucking up progress on NK. Who knew global affairs could be so complicated

BTW: 2 f's in soywolff

https://media.giphy.com/media/Zcx9gl5NsvEsM/giphy.gif

[Tgo01]

Saw this floating around today too:

Rep. Ted Lieu says the reason President Trump would want to pardon Paul Manafort "is because he doesn’t want Paul Manafort to flip on him and give information to the government -- that would also be obstruction of justice."


Short of a full and open accounting about his actions it will be very difficult for trump to prove that he didn't obstruct justice if those charges are brought. For one thing, we've seen him tamper with witnesses going back to Sally Yates and we've seen him bitch out his AG for not killing the investigation into Russian interference.

Why would Manafort "flip" now? That's dumb.

Also you and Lieu are quite possibly the dumbest people to ever live to think the president using his pardoning powers is "obstruction of justice." I guess this is the nonsense time4fun was alluding to earlier about Mueller taking Trump to court for pardoning Manafort.

[Fortybox]

Why would Manafort "flip" now? That's dumb.

Also you and Lieu are quite possibly the dumbest people to ever live to think the president using his pardoning powers is "obstruction of justice." I guess this is the nonsense time4fun was alluding to earlier about Mueller taking Trump to court for pardoning Manafort.

Maybe Trump could pardon his stupidity.

[Tgo01]

Maybe Trump could pardon his stupidity.

Gonna need a miracle to cure him of his stupidity.

[Androidpk]

Yeah, why would Manafort cooperate with the feds instead of spending the rest of his life in prison.

[Androidpk]

My general legal question is can the defense make a deal with the prosecution after the trial and verdict? Any law folks in the house?

Not a lawyer but I've seen multiple other lawyers say that Manafort can make a deal with the prosecutors at any time, even now.

[time4fun]

Not a lawyer but I've seen multiple other lawyers say that Manafort can make a deal with the prosecutors at any time, even now.

He can, but it won't undo the sentence that's already been rendered. Remember, separation of powers. The Executive doesn't have any say in sentencing.

[Fortybox]

Not a lawyer but I've seen multiple other lawyers say that Manafort can make a deal with the prosecutors at any time, even now.

https://media1.giphy.com/media/fbbDoMHhO63e/giphy.gif

[Androidpk]

He can, but it won't undo the sentence that's already been rendered. Remember, separation of powers. The Executive doesn't have any say in sentencing.

True. He hasn't been sentenced yet though, by Ellis, so if he wants the best deal possible he better act fast.

[Fortybox]

He can, but it won't undo the sentence that's already been rendered. Remember, separation of powers. The Executive doesn't have any say in sentencing.

https://media2.giphy.com/media/xUA7bd1hPASskdhGr6/giphy.gif

https://media2.giphy.com/media/19tv1qZSYGO2nsUChn/giphy.gif

[Tgo01]

Yeah, why would Manafort cooperate with the feds instead of spending the rest of his life in prison.

Are you talking about him "flipping" so he can receive a plea deal on the charges he wasn't convicted of, or are you talking about "flipping" in regards to the charges he was already convicted of?

[Androidpk]

both

[Tgo01]

Not a lawyer but I've seen multiple other lawyers say that Manafort can make a deal with the prosecutors at any time, even now.

I'm sure he can make a deal with prosecutors all he wants but according to federal guidelines it's way too late to make a deal on the charges he has already been found guilty of.

[Tgo01]

both

Well that's just dumb. He's facing what, 80 years in prison for what he's already been convicted of? Chances are he's going to die in prison anyways unless he gets a pardon, why would he make a plea deal for the other charges and ruin his only shot at a pardon?

[Androidpk]

Because he hasn't been sentenced yet. If he makes a deal with the prosecutors they can bring that to the judge. He doesn't HAVE to accept but he can and likely would.

[Tgo01]

Because he hasn't been sentenced yet. If he makes a deal with the prosecutors they can bring that to the judge. He doesn't HAVE to accept but he can and likely would.

That's a plea deal, it's way too late to make a plea deal.

[Androidpk]

Manafort can still make a deal with Mueller.

[Tgo01]

Manafort can still make a deal with Mueller.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcrmp/rule_11


Subdivision (e)(5) makes it mandatory that, except for good cause shown, the court be notified of the existence of a plea agreement at the arraignment or at another time prior to trial fixed by the court.

According to federal guidelines a plea agreement has to be made prior to the start of trial. The trial has concluded and he was found guilty, it's way too late for a plea agreement.

Sure I guess Manafort could just ask Mueller "Pretty please ask the judge to give me the bare minimum sentencing", but that would be it. There is no way for Mueller to have any of the charges that Manafort has been convicted of dropped.

Seems like a huge gamble on Manafort's part when his best bet is a complete pardon.

[time4fun]

True. He hasn't been sentenced yet though, by Ellis, so if he wants the best deal possible he better act fast.

I totally forgot that part haha. There's so much going on with all of this that Manafort already feels like old news.

What a weird time we live in.

[Androidpk]

https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcrmp/rule_11



According to federal guidelines a plea agreement has to be made prior to the start of trial. The trial has concluded and he was found guilty, it's way too late for a plea agreement.

Sure I guess Manafort could just ask Mueller "Pretty please ask the judge to give me the bare minimum sentencing", but that would be it. There is no way for Mueller to have any of the charges that Manafort has been convicted of dropped.

Seems like a huge gamble on Manafort's part when his best bet is a complete pardon.

You can say whatever you want, Manafort and Mueller can still make a deal.

[time4fun]

No. Not because she wasn't guilty beyond a shadow of a doubt.. but because she is a Clinton and they have always been able to do some shady ass shit and get away with it.



No. You keep saying this, even after being corrected time and time and time again... I'm beginning to believe you really do have a learning disability. There is a difference between Russian meddling (Spoiler alert: All countries do it) and President Trump colluding with Russia to fix the election which is the reason Hillary lost.



Yes. The head of the FBI works at the pleasure of the President and can be terminated at anytime. The reason why there is an investigation now is because of politics, plain and simple. I realize this hurts your world view, but it's the truth.



