Trump and Russia

[Deranged Rhino]

 

[Deranged Rhino]

 

For anyone curious. She self published after they pulled her book deal.

[Deranged Rhino]

 

[Deranged Rhino]

 

[Deranged Rhino]

 

[Tiberius]

Former national security adviser John Bolton said in an interview to promote his new memoir that has rocked Washington that Russian President Vladimir Putin thinks he "can play" President Trump like a "fiddle."

 

Asked by ABC's Martha Raddatz about Trump's relationship with Putin, Bolton said that he doesn't think the Russian leader is "worried" about Trump. 

"I think Putin thinks he can play him like a fiddle," said Bolton, who resigned from his position in the administration last September. "I think Putin is smart, tough, I think he sees that he’s not faced with a serious adversary here."

https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/503332-bolton-putin-thinks-he-can-play-trump-like-a-fiddle

[RochesterRob]

37 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

Former national security adviser John Bolton said in an interview to promote his new memoir that has rocked Washington that Russian President Vladimir Putin thinks he "can play" President Trump like a "fiddle."

 

Asked by ABC's Martha Raddatz about Trump's relationship with Putin, Bolton said that he doesn't think the Russian leader is "worried" about Trump. 

"I think Putin thinks he can play him like a fiddle," said Bolton, who resigned from his position in the administration last September. "I think Putin is smart, tough, I think he sees that he’s not faced with a serious adversary here."

https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/503332-bolton-putin-thinks-he-can-play-trump-like-a-fiddle

  Which is still disappointing for Putin as he thought he was going to bang Hillary like a gong.

[Doc]

LOL!  Yeah, it's been working out real great for ol' Vlad there, hasn't it?

 

He would have played Hilly like a pianola.

[Tiberius]

After one term LOSER Trump is gone, Biden’s team won’t let Putin back in G-8 as LOSER Trump wants to do, 

 

LOSER Trump wants to please Putin. LOSER Trump wants Putin to visit our White House. Sorry LOSER Trump, you need to go

[Doc]

So does Macron.

[Deranged Rhino]

 

[Buffalo_Gal]

5 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

Holy *****, that article shows Steele is flat out insane. Christopher Steele's news claims made the pee-pee "dossier" look almost coherent. "A blanket appeared to be thrown over it." When you write fanfiction, there are only so many people who will read, never mind believe, that slop.
 

</snip>
 

Boris Johnson and Theresa May ignored claims the Kremlin had a “likely hold” over Donald Trump and may have covertly funded Brexit, the former spy Christopher Steele alleges in secret evidence given to MPs who drew up the Russia report.
 

</snip>
 

Steele first presented a dossier about Trump to senior UK intelligence figures in late 2016, who he says took it seriously at first. But, he writes, “on reaching top political decision-makers, a blanket appeared to be thrown over it”.

</snip>
 

 

Edited June 22, 2020 by Buffalo_Gal

[Deranged Rhino]

 

 

[Deranged Rhino]

 

[Koko78]

1 hour ago, Buffalo_Gal said:

Holy *****, that article shows Steele is flat out insane. Christopher Steele's news claims made the pee-pee "dossier" look almost coherent. "A blanket appeared to be thrown over it." When you write fanfiction, there are only so many people who will read, never mind believe, that slop.
 

</snip>
 

Boris Johnson and Theresa May ignored claims the Kremlin had a “likely hold” over Donald Trump and may have covertly funded Brexit, the former spy Christopher Steele alleges in secret evidence given to MPs who drew up the Russia report.
 

</snip>
 

Steele first presented a dossier about Trump to senior UK intelligence figures in late 2016, who he says took it seriously at first. But, he writes, “on reaching top political decision-makers, a blanket appeared to be thrown over it”.

</snip>
 

 

 

It must have been political, and totally not because his dossier was full of obvious and tangible bullschitt!

[Doc]

Funny that no one on the left is calling that Russian disinformation.  When it obviously was. 

[SoCal Deek]

Please no! Not the Putin thing again? For the love of God, give it a rest! Nobody cares about Putin this much, not even his mom!

[Deranged Rhino]

 

[Deranged Rhino]

@transplantbillsfan -- moving this to a more appropriate thread... 

 

23 hours ago, transplantbillsfan said:

 

And yet I asked something of you first and you've ignored it.

 

I promise I'll respond to you once you've responded to me.

