Mega-Thread: Mueller investigation

[Shalcker]

To all the Trump supporters that keep touting that NO evidence has been found on Trump so far...can i get the link to the site or new source(s) that lays out all the evidence the FBI has in this ongoing investigation?

Wait, aren't you the one who claims there is all that evidence against Trump and his campaign?

And now you ask Trump supporters to find it for you?

Also, did anyone warn the Russians that were just indicted? I mean the evidence the FBI had on them was also on this public site/source before they were indicted, I'd assume...right?

They were mentioned in October RBC investigation (which goes through most things repeated in FBI indictment), obviously that should have tipped them off - it got structure, names, emails, paypal mentions and everything...

[Dontrike]

Wait, aren't you the one who claims there is all that evidence against Trump and his campaign?

And now you ask Trump supporters to find it for you?

Yes, those that say there is no evidence needs to prove that case. Unfortunately all they have are a bunch of lies, conspiracy theories, and a misunderstanding of the written word.

[Orbitus]

Wait, aren't you the one who claims there is all that evidence against Trump and his campaign?

And now you ask Trump supporters to find it for you?

They were mentioned in October RBC investigation (which goes through most things repeated in FBI indictment), obviously that should have tipped them off - it got structure, names, emails, paypal mentions and everything...

Coming from a bot that ignores any and all evidence or tries to explain it away, that is fucking rich. You ignore all the meetings, all the monetary evidence from Trump's past, all the Kremlin ties to the people that meet with the campaign, pretty much everything.

[Bodakane]

Wait, aren't you the one who claims there is all that evidence against Trump and his campaign?

And now you ask Trump supporters to find it for you?

Hahahaha, it is no surprise to me you didn't understand what I was asking at all.

[Shalcker]

Yes, those that say there is no evidence needs to prove that case. Unfortunately all they have are a bunch of lies, conspiracy theories, and a misunderstanding of the written word.

It is really strange to ask those who say there is no evidence to provide that evidence; evidence gathered in one place, no less.

- - - Updated - - -

Hahahaha, it is no surprise to me you didn't understand what I was asking at all.

What are you asking then?

"can i get the link to the site or new source(s) that lays out all the evidence the FBI has in this ongoing investigation" - plenty of evidence have already been released/leaked to media, as either things FBI have gathered but didn't produce indictments (like Trump transition team communications) or things they are already pressing charges on.

Both sides are drip-fed partial info that keeps them agitated and sure that their side winning is just around the corner.

[Bodakane]

It is really strange to ask those who say there is no evidence to provide that evidence; evidence gathered in one place, no less.

- - - Updated - - -

What are you asking then?

"can i get the link to the site or new source(s) that lays out all the evidence the FBI has in this ongoing investigation" - plenty of evidence have already been released/leaked to media, as either things FBI have gathered but didn't produce indictments (like Trump transition team communications) or things they are already pressing charges on.

Both sides are drip-fed partial info that keeps them agitated and sure that their side winning is just around the corner.

I feel like I found the first step of creating the "captcha" to confuse Russian bots, lol.

Let's try this from a different angle:

You and your ilk, keep screaming there's no evidence to Russian interfering/collusion/etc. You all keep saying that, because you haven't read about any evidence (until you do, then the argument changes from No Evidence X to No Evidence to Xx, so and so forth).

So that means one of two things only:

Either....

1. You guys think LEA release all their evidence in an on going case.

OR

2. You guys have access to all the FBI's files and can see there's no evidence.

And before you start your typical circumventing bullshit, this has nothing to do with believing what the evidence that has been leaked says or not. This has to do with the VERY specific argument that there is NO EVIDENCE. You guys cannot say there's no evidence unless you believe 1 or 2.

[Dontrike]

It is really strange to ask those who say there is no evidence to provide that evidence; evidence gathered in one place, no less.

No, it isn't. You and others need to prove how he is innocent. There is always evidence of being innocent, but not one time have you or anyone else proven that by using non-partisan sources. You yourself are biased for your country and therefore need to prove your side even more. You have shilled quite a bit for Putin and your country, which only makes your debate harder to prove.

If there was evidence of Trump being innocent they would have used it by now, but every time a new indictment or plea deal comes, each time a new bit of info pops its head out of the ground, it always points to him and his dealings, it always makes Trump try his hardest to stop it, and it shows he is in fact guilty of something. If he wasn't he wouldn't be trying to hard to stop it.

Explain that to us, miss, if he's so innocent why does he try so hard to stop it? Why does he attack the FBI? Why does he do any of it? You and your ilk have never been able to explain that.

[Mormolyce]

Well, forcibly removing communists from fixed rotary wing aircraft is a good thing, but I digress.

infracted - trolling

Remember when you were the reasonable one?

I'm not even trolling for once, it's legitimately sad.

[Shalcker]

You and your ilk, keep screaming there's no evidence to Russian interfering/collusion/etc. You all keep saying that, because you haven't read about any evidence (until you do, then the argument changes from No Evidence X to No Evidence to Xx, so and so forth).

No, it is in fact because I read all evidence to date and come to different conclusions (as far as Russian meddling/collusion with Trump goes).

I do not ignore evidence.

And before you start your typical circumventing bullshit, this has nothing to do with believing what the evidence that has been leaked says or not. This has to do with the VERY specific argument that there is NO EVIDENCE. You guys cannot say there's no evidence unless you believe 1 or 2.

Why are you pushing similar bullshit? "No evidence" means no evidence known to date (and people like Tijuana even spell it outright), not that no evidence could possibly exist anywhere.

- - - Updated - - -

No, it isn't. You and others need to prove how he is innocent.

No, that's not how it works. It's "innocent until proven guilty".

Plus, i have no desire to "prove Trump innocent" - it is completely irrelevant to me if he is or isn't guilty.

[Dontrike]

No, that's not how it works. It's "innocent until proven guilty".

Someone accused doesn't sit there and do nothing, they have to prove that they had nothing to do with what they are accused of, by proving where they were and potentially their actions. If you are accused of murdering someone you need to prove that you weren't there, or if you did kill them you need to prove if it was self defense or not.

Plus, i have no desire to "prove Trump innocent" - it is completely irrelevant to me if he is or isn't guilty.

Then why do you keep sticking up for him? Seems weird to keep doing that when you have no desire and that it's irrelevant to you.

[Bodakane]

No, it is in fact because I read all evidence to date and come to different conclusions (as far as Russian meddling/collusion with Trump goes).

I do not ignore evidence.

Why are you pushing similar bullshit? "No evidence" means no evidence known to date (and people like Tijuana even spell it outright), not that no evidence could possibly exist anywhere.

- - - Updated - - -

No, that's not how it works. It's "innocent until proven guilty".

Plus, i have no desire to "prove Trump innocent" - it is completely irrelevant to me if he is or isn't guilty.

Read this slowly, ask an adult for help if necessary.

You do not know what evidence they have. NO law enforcement agency releases their evidence to the public. The claims of no evidence is complete and utter bullshit.

[Belize]

I think it’s a propeller. What doesn’t move and rotates?

Is this a riddle?

Hmmm...

A Trump supporter that flails to desperately spin the facts, while failing and going nowhere!

[Captain N]

Is this a riddle?

Hmmm...

A Trump supporter that flails to desperately spin the facts, while failing and going nowhere!

Oooo I know this one....it was on Final Jeopardy.

What is a Ransath or Tijuana or a SuperTony?

infracted - trolling

[mvaliz]

Remember when you were the reasonable one?

I'm not even trolling for once, it's legitimately sad.

I don't. He's always been horrible with only a grain of possibility in him. =/

The sad part is this that he's doing what all the dumpsters are doing ATM, believing a) they're the victim of b) a massive conspiracy that surrounds them all that nobody wants to see. =/

infracyed - minor flaming

[Felya]

I don't. He's always been horrible with only a grain of possibility in him. =/

The sad part is this that he's doing what all the dumpsters are doing ATM, believing a) they're the victim of b) a massive conspiracy that surrounds them all that nobody wants to see. =/

The part where we need to be punished for it, is what is really messed up.

Oh and he was normal before Trump. I remember him always doing those weird (only because I don’t understand) hunger games, forum events. Then Trump wins and the guy just goes off the rails... people he would be mocking around with, now make him happy he can own a gun. Of all the people who snapped on Trump’s victory day, Tony fell the farthest. Hooked, Mage21, Panther and Jeezy all snapped, but either have returned to their previous scam or just never stopped. Tony went from a reasonable dude I talked shit with, to someone I cannot really reply to...

[Breccia]

You know what's worse than Trump ally and former least popular governor in America Chris Christie saying there is no public evidence of collusion "to this point", mirroring the FBI?

When Rush Limbaugh of all people says Trump should stop saying he's been vindicated.

Man, even Trump's closest allies are starting to pull away from the crazy. Wonder if they regret their life choices? Collusion or not, Trump is spewing falsehoods and acting demented (as in, acting like someone who has dementia). At what point do you jump ship?

- - - Updated - - -

And 538 has an update:



The headline is literally The Russia Investigation Is Moving Really Freaking Fast.

Our analysis of special counsel probes in the modern era, starting in 1979, puts Mueller’s investigation in select company for producing criminal charges at all — a majority of the investigations over the past four decades ended without charges being filed against anyone.

The total number of individuals charged in the investigation is now up to 18,2 including an indictment and two guilty pleas from last fall. One of the defendants from last fall, Rick Gates, is reportedly finalizing a plea deal, which would signal that he’s ready to cooperate with the investigation.

Historically, major special counsel investigations that have led to charges have lasted for years, with indictments and guilty pleas trickling out as an inquiry gains momentum. So more charges seem likely to come.

Take a look at the above chart, though. With one exception, the time between the last indictment, and the special investigation coming to an end, is over a year. Multiple years in most cases. Every time Mueller comes back with more indictments, re-set the clock.

[Crissi]

We are not derailing the thread with discussing and insulting other posters

[Tijuana]

No, it isn't. You and others need to prove how he is innocent. There is always evidence of being innocent, but not one time have you or anyone else proven that by using non-partisan sources. You yourself are biased for your country and therefore need to prove your side even more. You have shilled quite a bit for Putin and your country, which only makes your debate harder to prove.

If there was evidence of Trump being innocent they would have used it by now, but every time a new indictment or plea deal comes, each time a new bit of info pops its head out of the ground, it always points to him and his dealings, it always makes Trump try his hardest to stop it, and it shows he is in fact guilty of something. If he wasn't he wouldn't be trying to hard to stop it.

Explain that to us, miss, if he's so innocent why does he try so hard to stop it? Why does he attack the FBI? Why does he do any of it? You and your ilk have never been able to explain that.

You can't factually prove a negative. Science is real, whether you believe in it or not.

[GennGreymane]

You can't factually prove a negative. Science is real, whether you believe in it or not.

Which science we discussing here?

[Tijuana]

Which science we discussing here?

The ability to prove a negative, or the lack thereof, is foundational to the scientific process. Everyone ought to have learned that you can't prove a negative, and the class they would have been taught that, is science class.