The War Room Bet Thread V3

[Jack V Savage]

Wrong. I pointed out that D.C. juries are hopelessly biased.

LOL!

@Limbo Pete

 

[waiguoren]

LOL!

@Limbo Pete

Why tag Mr. Pet?

 

[Jack V Savage]

Why tag Mr. Pet?

Because he particularly appreciates it when you make a fool of yourself, and I don't think the Bet thread is widely read.

 

[Limbo Pete]

Because he particularly appreciates it when you make a fool of yourself, and I don't think the Bet thread is widely read.

Bingo bango!

 

[waiguoren]

Classic weasel Wai

 

[Lead]

@andnowweknow

Let me know if you and wai are in agreement here. This bet needs settled.

#31. @waiguoren v. @andnowweknow
1. Roger Stone will be indicted and convicted on at least one charge brought by Robert Mueller's team for Trump/Russia coordination/collusion/conspiracy.
2. andnowweknow- for, waiguoren- against
3. At the conclusion of Stone's trial, if it happens. If not, at the end of the Mueller investigation.
4. Sig bet
5. 10 months
6. The conviction needs to be for coordination/collusion/conspiracy between Trump/Russia. For example: treason, conspiracy to defraud the USA, or conspiracy to commit an offense against the USA by coordinating with the Russian state would all give the win to andnowweknow. Tax fraud as in the Manafort case would not count. Perjury would not count. If Stone signs a plea agreement for any reason, the bet is a push.
*Lead also reserves the right to have participants add two additional mods to decide who won if it's contested.

 

[andnowweknow]

@andnowweknow

Let me know if you and wai are in agreement here. This bet needs settled.

#31. @waiguoren v. @andnowweknow
1. Roger Stone will be indicted and convicted on at least one charge brought by Robert Mueller's team for Trump/Russia coordination/collusion/conspiracy.
2. andnowweknow- for, waiguoren- against
3. At the conclusion of Stone's trial, if it happens. If not, at the end of the Mueller investigation.
4. Sig bet
5. 10 months
6. The conviction needs to be for coordination/collusion/conspiracy between Trump/Russia. For example: treason, conspiracy to defraud the USA, or conspiracy to commit an offense against the USA by coordinating with the Russian state would all give the win to andnowweknow. Tax fraud as in the Manafort case would not count. Perjury would not count. If Stone signs a plea agreement for any reason, the bet is a push.
*Lead also reserves the right to have participants add two additional mods to decide who won if it's contested.

I don't consider the "Mueller" investigation in any way concluded given the dozens of spin off cases handed off by the special counsel team, several of which Stone would be a witness at least and a likely defendant in. It's more than fair to assume that adjudication of Roger Stone's involvement regarding Russia matters and convictions can't be fully determined until the president of the United States can actually be charged with a crime...

Also of note, the Mueller team clearly left open the possibility via public testimony of prosecution after the president has left office, and nobody disagrees with how tied to Trump Roger Stone is.

Bet remains open as I see it until the cases Mueller's team handed off to other prosecution teams can fully engage in investigation of the matters.

 

[Lead]

I don't consider the "Mueller" investigation in any way concluded given the dozens of spin off cases handed off by the special counsel team, several of which Stone would be a witness at least and a likely defendant in. It's more than fair to assume that adjudication of Roger Stone's involvement regarding Russia matters and convictions can't be fully determined until the president of the United States can actually be charged with a crime...

Also of note, the Mueller team clearly left open the possibility via public testimony of prosecution after the president has left office, and nobody disagrees with how tied to Trump Roger Stone is.

Bet remains open as I see it until the cases Mueller's team handed off to other prosecution teams can fully engage in investigation of the matters.

This was the line of the bet for determining when to make a call:
3. At the conclusion of Stone's trial, if it happens. If not, at the end of the Mueller investigation.