 

Do you actually know what the word "coward" means?

 

You asked me to show you where you had ever said anything wrong about Trump/Russia -- and I explained I did not have time over the weekend to dig. Rather than answer my question on your current opinion on the matter so we could cut right to the chase, you wanted to play games. So, game on.  

 

I had time today to look. And boy was it fun. Let's take a trip back through your Journey of Being Wrong from the very first day on Trump/Russia... by the time we get through this, the only question left is whether or not you will admit to being wrong as you said you would.

 

Let's find out! 

 

Starting with, your very first PPP post on the subject in October of 2018: 

 

On 10/29/2018 at 12:07 AM, transplantbillsfan said:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/local/public-safety/maria-butina-russian-gun-rights-advocate-charged-in-mueller-probe-moved-to-va-jail/2018/08/18/66a74252-a302-11e8-93e3-24d1703d2a7a_story.html

Maria Butina, Russian gun rights advocate charged in federal probe, moved to Va. jail

 

...aannnd 2+ months later...

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/nation-politics/ap-investigation-russian-charged-as-secret-agent-maria-butina-studied-us-groups-cyberdefenses-for-student-project/%3famp=1

AP Investigation: Russian charged as secret agent, Maria Butina, studied US groups’ cyberdefenses for student project

 

 

... but we're supposed to believe Russia didn't influence the 2016 Presidential election????

 

 

Note two things about this chalk-full-of-wrong post... first, you displayed no understanding of the Butina case and why it was important. What Butina showed was that despite the media narrative at the time, the only actual Russian spy deployed by Putin was identified, charged, and expelled immediately upon the changing of administrations. Not something one would expect from a "puppet" president. It also overlooks the fact that the Obama DOJ knew Butina was a Russian spook for well over a year but let her operate freely anyway... but again, details aren't important. Just feelz. 

 

But where you were demonstrably wrong was with your last statement. You imply Russia did influence the 2016 election. After the Mueller report, the OIG report, all the FBI disclosures and multiple trials and their accompanying discovery, transcripts, and testimonies, it's proven that Russia did NOT influence the election. 

 

So you literally were wrong from your first day on this topic. 

 

But that was just the start of your incredible Journey of Being Wrong... 

 

On 5/1/2019 at 3:26 PM, transplantbillsfan said:

 

So a stupid twitter argument by a couple of idiots is somehow substantive?

 

Seriously?

 

First of all, there's plenty of evidence, set forth by Mueller in his report, of collusion. (1)

 

But as he said in the report himself, he wasn't investigating collusion, he was investigating criminal conspiracy. (2)  And he couldn't "establish" criminal conspiracy--interesting wording in the context of a report that weaves a web of a campaign in contact with Russia at varying points and with knowledge that Russia's interference in the election would actually help Trump win.

 

And that leaves aside the entirety of the evidence laid out in the report of obstruction of justice, which is readily apparent.  Along with all the other ongoing investigations.

 

But yeah... send me another twitter argument of 2 nobodies saying "look at the collusion!" / "only a conspiracy theorist could call this collusion"...

 

might be slightly more substantive than a gif, but not much.

 

*Bolded and numbers are mine

 

1. This is a false statement. Per Mueller's own report, there was no evidence of collusion/conspiracy in his report. None. That was cemented by the later findings of the OIG and the disclosures from the Crossfire Hurricane team and its documents/origin point. They had an open investigation for nearly 3 years and found nada. Zip. Zero.

 

2. The first page of the report shows that this is incorrect. Mueller (really Weissman) makes it clear that collusion is not a legal term even though it's synonymous with conspiracy. Thus they used conspiracy, not collusion in the report. But they're the same thing. And -- guess what, he found zero evidence of it despite your first incorrect statement. 

 

Your ignorance on this topic was in FULL display early on... 

 

But there's a lot more! 

 

On 5/1/2019 at 9:19 PM, transplantbillsfan said:

 

The report and that passage itself establishes Mueller didn't find criminal conspiracy. It says nothing about collusion. (1)

 

That report is such an indictment on Trump that if this were a few decades ago, we'd have begun the impeachment process already. (2)

 

But this is the whole point, isn't it? Trump and Faux News have brilliantly twisted the narrative around over the last couple years or so. So much so that no one really knows their position on anything. Trump really has one news station that spins a yarn so often of an alternative universe along with a bunch of feeble minded Republican Senators for being able to serve out the full 4 years he'll get.

 

Doesn't matter to me though. So many atrocious precedents have been set by Republicans over the last 8 years... none of this is surprising. Just gotta endure just 19+ more months of Trump.

 

*Bolded and numbers are mine

 

1. You were wrong before about this, and you're still wrong in this post. But you're sticking to it regardless, even when others in the thread show you the excerpts in the report proving you're wrong... 

 

2. The report was a political operation, not a legal one. Its legal findings all exonerated Trump. Fully. On both conspiracy and obstruction. You're wrong again... 

 

And yet... you were't done making sure everyone understood that you knew/know very little about this topic! You were just getting warmed up! 

 

On 5/24/2019 at 1:14 PM, transplantbillsfan said:

 

I guess we pay attention to different media and political pundits.

 

The whole idea of criminal conspiracy was always a very high bar that I never thought would be undeniably proven. (1)

 

What was undeniably proven was that Russia interfered in our election, trying to tip the scales in Trump's favor, and he knew about it. (2)

 

The obstruction of justice was always the biggest and most visible thing for Trump.  And an incredibly strong case for it was laid out in the Mueller report.  One that would have had the impeachment process begun--and possibly ended--already if we didn't have a Republican Senate so hilariously hypocritical (*ahem*...Lindsay Graham) in their undying loyalty to this President. (3)

 

All that's just the Mueller stuff. (4)

 

Then you have all the investigations into Trump's personal business and background, which are completely warranted and constitutional.

 

Trump broke precedent (and his word) of sharing his taxes the way every single other Presidential candidate has done for the last half century.

 

Are you seriously telling me you aren't the least bit curious as to why he's so ferociously protective of his business dealings?

 

The Emoluments lawsuit going (slowly, of course, because Trump's an obstructionist) through the courts is maybe the most important among the plethora of issues with the guy. (5)

 

The guy is just out in the open corrupt.  He always has been.  I'm one of the silly ones who really thought he didn't stand a chance in the election.  But unlike a number of those other silly people, I actually went out and voted.  

 

Trump won't be impeached  (6) and will remain in office for another year and a half, barring some kind of unbelievable and unforseen flip or something so ridiculously and outright in the open illegal that even the Senate can't ignore it.  But again, I don't expect that will happen because Trump has basically had his whole life to build a working knowledge of how to be a crook without getting thrown in jail.  The guy knows how to use the courts, that's for sure.

 

However, when it's Biden (almost certainly the Democratic candidate, I believe) vs. Trump, I believe Trump will not only lose the popular vote by millions of votes AGAIN, that he'll also lose the electoral vote this time.

 

*Bolded and numbers are mine

 

1. Note the weasel way you worded this one. "I never thought would be undeniably proven" -- leaving it wide open for you to argue that it happened, they just couldn't prove it. Which brings us back to the question I asked you the other day and you've been running from ever since: Do you believe Trump or his campaign colluded/conspired with the Russians to steal the 2016 election? Show the class how you're still wrong on this topic by answering that honestly. 

 

2. Actually, we know now in light of the OIG report and the declassifications of the ICA source material, that it's proven Russia favored neither side. In fact, they ran operations designed to favor both Trump and Clinton because their goal was to sow chaos, not tilt the scales one way or the other. We know, for a fact now, that John Brennan kept the information about the Russians favoring Clinton out of the ICA in order to deceive the public. So, again, you are undeniably wrong again -- because you were lied to by the same people you're trying to defend. They lied to you because they think you're too stupid to think for yourself... and so far on your Journey of Being Wrong, they seem to be correct in that assessment. 

 

3. In reality, it was a very weak obstruction case based on legal fantasy. It was such a weak obstruction case that it was immediately rejected -- not just by Barr but by Rod Rosenstein who was there from the very beginning of the SCO and had no loyalty to Trump whatsoever. So, you're wrong again -- but this is because you're a partisan and not thinking critically. Thus you think this is somehow subjective... it isn't.  

 

4. "The Mueller stuff" which you got wrong every step of the way. Laughably so.  

 

5. Ooops! Wrong again. That case got tossed in the trash by the courts. 

 

6. Wrong again! This was one that even worked in your favor!  

 

Oh, wait, but there's more on @transplantbillsfan's ridiculously long and well documented Journey of Being Wrong. 

