*

Offline honk

  • *
  • Posts: 1419
  • resident goose
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #3820 on: April 19, 2019, 12:25:13 AM »
Yes, after literally two years of the anti-Trump crowd eagerly awaiting the second coming of Jesus Christ in the form of a steaming charge, we get absolutely nothing. Clearly not a victory for Trump.

I'm not sure exactly what you're likening to "the second coming of Jesus Christ in the form of a steaming charge" (Trump being implicated more concretely? Trump being impeached and convicted?), but if it was that wild and implausible, it doesn't seem like much of a victory for the other side for it to not happen. It's not like Obama was triumphantly celebrating every time a birther was laughed out of court. You may have been certain all this time that Trump wouldn't be charged or criminally implicated, but Trump himself definitely wasn't.

Quote
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1118876219381026818

I can forgive an old man for reposting a shitty meme like this, but you should know better. I'm very disappointed in you.
ur retartet but u donut even no it and i walnut tell u y

*

Offline Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 9673
  • (>^_^)> it's propaganda time (◕‿◕✿)
    • View Profile
    • The Flat Earth Society
Re: Trump
« Reply #3821 on: April 19, 2019, 12:53:15 AM »
You may have been certain all this time that Trump wouldn't be charged or criminally implicated, but Trump himself definitely wasn't.
I wasn't certain of anything - that's kind of the point, and the crucial difference between the two sides here. I simply adhered to Western values, namely the idea of presumption of innocence. I was mocking the anti-Trumpets for abandoning basic principles for political convenience, and I greatly enjoy the fact that the outcome of this investigation has validated that position. Moreover, I revel in the hand-wringing you guys have to engage it now to avoid having to admit that you fucked up.
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we've already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Twitter and Facebook!


*mic stays stationary and earth accelerates upwards towards it*

Re: Trump
« Reply #3822 on: April 19, 2019, 02:06:13 AM »
Mueller said, both before and in the report, that he doesn't believe the DoJ can charge a sitting president. The report explicitly says it does not exonerate Trump, nor does it say he is clear of obstruction of justice. It's just that Congress - not the DoJ - would be the ones that bring up charges of impeachment.

A Republican investigator confirmed numerous facts that have been in dispute, such as Trump trying to impede the investigation and Russia interfering in the US election on a massive and systemic scale with coordination of members of the Trump campaign. I'm not sure how you're spinning this into a good thing for Trump.
You don't think I'm going to post here sober, do you?  ???

I have embraced my Benny Franko side. I'm sleazy.

*

Offline Rama Set

  • *
  • Posts: 5594
  • Round and round...
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #3823 on: April 19, 2019, 03:08:15 AM »
From what I understand, the issue with proving obstruction charges would be that they would have to show corrupt goals for Trump rather than him just trying to save his ass, or curry favor with voters. Super unlikely. Trump 2020 is happening.
You don't get races of anything ... accept people.

*

Offline honk

  • *
  • Posts: 1419
  • resident goose
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #3824 on: April 19, 2019, 04:09:48 AM »
I simply adhered to Western values, namely the idea of presumption of innocence. I was mocking the anti-Trumpets for abandoning basic principles for political convenience, and I greatly enjoy the fact that the outcome of this investigation has validated that position.

There is not a single person posting in this thread who disagrees with that sentiment or has attempted to argue against it, despite the fact that you kept inserting it into unrelated discussions on the plausibility of the allegations surrounding Trump. It's a blatant strawman, as obvious as it would be if I were to tack "And furthermore, molesting children is wrong!" on the end of my posts. And speaking of things that people here haven't been saying...

Quote
Moreover, I revel in the hand-wringing you guys have to engage it now to avoid having to admit that you fucked up.

I understand that this is a disappointment for you, but this isn't actually happening. You don't get to have a scene where you triumphantly ram our own words in our faces as we awkwardly, feebly try to backtrack on our predictions and assertions and try to recover from the crippling embarrassment, because none of us are doing that. I have no problem admitting that the result of the investigation was less than I expected and hoped for, as I've already said. If you're this desperate to gloat, you're going to have to do it by yourself.

Mueller said, both before and in the report, that he doesn't believe the DoJ can charge a sitting president. The report explicitly says it does not exonerate Trump, nor does it say he is clear of obstruction of justice. It's just that Congress - not the DoJ - would be the ones that bring up charges of impeachment.

A Republican investigator confirmed numerous facts that have been in dispute, such as Trump trying to impede the investigation and Russia interfering in the US election on a massive and systemic scale with coordination of members of the Trump campaign. I'm not sure how you're spinning this into a good thing for Trump.