"At the end of the Mueller investigation" starts with a "if not", which states the conclusion of Stone's trial being the primary time to call this. Do we have a specific list of the remaining investigations? It sounds like we wouldn't reach a conclusion if it isn't concrete what remains outstanding or if it has any deadline to it.

 

[waiguoren]

3. At the conclusion of Stone's trial, if it happens. If not, at the end of the Mueller investigation.

Reading comprehension is not his strong suit. Stone's trial happened.

 

[Limbo Pete]

The lesson here is to not make wagers with someone that can't bet in good faith

 

[Lead]

The lesson here is to not make wagers with someone that can't bet in good faith

The conversation for this one was a long one and I tried multiple times to point out the different pieces/ situations that could arise. I don't really feel much sympathy for this bet as at the end, I was asking for more clarification and got a "I'm fine with everything". Some negligence was at play here.
https://forums.sherdog.com/posts/143695437/
https://forums.sherdog.com/posts/143948571/

 

[Fawlty]

Hmmm..... tempting. I dont gamble though. Gracious offer though. I do look forward to seeing if you are correct. You clearly actually believe it, unlike many trolls here.

A horrible bet he's offering. Trying to stack the deck with contingencies and freerolls. You're smart to turn it down.

 

[waiguoren]

The conversation for this one was a long one and I tried multiple times to point out the different pieces/ situations that could arise. I don't really feel much sympathy for this bet as at the end, I was asking for more clarification and got a "I'm fine with everything". Some negligence was at play here.
https://forums.sherdog.com/posts/143695437/
https://forums.sherdog.com/posts/143948571/

The bet specifically says it terminates at the conclusion of Stone's trial. Mr. Clown Shoes is trying to manipulate you by blowing past that key phrase.

 

[andnowweknow]

This was the line of the bet for determining when to make a call:
3. At the conclusion of Stone's trial, if it happens. If not, at the end of the Mueller investigation.

"At the end of the Mueller investigation" starts with a "if not", which states the conclusion of Stone's trial being the primary time to call this. Do we have a specific list of the remaining investigations? It sounds like we wouldn't reach a conclusion if it isn't concrete what remains outstanding or if it has any deadline to it.

We just know these investigations exist. I'm not aware of any specific list because they are entirely redacted matters but perhaps someone else has those specifics.

Here it is noted 14 investigations MUELLER INVESTIGATION spin offs still exist with the notation precisely that Trump (and thus Stone) would never be investigated for matters pertaining to the bet until the president is out of office, as we did not know at the time of the wager, that the wager would essentially be NULLED by the fact that the DOJ opinion PREVENTS PROSECUTION OF A SITTING PRESIDENT. This came out in the Mueller report.

https://www.axios.com/mueller-refer...ion-c8455658-02ff-4f4a-bda8-a04ea7b7be21.html

One of Stone's trials is over...the actual "trial" was prevented post bet by the above note regarding necessary spin offs.

@waiguoren knows all of this and probably agrees. That's what people are saying.

I'm not saying he should take the loss here though I think in the end that is likely, but unless he has proof that Stone faces no remaining "trials" (such as the one we originally made the bet over) it would seem reasonable for him to want to see the bet through instead of trying to win it on a technicality...namely that the bet was invalidated at the time the Mueller report was released as it previously stood.

 

[andnowweknow]

The bet specifically says it terminates at the conclusion of Stone's trial. Mr. Clown Shoes is trying to manipulate you by blowing past that key phrase.

My dude, you're trying to win it on a technicality (which is lame). I'm just saying it should be seen through for the obvious and valid reasons stated above.

 

[waiguoren]

We just know these investigations exist. I'm not aware of any specific list because they are entirely redacted matters but perhaps someone else has those specifics.

