TTLG|Thief|Bioshock|System Shock|Deus Ex|Mobile

View Poll Results: How long will Trump be President?

Voters
118. You may not vote on this poll
  • 1 Term (4 Years)

    23 19.49%
  • 2 Terms (8 Years)

    34 28.81%
  • 1st Term Impeachment/Assassination

    47 39.83%
  • 2nd Term Impeachment/Assassination

    2 1.69%
  • I don't know what's going on!

    12 10.17%
Page 412 of 412 FirstFirst ... 162312362367372377382387392397402407408409410411412
Results 10,276 to 10,300 of 10300

Thread: ✮✮✮ !Trump Dump! ✮✮✮

  1. #10276
    Moderator and Priest
    Registered: Mar 2002
    Location: Dinosaur Ladies of the Night
    Geez. A random discord post, and a link to a picture of an article.

    Those are some hard facts, folks.

  2. #10277
    That's exactly the kind of response I expected.

    You weren't NOT willing to go so far as to actually repudiate my conclusion.

    Don't believe me?

    Just go look on Twitter for yourself: https://twitter.com/hashtag/ImpeachTrump?src=tren

    https://twitter.com/search?q=Mueller&src=typd

    https://twitter.com/search?q=Barr&src=typd

    I see no indication that people are "graciously accepting the report".


    No "random" links or pictures from me. You're going to get very different results in real time than I just got and I'm about 100% confident that you aren't going to see people "graciously accepting the report" as was asserted previously.
    Last edited by Tony_Tarantula; 18th Apr 2019 at 18:03.

  3. #10278
    Moderator and Priest
    Registered: Mar 2002
    Location: Dinosaur Ladies of the Night
    A few angry randos on Twitter and Discord does not a mass movement make.

    If I were to follow your usual modus operandi, I'd say the entire Republican party is gearing up to kill a bunch of Jews, cuz hey, look at all these Alt-Right Trump supporters on Gab.

    ...it's a good thing I'm not quite so quick to leap to conclusions, huh?

  4. #10279
    Let's add a few more links to prove my point. Again, nothing "random". Just links to locations that are major hubs of Democrat discussion.

    Read the comments for yourself.

    https://www.facebook.com/OccupyDemocrats/

    https://www.facebook.com/beingliberal.org

    https://www.facebook.com/rightwingwatch/

    https://www.facebook.com/msnbc/

  5. #10280
    If you want we can also link to every major left-leaning news site.

    Because apparently only people with vested Authority count.


    A few angry randos on Twitter and Discord does not a mass movement make.

    If I were to follow your usual modus operandi, I'd say the entire Republican party is gearing up to kill a bunch of Jews, cuz hey, look at all these Alt-Right Trump supporters on Gab.

    ...it's a good thing I'm not quite so quick to leap to conclusions, huh?
    You don't have as much of a point as you think you do.

    I've been warning repeatedly (as have most center-left commentators) that the Democrat's hard turn towards identity politics is rapidly resulting in the creation of that kind of a right wing movement.

    Because that's what identity politics does. It creates two camps that have no coherent ideology beyond hating each other.


    There's also two other differences:

    1) I linked that so you could see what the Blue Checkmarks are saying. Those people aren't "a few randos" they have check marks because they're influencers. None of them are "graciously accepting the results of the report".

    2) Gab has approximately 0.03% of the userbase that Twitter does.
    Last edited by Tony_Tarantula; 18th Apr 2019 at 18:15.

  6. #10281
    Member
    Registered: May 2004
    Quote Originally Posted by Tony_Tarantula View Post
    Your argument here is so reductionist that it completely misses the point. I also didn't advocate for closing the border.

    It's also not true. Europe will soon start requiring a Visa application to visit: https://www.cnn.com/travel/article/u...021/index.html. They also require you to have a work permit to stay (A process I"m familiar with personally). Contrary to popular belief you don't get to just hop on a plane and stay as long as you like.
    Your president did. And nobody has seriously advocated for a completely open border either, so rather it's the open border argument that's reductionist and nonsensical to begin with. Or, rather, it's a very transparent dogwhistle.