No.



It's opposition research... mostly unverified and mostly fictional. Even the author has stated as much.



Cite a source? Don't honestly remember. Fuck, I'll even give this gift to you... let's call it 1-4.



I stated that it's not a surprise that the 9th Circuit Court wrongly stopped the travel bans from some countries... something the SCOTUS later overturned. You were wrong on this, as I pointed out that SCOTUS would overturn it. 1-5



Sometimes laughing at you and stating that you are indeed a fucking dumb cunt isn't arguing against anything. It's literally stating a fact.



Wait.. you are taking credit for the 9th circuit court decisions that were overturned? I literally stated that if they go to the SCOTUS, they would NOT be upheld. Sorry.. I don't give partial credit for really stupid responses. STill 1-5



In your head.. you probably really believe this. Reality has been a harsh mistress to you and when you actually wake up, you'll realize you're still 1-5 (and that 1 is me giving it to you)

Oh honey, I've had just enough wine and am just bored enough with DM to give you what you've been asking for but so DESPERATELY don't want:

Russia meddling in our elections:

I love how the Democrats are still blaming the colossal loss on anything but Hillary being the very shitty candidate she was.

Even if you believe Russia "did" it.. it's still the words and actions of the Democrats behind Wikileaks to begin with.

On Trump firing Comey to stop the Russia investigation:


She's right.

This appears to be an attempt to disrupt the investigation and plant someone of his choosing as FBI director.

How can you not be skeptical at this point? Even as a trump supporter... come on.






If you are anti-Trump, yes, this would appear to be something other than it is.



That Clinton broke the law and would be indicted "any day now"

Quote Originally Posted by time4fun View Post
1) The irony here is your assumption that it's the Democrats who've been playing partisan on this whole thing. This entire thing came out of the Benghazi hearings. And the whole notion that she was about to be indicted any day came from the right-wing media. Newsflash- it was VERY partisan. But that didn't come from the left.

LOL.

Hyperbole + stupidity = raging dumb cunt.

But hey.. every legal expert in the world believes she's innocent.

http://cliparting.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/Thumbs-up-thumb-up-clip-art-clipart-3-clipartix.jpg

On the Steele Dossier: (PS please show us a direct quote from Steele saying the Dossier was made up....we'll wait)


Reputable news sources didn't publish it because it was clearly fake. But Buzzfeed did because their standards are much lower because their reader base doesn't care as long as it fits their little snowflake viewpoint.

No wonder you and Backlash believe they are reputable.

On the Steele Dossier being used to get a FISA warrant:

The Steele Dossier that was bought and paid for by the DNC isn't enough to get a FISA warrant imo... yet, a FISA warrant was issued during a Presidential campaign by the opposing Party.

I'm not sure why anyone would be comfortable by that. Would you be ok with it if President Bush did it on then candidate Obama?

Unlikely.

And:



I hope this isn't just another FISA court type of auto-accept and auto-approve warrants.
Oh here's a fun one: you buying into the idea that Obama wiretapped Trump (AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA)


Good.

We need to investigate how a sitting President was able to eavesdrop on a candidate in the other Party during the election, using very questionable "evidence" that was bought and paid for by the Democrat Party.


Another fun one- when I pointed out that Trump had just invited the Russians to hack Clinton, and you acted like it was the stupidest thing in the world to point out (Spoiler alert- Mueller confirmed that they DID try to hack her THAT DAY)

Quote Originally Posted by time4fun
DORAL, Fla. — Donald J. Trump said Wednesday that he hoped Russia had hacked Hillary Clinton’s email, essentially encouraging an adversarial foreign power’s cyberspying on a secretary of state’s correspondence.

“Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing,” Mr. Trump said, staring directly into the cameras during a press conference. “I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press.”

Mr. Trump’s call was an extraordinary moment at a time when Russia is being accused of meddling in the U.S. presidential election. His comments came amid questions about the hacking of the Democratic National Committee’s computer servers, which American intelligence agencies have told the White House they have “high confidence” was the work of the Russian government.


Holy shit. He just told a foreign government to illegally hack into the emails of someone running for President and encouraged them to influence a U.S. election.

Holy shit. You honestly are one of the dumbest people on the Internet... unless you believe that Russia has some sort of time machine that they can use to get those deleted emails back.

But seriously, keep on herpin' and derpin' and making us all thankful we didn't eat lead based paint like you obviously did.

I really could have kept going, but I figure that's enough crow for any one person to eat.

The best part about this trip down memory lane? Seeing how when you jeer and shriek the most- that tells everyone when you are flat out wrong.

Mahalo my bitter, sad little man with no understanding of law or politics.

[Ardwen]

Manafort has a second trial coming and he could quite easily plead out in that case, it would be logical to do so for most people since they would very likely stack whatever time he got in trial two on top of whatever sentence he just earned in the first trial.

[cwolff]

Manafort has a second trial coming and he could quite easily plead out in that case, it would be logical to do so for most people since they would very likely stack whatever time he got in trial two on top of whatever sentence he just earned in the first trial.

He's 69 and facing some years in jail right now. The D.C. jury and judge should be less friendly and the prosecutors had a practice trial in VA. If he doesn't get a pardon or flip, it's safe to assume that he'll die in jail.

[Androidpk]

Manafort has a second trial coming and he could quite easily plead out in that case, it would be logical to do so for most people since they would very likely stack whatever time he got in trial two on top of whatever sentence he just earned in the first trial.

A second trial that will have over 1000 pieces of evidence against Manafort and a judge that isn't Ellis. Manafort will also be entering this trial a convicted criminal. On top of that he's broke and his legal fees are rising faster and faster.

[Ardwen]

He fully expects, as do I actually, a pardon from Trump, of course if he gets pardoned maybe the GOP will finally do something, but I doubt it.

[cwolff]

He fully expects, as do I actually, a pardon from Trump, of course if he gets pardoned maybe the GOP will finally do something, but I doubt it.

