Mega-Thread: Mueller investigation

[Orbitus]

And this is true. And the example of this is the Prague's visit. And you have just shown that you don't read even your own sources and just assume that they contain something like "Orbitus, you are right".

I know I am right. I have used that source before when ignorant and gullible people like you have claimed the Steele dossier is "fake", or "false, or "wrong". But you continue your support for Trump. I am sure it will pay out eventually. It might be after he loses in 2020 and is led off in handcuffs, but it might pay out eventually.

[Shalcker]

A grand total of one thing? Wow. You sure showed us the whole thing is false based on one thing. For someone that goes on and on about this being false I expected so much more from you than ONE thing. This is just disappointing.

As i said, none are proven.

I could go point-by-point, but that would take quite a while and you haven't shown yourself to be worth the effort.

The fact you said the whole thing hasn't been proven and yet only target one thing really shows you don't know what you're talking about.

Okay, if you're sure that Steele Dossier have been vindicated it should be easy enough for you to show which part of Mueller report supports Steele Dossier allegations.

[Orbitus]

As i said, none are proven.

I could go point-by-point, but that would take quite a while and you haven't shown yourself to be worth the effort.

Okay, if you're sure that Steele Dossier have been vindicated it should be easy enough for you to show which part of Mueller report supports Steele Dossier allegations.

Except, you know, what I linked.

[rda]

I know I am right. I have used that source before when ignorant and gullible people like you have claimed the Steele dossier is "fake", or "false, or "wrong". But you continue your support for Trump. I am sure it will pay out eventually. It might be after he loses in 2020 and is led off in handcuffs, but it might pay out eventually.

Sum total, you do what the media does - say or repeat something that is BS, get hit with a proof that this was BS, don't ever acknowledge that this was BS, say a lot of words about how Trump supporters or whoever it is that is bothering you are despicable and bla bla bla, and then move on to saying other BS.

[Shalcker]

Except, you know, what I linked.

Volume and Page, please.

[Bodakane]

Sum total, you do what the media does - say or repeat something that is BS, get hit with a proof that this was BS, don't ever acknowledge that this was BS, say a lot of words about how Trump supporters or whoever it is that is bothering you are despicable and bla bla bla, and then move on to saying other BS.

This is rich coming from a trump supporter.

[Orbitus]

Sum total, you do what the media does - say or repeat something that is BS, get hit with a proof that this was BS, don't ever acknowledge that this was BS, say a lot of words about how Trump supporters or whoever it is that is bothering you are despicable and bla bla bla, and then move on to saying other BS.

I haven't seen any proof from you. In fact, all I have seen from you, is a lot of Trump supporting, with no basis in fucking reality.

- - - Updated - - -

Volume and Page, please.

MY FUCKING LINK. Can you read? The list out things that have been confirmed.

[Shalcker]

MY FUCKING LINK. Can you read? The list out things that have been confirmed.

You linked article from January 2019, before Mueller report, containing multiple media speculations.

Please go with Mueller report instead.

[rda]

I haven't seen any proof from you. In fact, all I have seen from you, is a lot of Trump supporting, with no basis in fucking reality.

Some sourced proof from me to you then, as a parting gift.

Mueller's report, vol 2, page 139.

"At that time, Cohen understood Congress’s interest in him to be focused on the allegations in the Steele reporting concerning a meeting Cohen allegedly had with Russian officials in Prague during the campaign. Cohen had never traveled to Prague and was not concerned about those allegations, which he believed were provably false."

I bolded the key phrase so that you don't miss it like you missed most of what was said in your own source 20 minutes before.

[Grapemask]

You are trying so damn hard.

No, when you are working for a company, you are making them money. Because you are working for them in order to make them money. The pile of money is largely the same. This all is not the case with investigations.

I have a hard time telling the exact proportion of your posts that was sincere and useful vs drivel like the quote above, but it doesn't feel big.

No. This is baffling absurdity. Your entire presence in this thread is to offer bafflingly absurd arguments and anti-logic. And we know why, based on your background mentioned in another thread.