    Also, even people of EU don't just get to go to another country and stay as long as they like. They need to have a valid reason for that (work, study, etc) and show they can support themselves. No country has borders that are completely closed or completely open. Contrary to popular belief.

    Quote Originally Posted by Tony_Tarantula View Post
    No he wasn't. The corporate media largely protected him and I'm willing to bet that most of his supporters didn't even know that about him. The criticism came from actual "left" outlets like Guardian and journalists like Taibbi.
    Does CNN count as corporate media to you? Or the Los Angeles Times?

    Quote Originally Posted by Tony_Tarantula View Post
    You're behaving like a Climate denier here. The US aiding and abetting arms shipments to terrorists is not a "nothingburger". It's such a "nothingburger" that it would have gotten Reagan thrown out of office had Ollie North not taken the fall for it. Reciting "nothingburger" like a born again Christian during a sermon doesn't change that fact.
    Republicans themselves admitted that it was just to hurt Clinton's ratings. Ten investigations, six of them by Republican-controlled congressional committees, did not find anything to show that any high-ranking Obama administration officials had done anything wrong. If that's not a nothingburger, I don't know what is.

  7. #10282
    Member
    Registered: Jul 2010
    Quote Originally Posted by Pyrian View Post
    Well, at least you get credit for consistency. Almost refreshing given all the people embracing the report despite the fact that it contradicts everything they've been asserting for the past year-ish.

    That's your all CAPS "clue" that's supposed to be convincing? This is exactly the sort of thinking that keeps you from having any credibility whatsoever.

    But you'll go ahead and vote Republican despite the fact that one doesn't have to even do any digging (nevermind imagining) to figure out that they're corrupt as heck?
    You believe a report written by people who think State Sponsored Hackers use the same tools that piss-poor
    malware creators use to sucker grandma to infect herself with spyware.

    No root kits. No DNS black holes. No end-user sandboxing.

    And how does did we get these "Russian Hacking" details?

    From Crowdstrike, the firm that does IT for the DNC.

    Not our own IT people. A DNC paid organization who refused to hand DNC servers to the FBI.

    AND YOU STILL BELIEVE THAT'S CREDIBLE TOO.

    THIS MAN IS STILL DEAD!!!! AND THE DNC HAD HIM KILLED



    Until someone CREDIBLY refutes our former NSA director Bill Binney, we have only this conclusion.
    Last edited by nbohr1more; 18th Apr 2019 at 18:42.

  8. #10283
    Member
    Registered: May 2004
    Quote Originally Posted by Tony_Tarantula View Post
    Let's add a few more links to prove my point. Again, nothing "random". Just links to locations that are major hubs of Democrat discussion.

    Read the comments for yourself.

    https://www.facebook.com/OccupyDemocrats/

    https://www.facebook.com/beingliberal.org

    https://www.facebook.com/rightwingwatch/

    https://www.facebook.com/msnbc/
    Okay, I skimmed through some threads and I see a lot of quoting from the report, a lot of pointing out Republican hypocrisy, but nothing about disagreeing with the findings or the results of the report.

    Also, forget about "graciously accepting" whatever that means, I see people very enthusiastically accepting the report. It is pretty damning, after all, from what I've read (and I'm only half-way through). It confirms a lot of what has been reported by the media and shows that Lord Dampnut and co not only were aware of Russian interference, but welcomed and encouraged it. Even if their conduct doesn't meet the burden of proof for a criminal indictment, it's still reprehensible. And that's without even getting into the obstruction part.
    Last edited by Starker; 18th Apr 2019 at 19:28.

  9. #10284
    Member
    Registered: Feb 2002
    Location: In the flesh.
    My favorite was when someone compared Trumps administration to a cross between Good Fella's and The Three Stooges for how they tried to protect him from his own bumbling attempts to fire those conducting the investigation.

