Gagging for it (SCO Thread v. 29) Update Mueller Report Released

[Andy Capp]

LOL @ you unironically posting a tweet about "toxic tribalistic blindness".

 

[andnowweknow]

You are a strange guy!

You defend abhorrent liars using otherwise intellectual arguments that are really just technical defenses of said liars. That's pretty strange if you ask me, spending as much time and energy as you do doing that.

 

[MikeMcMann]

That is the face of a man that is NOT equipped for prison.

Agreed.

And at his age and stage of life why would he risk it? Why would he even contemplate a lie that would send him to prison? Loyalty? Would Trump go to prison for any of them over loyalty? I think not.

But what he could do, short of giving full truthfulness on anything that has a book keeping entry attached to it, that he cannot deny, is claim no memory or recollection on a lot of things. That is not considered lying even if they pull up evidence after. You can just suddenly 'remember' with the prompting.

So that is the question. Does he 'actively' give information based on ALL he knows, or does he just honestly cop to anything that they put in front of him that he knows but say nothing more than that.

I think they just need to give him full immunity, as he really is not the target here, and then they can compel him to testify fully. If they think he is lying or holds back he can lose that immunity and be charged on the prior stuff he admitted to while under immunity. It really raises the bar as Manafort found out.

 

[waiguoren]

Not as strange as you worshipping a , but you do you. I'll be here to remind you anytime you forget.

Thanks!

Wait, I already forgot. Could you remind me again?

LOL @ you unironically posting a tweet about "toxic tribalistic blindness".

Which tribe am I a part of? The Trump tribe? Not a fan. The Dershowitz tribe? He likes to defend the accused. Me too. I'd be with him if he were defending Jussie Smollet. Get it?

You defend abhorrent liars using otherwise intellectual arguments that are really just technical defenses of said liars. That's pretty strange if you ask me, spending as much time and energy as you do doing that.

How do you know how much time and energy I spend?


In this case, there is a mob of tribalist crazies in this thread whose main motivation in life appears to be a desire to witness the failure of Donald Trump. This time of nutty tribalist behavior is very interesting to me, and that's why I come in to watch you people make fools of yourselves.

I was taking a break from politics during the Hillary/Benghazi thing, but I imagine I would have had an anti-Hillary Clinton mob after me if I had been posting more. Without studying it carefully, it seems there were a lot of crazy conspiracy theories about that event, just like there are about Trump/Russia in this thread.

Unfortunately, you appear to be one of the crazies. The evidence: that retarded Roger Stone bet you took with me.

I like you though. I am sure you will learn from your mistakes.

 

[andnowweknow]

Thanks!

Wait, I already forgot. Could you remind me again?



Which tribe am I a part of? The Trump tribe? Not a fan. The Dershowitz tribe? He likes to defend the accused. Me too. I'd be with him if he were defending Jussie Smollet. Get it?



How do you know how much time and energy I spend?


In this case, there is a mob of tribalist crazies in this thread whose main motivation in life appears to be a desire to witness the failure of Donald Trump. This time of nutty tribalist behavior is very interesting to me, and that's why I come in to watch you people make fools of yourselves.

I was taking a break from politics during the Hillary/Benghazi thing, but I imagine I would have had an anti-Hillary Clinton mob after me if I had been posting more. Without studying it carefully, it seems there were a lot of crazy conspiracy theories about that event, just like there are about Trump/Russia in this thread.

Unfortunately, you appear to be one of the crazies. The evidence: that retarded Roger Stone bet you took with me.

I like you though. I am sure you will learn from your mistakes.

how did I know you'd spin the spirit of my point off into a question impossible to quantify or qualify? That's a rhetorical question. The answer is a lot of time, or you're just parroting breitbart or some other shit tier news org and copying and pasting. You can choose how that's seen. You did spend less energy in truth these past few months, since the blue wave you said will never happen swallowed the house beyond everyone's projections. That was rich.

You believe what Donald Trump says, at this point it's up in the air as to the truth and you're on the side of Trump and complete morons like Roger Stone. I'm fine being the "crazy" on the on the other side of that sociopathy led idiocy inducing narcissism project.

And you're a ridiculous human being saying that bet on Stone is actually going to go in your favor. You set up some weird intricate bet with essentially no expiration date and all sorts of caveats...and now we find out Stone was telling Trump about wiki leaks email dumps prior to them happening. And before you say Cohen is a liar, remember he's a liar who lied at the behest of a liar to protect said liars who you are defending...based on believing them and nothing else.

Last, why no Dershowitz love lately? His opportunism and loner dumbfuckery devil's advocate nonsense is too much for even your disingenuous bullshit meter? Lol.

 

[MikeMcMann]

I find this line so laughable when the Russia narrative has already been established.

 

[waiguoren]

you're on the side of Trump and complete morons like Roger Stone

I don't see the world as having only "two sides". That's the difference between me and you. It's also the reason you will lose our bet.

Last, why no Dershowitz love lately? His opportunism and loner dumbfuckery devil's advocate nonsense is too much for even your disingenuous bullshit meter? Lol.

Been busy and haven't been paying attention. I'm sure Dershowitz is still fighting the good fight though.

 

[waiguoren]

I find this line so laughable when the Russia narrative has already been established.

Trump-Russia collusion is a myth and a conspiracy theory.

 

[BarryDillon]

Trump-Russia collusion is a myth and a conspiracy theory.

Laughably dumb. Trump/Russia criminal conspiracy(as it should be called) is absolutely true. It's just a matter of political will. This should be a really crazy year.

 

[MikeMcMann]

Trump-Russia collusion is a myth and a conspiracy theory.

You are amongst those who need to actually read the Mueller mandate.

The investigation was started to look for "any links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals ...associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump;".

Those 'links' and/or 'coordination' are what are otherwise known as 'collusion'.

The "campaign" involves not just Trump but his Campaign Chair and others in the campaign.

Sorry but the 'collusion' is already established.

 

[waiguoren]

Laughably dumb. Trump/Russia criminal conspiracy(as it should be called) is absolutely true. It's just a matter of political will. This should be a really crazy year.

Any specific predictions?

Trump won't be indicted.

 

[bobgeese]

Laughably dumb. Trump/Russia criminal conspiracy(as it should be called) is absolutely true. It's just a matter of political will. This should be a really crazy year.

Well, if the guy who joined Wednesday say so...


<{cruzshake}>

 

[waiguoren]

Well, if the guy who joined Wednesday say so...


<{cruzshake}>

Is @BarryDillon @HomerThompson? Seems likely.

Hey Homer, how are you feeling about our "Trump will be removed from office on or before December 31, 2019" bet?

 

[waiguoren]

You are amongst those who need to actually read the Mueller mandate.

The investigation was started to look for "any links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals ...associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump;".

Those 'links' and/or 'coordination' are what are otherwise known as 'collusion'.

The "campaign" involves not just Trump but his Campaign Chair and others in the campaign.

Sorry but the 'collusion' is already established.

I'll bet I've posted that mandate on these forums more times than you have. I am familiar with it.

You are playing a word game. You and I are both playing it. Many anti-Trump people started using "collusion" incorrectly a couple years ago. Trump seized the term and used it to define the debate in a way that he will win. He did the same for "fake news". It's an awesome tactic.

People like you, who hate Trump, are now going insane because the Mueller report is incoming and will of course fail to show "collusion".

 

[MikeMcMann]

I'll bet I've posted that mandate on these forums more times than you have. I am familiar with it.

You are playing a word game. You and I are both playing it. Many anti-Trump people started using "collusion" incorrectly a couple years ago. Trump seized the term and used it to define the debate in a way that he will win. He did the same for "fake news". It's an awesome tactic.

People like you, who hate Trump, are now going insane because the Mueller report is incoming and will of course fail to show "collusion".

You'd probably lose that bet. I've likely posted it more and represented it more accurately and honestly than you.

This is the FACT of the issue "any links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals ...associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump;".

That is what Mueller is investigating and looking for. It has been THAT since he started. You are desperately trying to change the narrative because you can NOW see he has already established that with Manafort and others charges. So you now resort to disingenuous spin in an attempt to say that is not what the focus was and instead what you want it to be, is.

Your lies and spin won't work. It cannot work in the face of very CLEAR and WRITTEN mandate that can be quoted. YES, 'links' and 'coordination' are in FACT the collusion that was indicated. And YES 'links' and 'coordination' are already established.

 

[MikeMcMann]

Just to be clear about what @waiguoren and other Trumpsters are trying to do here.

You have seen the Trump and his surrogates arguments morphing over time. The very first line in the Mueller investigation is to investigate this...

"any links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals ...associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump;".

Trump and his surrogates for almost a year and half proclaimed no 'links' to Russia, no discussions with Russia, no connections to Russia. THAT has been the battle ground of this debate.

As Mueller has proceeded he has established all sorts of 'links' and all sorts of 'coordination'. Yes the elements of collusion are established. The Trumptards see that.

So now you are starting to see the Trumptards try and pretend this was not the debate despite this being the leading debate on this forum for over a year now. As we prepare to see the Mueller report dropped they are desperate to say 'links' and 'coordination' and the many indictments and guilty findings based upon that are somehow proof Mueller failed. LOL. Again the very first imperative in his mandate now proven would be a failure by him.