I think it's fair to say that the conclusion of the report has been a net positive for Trump, so to speak. He hasn't been indicted or criminally implicated, no further associates of his have been either, and most critically of all, nobody was indicted for collusion. He's in a much better place now than he was a month ago, when nobody knew what would be in the report. The full release has set him back somewhat from where he was yesterday, when the latest word was from Barr insisting that it exonerated him of everything and he was really just the victim all along, but not enough to erase the net positive of him being more or less cleared.
ur retartet but u donut even no it and i walnut tell u y

Re: Trump
« Reply #3825 on: April 19, 2019, 04:26:34 AM »
Trump, from what I've read, basically was paranoid that the investigation would produce a fake result.  That it would be manipulated.  His entire attack was based on pure paranoia.  Still is.

Ironically, he should be praising the investigation.  Not only has he said "if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear" but the investigation exposed Trump's long time lawyer's recording of client conversations. 

But he won't because he still thinks Meuller is against him and tried to destroy him. 

*

Offline Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 9673
  • (>^_^)> it's propaganda time (◕‿◕✿)
    • View Profile
    • The Flat Earth Society
Re: Trump
« Reply #3826 on: April 19, 2019, 08:44:58 AM »
Saddam, exemplifying the behaviour I'm making fun of while declaring it not to be happening is not helping your case. Your opposition to the presumption of innocence (but only when applied to Trump, because orange man guilty) has been going on for quite some time (and let's remember the specific statement that sent you on that crusade: my suggestion that being obscene does not directly imply being a criminal).

Whenever there's an accusation, you jump on it. Trump said words about how women can be easily abused? That must mean he's personally abusing women! The words themselves are incriminating! Of course, nothing came out of that and you bawled about how you never claimed not to presume innocence.

Now, history repeats himself - after two years of eagerly posting article after article about the many things Trump is totally guilty of we get... nothing. But, of course, every time you posted this drivel so proudly, following with your signature "haha drumpfe make funny face" boomer meme, you didn't actually mean it. Obviously.

Will you learn from your mistakes this time, or will we be having this conversation again in a couple years, where you will have totally-not-jumped on another moronic bandwagon?

With this nonsense out of the way, perhaps we can go back to disliking Trump in ways which don't rely on conspiracy theories. For example, by making fun of his (still not newsworthy) personal tweets: https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1118848431932493824

Is the harassment presidential in the same way that Trump is Presidential™?

Trump, from what I've read, basically was paranoid that the investigation would produce a fake result.  That it would be manipulated.  His entire attack was based on pure paranoia.  Still is.

Ironically, he should be praising the investigation.  Not only has he said "if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear" but the investigation exposed Trump's long time lawyer's recording of client conversations. 

But he won't because he still thinks Meuller is against him and tried to destroy him. 
This is spot on and completely consistent with Trump's past behaviour. The same paranoia is likely the root cause of him pretending not to remember his past statements (say, the whole "I love Wikileaks" thing) - he seems to think that when people ask him questions, they're universally out to discredit him
« Last Edit: April 19, 2019, 09:52:45 AM by Pete Svarrior »
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we've already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Twitter and Facebook!


*mic stays stationary and earth accelerates upwards towards it*

Re: Trump
« Reply #3827 on: April 19, 2019, 11:17:23 AM »
Meet The People In Trump's Orbit Who The Mueller Report Says Ignored His Orders https://n.pr/2VS8efq

Its neat to see how even Trump's loyal followers ignored him so he wouldn't screw himself over.   Which kinda proves why this investigation was so necessary.  Trump WANTED to do alot of things that would be illegal.  We know because he publically said so.  Its only through efforts of his own administration that most didn't happen.

*

Offline Dr Van Nostrand

  • *
  • Posts: 125
  • There may be something to this 'Matrix' stuff...
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #3828 on: April 19, 2019, 02:13:13 PM »
Remember Bill Clinton and the Starr report?

Independent counsel Kenneth Starr investigated Bill Clinton over shady real estate deals and the investigation expanded over two years to reach into the Monica Lewinsky scandal. It was released on the internet a few days after it was completed ( pages 445 pages.)

Now imagine instead, that after years of investigations producing a 400 page report, Ken Starr didn't publish the report but instead gave it to Janet Reno, the Attorney General that Clinton appointed. Then Janet Reno only publishes a four page summary exonerating the Bill Clinton. The Republicans would have had a melt-down.