Go be dishonest somewhere else. You already played the victim card and cried about how you were going to go run away because no one would appreciate your nonsense. You're right, we don't, so do what you promised and go.

[Dontrike]

Okay, if you're sure that Steele Dossier have been vindicated it should be easy enough for you to show which part of Mueller report supports Steele Dossier allegations.

Nope, that's not how this works. You made the claim and now you have to back it up and the fact you still haven't continues to show I was correct with you moving goalposts.

[Shalcker]

Nope, that's not how this works. You made the claim and now you have to back it up and the fact you still haven't continues to show I was correct with you moving goalposts.

Nope, my goalpost always was that everything Steele couldn't have possibly sourced from publicly available information remains unproven. I have even given specific example of such unproven claim.

It was response to claim that Steele Dossier have been proven, and that saying otherwise would be a lie. Single example already destroys that particular line of thought.

Now, you could try to undermine my overall viewpoint by counter-examples from Mueller report that actually support Steele Dossier - but given your unwillingness to do that, i would assume you're arguing in bad faith and presume no such examples exist, thus proving my point.

[Gorsameth]

You linked article from January 2019, before Mueller report, containing multiple media speculations.

Please go with Mueller report instead.

Why does it have to come from Muellers report when Mueller's job was not to investigate the Steele dossier?

[Bodakane]

Why does it have to come from Muellers report when Mueller's job was not to investigate the Steele dossier?

Because, refuting Steele Dossier by any means necessary nets a 2 turnip payment.

[Shalcker]

Why does it have to come from Muellers report when Mueller's job was not to investigate the Steele dossier?

Well, who's job it was then? Who supposedly validated it's finding, and where can i read their report?

- - - Updated - - -

Because, refuting Steele Dossier by any means necessary nets a 2 turnip payment.

How many turnips do you get for claiming it to be entirely true?

[DocSavageFan]

You were the same person that said it was acceptable Barr did the same thing in the same period of time. Weird how it's too hard now, but so easy before.

Sarcasm my friend...it's called sarcasm.

[Breccia]

A senile old man went on CNN and NBC and said there was nothing wrong with a campaign taking information from Russians.

Which immediately raises multiple questions.

1) Federal campaigns cannot take anything of value from foreign sources. So what is Giulliani trying to say? The information they wanted in the Trump Tower meeting, and WikiLeaks, both clearly had value, based on how they approached them.

2) Why did they lie about it?

3) Why didn't they tell law enforcement they were approached by Russians trying to do something illegal?

4) Even if we assume their pushed narrative (even they don't believe it, they've been caught and are stalling) there's the issue of morality.

Tapper pushed back on Giuliani's claim, questioning whether Giuliani would accept information from Russians against a candidate if he were running for office.

"I probably wouldn't. I wasn't asked," Giuliani responded. "I would have advised, just out of excess of caution, don't do it."

"But you're saying there was nothing wrong with doing that," Tapper interjected.

"There's no crime," Giuliani replied. "We're going to get into morality? That isn't what prosecutors look at — morality."

That sounds like admission they knew it was the wrong thing to do, breaking the law or not. Which, of course, lines up with the fact that they repeated lied about it. Generally speaking, if I do something I know is neither illegal nor immoral, and someone asks me about it, I tend not to lie and say "no, I didn't do that" because there'd be no ramifications if I was caught. Because it's not illegal or immoral.

Still, Giulliani admitting the move was immoral isn't a great step here.

Giulliani also called Mueller's report a one-sided cheap shot. He did not say the contents were lies.

"That was stupid. Giulliani going on CNN or NBC or ABC or CBS or PBS/NPR or [long list of media sources] was stupid because they are all Fake News Media and perjury trap conspirators with the libruls. He should have gone on the only real news out there, FOX News."

He did. Wanna see the video?

"Uh..."

No really, it's good. There's a bit where Giullani calls the Mueller report "proof" that there was no obstruction and Chris Wallace fucking bitchslaps him.