Its scary man. They just threw Sessions under the bus. Graham and Grassley signaled that this time they'll let Jeff go. What a change 1 year makes. The only thing that can stop these guys is a Dem house raising hell with subpoenas, committee hearings etc... They can't impeach barring an absolutely disastrous Mueller report.

[time4fun]

He fully expects, as do I actually, a pardon from Trump, of course if he gets pardoned maybe the GOP will finally do something, but I doubt it.

And yet, between New York, California, and Virginia- there are enough state crimes they could get him with that a Federal Pardon won't necessarily matter.

Which deepens the mystery as to why Manafort appears unwilling to strike a deal.

[cwolff]

And yet, between New York, California, and Virginia- there are enough state crimes they could get him with that a Federal Pardon won't necessarily matter.

Which deepens the mystery as to why Manafort appears unwilling to strike a deal.

I can't wait for the book to come out after this is all over. There is so much going on beneath the surface that we don't see. For example; I wonder how much communication Mueller's team has with various state level prosecutors. We've seen he's been dishing cases off to them that he doesn't either want to pursue or wants to get into a pardon free environment. I want to know what the strategy is.

[time4fun]

I can't wait for the book to come out after this is all over. There is so much going on beneath the surface that we don't see. For example; I wonder how much communication Mueller's team has with various state level prosecutors. We've seen he's been dishing cases off to them that he doesn't either want to pursue or wants to get into a pardon free environment. I want to know what the strategy is.

I'm pretty sure Tom Clancy already wrote this book =/

[Androidpk]

Either Manafort is holding out for a pardon(s) or he's worried about Russian reprisal.

[cwolff]

I'm pretty sure Tom Clancy already wrote this book =/

The Hunt for Orange Bloviator~A taut edge of your seat thriller about an overgrown oompah loompah who, with the help of his Kremlin allies, secures the highest seat of power in the country. Can the former Marine turned intelligence officer bring down this menace before the Bloviator destroys the nation.

[Androidpk]

I've probably said this before but I believe there will be more charges coming for Manafort related to the Trump Tower meeting.

[cwolff]

I've probably said this before but I believe there will be more charges coming for Manafort related to the Trump Tower meeting.

I agree. We'll have to see what happens but that would make sense. For sure, Don Jr. is in jeopardy.

Mueller will probably keep that part of the investigation under wraps until the rest of it falls into place if he has a case to make against close trumpsters or the POTUS. It's possible he comes back with something really benign and nothing too bad regarding trump, but if he is making a case against the president, he'll have to play that very carefully.

[SHAFT]

1-800-NO-COLLUSION

[Parkbandit]

Oh honey, I've had just enough wine and am just bored enough with DM to give you what you've been asking for but so DESPERATELY don't want:

Oh honey :puke:, no amount of wine, alcohol or beer would make you look less foolish.


Russia meddling in our elections: As explained ad nauseam to you... I've never said that Russia didn't meddle. I've stated that Russia didn't collude with Trump to cause Hillary to lose. Thank you for proving my point, yet again.


On Trump firing Comey to stop the Russia investigation:

What does that prove? Are you suggesting that what I've been saying from the get go.. that Comey works at the pleasure of the President and can be fired at anytime for anything is wrong? Bitch, please. 0-2 so far.


That Clinton broke the law and would be indicted "any day now"

Quote Originally Posted by time4fun View Post
1) The irony here is your assumption that it's the Democrats who've been playing partisan on this whole thing. This entire thing came out of the Benghazi hearings. And the whole notion that she was about to be indicted any day came from the right-wing media. Newsflash- it was VERY partisan. But that didn't come from the left.

How does that change anything I've said? It's like you really, REALLY want to be right.. and will simply throw up quotes that doesn't prove your case at all. 0-3.


On the Steele Dossier: (PS please show us a direct quote from Steele saying the Dossier was made up....we'll wait)



On the Steele Dossier being used to get a FISA warrant:

I've already given you a partial credit on this. 1-3


And:

Oh here's a fun one: you buying into the idea that Obama wiretapped Trump (AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA)

Not on your original list. No extra credit given.


Another fun one- when I pointed out that Trump had just invited the Russians to hack Clinton, and you acted like it was the stupidest thing in the world to point out (Spoiler alert- Mueller confirmed that they DID try to hack her THAT DAY)

Quote Originally Posted by time4fun
DORAL, Fla. — Donald J. Trump said Wednesday that he hoped Russia had hacked Hillary Clinton’s email, essentially encouraging an adversarial foreign power’s cyberspying on a secretary of state’s correspondence.

“Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing,” Mr. Trump said, staring directly into the cameras during a press conference. “I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press.”

Mr. Trump’s call was an extraordinary moment at a time when Russia is being accused of meddling in the U.S. presidential election. His comments came amid questions about the hacking of the Democratic National Committee’s computer servers, which American intelligence agencies have told the White House they have “high confidence” was the work of the Russian government.


Holy shit. He just told a foreign government to illegally hack into the emails of someone running for President and encouraged them to influence a U.S. election.

If you don't have any sense of humor at all and a basic 3rd grade intellectual level, I could see how you would misinterpret this as evidence of collusion.



I really could have kept going, but I figure that's enough crow for any one person to eat.
The best part about this trip down memory lane? Seeing how when you jeer and shriek the most- that tells everyone when you are flat out wrong.

Nothing on SCOTUS decision? Weird. It went down EXACTLY how I said it would.


Mahalo my bitter, sad little man with no understanding of law or politics.

Bitter? Bitch, you just spent how long on a Friday night, searching through my posts, trying your hardest to prove you were right about something.. and you only proved you were a dumb, sad little bitch with no life and a knack for being wrong on most things political.

[Parkbandit]

1-800-NO-COLLUSION

1-800-meltdownsyndrome

[Androidpk]

Yo, T4F, have you seen any reports about Weisselberg being granted complete immunity from prosecution vs. transactional or use immunity and does that mean anything?

https://www.emptywheel.net/2018/08/25/on-use-immunity-and-predictions-of-doom-for-the-presidency/

[time4fun]

https://www.emptywheel.net/2018/08/25/on-use-immunity-and-predictions-of-doom-for-the-presidency/

Very interesting.

Seems like it's time I got my NY Times subscription back as I managed to read every outlet except the one that broke the story. #researchskills

This would suggest that either they don't feel like they have enough on Trump Org to formally charge them, that they've just decided not to charge them, OR that one of the sources for the NY Times article is intentionally trying to mitigate any blowback on Weisselberg. Indeed, the source may actually have been Weisselberg himself. Whenever these stories come out- I always try to ask myself who ends up looking better because of it. That normally tells you a lot about who the sources are.

I do find it incredibly hard to believe that Weisselberg is only granted use immunity for the Cohen case. He's directly implicated in too many of these cases for either him or prosecutors to be thinking about this all in such compartmentalized ways. Having said that- the author makes a really good point: Weisselberg is still working at the Trump Organization. That alone does undercut my argument. And if it IS true he agreed to use immunity, then that suggests that they're not looking at prosecuting him for anything else right now. (Or at least that he's reasonably sure they won't)

[Fortybox]

Very interesting.

Seems like it's time I got my NY Times subscription back as I managed to read every left-leaning outlet except the one that broke the story. #biasedresearchskills

This would suggest that either they don't feel like they have enough on Trump Org to formally charge them, that they've just decided not to charge them, OR that one of the sources for the NY Times article is intentionally trying to mitigate any blowback on Weisselberg. Indeed, the source may actually have been Weisselberg himself. Whenever these stories come out- I always try to ask myself how can I tie this directly to Trump, regardless of what is being said, and who ends up looking better because of it. That normally tells you a lot about who the sources are.

I do find it incredibly hard to believe that Weisselberg is only granted use immunity for the Cohen case. He's directly implicated in too many of these cases for either him or prosecutors to be thinking about this all in such compartmentalized ways. Having said that- the author makes a really good point: Weisselberg is still working at the Trump Organization. That alone does undercut my argument and I am completely and utterly wrong like I usually am. And if it IS true he agreed to use immunity, then that suggests that they're not looking at prosecuting him for anything else right now. (Or at least that he's reasonably sure they won't)

Fixed.

[Tgo01]

Seems like it's time I got my NY Times subscription back as I managed to read every outlet except the one that broke the story. #researchskills

These the same research skills that told you an acquittal is an official verdict of innocence?

[Methais]

Oh honey, I've had just enough wine and am just bored enough with DM to give you what you've been asking for but so DESPERATELY don't want:

Russia meddling in our elections:


On Trump firing Comey to stop the Russia investigation:






That Clinton broke the law and would be indicted "any day now"

Quote Originally Posted by time4fun View Post
1) The irony here is your assumption that it's the Democrats who've been playing partisan on this whole thing. This entire thing came out of the Benghazi hearings. And the whole notion that she was about to be indicted any day came from the right-wing media. Newsflash- it was VERY partisan. But that didn't come from the left.


On the Steele Dossier: (PS please show us a direct quote from Steele saying the Dossier was made up....we'll wait)



On the Steele Dossier being used to get a FISA warrant:


And:

Oh here's a fun one: you buying into the idea that Obama wiretapped Trump (AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA)




Another fun one- when I pointed out that Trump had just invited the Russians to hack Clinton, and you acted like it was the stupidest thing in the world to point out (Spoiler alert- Mueller confirmed that they DID try to hack her THAT DAY)

Quote Originally Posted by time4fun
DORAL, Fla. — Donald J. Trump said Wednesday that he hoped Russia had hacked Hillary Clinton’s email, essentially encouraging an adversarial foreign power’s cyberspying on a secretary of state’s correspondence.

“Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing,” Mr. Trump said, staring directly into the cameras during a press conference. “I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press.”

Mr. Trump’s call was an extraordinary moment at a time when Russia is being accused of meddling in the U.S. presidential election. His comments came amid questions about the hacking of the Democratic National Committee’s computer servers, which American intelligence agencies have told the White House they have “high confidence” was the work of the Russian government.


Holy shit. He just told a foreign government to illegally hack into the emails of someone running for President and encouraged them to influence a U.S. election.


I really could have kept going, but I figure that's enough crow for any one person to eat.

The best part about this trip down memory lane? Seeing how when you jeer and shriek the most- that tells everyone when you are flat out wrong.

Mahalo my bitter, sad little man with no understanding of law or politics.

Try using some of that DM money to help your illegal brother get legal.

[Astray]

Try using some of that DM money to help your illegal brother get legal.

That would take 5 seconds away from arguing on the PC, can't do that. That's just crazy.

[Tgo01]

That would take 5 seconds away from arguing on the PC, can't do that. That's just crazy.

Well someone has to make shit up all day long. If not time4fun then who?

[Astray]

Well someone has to make shit up all day long. If not time4fun then who?

It's really a hostage situation if you look at it. These people are hiding you around because the State wants to send you back to your home in your country.

It's like a reverse coyote situation.

[time4fun]

Conservative Troll Posse: "Quick- talk about anything other than Trump or Russia, or we'll be forced to admit we were wrong the whole time!"

[Parkbandit]

Conservative Troll Posse: "Quick- talk about anything other than Trump or Russia, or we'll be forced to admit we were wrong the whole time!"

Time4dum Troll: "Quick- spend a Friday night scouring through Parkbandit's posts to try and make a case that I was right for a change. When that doesn't work, just move some goal posts, post things that have nothing to do with the claims I made and hope no one calls me out on being a complete loser!"

[Tgo01]

Conservative Troll Posse: "Quick- talk about anything other than Trump or Russia, or we'll be forced to admit we were wrong the whole time!"

Hey I've asked you several times what theory of law are you operating under that suggests Trump can be taken to court if he pardons Manafort. You seem unwilling to have a discussion on this ;)

[time4fun]

Time4dum Troll: "Quick- spend a Friday night scouring through Parkbandit's posts to try and make a case that I was right for a change. When that doesn't work, just move some goal posts, post things that have nothing to do with the claims I made and hope no one calls me out on being a complete loser!"