  10. #10285
    Moderator and Priest
    Registered: Mar 2002
    Location: Dinosaur Ladies of the Night
    Quote Originally Posted by Tony_Tarantula View Post
    1) I linked that so you could see what the Blue Checkmarks are saying. Those people aren't "a few randos" they have check marks because they're influencers. None of them are "graciously accepting the results of the report".
    The report wasn't exactly a cut and dry conclusion now, was it? From what I'm seeing from your links, no one's doubting Mueller's loyalties, just saying the report proves Trump did X, and Y should happen to him.

    I'd probably explain the end result of the Mueller Investigation as such: So there wasn't quite enough to damn Trump to the impeachment pit? Hey, there wasn't enough evidence to convict Casey Anthony of murder either, but given what was dredged up during the trial, you still wouldn't exactly trust her to babysit your kids now, would you?

    And even if they were, they have as much of a right to say shit as the people who spent the last two years screaming that Mueller was a rabid deep state crypto-democrat attack dog assisting in a coup against a duly elected president.

    2) Gab has approximately 0.03% of the userbase that Twitter does.
    You're missing my point. I wasn't saying that people on Gab are doing X or Y. Rather, I was saying that you could go to any random site or service on the internet, grab any random quote from any random individual, and say "LOOK! LOOK AT WHAT THESE FUCKS ARE UP TO", and it wouldn't mean shit, because it's one example in a situation where many are needed.

    Your slightly expanded upon list of examples is a better attempt, but still doesn't prove what you're saying.

  11. #10286
    Member
    Registered: Jul 2010
    Quote Originally Posted by Renzatic View Post
    The report wasn't exactly a cut and dry conclusion now, was it?
    IT WOULD BE CUT AND DRY IF IT CONTAINED NETWORK FORENSICS COMPUTERS ARN'T MAGIC!!!
    POST TCP DUMPS, TIMESTAMPS, CACHES, ETC. AKA REAL HARD EVIDENCE

    THE WHOLE INVESTIGATION IS ABOUT HACKING AND THE MUELLER REPORT HAS NO HACKING EVIDENCE!!!!

    Just limp dicked coerced testimony (law enforcement entrapment and blackmail).

    A REAL INVESTIGATION SHOULD LOOK LIKE THIS!!!!

    https://theforensicator.wordpress.co...data-analysis/
    Last edited by nbohr1more; 19th Apr 2019 at 02:50.

  12. #10287
    Moderator and Priest
    Registered: Mar 2002
    Location: Dinosaur Ladies of the Night
    The Mueller investigation was primarily concerned with obstruction of justice, numbfuck.

    And anyway, Mueller does detail quite a bit on the Russian interference in the first half of the document. Detailing how the IRA did what they did. It doesn't throw about IP addresses, and isn't filled with page after page of BASH commands, but it details fairly well exactly what happened, when, and how.

    Remember, Mueller's reports are meant to be read by DC lawyers, and members of congress. They themselves won't delve down into the nitty gritty tech details, rather providing an overview, and various determinations made from the end results of other, more tech savvy investigators.

    Mueller's IRA indictment

    ...which is referenced in:

    The Mueller Report (now searchable!)
    Last edited by Renzatic; 19th Apr 2019 at 03:24.

  13. #10288
    Member
    Registered: Jul 2010
    Obstruction is a premature concept, if there was no collusion to begin with. Proof of "collusion" would entail HACKING PROOF.
    Everyone loves "Science and Facts" until they must turn the microscope on the DNC.

    You don't get more factual than IT forensics.

    Spill your data dumps. Spill your NSA collections. Let God sort it out.

    Except we "pretend" that the NSA doesn't already have every Trump and Hillary phone call, text message, and incidental audio collection cataloged
    because we are still trying to convince "Joe shmuck" that Bill Binney, Edward Snowden, and Assange are all wrong and the NSA only collects on foreign criminals.

    That IRA indictment is a joke. 70% of the crimes are things that all Internet Citizens are entitled to do.

    I created a political hashtag #BobMuellerIsAbettingSethRichMurder ... now I'm a "cyber criminal" who's "hacking the upcoming election"?