Understand that the Republicans are lying about Trump's complete exoneration. The report from Mueller said specifically that the President could not be exonerated from obstruction of justice charges. It also documents a number of untruths told by Sarah Sanders to the press. It also documents the Russian efforts to get Donal Trump elected and sew division in our country.

BTW: I'm a Libertarian. I don't hold any slant right or left and I've downloaded the full report today to examine it with my own eyes.


Round Earther patiently looking for a better deal...

Re: Trump
« Reply #3829 on: April 19, 2019, 04:17:04 PM »
Remember Bill Clinton and the Starr report?

Independent counsel Kenneth Starr investigated Bill Clinton over shady real estate deals and the investigation expanded over two years to reach into the Monica Lewinsky scandal. It was released on the internet a few days after it was completed ( pages 445 pages.)

Now imagine instead, that after years of investigations producing a 400 page report, Ken Starr didn't publish the report but instead gave it to Janet Reno, the Attorney General that Clinton appointed. Then Janet Reno only publishes a four page summary exonerating the Bill Clinton. The Republicans would have had a melt-down.

Understand that the Republicans are lying about Trump's complete exoneration. The report from Mueller said specifically that the President could not be exonerated from obstruction of justice charges. It also documents a number of untruths told by Sarah Sanders to the press. It also documents the Russian efforts to get Donal Trump elected and sew division in our country.

BTW: I'm a Libertarian. I don't hold any slant right or left and I've downloaded the full report today to examine it with my own eyes.

I'm gonna be blunt: No Duh.
Partisanism is a thing.  If Trump ran as a Democrat, he'd have republicans screaming how unfit he is.  Just the way it is: you hate the other side.  Doesn't matter who they are or what they say.

*

Offline honk

  • *
  • Posts: 1419
  • resident goose
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #3830 on: April 20, 2019, 02:54:06 AM »
Saddam, exemplifying the behaviour I'm making fun of while declaring it not to be happening is not helping your case. Your opposition to the presumption of innocence (but only when applied to Trump, because orange man guilty) has been going on for quite some time (and let's remember the specific statement that sent you on that crusade: my suggestion that being obscene does not directly imply being a criminal).

Whenever there's an accusation, you jump on it. Trump said words about how women can be easily abused? That must mean he's personally abusing women! The words themselves are incriminating! Of course, nothing came out of that and you bawled about how you never claimed not to presume innocence.

What you're linking is an argument about whether or not Trump admitted to groping women without their consent. It was a factual dispute about what Trump did or didn't admit to. The presumption of innocence was never in question, and everyone arguing with you stressed that the stakes for Trump were nothing more than him perhaps not being elected president. It seems to me like you're interpreting the presumption of innocence to simply mean the benefit of the doubt in a general sense, and also extending it to personal judgments about subjects like whether or not we should vote for someone, or discussing on an Internet message board whether or not a politician did a certain bad thing. That's not a reasonable expectation of human behavior, and it's certainly not interchangeable with the idea of the presumption of innocence that you invoke when you talk about "Western values" and "basic principles."

And of course "nothing came out of that." It's not like there was going to be some sort of investigation into Trump allegedly groping an unknown woman at an unknown time based on the contents of a recording of him bragging about what a stud he is. What a bizarre thing to say.

Quote
Now, history repeats himself - after two years of eagerly posting article after article about the many things Trump is totally guilty of we get... nothing. But, of course, every time you posted this drivel so proudly, following with your signature "haha drumpfe make funny face" boomer meme, you didn't actually mean it. Obviously.

Will you learn from your mistakes this time, or will we be having this conversation again in a couple years, where you will have totally-not-jumped on another moronic bandwagon?

This once again seems more like the discussion you wish we were having rather than the discussion we actually are having, but as you obviously want to get it off your chest, I won't bother arguing the point. Go ahead, let it all out. Don't let me weasel out of the hole I've dug myself into over the last two years like the leftist coward I am. You've got to make me feel the loss of FES street cred.
ur retartet but u donut even no it and i walnut tell u y

*

Offline Bette Davis Eyes

  • *
  • Posts: 43
  • let's eat some apples and get naked
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #3831 on: April 20, 2019, 02:43:40 PM »
The only straw man here is Trump, the topic that got you to create 192 pages of spent energy over a position that is little more than a figurehead.  No doubt at the next presidential debate everyone will listen intently as the candidates say whether they will lower taxes, even though they have no power to do so.  If this isnt just for the sake of beating your chests and there’s things that matter to you, I’d suggest the next thread be on the speaker of the house.  Or better yet on the American people who don’t realize the thing they hate so much in Washington is just someone holding a mirror up for them to see themselves in.
« Last Edit: April 20, 2019, 02:45:39 PM by Bette Davis Eyes »
I can't believe I'm still fucking trapped in the infinite Universe....Anyone got something for claustrophobia or anxiety?