Your entire reply was just your own sad version of "A crime is not a crime".

I showed you your OWN comments, and you pulled your classic "Oh I was just kidding", and "I didn't really say what I clearly just said".

But let's keep pretending like you and I have been agreeing this whole time about Trump and his myriad of political and legal troubles. It's adorable.

[cwolff]

Conservative Troll Posse: "Quick- talk about anything other than Trump or Russia, or we'll be forced to admit we were wrong the whole time!"

True. They don't actually have anything to say thats positive for trump. If they did they'd make their own threads for it. The best they can do is react to what others post. Its pretty typical with the trump crowd.

[time4fun]

True. They don't actually have anything to say thats positive for trump. If they did they'd make their own threads for it. The best they can do is react to what others post. Its pretty typical with the trump crowd.

He backed them right into a corner, and they followed him there willingly.

[Tgo01]

Hey I've asked you several times what theory of law are you operating under that suggests Trump can be taken to court if he pardons Manafort. You seem unwilling to have a discussion on this ;)

See? ;)

[time4fun]

So the words of Roger Stone are, obviously, to be taken with a mountain of salt, but Roger Stone is now saying (https://www.newsweek.com/roger-stone-mueller-will-indict-donald-trump-jr-1090698)they are about to indict Trump Jr for lying to the FBI


Roger Stone, a former Donald Trump aide who’s long been linked with special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into Russian election interference, said he believes one of the president’s sons, Donald Trump Jr., will soon be indicted for “lying to the FBI.”

“I [predict], based on excellent sourcing, that the special counsel is going to charge Donald Trump Jr. with lying to the FBI,” Stone told James Miller of the conservative online outlet The Political Insider. “Notice they’re not charging him for having an illegal meeting with a Russian at Trump Tower because there’s nothing illegal about that meeting.”

[Methais]

So the words of Roger Stone are, obviously, to be taken with a mountain of salt, but Roger Stone is now saying (https://www.newsweek.com/roger-stone-mueller-will-indict-donald-trump-jr-1090698)they are about to indict Trump Jr for lying to the FBI

You keep forgetting to answer Tgo's question while you're busy running your mouth about how other people change the subject when they don't want to talk about something that you decided makes them uncomforatble.

in b4 "stay on topic"

[Fortybox]

You keep forgetting to answer Tgo's question while you're busy running your mouth about how other people change the subject when they don't want to talk about something that you decided makes them uncomforatble.

in b4 "stay on topic"

You do realize she isn't forgetting and is trolling right?

So many of you spend WAY too much time in all of this. It's entertaining though. I don't even need to play GS anymore!

[Parkbandit]

Your entire reply was just your own sad version of "A crime is not a crime".

I showed you your OWN comments, and you pulled your classic "Oh I was just kidding", and "I didn't really say what I clearly just said".

But let's keep pretending like you and I have been agreeing this whole time about Trump and his myriad of political and legal troubles. It's adorable.

In your head, I bet you really believe you did prove how right you were.

If only reality was in your head..............

[Androidpk]

So the words of Roger Stone are, obviously, to be taken with a mountain of salt, but Roger Stone is now saying (https://www.newsweek.com/roger-stone-mueller-will-indict-donald-trump-jr-1090698)they are about to indict Trump Jr for lying to the FBI

When did Jr talk to the FBI?

[Androidpk]

https://i.imgur.com/NL3J0eQ.jpg

[time4fun]

When did Jr talk to the FBI?
I definitely don't recall any reporting that he had spoken with the FBI- though I suppose it's very possible. I think the real questions here are really about why Stone said what he said.

[Androidpk]

Probably to try and get Trump to fire Sessions/Rosenstein/Mueller.

[time4fun]

Smart money says you're right. I'm guessing Stone is worried he has an indictment coming down on him any day now, and he's throwing everything at the wall he can to try to stop it.

[time4fun]

In your head, I bet you really believe you did prove how right you were.

If only reality was in your head..............

On the plus side, you've finally answered this longstanding question we've all had about you people: how can you have been so wrong so many times and yet still feel so confident that you're right.

It turns out- you're not just lying to us. You're lying to yourselves.

Fascinating.

[Parkbandit]

Smart money says you're right.

Three things you know nothing about:

Smart
Money
Right


On the plus side, you've finally answered this longstanding question we've all had about you people: how can you have been so wrong so many times and yet still feel so confident that you're right.

It turns out- you're not just lying to us. You're lying to yourselves.

Fascinating.

It's fascinating that you are projecting so hard right now... even after it's been illustrated how utterly wrong you are at everything.

But you keep on trying!

[Archigeek]

Is it hot yet?

[Parkbandit]

Is it hot yet?

Depends on who you ask. It's been "hot" since 11/9/16 for some people....

[time4fun]

Three things you know nothing about:

Smart
Money
Right


okay, that's hilarious.


I could laugh myself silly over you, of all people, claiming those first two. But let's get to the real point.

Let me remind you that when you tried to think up things I was wrong about, you came up with exactly one legitimate thing within the last year: me being incorrect about 1/3 of the Muslim Bans. It's a shame I'll carry with me the rest of my life, I'm sure.

And it took me no time at all to list over a dozen things you've been wrong about.

Smirk, jeer, swear, and indulge in your anger management issues all you'd like- it doesn't change the truth. There's a group of us who have been telling you from the beginning that Trump was a criminal, was abusing Presidential powers, and that he was absolutely in cahoots with Russia. And all of that is coming to light at a rapid pace at this particular moment. You can play the denial card all you'd like, but you've been wrong every step of the way. And if you opened up your eyes for about 30 seconds, you'd see that.

[SHAFT]

1-800-meltdownsyndrome

You wish you were me, dickhole.

Your wife wishes you were me. Your kids too.

Funny thing is... if I were you, I’d kill myself.

[cwolff]

You wish you were me, dickhole.

Your wife wishes you were me. Your kids too.

Funny thing is... if I were you, I’d kill myself.

DAMN!! Old Boy is going to need this video to recover from that.


https://youtu.be/-2u9hOvt1GY

[Fortybox]

On the plus side, you've finally answered this longstanding question we've all had about you people: how can you have been so wrong so many times and yet still feel so confident that you're right.