    More of the DNC shenanigans to make it dangerous to do grassroots political movements like support Bernie.

    Only supporting the DNC\RNC machines are valid. Everything else is "Russian Election Hacking".

    Just like that "Ministry of Truth" law they passed at the end of the 2016 voting season.

    Only authorized channels can "create news", anyone not aligned with the DNC\RNC = Fake News and possibly in violation of the law.

    And all that activity amounts to what?

    Moving less than 1% of the voters to vote for Trump?

    Probably less.

    And if Ted Cruz were the candidate, Russia wouldn't have done these things?

    Nope. There would be Cruz "hashtags".

    And Russia weren't doing these things before 2016?

    Laughable. Every election. Every time. They will try. So will China, Saudi Arabia, Israel, Turkey, UK, etc.

  14. #10289
    Member
    Registered: May 2004
    That one time Lindsey Graham made a case for impeaching the president:


  15. #10290
    Member
    Registered: Jul 2010
    Quote Originally Posted by Starker View Post
    That one time Lindsey Graham made a case for impeaching the president:

    Just link the "Now This" channel page.

    Or their wikipedia entry:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NowThis_News

    Another DNC shill group.

  16. #10291
    Member
    Registered: May 2004
    So I went through the Mueller report and a few thoughts.

    There's a lot more there than I would have expected, and that's with the juiciest bits having been redacted.

    Lord Dampnut's and his associates' Russia connections and actions were more extensive than has been reported and although they didn't meet the (pretty high) standards of treason or criminal conspiracy, they are at the very best extremely suspicious and at the worst completely reprehensible.

    The reporting so far has been pretty accurate for the most part.

    Mueller did not look into Lord Dampnut's finances.

    The report does not include counterintelligence findings.

    There are quite a few cases still ongoing.

    Hence, there's potentially still a lot of shoes to drop.


    Lord Dampnut very blatantly tried to obstruct justice, and mostly failed because people refused to carry out his repeated orders.

    The reason Mueller didn't charge Lord Dampnut with obstruction of justice was because the DOJ guidelines stopped him from doing that.

    The reason Mueller didn't decide on whether Lord Dampnut obstructed justice or not was because he could not be charged -- it would be unfair if he made such a statement and then Lord Dampnut would be unable to defend himself in court.

    However, he did emphatically say that if there was any reason to say that Lord Dampnut is innocent, he would do that.

    Also, there's a suggestion that charges could be brought after Lord Dampnut's term ends or if Congress decides to impeach him.

    Hence, Mueller basically saw his duty as preserving the evidence, so that a relatively fresh record of the events would remain for the future.


    In conclusion, Barr wildly mischaracterised the report in his summary and in the press conference, to put it charitably. Not exactly surprising, as he has been caught lying for papa Bush before in a somewhat similar situation, though that came out only years later.

    Oh, and here's a bit more accurate Game of Thrones meme than the one Lord Dampnut put out:

    Last edited by Starker; 19th Apr 2019 at 08:16.

  17. #10292
    Member
    Registered: Jun 2009
    Location: The Spiraling Sea
    If we only knew where the "Pee Tape" was, it would be lights out for Drumph!...

    WE.MUST.FIND.THE.PEE.TAPE!...

  18. #10293
    Quote Originally Posted by Renzatic View Post
    The Mueller investigation was primarily concerned with obstruction of justice, numbfuck.

    Every article from May 2017 that comes up says it was about Russian Collusion: https://www.npr.org/2017/05/23/52968...law-firms-ties

    Justice Department ethics experts have decided Robert Mueller can proceed as the special counsel leading the investigation into the Russian government's efforts to interfere in the 2016 election, despite his former law firm's representing President Trump's daughter Ivanka and son-in-law Jared Kushner.
    Doesn't mean they can't find something else of course.


    There's a lot more there than I would have expected, and that's with the juiciest bits having been redacted.