Don't let them do that. Don't let them spin it. It is the very first line of the Mueller Mandate. It is exactly what he set out to establish or find. And in establishing, NO that is not a failure by him and proof somehow Trump was correct.


(edit: here are many of the types of statements that spurred the Mueller Investigation that Trumptards are trying to spin that if established prove Trump correct.)

..., 2016: Trump spokeswoman Hope Hicks gave the Associated Press a blanket denial of Trump campaign contacts with Russia, stating, “It never happened. There was no communication between the campaign and any foreign entity during the campaign.”

"It never happened," she told the AP. "There was no communication between the campaign and any foreign entity during the campaign."

...July 24, 2016: Paul Manafort appeared on ABC’s This Week and George Stephanopoulos asked him “Are there any ties between Mr. Trump, you or your campaign and Putin and his regime?” To which Manafort responded, “No, there are not. That’s absurd. And you know, there’s no basis to it.”

...er 18, 2016: Kellyanne Conway went on “Face the Nation,” and John Dickerson asked her, “Did anyone involved … in the Trump campaign have any contact with Russians trying to meddle with the election?” Conway responded, “Absolutely not. And I discussed that with the president-elect just last night. Those conversations never happened. I hear people saying it like it’s a fact on television. That is just not only inaccurate and false, but it’s dangerous.”

..., 2017: White House spokeswoman Sarah Huckabee Sanders denied contacts between Russia and the Trump campaign, stating, “This is a nonstory because to the best of our knowledge, no contacts took place, so it’s hard to make a comment on something that never happened.”

 

[waiguoren]

Just to be clear about what @waiguoren and other Trumpsters are trying to do here.

You have seen the Trump and his surrogates arguments morphing over time. The very first line in the Mueller investigation is to investigate this...

"any links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals ...associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump;".

Trump and his surrogates for almost a year and half proclaimed no 'links' to Russia, no discussions with Russia, no connections to Russia. THAT has been the battle ground of this debate.

As Mueller has proceeded he has established all sorts of 'links' and all sorts of 'coordination'. Yes the elements of collusion are established. The Trumptards see that.

So now you are starting to see the Trumptards try and pretend this was not the debate despite this being the leading debate on this forum for over a year now. As we prepare to see the Mueller report dropped they are desperate to say 'links' and 'coordination' and the many indictments and guilty findings based upon that are somehow proof Mueller failed. LOL. Again the very first imperative in his mandate now proven would be a failure by him.

Don't let them do that. Don't let them spin it. It is the very first line of the Mueller Mandate. It is exactly what he set out to establish or find. And in establishing, NO that is not a failure by him and proof somehow Trump was correct.


(edit: here are many of the types of statements that spurred the Mueller Investigation that Trumptards are trying to spin that if established prove Trump correct.)

lol at the notion that I am a "Trumpster"

lol at the notion that my arguments have changed at all over the 2 years over which I've been calling you bots out for your inanity

lol at you for writing pointless paragraphs of nonsense

 

[MikeMcMann]

lol at the notion that I am a "Trumpster"

lol at the notion that my arguments have changed at all over the 2 years over which I've been calling you bots out for your inanity

lol at you for writing pointless paragraphs of nonsense

lol at you calling it pointless when it DESTROYS your lie.

Don't worry. You can always convince the fellow Trumptards that as Mueller continues to establish the 'links' and 'coordination' and thus the collusion that somehow the more establishes the more he is failing.

lol, you are painfully stupid if you think anyone but your fellow Trumptards will fall for it.

 

[MikeMcMann]

I'll bet I've posted that mandate on these forums more times than you have. I am familiar with it.....

And I am going to withdraw my prior comment and agree you probably posted more than me. It was the main thing the most vehement Trumptards were posting over the years quitting and saying it would never be established or proven. As charge after charge racked up the Trumptards would repeat this ""any links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals ...associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump;". ... and ask if it was proven or not because more of the early charges had nothing to do with 'links' or 'coordination' with Russia and the actual Trump campaign. That info has only come out recently and mostly thru an accidentally un-redacted filing by Manafort's side otherwise we would not even have that yet.

So yes, you probably did post it more when you thought it served you but now you are desperate to run away from it, deny it and spin it.

 

[waiguoren]

lol at you calling it pointless when it DESTROYS your lie.

Don't worry. You can always convince the fellow Trumptards that as Mueller continues to establish the 'links' and 'coordination' and thus the collusion that somehow the more establishes the more he is failing.

lol, you are painfully stupid if you think anyone but your fellow Trumptards will fall for it.

You can't produce posts showing that I have changed my position.

I've been consistent from the start: Trump is extremely unlikely to have conspired with Putin to hack the DNC/Podesta e-mails, and Mueller won't find Trump did so. People who believe otherwise are wacko.