Here it is noted 14 investigations MUELLER INVESTIGATION spin offs still exist with the notation precisely that Trump (and thus Stone) would never be investigated for matters pertaining to the bet until the president is out of office, as we did not know at the time of the wager, that the wager would essentially be NULLED by the fact that the DOJ opinion PREVENTS PROSECUTION OF A SITTING PRESIDENT. This came out in the Mueller report.

https://www.axios.com/mueller-refer...ion-c8455658-02ff-4f4a-bda8-a04ea7b7be21.html

One of Stone's trials is over...the actual "trial" was prevented post bet by the above note regarding necessary spin offs.

@waiguoren knows all of this and probably agrees. That's what people are saying.

I'm not saying he should take the loss here though I think in the end that is likely, but unless he has proof that Stone faces no remaining "trials" (such as the one we originally made the bet over) it would seem reasonable for him to want to see the bet through instead of trying to win it on a technicality...namely that the bet was invalidated at the time the Mueller report was released as it previously stood.

What is the matter with you? You signed off on a bet that explicitly says it terminated at the conclusion of Stone's trial. The trial happened. The bet is over with.

 

[waiguoren]

My dude, you're trying to win it on a technicality (which is lame). I'm just saying it should be seen through for the obvious and valid reasons stated above.

A technicality? This is not a 20-page contract. It's a six-line bet. Everything is clear for all to see.

 

[andnowweknow]

What is the matter with you? You signed off on a bet that explicitly says it terminated at the conclusion of Stone's trial. The trial happened. The bet is over with.

I disagree and now I see why many other posters are questioning your honesty and noting your penchant for not betting in good faith.

 

[andnowweknow]

A technicality? This is not a 20-page contract. It's a six-line bet. Everything is clear for all to see.

I'm happy for Lead or someone else to make the call, I've made my point I think...and I think you understand my point as well. If you're that concerned with "winning" a bet and not interested in what I have said here, not the end of the world.

 

[Lead]

We just know these investigations exist. I'm not aware of any specific list because they are entirely redacted matters but perhaps someone else has those specifics.

Here it is noted 14 investigations MUELLER INVESTIGATION spin offs still exist with the notation precisely that Trump (and thus Stone) would never be investigated for matters pertaining to the bet until the president is out of office,

https://www.axios.com/mueller-refer...ion-c8455658-02ff-4f4a-bda8-a04ea7b7be21.html

You're presenting a premise here though that doesn't seem possible for calling the bet. Is it guaranteed we ever know about the redacted cases? If not, are you saying that shortly after Trump is out of office is when this bet should be settled? We have a #3 so these things don't continue on indefinitely, especially if it is an event that's going to or not going to happen.

as we did not know at the time of the wager, that the wager would essentially be NULLED by the fact that the DOJ opinion PREVENTS PROSECUTION OF A SITTING PRESIDENT. This came out in the Mueller report.

A very important piece in making these bets is if there are any "if" situations you believe should make the bet null, we list them in the bet itself under #6. Otherwise, they aren't acknowledged just because we didn't have the foresight to know that would happen. It would just leave open the possibility of not honoring the bet. Everything needs to be handled and made clear upfront before the bet is finalized for that stuff.

https://www.axios.com/mueller-refer...ion-c8455658-02ff-4f4a-bda8-a04ea7b7be21.html
One of Stone's trials is over...the actual "trial" was prevented post bet by the above note regarding necessary spin offs.

@waiguoren knows all of this and probably agrees. That's what people are saying.

I'm not saying he should take the loss here though I think in the end that is likely, but unless he has proof that Stone faces no remaining "trials" (such as the one we originally made the bet over) it would seem reasonable for him to want to see the bet through instead of trying to win it on a technicality...namely that the bet was invalidated at the time the Mueller report was released as it previously stood.

The report could very well be seen as the end of the investigation. That's why the bet got extended because despite the investigation coming to a close, the trial still remained open and was the overriding piece to #3 (Trial conclusion > End of investigation).

We can ask other mods on this bet whether it should be called. I'm leaning on it should but we can elect two others if you are contesting #3.