    Lord Dampnut's and his associates' Russia connections and actions were more extensive than has been reported and although they didn't meet the (pretty high) standards of treason or criminal conspiracy, they are at the very best extremely suspicious and at the worst completely reprehensible.
    See Video I posted...I want to say about three months ago. Trump has extensive connections to some New York mob families which in turn have connections to Russian and Jewish Mafia. He helped them launder a rather substantial amount of money from the NJ gas tax scam.

    The reporting so far has been pretty accurate for the most part.
    Like this? https://twitter.com/TerryMoran/statu...10116361932800

    Or this? https://youtu.be/sAKmtfTe2rc

    Or the "Bombshell"? https://twitter.com/BuzzFeedNews/sta...99665185980422

    Or this one? https://theintercept.imgix.net/wp-up...&w=1010&h=1024

    How about this story? https://edition.cnn.com/2018/07/26/p...form=hootsuite





    No worries though. I'm sure the walls are actually closing in this time.
    Last edited by Tony_Tarantula; 19th Apr 2019 at 14:13.

  19. #10294
    Member
    Registered: May 2004
    Location: Canuckistan GWN
    Just a reminder to Trump apologists; collusion is not a legal term, it is an obfuscation adopted by Trump and his cabal - Trump was not exonerated on the Russian interference into the 2016 election, merely that his people (and I use that term generously) did not coordinate with the Russians. They also didn't report the illegal actions of the Russian agents they had clear knowledge of. - Trump was certainly not exonerated on obstruction since Mueller reported that the only reason most of Trump's attempts to COMMIT THE CRIME were foiled by his underlings refusing to or neglecting to carry out his "crazy shit" instructions.

    These simple facts cannot be repeated often enough... apparently.

    And now, this...


  20. #10295
    Member
    Registered: May 2004
    Quote Originally Posted by Tony_Tarantula View Post
    Like this?
    Hell of a lot more than the White House: https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/...064044822.html

  21. #10296
    Moderator and Priest
    Registered: Mar 2002
    Location: Dinosaur Ladies of the Night
    I think it's funny that so many people are demanding she step down for her misdeeds. What do they think that'll accomplish? The White House will just get someone else to lie.

  22. #10297
    Member
    Registered: May 2004
    Location: Canuckistan GWN
    Quote Originally Posted by Renzatic View Post
    I think it's funny that so many people are demanding she step down for her misdeeds. What do they think that'll accomplish? The White House will just get someone else to lie.
    I think it's (not)funny that her resignation would not be offered by her or demanded by her boss. But that's how low the barr is now.

  23. #10298
    Moderator and Priest
    Registered: Mar 2002
    Location: Dinosaur Ladies of the Night
    But her emails.

  24. #10299
    Member
    Registered: Jul 2010
    Quote Originally Posted by Renzatic View Post
    But her emails.
    Let me get this straight.

    Sarah Sanders told the press that anonymous FBI whistleblowers were not satisfied with Comey.

    Then she's going to tell Mueller WHO THESE WHISTLEBLOWERS ARE so Mueller can open up the NOC list and have them KILLED?

    So SARAH SANDERS is an EVIL LIER for protecting these people by recanting this claim when under inquiry?

    IS THIS HOW DUMB WE ARE???

    HOW MANY WHISTLE-BLOWERS were taken down by Mueller under Obama?

    And we're gonna let him know who at the FBI is telling on their bosses?



    Oh and this "lie" is "worse" than this Hillary workflow:

    1) Requesting "above top secret" classified "special access program" documents from a "friend with clearances".
    2) Having said "friend" remove the documents from a secure SCIF
    3) Having said "friend" upload them into an unauthorized system and forward them to Hillary's server
    4) Then Hillary making a big email chain that includes this SAP "above top secret" data

    What Sarah Sander did is "worse than that"?

  25. #10300
    Moderator and Priest
    Registered: Mar 2002
    Location: Dinosaur Ladies of the Night
    You know, I'm beginning to think you might have some kind of condition.

Page 412 of 412 FirstFirst ... 162312362367372377382387392397402407408409410411412

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •