OMGOMGOMG THIS IS REALLY IT THIS TIME!!!!!!!!111
Printable View
That’s because you and idiots like you literally don’t understand jokes or when you’re being trolled.
Look at Ashliana for example. Wrathbringer makes zero attempt to not look like he’s trolling, but the bait keeps getting taken over and over and given serious responses like:
When chances are WB didn’t even read the post he responded to in the first place.
You’re not really any different. But that’s why we like having you idiots around, especially once Backlash stopped posting regularly from his daily stupor.
On another note, I wasn’t aware that anybody at all took an unofficial forum for a 30 year old text game seriously where like 3 people circle jerk Trump hatred and false hope all day and get trolled and laughed at by the handful of other active posters.
Why would anyone do such a thing outside of the boob thread in its glory days?
It doesn't matter if Wrathbringer "tries," or not. The point remains the same: Wrathbringer can't rationally defend his position. Parkbandit can't defend his position. You can't defend your position. Every time you try, you end up giving up and resorting to "LAWL, U SO STOOPID, LIEBRUHL." Except doubling down on your stupidity doesn't change reality. It doesn't change the fact that people you voted into power are going to federal prison.
Reality check: This forum is almost nothing but you, Wrathbringer, Parkbandit and one or two other reactionary idiots circlejerking, occasionally broken up by either the left-wingers who enjoy poking holes in your retarded positions, or the occasional average poster who wanders in here, sees how you treat people, posts once and runs off.Quote:
Originally Posted by Methais
No one argued if there were no charges, there was no crime.
The argument was you can't assume someone is definitely going to prison and definitely violated the law until the investigation is over. The same standard is true here as well.
But nothing about the argument says "We should ignore all evidence, even when it's staring us straight in the face, and not discuss it." But if you want to pretend it's interpreted that way- I suggest you lead by example and exit this thread.
Occasionally? Ever since Trump became President, it's been a non-stop liberal retard parade. I've never, ever seen so many unhinged liberals cry so hard in all my life. So scared, so frightened, so angry!
It's been hilarious watching idiots like you come in, shit on the place with your special brand of stupidity, then leave all upset.. only to come back again and again and again.
I must say, you've haven't been this entertaining since you were caught using an alt to post in agreement with yourself.
Thank you for entertaining us, Clown.
Trump might not get nailed for anything. It's hard as hell to bring down a president. It is too early to be so confident that Mueller has nothing on trump. It feels weird to even have to point that out. He's under investigation right now. When the investigation's over we'll know what Mueller has or doesn't have.
So now, it's too hard to convict President Trump for all the Russian collusion he obviously did... because he was elected President?
https://media1.tenor.com/images/c924...itemid=9264828
I hate to burst your bubble, but you're grossly misinterpreting this news.
1) Trump is currently (well as of a month ago) the subject of a criminal investigation- which means this isn't a charade, and it definitely does not mean Mueller has squat on Trump. If Mueller had nothing on him, he would absolutely, 100% not be a subject of a criminal probe. You don't become a subject of a probe until there is evidence of potential wrongdoing, and you can't actually stay a subject without additional evidence from the probe itself that indicates you should, in fact, continue to be a subject. And I want to emphasize here- this is particularly true if you are investigating a sitting US President.
So any narrative here that Trump is exonerated, or that there is no evidence against him is abjectly false and literally contradicts what we just learned.
Having said that, there are two very likely scenarios that Trump currently finds himself in. One scenario that is potentially better for him, and one he desperately doesn't want to be in.
The one he wants:
Robert Mueller is a DoJ employee. The DoJ's current guidelines say that a sitting President can't be criminally indicted. A target of the probe is someone they have enough evidence to indict. Even if Mueller is sitting on enough evidence for a criminal indictment, it's actually very likely that Trump still would not be considered a target of the probe because of the aforementioned DoJ policy. That doesn't mean Trump is in the clear, however. Because Mueller would still present that evidence in his final report, and Rosenstein would almost certainly take it to Congress (and could decide to release the information publicly).
It's also possible that while there is enough evidence to indict, it's not enough evidence to convince Congress to act. So there's actually a lot to cushion Trump in this.
The one he desperately does not want:
He's not a target because they haven't interviewed him yet. They likely don't consider themselves to have enough evidence to indict if there's been no interview. It's actually inconceivable that they would consider charges in a case like this without that interview, regardless of what their standard practice is. This involved obstruction- you can't indict until you've established corrupt intent. That would require an interview. In that case (the article actually goes into this as well), Trump is a subject until he walks into the interview, and then- once they have their interview as evidence- he walks out as a target.
There is actually some hinting at this in the article:
There is also the possibility that ultimately there won't be enough evidence to indict, but literally nothing about this article suggests that is the most likely outcome.Quote:
Mueller reiterated the need to interview Trump — both to understand whether he had any corrupt intent to thwart the Russia investigation and to complete this [obstruction] portion of his probe, the people said.
And, again, your interpretation that Mueller has nothing on Trump is 100% contradicted by this new information. What you just learned is that Mueller very much has evidence of at least potential criminal wrongdoing, and they are continuing to gather more evidence to build the case. If they weren't, he would not be a subject of the investigation right now- even if he had been at one point.
Oh PB. Your confidence is inspiring.
You were wrong about Clinton
You were wrong about Russia not having meddled in our elections
You were wrong about Trump's Russia connections not being a big deal
You were wrong about Comey's firing being totally fine and not warranting a special prosecutor
You were wrong about Trump not being under investigation
You were wrong about Mueller having no evidence on Trump
But I will give you this- if you keep guessing A, eventually the answer will be A. So keep it up, and maybe one day you'll be right about something.
Anything.
Reality: You voted a circus into power, and people have been discussing their antics. The only retard parade here have been you and the other reactionaries twisting yourselves into pretzels rationalizing your decision, claiming that every negative story is "FAKE NEWS!" (because you were gullible enough to buy into Trump's explanations) before finding out 3 days -- or sometimes 10 minutes -- later, that you once again got played, and embarrassed yourself with how servile -- and willing to put party before nation -- you've become.
Okay, Mr. Triple Poster. Tell me more about how upset everyone else is. Especially when you can't engage on the issues, and inevitably slink away to your hole every time you get called out for bullshitting.Quote:
Originally Posted by Parkbandit
:rofl: Yes, that is surely what that means. Trump should feel free to have that sit-down interview any time now.Quote:
Originally Posted by Adrian
Kudos, as always, with finding yourself unable to substantively reply. Not to mention:
https://i.imgur.com/YtkY319.png
Your stupidity isn't.