Yesterday is here to show us how far we’ve come.
Today is here to show us what fool’s we have remained.

*

Offline honk

  • *
  • Posts: 1419
  • resident goose
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #3832 on: April 21, 2019, 01:40:16 PM »
The only straw man here is Trump, the topic that got you to create 192 pages of spent energy over a position that is little more than a figurehead.  No doubt at the next presidential debate everyone will listen intently as the candidates say whether they will lower taxes, even though they have no power to do so.  If this isnt just for the sake of beating your chests and there’s things that matter to you, I’d suggest the next thread be on the speaker of the house.  Or better yet on the American people who don’t realize the thing they hate so much in Washington is just someone holding a mirror up for them to see themselves in.

A wild edgelord appears.

I like that the report went out of its way to address the Seth Rich conspiracy theory, and how Assange and WikiLeaks continued to dishonestly push it despite knowing it wasn't true:

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/20/us/mueller-report-seth-rich-assange.html
ur retartet but u donut even no it and i walnut tell u y

*

Offline Bette Davis Eyes

  • *
  • Posts: 43
  • let's eat some apples and get naked
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #3833 on: April 21, 2019, 07:46:57 PM »
The only straw man here is Trump, the topic that got you to create 192 pages of spent energy over a position that is little more than a figurehead.  No doubt at the next presidential debate everyone will listen intently as the candidates say whether they will lower taxes, even though they have no power to do so.  If this isnt just for the sake of beating your chests and there’s things that matter to you, I’d suggest the next thread be on the speaker of the house.  Or better yet on the American people who don’t realize the thing they hate so much in Washington is just someone holding a mirror up for them to see themselves in.

A wild edgelord appears.

I like that the report went out of its way to address the Seth Rich conspiracy theory, and how Assange and WikiLeaks continued to dishonestly push it despite knowing it wasn't true:

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/20/us/mueller-report-seth-rich-assange.html

I guess to a blind kid playing in traffic, someone talking about cars would seem like an edgelord.  Fool that I am not to have recognized I was standing in the playground  of a kindergarten.  Consider me devastated to have been called a name by someone I was trying to help become smarter.

Ya know, if you call people names when they say something you don’t understand you may as well have just recorded all your opinions on your computer and then played them back to yourself while sitting alone in your room.  It would be so much easier and you wouldn’t need an internet connection, but you’d get the same benefit.
I can't believe I'm still fucking trapped in the infinite Universe....Anyone got something for claustrophobia or anxiety?

Yesterday is here to show us how far we’ve come.
Today is here to show us what fool’s we have remained.

Re: Trump
« Reply #3834 on: April 21, 2019, 08:33:47 PM »
The only straw man here is Trump, the topic that got you to create 192 pages of spent energy over a position that is little more than a figurehead.  No doubt at the next presidential debate everyone will listen intently as the candidates say whether they will lower taxes, even though they have no power to do so.  If this isnt just for the sake of beating your chests and there’s things that matter to you, I’d suggest the next thread be on the speaker of the house.  Or better yet on the American people who don’t realize the thing they hate so much in Washington is just someone holding a mirror up for them to see themselves in.

A wild edgelord appears.

I like that the report went out of its way to address the Seth Rich conspiracy theory, and how Assange and WikiLeaks continued to dishonestly push it despite knowing it wasn't true:

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/20/us/mueller-report-seth-rich-assange.html

I guess to a blind kid playing in traffic, someone talking about cars would seem like an edgelord.  Fool that I am not to have recognized I was standing in the playground  of a kindergarten.  Consider me devastated to have been called a name by someone I was trying to help become smarter.

Ya know, if you call people names when they say something you don’t understand you may as well have just recorded all your opinions on your computer and then played them back to yourself while sitting alone in your room.  It would be so much easier and you wouldn’t need an internet connection, but you’d get the same benefit.
Pretty sure Edgelord is a username.

*

Offline Bette Davis Eyes

  • *
  • Posts: 43
  • let's eat some apples and get naked
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #3835 on: April 23, 2019, 04:21:01 AM »
The only straw man here is Trump, the topic that got you to create 192 pages of spent energy over a position that is little more than a figurehead.  No doubt at the next presidential debate everyone will listen intently as the candidates say whether they will lower taxes, even though they have no power to do so.  If this isnt just for the sake of beating your chests and there’s things that matter to you, I’d suggest the next thread be on the speaker of the house.  Or better yet on the American people who don’t realize the thing they hate so much in Washington is just someone holding a mirror up for them to see themselves in.