But, mayor, that’s not true. The Mueller report makes it clear, especially on the issue of obstruction, that he’s leaving it to Congress.

Naturally, Giulliani immediately caved like a bitch.

You do not apply a standard of exoneration to anyone. Whether it’s a president, an impeachment. You can’t exonerate. Exoneration means proving a negative.

First of all, @cubby you're on.

Second of all, that is direct contradiction of Trump's statement on the subject. Even Team Trump is now saying "total exonoration" is just flat-out false, and they did it on FOX News.

[Gorsameth]

It's simple. Giuliani is lying.

To quote Mueller

To that end, federal campaignfinance law broadly prohibits foreign nationals from making contributions, donations,
expenditures, or other disbursements in connection with federal , state, or local candidate elections,
and prohibits anyone from soliciting, accepting, or receiving such contributions or donations.

The main reason Trump Jr. isn't currently in jail is because the law (unfortunately) requires 'Wilful intent', which means you need to know the law exists before you can be found breaking it.
He was saved by his stupidity.

Giuliani can go on air and lie because its just an interview and doesn't hold legal consequences.

[Breccia]

Giuliani can go on air and lie because its just an interview and doesn't hold legal consequences.

Of course. Same reason Trump can lie in SotU and Sanders can lie from the podium.

I just find it both telling and hilarious -- tellarious? Helling? I'll work on it -- that Giulliani flat-out contradicted Trump on FOX News, because he was backpedalling and tripped.

Oh, and I don't know if it was brought up before, but, while defending "no collusion" the rabid fanbase have something new to choke down. See, apparently friends of Putin gave a US-Russia cooperation plan and handed it to Kushner, who handed it to Tillerson. This was between the election and inauguration, so at the very minimum it's shady as shit. Also Prince was involved, so, that's neat.

Kirill Dmitriev, the chief executive officer of Russia's sovereign wealth fund, was among the Russians who tried to make contact with the incoming administration. In early December, a business associate steered Dmitriev to Erik Prince, a supporter of the Trump Campaign and an associate of senior Trump advisor Steve Bannon. Dmitriev and Prince later met face-to-face in January 2017 in the Seychelles and discussed U.S.-Russia relations. During the same period, another business associate introduced Dmitriev to a friend of Jared Kushner who had not served on the Campaign or the Transition Team

Dmitriev and Kushner's friend collaborated on a short written reconciliation plan for the United States and Russia, which Dmitriev implied had been cleared through Putin. The friend gave that proposal to Kushner before the inauguration, and Kushner later gave copies to Bannon and incoming Secretary of State Rex Tillerson

"Which Fake News -- "

That's a direct quote from the Mueller report.

That sure sounds like collusion to me. Hey, remember the press conference where Trump openly said he was working with Russia pre-inauguration? No? That's because he never gave one. So this information was kept secret, because it was either illegal or unethical or both. Oh, right, Flynn got fired for doing that.

"But we have no proof Trump worked with that plan in any way."

Interesting point. What was in the plan?

"Uh...we never saw it."

Exactly. It's quite possible the plan, which Kushner willingly took and brought to Tillerson, was 17 pages of Tetris doodles and "give us Syria" written in turnip juice, and as such, was immediately thrown out. Or, it's possible the report said "If you undo the sanctions and resist the new ones, we will work with you on oil prices" which is 100% what's been happening. We don't know, because Kushner, Prince, Tillerson and especially Russia never mentioned this once in public.

Oh, and *ahem* Team Trump didn't report this foreign contact at the time. But what else is new?

[Zaydin]

The least House Democrats should do is censure Trump. Sure, it might be little more than a legal slap on the wrist but it'd still be more consequences than he's ever faced in his life and it'd be a huge pulsating asterisk next to his name in the history books. Well, ANOTHER asterisk next to his name, along with the ones noting how he only won due to Russian meddling.

Plus you know he'd be raging about it forever.