That she would lose the election? No I wasn't, you were. I was one of the very few here that actually predicted a Trump victory.Quote:
You were wrong about Clinton
I stated numerous times: Russia didn't change the election outcome and there is no evidence that Trump colluded with Russia.Quote:
You were wrong about Russia not having meddled in our elections
So far, I'm correct.
And still correct.Quote:
You were wrong about Trump's Russia connections not being a big deal
Still correct. Turned out, Comey was a piece of shit and should have been fired years ago.Quote:
You were wrong about Comey's firing being totally fine and not warranting a special prosecutor
Wut? Context? Maybe a quote?Quote:
You were wrong about Trump not being under investigation
For collusion. Still so very right.Quote:
You were wrong about Mueller having no evidence on Trump
Like I stated... you, of all people, should never, ever do any political predictions.Quote:
But I will give you this- if you keep guessing A, eventually the answer will be A. So keep it up, and maybe one day you'll be right about something.
Anything.
I voted in someone that would make little snowflakes like you have a meltdown.
And that meltdown has been going strong ever since. BEST vote I have ever cast.
Wait.. so it used to be 12 posts in 30 minutes was a sure sign of being "upset". Now it's 3 posts in a row is a sign?Quote:
Okay, Mr. Triple Poster. Tell me more about how upset everyone else is.
You two fools need to write these rules down so you don't confuse each other.
LOL. I can't engage in the issues with you.. it's like arguing with a retard.. no one wants to be that guy.Quote:
Especially when you can't engage on the issues, and inevitably slink away to your hole every time you get called out for bullshitting.
I suppose I could do some real bullshit, create a number of alt accounts and use them to "agree" with me... but that would take someone who has some serious mental problems and low esteem issues.
And I'm keeping all my responses to only TWO posts until these rules come out. I don't want to come across as "upset" when clearly it's not.
THIS POST DOES NOT COUNT TOWARDS THE 3 POSTS IN A ROW.
I never get why people give a shit how many posts someone does in a row. We won't run out of posts. It's fine.
Make the posts. It's why we're here. See? I did two, nothing bad happened.
You got conned by a reality TV star. It's true other people are upset at the consequences of your stupidity, but that doesn't change your underlying stupidity. And beeteedubs, you've been having a meltdown since, shitting out poorly conceived apologetics, hysterically calling news "fake" -- only to have it confirmed days, hours or minutes later -- and then falling for the same trick repeatedly. Contorting yourself into a pretzel in order to rationalize supporting someone robbing you blind is you having a meltdown in slow motion.
The more posts, the more upset you obviously are. That doesn't seem particularly difficult to understand, but you often have issues with simple matters.Quote:
Originally Posted by Parkbandit
Whatever you say, PB. You were confronted with a long list of developments that demonstrate the Trump administration's collusion with Russia. You found yourself totally incapable of responding to it and fled, per the usual. Not just you walking in and out of a conversation, but fleeing from a response to a question that you stupidly asked. You can't engage in the issues, period, as you've demonstrated over more than a decade. You're a deluded imbecile, and it's fun putting you in your place.Quote:
Originally Posted by Parkbandit
You're retarded. Also:
Attachment 8958
Please quote just one post of PB being hysterical.
I see you've been attending time4fun's logic classes.Quote:
The more posts, the more upset you obviously are. That doesn't seem particularly difficult to understand, but you often have issues with simple matters.
Yes that's exactly what happened.
http://forums.elanthia.online
How exactly was I conned?
First thing he did was nominate and get confirmed a very young and Conservative judge? If that is the only thing he does during his first term.. it's a win for me and a loss for you.
You and your ilk having daily Trump Meltdowns are just the cherry on top of a delicious sundae.
Thank you for coming back. I knew you would.. just like I knew you would after you left all those other times. You can't stay away, no matter how hard you try. It's part of your low self esteem issues.
Is that how this works? Good to know.Quote:
The more posts, the more upset you obviously are. That doesn't seem particularly difficult to understand, but you often have issues with simple matters.
Let me know the exact cutoff. 3 is upset? 2 is ok? 1 is perfectly sane? Is that the benchmark everyone uses on an open forum?
Are you using the same PhD in Psychology that time4fun uses?
How can I flee... AND post 3 posts in a row, therefore so upset?Quote:
Whatever you say, PB. You were confronted with a long list of developments that demonstrate the Trump administration's collusion with Russia. You found yourself totally incapable of responding to it and fled, per the usual. Not just you walking in and out of a conversation, but fleeing from a response to a question that you stupidly asked. You can't engage in the issues, period, as you've demonstrated over more than a decade. You're a deluded imbecile, and it's fun putting you in your place.
The only one between the 2 of us that has fled from these forums is you. I've never left.. you've left multiple times now whenever you are outted for stupidity.
Also, you have never, ever "put me in my place". Ever.
Add delusions of grandeur to your many, many mental issues.
This is my 3rd post in a row to show how upset I am... but Neveragain had the c-c-c-combo breaker.. so I guess I'm not upset.
(OR AM I!?)
What's being made up? You said those things multiple times. Obviously not in the exact words of OMG OMG OMG THIS IS REALLY REALLY SUPER IT TIME FOR REALZ GUYS!!! but I understand that most things need to be spelled out for you in order for you to get it, especially when humor is involved.
Remember how the elections are still 7 months in the future? Tell us more about these election results that haven't happened yet.Quote:
Remember when you said there wouldn't be a democratic backlash in the 2018 elections?
Congratulations on having demonstrated how little you understand about American politics.
Congratulations on having demonstrated how little you understand about American politics.
Or anything that hasn't happened yet.
Or anything involving time.
Or anything at all.
Except for how to be retarded.
And sniff your own farts.
As much as I hate to rob you of what is apparently a very comforting story for you, I left because Whirlin asked me to help by posting exclusively in the new forum.
You act as though I just woke up one day and suddenly realized you little 4Chan wannabes were bad for the game.
Whirlin is gone now, so I no longer feel obligated to avoid public posts on these forums. But if it makes you feel better to think it was you, by all means.
Mandate? In any event, I was never a fan of that other forum. I think I posted there once.
This is the part you find contentious?Quote:
Originally Posted by Methais
https://media0.giphy.com/media/dEdmW17JnZhiU/giphy.gif
There's a cadre of right-wing circlejerkers, some left-wingers, maybe one or two centrists, and the occasional person who rarely posts, says their one piece and disappears for another few months, and on rare occasions, post a little more. People like Taernath, Jeril, Richard, Drauz, etc.
Okay. This exchange, for one.Quote:
Originally Posted by Methais
This, for another.