It turns out- you're not just lying to us. You're lying to yourselves.

Fascinating.

You people?...

[Parkbandit]

okay, that's hilarious.

I could laugh myself silly over you, of all people, claiming those first two. But let's get to the real point.

Yes, yes.. remind us how you went to the best schools and make more money than all of us combined again. I mean, this is the Internet and all.. you can be anything you want. Heck, you could actually be a girl here!


Let me remind you that when you tried to think up things I was wrong about, you came up with exactly one legitimate thing within the last year: me being incorrect about 1/3 of the Muslim Bans. It's a shame I'll carry with me the rest of my life, I'm sure.

Convenient that you choose "within the last year", given how solid you were in the tank for Hillary. And you were 100% wrong about the travel bans.. where I was 100% correct. I wasn't shocked at all when the 9th Circus Court denied them... and said they would easily be overturned by SCOTUS. Guess what happened? Oh, that's right: Exactly what I said would.


And it took me no time at all to list over a dozen things you've been wrong about.

You have yet to prove anything. Like I said when you first posted your "ZOMG I WUZ RIGHT 18 TIMES! LOOK!" I imagine with the time you took to construct the list, you probably wanted us to print it out and put it on our fridge.. but let's be honest: It was a pure fictional account.



Smirk, jeer, swear, and indulge in your anger management issues all you'd like- it doesn't change the truth. There's a group of us who have been telling you from the beginning that Trump was a criminal, was abusing Presidential powers, and that he was absolutely in cahoots with Russia. And all of that is coming to light at a rapid pace at this particular moment. You can play the denial card all you'd like, but you've been wrong every step of the way. And if you opened up your eyes for about 30 seconds, you'd see that.

Like I stated before... when you actually join us in the real reality, you will realize how utterly stupid you look right now and hopefully slink away to join Whirlin on another message board.

[Parkbandit]

You wish you were me, dickhole.

Your wife wishes you were me. Your kids too.

You wish. Continue your meltdown.. yours has been one of the best ones to witness.


Funny thing is... if I were you, I’d kill myself.

Feel free to pretend you are me.

[Parkbandit]

DAMN!! Old Boy is going to need this video to recover from that.


"OMG SICK BURN!"

Are you 12... or just the intellectual age of a 12 year old?

[Fortybox]

"OMG SICK BURN!"

Are you 12... or just the intellectual age of a 12 year old?

Real friends don't let friends drink soy.

[time4fun]

Yes, yes.. remind us how you went to the best schools and make more money than all of us combined again. I mean, this is the Internet and all.. you can be anything you want. Heck, you could actually be a girl here!



Convenient that you choose "within the last year", given how solid you were in the tank for Hillary. And you were 100% wrong about the travel bans.. where I was 100% correct. I wasn't shocked at all when the 9th Circus Court denied them... and said they would easily be overturned by SCOTUS. Guess what happened? Oh, that's right: Exactly what I said would.



You have yet to prove anything. Like I said when you first posted your "ZOMG I WUZ RIGHT 18 TIMES! LOOK!" I imagine with the time you took to construct the list, you probably wanted us to print it out and put it on our fridge.. but let's be honest: It was a pure fictional account.



Like I stated before... when you actually join us in the real reality, you will realize how utterly stupid you look right now and hopefully slink away to join Whirlin on another message board.

So first- if you have to go back more than a year to find more than one thing I've been wrong about- you don't have a very strong case. If we extend out to two years- we're up to two things. Given how many things I've argued/predicted/etc that's a hell of a track record. And you know it. And- again- given that you have disagreed with me on virtually every issue for the last two years that means you have a hell of a track record too. I mean, it's hard to be that wrong so consistently.

And, I do love how you are trying to turn this around. When I posted a quick list of 18 things, your deflection defense was to say "Prove it!" because you banked on me not being willing to take the time to find the quotes- even though you are perfectly aware of what your stances were on all of those issues. Now, your defense is "I bet it took a long time to find those quotes!" As though somehow that means I didn't find them, and you weren't wrong. Spoiler alert- it took about 20 minutes. And coming up with that list took me about 2. And both exercises were wildly entertaining. You do say some utterly ridiculous things.


I presented you with your own words, and you still can't admit that you were wrong. The depth of your denial is now reaching clinical levels.

I'm not the one who looks stupid right now my dear. That distinction has always been yours.

[Tgo01]

So first- if you have to go back more than a year to find more than one thing I've been wrong about- you don't have a very strong case.

I don't even have to go back a week:

An acquittal is an official verdict of innocence.
You can be tried for the exact same crime more than once after being found not guilty if the government finds more evidence.

There you go. You can shut up now.

[Fortybox]

So first- if you have to go back more than a year to find more than one thing I've been wrong about- you don't have a very strong case. If we extend out to two years- we're up to two things. Given how many things I've argued/predicted/etc that's a hell of a track record. And you know it. And- again- given that you have disagreed with me on virtually every issue for the last two years that means you have a hell of a track record too. I mean, it's hard to be that wrong so consistently.

And, I do love how you are trying to turn this around. When I posted a quick list of 18 things, your deflection defense was to say "Prove it!" because you banked on me not being willing to take the time to find the quotes- even though you are perfectly aware of what your stances were on all of those issues. Now, your defense is "I bet it took a long time to find those quotes!" As though somehow that means I didn't find them, and you weren't wrong. Spoiler alert- it took about 20 minutes. And coming up with that list took me about 2. And both exercises were wildly entertaining. You do say some utterly ridiculous things.


I presented you with your own words, and you still can't admit that you were wrong. The depth of your denial is now reaching clinical levels.

I'm not the one who looks stupid right now my dear. That distinction has always been yours.

You do realize that you are acknowledging your long-standing fight with another internet persona. What a total waste of RL time.

[Ashlander]

You do realize that you are acknowledging your long-standing fight with another internet persona. What a total waste of RL time.

Self awareness is one of her greatest weaknesses.

[Parkbandit]

So first- if you have to go back more than a year to find more than one thing I've been wrong about- you don't have a very strong case. If we extend out to two years- we're up to two things. Given how many things I've argued/predicted/etc that's a hell of a track record. And you know it. And- again- given that you have disagreed with me on virtually every issue for the last two years that means you have a hell of a track record too. I mean, it's hard to be that wrong so consistently.

And, I do love how you are trying to turn this around. When I posted a quick list of 18 things, your deflection defense was to say "Prove it!" because you banked on me not being willing to take the time to find the quotes- even though you are perfectly aware of what your stances were on all of those issues. Now, your defense is "I bet it took a long time to find those quotes!" As though somehow that means I didn't find them, and you weren't wrong. Spoiler alert- it took about 20 minutes. And coming up with that list took me about 2. And both exercises were wildly entertaining. You do say some utterly ridiculous things.


I presented you with your own words, and you still can't admit that you were wrong. The depth of your denial is now reaching clinical levels.

I'm not the one who looks stupid right now my dear. That distinction has always been yours.

I didn't comb through your posts to find 3 examples of how wrong you were.. they were off the top of my head.

YOU are the one that spent a Friday night hoping and praying to find some quotes of mine.. and couldn't even do that right since you had 18 fictional accounts of things I was "wrong" about and you were "right" about.. but when called out, you gave maybe a half dozen quotes of mine that didn't prove a single thing.

And your "logic" was that because I disagree with you and you were right, therefore I must be wrong.

http://e.lvme.me/pzv5j7l.jpg

You really should take a real logic course after your pre-K Self Awareness seminar.

[time4fun]

I didn't comb through your posts to find 3 examples of how wrong you were.. they were off the top of my head.

YOU are the one that spent a Friday night hoping and praying to find some quotes of mine.. and couldn't even do that right since you had 18 fictional accounts of things I was "wrong" about and you were "right" about.. but when called out, you gave maybe a half dozen quotes of mine that didn't prove a single thing.

And your "logic" was that because I disagree with you and you were right, therefore I must be wrong.

http://e.lvme.me/pzv5j7l.jpg

You really should take a real logic course after your pre-K Self Awareness seminar.

ROFL

So first the problem was that I just made these things up. Now it's that I made my list by finding old quotes of yours critizing claims that turned out to be true or saying things that turned out to be untrue. But those quotes show just how wrong I was somehow.

And also the problem is I didn't find enough quotes and only bothered to show you were wrong on half of them. But also I lose because I took time to find quotes proving you were wrong after you explicitly asked me to find quotes.

Your arguments are all over the place. Like someone throwing every dart they have at the board because they were caught being wrong multiple times.

Oh sorry, you were just "kidding" when you said those things.


But let's get to the heart of it. You were banking on me not bothering to find quotes of you arguing things you absolutely argued. Then I did, and you panicked and starting your traditional snarling and frothing at the mouth.

I will acknowledge that there was one claim I looked for and couldn't find: you saying Clinton was going to be indicted. (Though you constantly criticized the notion that she hadn't done anything that warranted prosecution). But your argument was that it was due to political considerations. Meanwhile the Trump administration's own Inspector General found no evidence that the decision not to prosecute had anything to do with political considerations.

So I was wrong about which part you were wrong on. Everything else was incredibly easy to find and didn't take long. I didn't really feel the need to spend more than 20 minutes looking at your blooper reel.

[Parkbandit]

ROFL

So first the problem was that I just made these things up. Now it's that I made my list by finding old quotes of yours critizing claims that turned out to be true or saying things that turned out to be untrue. But those quotes show just how wrong I was somehow.

And also the problem is I didn't find enough quotes and only bothered to show you were wrong on half of them. But also I lose because I took time to find quotes proving you were wrong after you explicitly asked me to find quotes.

Your arguments are all over the place. Like someone throwing every dart they have at the board because they were caught being wrong multiple times.

Oh sorry, you were just "kidding" when you said those things.


But let's get to the heart of it. You were banking on me not bothering to find quotes of you arguing things you absolutely argued. Then I did, and you panicked and starting your traditional snarling and frothing at the mouth.

I will acknowledge that there was one claim I looked for and couldn't find: you saying Clinton was going to be indicted. (Though you constantly criticized the notion that she hadn't done anything that warranted prosecution). But your argument was that it was due to political considerations. Meanwhile the Trump administration's own Inspector General found no evidence that the decision not to prosecute had anything to do with political considerations.

So I was wrong about which part you were wrong on. Everything else was incredibly easy to find and didn't take long. I didn't really feel the need to spend more than 20 minutes looking at your blooper reel.

Someone's trying for cwolff's belt!

Let's review.. remember when you posted this list of 18 things I was "wrong" about?


Oh that's hilarious.

You were wrong about the following:

1) Trump having extensive Russian ties
2) The Trump Campaign having dozens of contacts with the Russian government
3) Russia interfering with our elections
4) Coney's firing being serious enough to warrant an investigation
5) Clinton not being indicted for anything
6) Trump self-dealing and breaking numerous laws with his foundation
7) The Trump Tower meeting involving a meeting with a Russian government representative and a conversation about both sanctions and the Russian government offering help to the campaign (i.e. Collusion)
8) The Mueller investigation being legitimate and actually leading to indictments
9) Flynn actually having lied about his own Russian contacts
10) Comey having been fired specifically over the Russia investigation
11) Democrats being heavily favored to win back the House
12) The first two Muslim bans being illegal (how quickly they forget)
13) The tax bill causing inflation to rise
14) Several parts of the Steele Dossier having been corroborated
15) The Steele Dossier not being what started the Russia investigation
16) Carter Page being a Russian spy
17) The Carter Page FISA warrant application not being based on the Steele Dossier
18) The Carter Page FISA warrant application did mention the Steele Dossier was a piece of opportunities research

The list goes on and on.

And here's why you people are always so incredibly wrong: you listen to people who lie to you over and over again. And you're so deeply stupid that you keep going back for more

And the "list goes on and on"... so at a minimum, I was expecting you to back this list up.

