Mega-Thread: Mueller investigation

[Wyrt]

At this point they need to be shuttered. That is if they don't get brought down by sexual harassment cases first.

They need to be taken down. They aren't news, they're bullshit fear mongering propaganda trying to incite violence.

[Orbitus]

No, no; no cop-out "a lot of them".

Please name ones in the article before i follow your link to be sure you actually read it.

Or more likely nothing actually happened.

Plenty of things are theoretically possible and didn't happen.

Sorry, the only one fucking copping out, is you. I am not going to hold your fucking hand and lead you through the article.

- - - Updated - - -

McCarthy's on a roll lately. Just dropped another one. I'll spare you, but if any of you out there lean right, it's good stuff.

To everyone else that lives in this place called Reality, McCarthy is writing nothing but bullshit fiction.

- - - Updated - - -

Somehow missed this.

We will evaluate the claims in each report individually. It’s critical to note that these claims are for the most part not verified, and should not be considered as such.

Yeah, this is from October. A lot of it has been confirmed by the FBI. Before and since then.

- - - Updated - - -

At this point they need to be shuttered. That is if they don't get brought down by sexual harassment cases first.

I wish Disney would have taken all of Fox and shut down Fox News. It would have been a great day.

[NYC17]

McCarthy's on a roll lately. Just dropped another one. I'll spare you, but if any of you out there lean right, it's good stuff.

"If anyone doesn't want their views challenged, but need their fragile belief structure reinforced by partisan hacks who trade in conspiracy theories under the rather comical guise of legal analysis, read McCarthy's latest".


Google translate.

[Dacien]

Yeah, this is from October. A lot of it has been confirmed by the FBI. Before and since then.

Do you have a link I can look at?

[Stormspark]

They need to be taken down. They aren't news, they're bullshit fear mongering propaganda trying to incite violence.

Plus, at this point, it's libel/slander.

[Orbitus]

Do you have a link I can look at?

Already linked it.
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_a...roborated.html

This was from September, and it's just the list that has been corroborated.

[Nihilist74]

https://politics.theonion.com/robert...tru-1821395781

[Dacien]

Already linked it.
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_a...roborated.html

This was from September, and it's just the list that has been corroborated.

This article seems to say much of the same things as the later Washington Post article in a different way: much is unverified, some of what remains is corroborated.

This is not the same as it being "mostly confirmed".

[Orbitus]

This article seems to say much of the same things as the later Washington Post article in a different way: much is unverified, some of what remains is corroborated.

This is not the same as it being "mostly confirmed".

Sorry, but I am calling bullshit. But you believe bullshit like Andrew McCarthy.

[Shadowmelded]

Yes, McCarthy mentions the due diligence of these courts and the FBI at the very beginning of his article you politely linked.

I find these arguments compelling. I'm going to shock you right now, but I'm right-wing. And so these arguments are compelling to me. They're hideous to you, but compelling to me. That doesn't mean I unquestioningly support any narrative, I'm bringing it up on a politics subforum for discussion, and so far the best rebuttal I've read is that nevermind his opinion, he's a hack with an agenda.

Because he is a hack that's weaponizing his past profession to spread disinformation. Take the first sentence in the article NYC linked, it already assumes that the dossier was used for the FISA warrant with nothing to back that assertion up, and only gets worse from there. I mean can you not tell how disingenuous he is when he's unwilling to take ownership of the theory he's putting forward and has to frame it as coming from somewhere else?

[Deja Thoris]

This article seems to say much of the same things as the later Washington Post article in a different way: much is unverified, some of what remains is corroborated.

This is not the same as it being "mostly confirmed".

Mueller has the dossier and he has the combined resources of most of the wests intelligence agencies.

I'd bet my life 10 times over that a lot of that stuff has been verified or dismissed by now.

[Shalcker]

Sorry, the only one fucking copping out, is you. I am not going to hold your fucking hand and lead you through the article.

Then you didn't read it. Dismissed.

You got no idea what was actually confirmed or not, you just want to believe headlines.

[Marcellus1986]

Then you didn't read it. Dismissed.

You got no idea what was actually confirmed or not, you just want to believe headlines.

Sorry if we believe the free western press and not MMO-Champ’s resident Kremlin shill.

Your borscht is getting cold, comrade.

[Shalcker]

Sorry if we believe the free western press and not MMO-Champ’s resident Kremlin shill.

You believe headlines.

You don't actually read and understand articles if you cannot explain what they are saying.

[Marcellus1986]

You believe headlines.

You don't actually read and understand articles if you cannot explain what they are saying.

That most of the dossier has, in fact, been corroborated barring the most salacious claims has been common knowledge for months. The only people claiming it’s fake are Kremlinbots and Trump supporters.

[Shalcker]

That most of the dossier has, in fact, been corroborated barring the most salacious claims has been common knowledge for months.

So, no "most"; which parts exactly were corroborated and how?

The only people claiming it’s fake are Kremlinbots and Trump supporters.

My only claim is that you don't actually understand what was corroborated. Hence you keep repeating "most".

[Orbitus]

Then you didn't read it. Dismissed.

You got no idea what was actually confirmed or not, you just want to believe headlines.

Yeah, sorry if I don't believe a Russian trying to defend dear leader Putin and his fucking cockholster Trump.

[Marcellus1986]

So, no "most"; which parts exactly were corroborated and how?

My only claim is that you don't actually understand what was corroborated. Hence you keep repeating "most".

Read the article(s).

You’ve been at this circular arguing nonsense since the Ukraine threads way back when. It wasn’t witty then and it isn’t now.

[Shalcker]

Read the article(s).

So you support my assertion that you don't know. You cannot even name any examples.
You just think "most were corroborated" because that's what you like to believe.

That's fine. Everyone is entitled to their own beliefs.

You’ve been at this circular arguing nonsense since the Ukraine threads way back when. It wasn’t witty then and it isn’t now.

There is nothing circular about Americans often not actually reading or understanding articles they link...

[Marcellus1986]

So you support my assertion that you don't know. You cannot even name any examples.
You just think "most were corroborated" because that's what you like to believe.

That's fine. Everyone is entitled to their own beliefs.

There is nothing circular about Americans often not actually reading or understanding articles they link...

Your “assertion” is, quite frankly, bullshit; as are pretty much all assertions or arguments you make.

- - - Updated - - -

So since Shalcker had activated into this thread, I guess it is safe to assume that some big revelation about the investigation is about to hit.

More like his Russia algorithm went off and he had to run to white knight Putin.