Whenever he gets really upset, he starts ignoring whatever it was he was talking about, and rants and raves about the person, rather than what he was talking about. Both because of his inability to control himself, but also to distract from how hilariously poorly he was arguing.
If you voted for Trump at any level based on the issues, you got conned. The deficit, national defense, the revitalization of middle America, etc. Not to mention you voted for someone who was openly conspiring with a foreign power. You've rationalized the GOP-donating wealthy looting the country in exchange for the peanuts you've personally received.Quote:
Originally Posted by Parkbandit
You did get a justice confirmed, congrats. It's a pity it came at the cost of introducing purely partisan politics into the process, though, given what Mitch McConnell decided to do with the seat while Obama was in office. If you don't think that's going to bite the GOP in the long-term, you're precisely as stupid as I already know you are.
And again, not sure where you've gotten the notion that I ever "left." I always lurk, even if I'm not particularly motivated to get into one of these back-and-forths you love so much.
"If I act like it's silly, it won't be true! Even if it's completely obvious!"Quote:
Originally Posted by Parkbandit
Spoiler Alert: When you go on a spree of epithet-laced screeds, it's obvious you're upset. Especially when you drop the pretense of caring about the issue you're "discussing" in lieu of those screeds and solely attack the person behind the argument.
As I just mentioned: You flee the argument, in favor of your usual derailing strategy. Case in point. You'll just start railing about something else, responding to someone else, etc. And again.... never left, buddy, just because I don't always post daily. And you've been put in your place dozens of times, just like you were here.Quote:
Originally Posted by Parkbandit
How did that work out for you? :lol:
You calling anyone at all a wannabe is beyond anything the word "ironic" can describe.Quote:
You act as though I just woke up one day and suddenly realized you little 4Chan wannabes were bad for the game.
Whirlin has been gone from the safe space forum for several months now. Cool logic.Quote:
Whirlin is gone now, so I no longer feel obligated to avoid public posts on these forums. But if it makes you feel better to think it was you, by all means.
Also lol @ you being Whirlin's bitch.
Let's have a closer look:
You must be a very fragile person if you consider either of those as hysterical. Please tell us your definition of hysterical.
Thank you for continuing to be entertaining as fuck though.
Losing your shit and railing at people because you lost an Internet argument and are throwing a tantrum is hysterical. Sorry, buddy. If you mean hysterical in the sense that PB desperately needs to seek out his Medicare-paid doctor for blood pressure medicine, you'd have to be there in person, though I wouldn't recommend it.
LOL. How'd that work out for you?
You are the toxic bitch no one would follow.
Sorry. Honestly, we didn't miss you. At all.
Ok, I did a little because I am entertained by ignorant toxicity... it's a character flaw of mine.
You felt obligated?Quote:
You act as though I just woke up one day and suddenly realized you little 4Chan wannabes were bad for the game.
Whirlin is gone now, so I no longer feel obligated to avoid public posts on these forums. But if it makes you feel better to think it was you, by all means.
Seriously?
LOL.
Who was I going to vote for, Hillary? Stop. You're just being silly now.
Wait... are you suggesting you care about any of those?Quote:
The deficit, national defense, the revitalization of middle America, etc.
Your party certainly isn't.
Still waiting for any evidence. All you have so far is conjecture, wishful thinking and hope. Those won't stick in a court... sorry :(Quote:
Not to mention you voted for someone who was openly conspiring with a foreign power.
I'm personally better off today than I would have been with Hillary. Seems like an easy choice to me.Quote:
You've rationalized the GOP-donating wealthy looting the country in exchange for the peanuts you've personally received.
It's called the Biden Rule. Worked perfectly. The ONE thing Joe gave us worth a damn.Quote:
You did get a justice confirmed, congrats. It's a pity it came at the cost of introducing purely partisan politics into the process, though, given what Mitch McConnell decided to do with the seat while Obama was in office. If you don't think that's going to bite the GOP in the long-term, you're precisely as stupid as I already know you are.
You don't? You can't ever leave it be.. you always drive for that last post on the subject. Look at this thread for examples.Quote:
And again, not sure where you've gotten the notion that I ever "left." I always lurk, even if I'm not particularly motivated to get into one of these back-and-forths you love so much.
For someone who isn't particularly motivated, you sure seem particularly motivated.
I'm certain, this back and forth will go on for a while... because you aren't particularly motivated......................................... ....
So, there isn't a clear cut rule on a public forum of 3 posts you're upset... it's just whatever you feel like at the time?Quote:
"If I act like it's silly, it won't be true! Even if it's completely obvious!"
Spoiler Alert: When you go on a spree of epithet-laced screeds, it's obvious you're upset. Especially when you drop the pretense of caring about the issue you're "discussing" in lieu of those screeds and solely attack the person behind the argument.
You're retarded.
What? You put me in my place?Quote:
As I just mentioned: You flee the argument, in favor of your usual derailing strategy. Case in point. You'll just start railing about something else, responding to someone else, etc. And again.... never left, buddy, just because I don't always post daily. And you've been put in your place dozens of times, just like you were here.
LOL. We will see when President Trump is still in office, going for 4 more years.. and you are still "B-b-b-b-b-but Russia!" through your tears.
As far as putting you in your place, here's how it really is: http://forum.gsplayers.com/showthrea...836#post830836
You removed all the posts of Kierphe because it literally made you look more retarded than usual.. but there's still entertainment in there for people to read.
3rd post.
https://i.imgur.com/dNbP1Bp.gif
If you made your decision based on the issues, you got conned. It's that simple. Your after-the-fact rationalizing isn't particularly interesting.
The deficit has exploded every time the GOP has taken power in most of our (perhaps not your) lifetimes, with one exception: Bush Sr., and he was unpopular with your crowd for that very reason. The GOP's policies will accelerate, not reverse, the decline of middle America. The notion that the right cares about national defense is comical, as you literally voted for someone openly calling for a foreign intelligence agency to commit espionage on his behalf, and who has threatened nuclear war, on Twitter, for no reason. He's weakened our relationship with all our allies, all our trading partners, and is in the midst of waging a trade war, again, for absolutely no reason.Quote:
Originally Posted by Parkbandit
Sorry, buddy! Your talking point's out of date. We have evidence, which you ignored, remember? And, uhh, multiple people have already been convicted (Flynn, Gates, van der Zwaan) and the last just got sentenced to a short prison sentence. Your failure to read the news reflects only on you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Parkbandit
Financially, you might be superficially be better off, in the short term, at the cost of everything that conservatives used to claim you care about (see: policy), and weaker in every other regard. Perhaps an easy choice for you, but in addition to that stance demonstrating that you're an imbecile, it demonstrates you're not really a conservative. Your own personal self-interest is apparently your only motivation.Quote:
Originally Posted by Parkbandit
How you rationalize it is your business. Biden did bloviate about it, but the Democrats never did it. The GOP did. Don't blame anyone when it comes back to bite you, though. Similarly, if McConnell changes the rules to a bare majority able to pass bills (which, to his credit, he claims he won't do), don't blame anyone but yourselves.Quote:
Originally Posted by Parkbandit
Nope, never left! I do, however, do as you claim. So do you, though. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Parkbandit
Something called context matters. Reactionaries don't really like grey areas, though, do you? Oh well. Not everybody thinks in such retarded, reductionist terms as you do. But one can definitely tell when you're off your meds, PB.Quote:
Originally Posted by Parkbandit
Yup. Sure did. Remember how you completely, utterly failed to respond, relying on a personal insult instead? That would be you capitulating, being put in your place. Shamed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Parkbandit
Sure thing, buddy. The first person was just sentenced to jail. Your failure to follow the developments, again, reflects only on you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Parkbandit
Notice how you had to reach back 9 1/2 years, and I reached back to 2 days ago? Spoiler Alert: That isn't a coincidence or an accident. You debase yourself on a constant basis, my deluded friend.Quote:
Originally Posted by Parkbandit
Is
Ashliana
Flimbo? 4 posts!!!!!111one
You are trying so hard to make sense.. but failing miserably. I feel like I should throw you a life preserver.. but I don't really want to. Keep struggling...
As far as my vote goes... who would I vote for? Hillary? What is it on her platform do you believe lines up with my political beliefs?
I knew what I was getting with Trump: Good judicial nominations (hopefully 1 or 2 more in the next 3 years!) and less government regulations.
PLUS, the entertainment value of seeing snowflakes like you have a complete meltdown. I not only called the election for Trump, I also predicted the entertainment I would receive from him winning.
Please tell me the Democrats are suddenly for a balanced budget, a solid middle class and a strong national defense! That would literally be music to my ears... unfortunately for you: that's just bullshit on your part and you know it.Quote:
The deficit has exploded every time the GOP has taken power in most of our (perhaps not your) lifetimes, with one exception: Bush Sr., and he was unpopular with your crowd for that very reason. The GOP's policies will accelerate, not reverse, the decline of middle America. The notion that the right cares about national defense is comical, as you literally voted for someone openly calling for a foreign intelligence agency to commit espionage on his behalf, and who has threatened nuclear war, on Twitter, for no reason. He's weakened our relationship with all our allies, all our trading partners, and is in the midst of waging a trade war, again, for absolutely no reason.
I mean, I guess you know better than Mueller himself, who said there was no evidence of criminal wrong doing on Trump's part.Quote:
Sorry, buddy! Your talking point's out of date. We have evidence, which you ignored, remember? And, uhh, multiple people have already been convicted (Flynn, Gates, van der Zwaan) and the last just got sentenced to a short prison sentence. Your failure to read the news reflects only on you.
It's not like you have an upset axe to grind or anything.............
Wrong as usual. I AM better off today. I'll BE better off tomorrow.Quote:
Financially, you might be superficially be better off, in the short term, at the cost of everything that conservatives used to claim you care about (see: policy), and weaker in every other regard. Perhaps an easy choice for you, but in addition to that stance demonstrating that you're an imbecile, it demonstrates you're not really a conservative. Your own personal self-interest is apparently your only motivation.
Again, my alternative would be Hillary Clinton. Do you think she would propose tax reform that included a cut of any sort?
My choice was between Hillary Clinton and Trump. It was the right call for us to make on 11/8/16 and it's still the right call today. I'm sorry you can't seem to get over it. Poor you.
Harry Reid already broke the Senate rule.. and Biden set the precedent already. Do you think we shouldn't have done it? You're really stupid.Quote:
How you rationalize it is your business. Biden did bloviate about it, but the Democrats never did it. The GOP did. Don't blame anyone when it comes back to bite you, though. Similarly, if McConnell changes the rules to a bare majority able to pass bills (which, to his credit, he claims he won't do), don't blame anyone but yourselves.
Where did I say I wasn't particularly motivated? I LOVE these back and forths and can keep going on forever. YOU were the one lying when you said you didn't like them, as evidenced by the post I'm quoting and your history here.Quote:
Nope, never left! I do, however, do as you claim. So do you, though. :)
You claim you're above it.. but you're only lying to yourself. We've seen your posting history here.
You made the claim that I was upset. Your evidence was 3 posts in one topic.Quote:
Something called context matters. Reactionaries don't really like grey areas, though, do you? Oh well. Not everybody thinks in such retarded, reductionist terms as you do. But one can definitely tell when you're off your meds, PB.
You made this dumb rule.. but at least we both can agree you're dumb.
Delusional.Quote:
Yup. Sure did. Remember how you completely, utterly failed to respond, relying on a personal insult instead? That would be you capitulating, being put in your place. Shamed.
You haven't put anyone in their place here. Ever.
So, the first person was sentenced to jail for being on the Trump Administration and colluding with the Russians?Quote:
Sure thing, buddy. The first person was just sentenced to jail. Your failure to follow the developments, again, reflects only on you.
Anything else, is just something entirely different.
Sorry.
I'm not your buddy. I'm not your friend.Quote:
Notice how you had to reach back 9 1/2 years, and I reached back to 2 days ago? Spoiler Alert: That isn't a coincidence or an accident. You debase yourself on a constant basis, my deluded friend.
And given that you created another login to use to agree and got caught with was literally the dumbest thing to ever happen on this message board.
And you've done PLENTY of really stupid things.
Go away already Macguyver.
:rofl: It's a moot point, as you've established you don't really have any political beliefs, beyond your short term, self-serving interests and your tribal interests.
Democrats are far more fiscally responsible than the GOP. That's totally beyond dispute at this point. The conservative advocacy organizations have been talking about it since last year. What a surprise that that information hasn't found its way to you, though it did to me.Quote:
Originally Posted by Parkbandit
There's a reason why the peanuts that individuals' tax rates were cut are temporary, and the corporate tax cuts are permanent. Spoiler Alert: It isn't because the GOP cares about the middle class. Similarly, their failed efforts to turn back the clock on healthcare expansion don't serve the middle class, nor do their efforts on the FCC, the environment, and basically any other issue. Likewise, the GOP absolutely destroyed its credibility on national defense, after spending how many trillions of dollars in Iraq? Trump's main foreign policy accomplishment has been threatening nuclear war on Twitter, and dismantling the State Department. Your ignorance of those issues doesn't constitute a reasoned position.
... Yeah. You need to work on your reading comprehension. Just like Trump does. That's for the better, though, if it lulls him into the same erroneous thinking you just demonstrated. That's what you get for only reading Trump's tweets or headlines on Drudge: an incomplete picture based on a selective interpretation designed not to inflame the cheetoh-in-chief's feefees.Quote:
Originally Posted by Parkbandit
Again... superficially, in the short-term, at the greater cost of American power, influence, an increasingly small middle class, damage to all our relationships with our allies and trade partners, etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by Parkbandit
No, she probably wouldn't have, as the rationale for a tax cut made no sense, provided that you actually care about the things you claim to care about: a balanced budget, the middle class, etc. When Trump took office, jobless claims were at record lows, the deficit was finally under reasonable control, the stock market was at record highs. A permanent tax cut for corporations and the super-wealthy didn't make a lot of sense. But they, like you, are self-serving: not meaningfully "conservative."Quote:
Originally Posted by Parkbandit
Um.. No. Reid used reconciliation, as the GOP did for their tax bill. That's not what I was talking about, and again, McConnell has said he won't be doing it. (If he does, he'll regret it). Trump has been trying, so far in vain, to get him to do it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Parkbandit
Erm.. No, again. This is the third time in a single exchange that you're having reading comprehension problems. Perhaps you should re-read the thread.Quote:
Originally Posted by Parkbandit
Fourth time. You really need to take a breath, read what's being written, think back the half-century ago to your grade school education, and try again.Quote:
Originally Posted by Parkbandit
:rofl: Except for two days ago, where you totally opted out of an argument (i.e., conceded). You got blown out. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Parkbandit
Yeah...... The Special Counsel, appointed to investigate Trump et. al's links to Russia and subsequent crimes? The very same one has convicted several people, and sentenced another. Stay tuned. But again, your failure to keep up with the news is on you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Parkbandit
Try again.Quote:
Originally Posted by Parkbandit
This almost counts as a response, except for that part where you simply repeated the thing you already did, and couldn't actually come up with anything else, compared to my example two days ago. Blown out yet again. Perhaps next time you'll try to actually make an argument instead of just repeating the last thing you tried and failed with.Quote:
Originally Posted by Parkbandit
tl;dr You're retarded.
I literally started to read your response.. but then realized you aren't particularly motivated for the back and forth and assumed your tl;dr was full of lies, stupidity, assumptions and excuses.
So I didn't bother reading.
I know you spend a great deal of time on that post.. but I wasn't particularly motivated to sift through all the stupid to find an inkling of intelligence.
Also, skimming through it, I saw no underlines, bold or italics.. so I didn't think you really did your best work on it.
Overall, I assigned the letter grade you always crave..
http://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/976/cps...-524905849.jpg
[QUOTE=Adrian;2015628]You don't actually know anything about deficit spending under the previous 6 administrations, do you?
Let's Review:
Reagan (R) 8 years: 132% increase
Bush Sr (R) 4 years: 36% increase
Clinton (D) 8 years: 1% reduction
Bush Jr (R) 8 years: 57% increase
Obama (D) 8 years: 57% increase
Trump (R) 4 years: currently on track to increase the deficit by almost as much as Obama did in 8 years
Obama is the one President there that had an actual Recession to deal with. His spending increase was required to keep the economy of completely shutting down.
You've been trained to think about nothing but spending- as though that's the sole factor that adds to the debt.
Meanwhile Republicans continue to slash revenue without actually reducing spending. PS $1 of government spending is actually better for the deficit than $1 of reduced revenue.
It never ceases to amaze me how poorly acquainted you people are with reality.
Sorry, I don't understand the question. Nothing bad happened to me. My quality of life isn't linked to which game forum I use.
I hardly played Gemstone from November through Feb due to a new job. But yeah, I guess I should have been here posting the same gif over and over again in a thread about a subject I'm too scared to have an actual opinion on like a winner.
It's fine, I'm sure your life only looks sad.
Several stories broke today:
1) A continuation of the previous news cycle about the report Mueller is supposedly planning on putting together. It looks like the timeline is expected to be sometime in June or July. That would make sense as Mueller isn't going to want to put anything out too close to the election. The fact that he is planning a report to answer "the public's questions" indicates that Mueller likely doesn't believe that he can indict a sitting President (either by constitutional law or by the DoJ's own stance). What's really interesting about this is that it's also typically DoJ policy not to release information in situations where no indictment is warranted. That would suggest either that Mueller believes that Trump is guilty of obstruction (and is writing a report in lieu of a criminal indictment he doesn't believe can be made), OR that Mueller has decided that simply declining indictment isn't enough- that this warrants a public Comey-style announcement. That would seem odd as it would open his investigation up to the same malpractice critiques Comey faced.
2) CNN is reporting that Mueller's team has been intercepting Russian Oligarchs who enter the US and questioning them (in one case actually taking electronic devices). Apparently he's looking to track Russian money that may have been funneled into the 2016 election through various means. The investigation into illegal campaign contributions via Russia has been reported on in the past, but this is the first time anyone has reported on targeting of Oligarchs.
We tend to run under the assumption that the reason why Republicans have been so reticent to investigation Russian election meddling is that they don't want to go down with Trump if they find something. But in the back of my mind, I've been wondering if maybe the concerns hit a bit closer to home. Russia was getting involved heavily in conservative circles (think NRA, Cambridge Analytica, etc). Republicans may also be afraid that investigating too closely will turn up evidence that Russian money or aid went to them. I'm not suggesting willful collusion, but if it turns out Russia DID use the NRA to funnel tens of millions of dollars into the election to help Republicans, just being associated with the NRA could suddenly become politically dangerous.
3) Yesterday the Judge in one of Manafort's cases (the one where he's targeting Mueller's investigation specifically) basically told him he had no case based on Mueller's filings. Manafort is definitely fighting until the bitter end, but the vast majority of what Mueller has been letting out publicly seems all bent on putting additional pressure on Manafort to flip. It will be interesting to see if he finally cracks.
4) Mueller seems to be continuing to narrow in on Stone's ties to wikileaks. My best guess is that he's pretty darn sure that if faced with any kind of prison time, Stone will sing like a canary. Stone is abjectly self-serving and seems like an obvious potential weak link. In fairness to Stone though, he actually seems to have a pretty good alibi in regards to having had dinner with Assange. Unfortunately, that email about dinner with Assange is honestly the least of his concerns.
In terminal medical cases, doctors often deal with patients who move through “stages” that begin with denial. These so-called Kübler-Ross stages can be a long road toward acceptance. A weird form of Kübler-Ross seems to have taken hold of the media. Rather than refusing to accept indicators of impending death, many journalists and analysts seem incapable of accepting signs that the Trump presidency could survive.
That painful process was more evident Tuesday night when the Washington Post reported that special counsel Robert Mueller told the White House last month that Trump was not considered a “target” but only a “subject” of the investigation. After a year of being assured that “bombshell” developments and “smoking gun” evidence was sealing the criminal case against Trump, the dissonance was too great for many who refuse to accept the obvious meaning of this disclosure.
The U.S. Attorney’s manual defines a “subject” as a “person whose conduct is within the scope of the grand jury's investigation.” It is a designation that can change but it is also a meaningful description of the current status of an individual. Mueller at this time apparently does not believe Trump meets the definition of a target or a “person as to whom the prosecutor or the grand jury has substantial evidence linking him or her to the commission of a crime and who, in the judgment of the prosecutor, is a putative defendant.” That would have been less notable when Mueller was appointed in 2017 than it is now, after more than a year, dozens of criminal counts, hundreds of thousands of documents, and a bevy of cooperating witnesses.That Mueller does not believe there is “substantial evidence linking [Trump] to the commission of a crime” would seem to merit some, albeit grudging, recognition. However, there has been a disturbing lack of objectivity in the coverage of this investigation from the start. Throughout it, some of us have cautioned that the criminal case against Trump was far weaker than media suggested. Fired FBI Director James Comey himself told Congress that Trump was not a target of his investigation. Indeed, Trump was reportedly upset with Comey largely because Comey would not say that publicly.
When Trump fired Comey, I supported the call for a special counsel, and I still support Mueller in completing his investigation. However, the case of criminal conduct by Trump has not materially improved over the last year. Last October, Mueller brought the first indictments against former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort and his deputy, Richard Gates. Notably, none of the indictments were linked to the campaign, let alone Trump. When that obvious point was raised, we were told that it meant nothing and Mueller was likely holding back the really damaging indictments while pressuring Trump aides. Commentators continue to announce “bombshell” disclosures against Trump on a daily basis, with experts alleging clear cases for treason to obstruction to witness tampering and other crimes.
Then, in November, came the disclosure of plea agreements with former Trump national security adviser Michael Flynn and former campaign foreign policy adviser George Papadopoulos. However, these pleas were for making individual false statements to federal investigators. Neither the charges nor the narratives in the filings tied Trump or his campaign to any criminal act. Later indictments involving lawyer Alex van der Zwaan and internet operator Richard Pinedo involved a false statement and a single count of identity fraud, again unrelated to Trump or his campaign. Nevertheless, commentators insisted Mueller was just laying the groundwork for his major filing.
In February, Mueller handed down indictments of 13 Russian nationals and three Russian organizations for election-related crimes, from hacking to identity fraud. Not only did these charges not implicate Trump or his campaign, but the filing expressly stated that no one in the Trump campaign knowingly engaged Russians in these efforts. Now, Mueller reportedly has said he does not consider Trump a “target” of the criminal investigation. Looking at each of the prior filings, the disclosure would seem consistent with a lack of compelling evidence of a crime by Trump. Indeed, it would indicate Trump’s status has not changed from when Comey told Congress that Trump was not a target.
Still, some analysts immediately denied that Mueller’s disclosure was anything but bad news for Trump. On CNN, legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin insisted that “being a ‘subject’ is a very serious thing” and a “very significant designation” because it is clear “the FBI is investigating the president.” Of course, the only lower designation in a criminal investigation would be “witness.” Moreover, it was confirmed last year that Trump was being investigated.
http://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary...riminal-target
Sorry :(
That's what they said about Watergate too. But, the difference is that we know there was collusion. Its been verified by the trumps. Sure they lied and denied and covered up, but it all came out. Now its a matter of separating the criminal from the non criminal.
Edit: ya Flimbos cool too. I'm glad to see him back
Pee tape is real
I am shocked.
https://media1.giphy.com/media/EouEzI5bBR8uk/giphy.gifQuote:
Nothing bad happened to me. My quality of life isn't linked to which game forum I use.
Do you now make even more than everyone else here combined like you claimed in the past?Quote:
I hardly played Gemstone from November through Feb due to a new job.
Now that you mention it though, that must be why LNet was way less retarded for a while. Then you came back cunting things up, which is the case everywhere you go.
It would certainly be much better than you cunting things up with your butthurt fueled walls of text that no one reads.Quote:
But yeah, I guess I should have been here posting the same gif over and over again
The thing you and your crew of dildo tards are incapable of understanding is that normal people aren’t interested in having serious debates with fringe retards like you. It’s a complete waste of time. So instead you get laughed at because if you’re going to be cunting things up all day every day, the silver lining is that your extreme stupidity is entertaining.Quote:
in a thread about a subject I'm too scared to have an actual opinion on like a winner.
Keep spending hours upon hours posting massive walls of text full of false hope and butthurt that nobody reads though. I’m not being sarcastic either. I mean it when I say that. Please keep it up. I’m sure that if you do it enough, Washington will see just how upset you are over Hillary losing and they’ll impeach Trump and put Hillary in office, just for you.
Not only does your life look sad, but it actually is sad. At least it’s funny sad. Not funny for you, but for everyone else. Except maybe cwolff but he’s basically Backlash’s retarded little brother.Quote:
It's fine, I'm sure your life only looks sad.
Also:
https://media.giphy.com/media/Gt4FaBEFngjL2/giphy.gif
I would also like to add that the previous post was made while taking a massive dump.
This post is post-dump, but the previous post was mid-dump.
That fringe retarded section of the Democrat Party is their majority though. The ones in power have to placate to these morons, even though they are just using them.
The best part is: These morons have no idea they are being used to gen up rage against what they really believe was a stolen election. Hillary SHOULD be President.. they did everything they could to make that happen and if it weren't for the normal Americans, it would have come to fruition.
It's not fair!
I’m more interested in the Whirlin/Time4fun collusion than the non-existent Russia one. Why doesn’t anyone care??? A special counsel should be appointed to explore this.
You don't have to keep repeating yourself. And, uhh, you do realize the quote you made your signature (... lol), doesn't actually imply hypocrisy for the times when I do feel like getting into a back-and-forth.
I've known you've had reading comprehension problems for years, but this is an entirely new level of you falling on your face. Kudos on demonstrating the ability to keep surprising people after a decade, even if it's with the increasing depths of your stupidity. Clearly, you never went to college, but that's like third grade level reading comprehension.
Yikes.
That's really not true, though. Permanently offended snowflakes don't represent the majority of Democrats any more than Alex Jones or someone like Milo (I refuse to look up how to spell his last name) represents the majority of Republicans. Modern social media has just made it incredibly easy for a very loud minority of the population to appear to speak for their entire side, which is one of the larger downsides of social media.
I'm not so sure about that. I don't see many "normal" Democrats anymore. Their platform, candidates and direction all point to this... unless you are saying that this is all an effort to pull in that very loud minority. Their de-facto leader going into 2020 is probably going to be a 78 year old socialist. The party has this weird relationship with racist fucks like Louis Farrakhan and even elected Keith Ellison into power.
Seek psychiatric care.
The distinction here is that the right nominated, and then elected, someone on the level of Alex Jones and Milo. The left never has. Your brand of shitty, reductionist false equivalency is precisely what's given the right cover to rationalize how dysfunctional their politics have become.Quote:
Originally Posted by Audioserf
I was mainly talking about average citizens discussing politics, not the politicians themselves. It's really hard to have any discussions about issues anymore because it devolves reeeeeeealllly quick into a shouting match between far left and far right. As far as the party and platform, the sad thing to me (a dirty lib!) is it seems like the Democrats are a party without a platform at this point. There is no leader or singular voice, nobody popular enough on a national scale to get democrats out to the polls in two years. The HRC Project failed twice and they don't really stand for anything anymore. Bernie is old as hell and anything even approaching socialism is a very difficult sale in America. Running on a "We Aren't Trump" message is not going to cut it in 2020.
I don't disagree with you. I have a lot of issues with the right and Trump. But I don't believe every last person who voted Trump injects Fox News into their veins. A lot of people wanted change - any change - and saw Trump as an avenue for it. I voted for Obama twice and I held my nose and voted for Hillary (who ran on a 'I'm Not Trump' platform and entirely ignored the states and demographics Trump dominated with, and then spent 18 months complaining that she lost, for some reason). Your immediate assumption that I'm a Republican is pretty funny, though.
By all means, please point out to where I "assumed you were a Republican." I didn't. I said your brand of false equivalency - of the crazy left and the crazy right - is what gives the right cover.
Leftists buy into it, too. Is there a crazy left? Sure. Is there a crazy right? You bet. Except the crazy left is far more marginalized than the crazy right, which has taken over Fox News, and in Trump, the GOP itself.
This is big because Whirlin was mod for both forums. So he was deliberately involved with trying to destroy the PC. New light into the matter, based on time4fun, shows that others were involved as well.
So I find it a little funny that someone is involved with collusion while criticizing the President about collusion...
OMG I POSTED 3 TIMES IN A ROW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! NOW FOUR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Holy shit, I must be upset.
We're definitely going to have to figure this out. Biden vs. Bernie won't cut it and I'm hard pressed to think of one dem. that's got the charisma to win.
Not too worried about the platform yet. I'm hoping they will plant a flag for Medicare for all, min wage, unions and the dreamers. It feels like playing it safe right now. I get that its tough with the GOP controlled congress, WH and majority conservative supreme court. Its forcing a lot of defense, but I am ready to see some offense.
It read to me like you were assuming I was Republican. My mistake then!
The weird thing about the crazy left is that they haven't established a platform like Fox News has for the right. There's nobody of prominence on the left willing to be at all incendiary and passionate. I feel like the Democrats are in this constant contest to "out decorum" the Republicans and always be the adult in the room. The problem with that is you don't win elections by writing West Wing fan fiction. 2016 proved that the nice guy squad is never going to win a presidential election again. Maybe the left could use a little more crazy.
Maybe the left could use a little LESS crazy.
Right now, they are spending all their time on figuring out a provable excuse for losing in 2016 instead of looking to 2020.
Hopefully, they keep looking back and thinking that everyone is just anti-Trump like they are.
It's mainly old guard Dems looking to save face. The Clinton Wing of the party knows their time could be up and are desperately scrambling to deflect responsibility for running an awful campaign for a flawed candidate.
For what it's worth, I believe Russia exerted influence (primarily via manipulation of social media messaging), but I do not believe that influence was the reason Trump won.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bos...gkTXL/amp.html
We're learning abkut this as we get further from the election, and the trend is that the information warfare so help him win. The trend is also that trump and his people had much more contact with Russians than they admit. There are missing links to absolutely proving corruption, but the only information we get is worse, not better for the "no collusion" theory.Quote:
The study from researchers at Ohio State University finds that fake news likely played a significant role in depressing Hillary Clinton’s support on Election Day 2016. The study, which has not been peer reviewed but which may be the first look at how fake news impacted voter choices, suggests that roughly 4 percent of Barack Obama’s 2012 supporters were dissuaded from voting for Clinton in 2016 by belief in fake news stories.
Edit: I do like that the left has no alex Jones, fox news, rush Limbaugh types with any success. It gives me hope for the country.
Oh, Wrathbringer. What's that dripping from your lips? Oh! It's:
https://i.imgur.com/irBruYK.jpg
You're spewing butthurt as we speak. You just have zero self-awareness. Consult one of these:
https://i.imgur.com/Q4lU9YS.png
Or a psychiatrist.
If anything, it shows character. Some people have wayyyyyu too much time on their hands.
You’re right though. She will randomly do one of two things on lnet when she is around: 1) say something about Trump to elicit argument or 2) post in-game text about one of her blunts/toys to get attention.
None of you have shown any sign of outsmarting her. Have you noticed that she backs up her ideas with references.
Why don't you all try making sound logical arguments against what she says. I'm interested in seeing that and its noticeably absent from the right wingers here.
Hint: "hurrr, you're being successfully trolled" isn't very good trolling. I'd say "Stay retarded, Wrathbringer," but, well.. Y'know.
https://media1.giphy.com/media/mPFArc9iWXeoM/giphy.gifQuote:
Originally Posted by Wrathbringer
Except "ageism" isn't recognized as a thing except among the fringiest of the fringe left, whereas you have a decade-plus, extensive history of classic bigotry. Oh, wait! You actually thought you were making a convincing argument?
Even if I were a hypocrite (:rofl:), you'd still be a bigot, which doesn't change anything that I said. Kudos, though, on your simultaneous belief that "LAWL LIEBRUHLS ESS JAY DUBBLEYEWS ARE SNOWFLAKES" while trying to pull that with no sense of irony or shame.
Except that's your standard reply for every left-winger to whom you can't muster up a response. :)
Also:
https://i.imgur.com/YtkY319.png
Case in point: You couldn't come up with a response to your "b-b-b-but only SHIFT+1 YOU!..." nonsense being deflated. And, as always:
https://i.imgur.com/YtkY319.png
It is REALLY heating up now!