You came back with literally 8 quotes of mine. Not even half.

Of those 8 quotes, you literally proved 1, which I already gave you credit for in your original list.

1 out of 18.

You knocked it out of the park with this one! 1 out of 18 is probably the best you've ever done!

I think someone deserves special recognition today! Do people know how hard it is to get a 5 1/2 on a test?? It's damn near impossible!

GOOD JOB!
http://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0804/6487/products/participation_trophy_1_large.jpg?v=1523044295

[Methais]

ROFL

So first the problem was that I just made these things up. Now it's that I made my list by finding old quotes of yours critizing claims that turned out to be true or saying things that turned out to be untrue. But those quotes show just how wrong I was somehow.

And also the problem is I didn't find enough quotes and only bothered to show you were wrong on half of them. But also I lose because I took time to find quotes proving you were wrong after you explicitly asked me to find quotes.

Your arguments are all over the place. Like someone throwing every dart they have at the board because they were caught being wrong multiple times.

Oh sorry, you were just "kidding" when you said those things.


But let's get to the heart of it. You were banking on me not bothering to find quotes of you arguing things you absolutely argued. Then I did, and you panicked and starting your traditional snarling and frothing at the mouth.

I will acknowledge that there was one claim I looked for and couldn't find: you saying Clinton was going to be indicted. (Though you constantly criticized the notion that she hadn't done anything that warranted prosecution). But your argument was that it was due to political considerations. Meanwhile the Trump administration's own Inspector General found no evidence that the decision not to prosecute had anything to do with political considerations.

So I was wrong about which part you were wrong on. Everything else was incredibly easy to find and didn't take long. I didn't really feel the need to spend more than 20 minutes looking at your blooper reel.

ROFL











































































You're retarded.

[Parkbandit]

ROFL
You're retarded.

I think you are being unfair to the mentally retarded at this point.

Even they are smart enough not to want to be compared to time4fun...

[Methais]

I think you are being unfair to the mentally retarded at this point.

Even they are smart enough not to want to be compared to time4fun...

But I thought starting posts with ROFL automatically makes you right.

Silly me. :shrug:

[ClydeR]

https://www.instagram.com/p/Bm_khRwA0d1

In the above linked video, Roger Stone preemptively denies an unpublished report that he told Trump what would be in the Wikileaks leaks. Without seeing the unpublished reports, there's no way to know if the is actually denying the accusation in the reports. The denial is very specific. He says that he did not tell Trump in October of 2016 exactly what and when Wikileaks would leak. The denial would have been more effective if he had just said he did not tell Trump what Wikileaks was up to.

[Androidpk]

It's true, Roger Stone did not tell Trump that in October. He told him that in August.

[cwolff]

The non-denial denial.

[Fortybox]

But I thought starting posts with ROFL automatically makes you right.

Silly me. :shrug:

No, first you have to be an active GS player.

Second, you must preface with "Oh honey" and give a set of ellipses.

[Methais]

No, first you have to be an active GS player.

Second, you must preface with "Oh honey" and give a set of ellipses.

ROFL

Oh honey...

You hurl a freezing ball of pure cold at a huge lava elemental!
AS: +482 vs DS: +292 with AvD: +43 + d100 roll: +80 = +313
... and hit for 120 points of damage!
You sense a surge of essence being dragged from the elemental and into your multicolored soulstone.
The lava elemental hardens into a chalky rock that quickly crumbles away into nothingness.
As the last of the lava elemental disappears, a small black pearl appears in its place.
The silvery luminescence fades from around a huge lava elemental.
The bright luminescence fades from around a huge lava elemental.
A huge lava elemental appears somehow different.
The brilliant luminescence fades from around a huge lava elemental.
A huge lava elemental glances around, looking a bit less confident.
The tingling sensation and sense of security leaves a huge lava elemental.
The freezing ball of pure cold explodes into a large sphere of frost.
Cast Roundtime 3 Seconds.


Am I doing this right? How many PhD's is this worth?

[Seizer]

ROFL

Oh honey...

You hurl a freezing ball of pure cold at a huge lava elemental!
AS: +482 vs DS: +292 with AvD: +43 + d100 roll: +80 = +313
... and hit for 120 points of damage!
You sense a surge of essence being dragged from the elemental and into your multicolored soulstone.
The lava elemental hardens into a chalky rock that quickly crumbles away into nothingness.
As the last of the lava elemental disappears, a small black pearl appears in its place.
The silvery luminescence fades from around a huge lava elemental.
The bright luminescence fades from around a huge lava elemental.
A huge lava elemental appears somehow different.
The brilliant luminescence fades from around a huge lava elemental.
A huge lava elemental glances around, looking a bit less confident.
The tingling sensation and sense of security leaves a huge lava elemental.
The freezing ball of pure cold explodes into a large sphere of frost.
Cast Roundtime 3 Seconds.


Am I doing this right? How many PhD's is this worth?
At least three in algorithm/coding.

[Fortybox]

ROFL

Oh honey...

You hurl a freezing ball of pure cold at a huge lava elemental!
AS: +482 vs DS: +292 with AvD: +43 + d100 roll: +80 = +313
... and hit for 120 points of damage!
You sense a surge of essence being dragged from the elemental and into your multicolored soulstone.
The lava elemental hardens into a chalky rock that quickly crumbles away into nothingness.
As the last of the lava elemental disappears, a small black pearl appears in its place.
The silvery luminescence fades from around a huge lava elemental.
The bright luminescence fades from around a huge lava elemental.
A huge lava elemental appears somehow different.
The brilliant luminescence fades from around a huge lava elemental.
A huge lava elemental glances around, looking a bit less confident.
The tingling sensation and sense of security leaves a huge lava elemental.
The freezing ball of pure cold explodes into a large sphere of frost.
Cast Roundtime 3 Seconds.


Am I doing this right? How many PhD's is this worth?

I'd say about 5. For more PhD's you need to entitle a heading in bold and then in the subsequent paragraph talk about something else. That would bring up the PhD count to at least 267 according to the algorithm.