A wild edgelord appears.

I like that the report went out of its way to address the Seth Rich conspiracy theory, and how Assange and WikiLeaks continued to dishonestly push it despite knowing it wasn't true:

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/20/us/mueller-report-seth-rich-assange.html

I guess to a blind kid playing in traffic, someone talking about cars would seem like an edgelord.  Fool that I am not to have recognized I was standing in the playground  of a kindergarten.  Consider me devastated to have been called a name by someone I was trying to help become smarter.

Ya know, if you call people names when they say something you don’t understand you may as well have just recorded all your opinions on your computer and then played them back to yourself while sitting alone in your room.  It would be so much easier and you wouldn’t need an internet connection, but you’d get the same benefit.
Pretty sure Edgelord is a username.

Thanks Dave - I appreciate you trying to help clarify.  Always happy to apologize if I misunderstood.  Thanks again.
I can't believe I'm still fucking trapped in the infinite Universe....Anyone got something for claustrophobia or anxiety?

Yesterday is here to show us how far we’ve come.
Today is here to show us what fool’s we have remained.

Re: Trump
« Reply #3836 on: April 30, 2019, 10:16:44 AM »
Remember Bill Clinton and the Starr report?

Independent counsel Kenneth Starr investigated Bill Clinton over shady real estate deals and the investigation expanded over two years to reach into the Monica Lewinsky scandal. It was released on the internet a few days after it was completed ( pages 445 pages.)

Now imagine instead, that after years of investigations producing a 400 page report, Ken Starr didn't publish the report but instead gave it to Janet Reno, the Attorney General that Clinton appointed. Then Janet Reno only publishes a four page summary exonerating the Bill Clinton. The Republicans would have had a melt-down.

Understand that the Republicans are lying about Trump's complete exoneration. The report from Mueller said specifically that the President could not be exonerated from obstruction of justice charges. It also documents a number of untruths told by Sarah Sanders to the press. It also documents the Russian efforts to get Donal Trump elected and sew division in our country.

BTW: I'm a Libertarian. I don't hold any slant right or left and I've downloaded the full report today to examine it with my own eyes.
Starr and Mueller operating under the same rules?

*

Offline Rama Set

  • *
  • Posts: 5594
  • Round and round...
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #3837 on: April 30, 2019, 10:40:29 AM »
By gawd, it’s not even a complete sentence, nevermind a reply to what was quoted.
You don't get races of anything ... accept people.

*

Offline WellRoundedIndividual

  • *
  • Posts: 605
  • Proverbs 13:20 is extremely relevant today.
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #3838 on: May 01, 2019, 07:37:36 PM »
I got a kick out of this article.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6981035/Bill-Barr-faces-senators-following-revelation-Mueller-told-TWICE-release-report-summaries.html

Specifically: "IT WAS MY BABY!"

and

"In a tense standoff with Senate Democratic Whip Dick Durbin of Illinois, a combative Barr insisted..."

What a shit show...
BobLawBlah.

Re: Trump
« Reply #3839 on: May 02, 2019, 11:06:18 AM »
Remember Bill Clinton and the Starr report?

Independent counsel Kenneth Starr investigated Bill Clinton over shady real estate deals and the investigation expanded over two years to reach into the Monica Lewinsky scandal. It was released on the internet a few days after it was completed ( pages 445 pages.)

Now imagine instead, that after years of investigations producing a 400 page report, Ken Starr didn't publish the report but instead gave it to Janet Reno, the Attorney General that Clinton appointed. Then Janet Reno only publishes a four page summary exonerating the Bill Clinton. The Republicans would have had a melt-down.

Understand that the Republicans are lying about Trump's complete exoneration. The report from Mueller said specifically that the President could not be exonerated from obstruction of justice charges. It also documents a number of untruths told by Sarah Sanders to the press. It also documents the Russian efforts to get Donal Trump elected and sew division in our country.

BTW: I'm a Libertarian. I don't hold any slant right or left and I've downloaded the full report today to examine it with my own eyes.
Starr and Mueller operating under the same rules?
By gawd, it’s not even a complete sentence, nevermind a reply to what was quoted.
Try to use your self-proclaimed intellectual superiority...just a little...

Kramer wrote the Republicans would have a meltdown...

His whole post is based on the fallacy Starr and Mueller operating under the same rules, when...they are not.

Okay?

Let alone, it is not the job of a prosecutor to exonerate...

The whole exercise has been shown to be a tremendous dog and pony show...