Logged in the other day and saw her telling LNet how she could out-cardio everyone. Maybe she posts her all day walls of text while out jogging or some shit.
Not that I’d think that GS playerbase is a bunch of high cardio people or something, but I’m sure I had just missed the part about how she’s won a few Boston Marathons or something.
That’s because left wingers like the retards on here literally believe that the problem isn’t with them, it’s eveeyone else who has the problem.
I don’t know how many posts in a row this makes, but it’s probably enough to be accused of having a meltdown I would assume.
https://i.imgur.com/YtkY319.png
The right-wingers are the only ones, I'm afraid, who find themselves unable to engage on the issues. And context still matters, much to your dismay.Quote:
Originally Posted by Methais
You are right: I have no answer to "NO REALLY, THIS IS IT! REAL EVIDENCE OF COLLUSION: TRUMP AND PUTIN BOTH HAVE THE LETTER U AND P IN THEIR NAMES AND THAT MEANS THE GIG IS "UP"!!!
Says the sad little snowflake that has literally been crying for 18 months straight.Quote:
We aren't dealing with a coherent, logical philosophy. Ironically, they're "feelings" people and that drives their beliefs.
Stop. You aren't even good at this.
No one is going to waste their time trying to argue with unreasonable fringe idiots. It’s a much better use of time to just laugh and get some entertainment out of it. And even if anyone did take you seriously, what would the end result be for either side? A bunch of wasted time for everyone. Nobody is going to change anyone else’s mind on here about politics and it’s not like someone in power is going to stumble on a thread from a 30-year-old text game and be like, “Wow we really need to do something about Trump look what they’re saying! Ashliana’s posts really opened my eyes let’s impeach Trump tomorrow and make Hillary president!!!” and all your side has done for the past year and a half is piss and moan and cry about Hillary losing, and that anyone who voted for Trump, or even just didn’t vote for Hillary, is a racist bigot everythingphobe.
But tell us again though why we should take you seriously instead of laughing at your ongoing butthurt fueled daily meltdowns.
That’s literally your party’s platform right now.
You, PB, etc, have all spent years -- more than a decade -- arguing with people. Whether or not you think they're "unreasonable fringe idiots" -- in your demented estimation -- is besides the point. You've already chosen to do it. But like you, I've derived entertainment from seeing you desperately try to rationalize yourself, only to fall flat and throw tantrums when we inevitably come to the conclusion of any these exchanges: slinging antipathy at each other.
"Tell us again?" Erm, I don't recall saying "you should take me seriously." I said: Methais can't back up his positions. And you can't. And demonstrating that you can't, and PB can't, and Wrathbringer can't -- is the "laughing and entertainment."Quote:
Originally Posted by Methais
I don't know what that is, so I'm going to guess no.
https://i.imgur.com/YtkY319.pngQuote:
Originally Posted by Wrathbringer
That's a great point, but there are a few minor exceptions:
1) Clinton will not be prosecuted due to the mens rea issues- which was the bulk of the reasoning offered by Comey
2) There would be a blue wave as backlash to Trump in 2018 (Democrats have outperformed partisan lean by about 14 points on average, and as of Feb around 40 seats have flipped to Dem in special elections since 2017. Also Dems have been up between 5-15 on the Generic Ballot for about a year now)
3) The warning I gave in 2016 that Trump's Russia connections were not benign, and that they were problematically extensive (Oook he's literally under investigation for them)
4) That Trump IS under investigation (which you poor little toasters repeatedly denied)
5) That Russia DID meddle in the election to help Trump win (which you poor little toasters also denied)
6) That Comey's firing was going to warrant an obstruction investigation (Oh look, according to a Republican appointee of a Republican President approved by a Republican Senate- it did!)
7) That parts of the Dossier were, in fact, correct (Oh look, they are)
8) That there was enough evidence to warrant a serious collusion investigation (Once again- according to a Republican appointee of a Republican President approved by a Republican Senate- it did!)
Meanwhile you silly little stooges keep shrieking "BUT THERE'S NO INDICTMENT FOR COLLUSION- SO YOU'RE WRONG!". Which is a very reasonable statement as long as you ignore the fact that I've been saying for some time now that there's a lot of reason to suspect that a sitting President won't be indicted, and the fact that the Mueller investigation- which is heating up VERY rapidly and which just confirmed that Trump is under criminal investigation- isn't nearly finished yet.
I suppose what I'm trying to say is- you should really keep shrieking, insulting, and gif'ing.
Because that's literally all any of you have.
Mahalo sweetie.
And you still don't have an impeachment or my $15 GOA for that matter.
https://media.tenor.com/images/3eb4b...bd68/tenor.gif
Tonight was- as usual- another full news night for the Russia investigation:
1) New Court filings tonight from the Mueller team show that Manafort was served with 7 new warrants in March. One of the warrants was for 5 AT&T phone numbers, and, according to filings is related to "ongoing investigations that are not the subject of either of the current prosecutions involving Manafort,". Four of them were redacted to protect sources and information about ongoing investigations. Keep in mind that this week we found out that Rosenstein had explicitly approved Manafort as a target in the Russia/Trump/Collusion part of the investigation. It's quite possible that we're starting to see the inklings of Manafort indictments in that direction. Or they could be unrelated but a part of the continuing work to pressure Manafort into flipping.
2) Meanwhile, McClatchy reports tonight that
Reportedly the investigators were VERY interested in transactions involving Michael Cohen. This follows reports in March that Mueller had subpoenaed the Trump Organization, and that Mueller was particularly interested in information on the Moscow Deal- which Cohen was very involved in.Quote:
Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigators this week questioned an associate of the Trump Organization who was involved in overseas deals with President Donald Trump’s company in recent years.
Armed with subpoenas compelling electronic records and sworn testimony, Mueller’s team showed up unannounced at the home of the business associate, who was a party to multiple transactions connected to Trump’s effort to expand his brand abroad, according to persons familiar with the proceedings.
It seems very likely that the latest subpoenas were based- at least in part- on the information they acquired from the Trump Org work in March.
McClatchy also reminds us:
Quote:
[Cohen's] partner in that effort [to secure a Trump Tower deal in Moscow in 2016] was Russian émigré and former Trump Organization associate Felix Sater, whose involvement in the pursuit of a Moscow-area hotel became public last year at a time when now-President Trump was insisting that he had no business interests in Russia.
This is literally the political equivalent of sitting in the third inning of a baseball game and saying that anyone who said the opposing team was going to win is an idiot because they haven't won yet.
Hopefully I don't need to explain to you how embarrassing it is to have that as your one and only argument.
I also never said that he would be impeached- you boys created that caricature to comfort yourselves. I said that he clearly colluded with Russia.