 

On 7/25/2019 at 11:27 PM, transplantbillsfan said:

 

Considering the widespread findings are that, in fact, Russia "tried to" but did not directly influence a single vote, seems Obama's off the hook. (1)

 

Trump's still on the hook and, as we learned from Mueller the other day, is likely still under a counterintelligence investigation. (2) 

 

Forgive the fact that anyone might be critical of a guy who is directly warned by multiple US intelligence agencies that Russia is directly meddling in the current election he's participating in and then goes out and says, "Russia, if you're listening, we'd love those emails!" (3)

 

There are very good reasons the majority of this country loathes Trump. I will give him this, he's probably giving the country the most serious evaluation of whether our electoral college is outdated or not.

 

If he happens to win in 2020 (I doubt he will, but after 2016, who knows? Russians and others will still meddle afterall), then I suspect that the American voting system as we know it would have a lifespan of a decade at most.

 

*Bolded and numbers are mine

 

1. What's hilarious about this one is that you admit (without really admitting) you were wrong with your very first post already highlighted above.  You admit, almost a year later, that no votes were changed. Russia didn't influence the election -- despite their efforts to do so. Meddle does not = interfere. 

 

2.  Wrong all the way. He's off the hook (exonerated) and there was no additional CI investigation. That's two wrongs in one statement! 

 

3. We know now Trump was not fully briefed on the threats. This is proven by multiple declassifications and congressional testimonies. You were wrong again -- but it sure is a nice piece of fiction to string those things together like that (while omitting the fact that what he said on stage was A) a joke and B) not right after being briefed by the FBI. Starting to see how you were programmed VERY EARLY ON? 

 

We're still not done! And to be frank, I was tuckering out at this point in my search. My sides were hurting too much from laughing at your stunning display of ignorance time and time again... so let's keep going along with you on your wonderfully ironic Journey of Being Wrong while also being super condescending! 

 

On 7/26/2019 at 10:06 AM, transplantbillsfan said:

 

Nah. Your twisting of my own narrative here is actually on you. Don't worry, I know this is what you guys do over here.

 

 

Exonerated Trump?

 

Trump was NOT exonerated, literally the wording of the guy who investigated Trump. (1)

 

And if you think that Trump shouldn't continue to be under scrutiny for, among other things, consciously undermining the 2016 election under the campaign finance reform statutes, that's another thing on you.

 

 

Wait... so now you know exactly what the agencies told him about what The Russians were doing in terms of meddling when they met with Trump--and I know you're aware that they did in fact meet with him to warn about Russian meddling--AND you also know what Trump was thinking that moment he asked publicly for the emails, which were released quickly thereafter? (2)

Your God complex is on you.

 

 

*Bolded and numbers are mine

 

1) A prosecutor doesn't exonerate, so Mueller's words were improper. The result of the Mueller probe was a declaration of innocence. No charges brought, no indictment. And we live in a country where we are innocent until proven guilty. Trump was found innocent in full. Even on obstruction which both RR and Barr ruled on despite Weissman's punting. 

 

2) We in fact do know exactly what they briefed him on, and per Comey's own testimony they did not brief Trump in full deliberately. Why? Because he was a target of their CI investigation. This is not speculation, it's now proven fact. You were wrong about that and the timing of the email release. But again, why bother learning the facts when you can be lazy and let the Legacy Media tell you how to think instead? 

 

******************************************

 

This is not really the end of your Journey of Being wrong, but it's a good stopping point. I'm certain there's more stupidity in the year that followed but I think 17 clear examples of times you, @transplantbillsfan were demonstrably wrong about the Trump/Russia story and its outcome is more than enough to prove my point.

 

You were wrong from your very first day down here on this topic... 

 

And you've never copped to it. Not once. 

 

Here's your chance to remedy that.

 

 

[Hedge]

[Deranged Rhino]

On 6/21/2020 at 4:14 PM, transplantbillsfan said:

Do you actually know what the word "coward" means?

It means someone who talks a great deal

of shite, only to then run away when called out — like a coward... 

 

You should know. You’ve been doing it for your whole life, coward. 

[Deranged Rhino]

View of @transplantbillsfan in hiding... 

 

 

17 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said:

@transplantbillsfan -- moving this to a more appropriate thread... 

...

 

[Warren Zevon]

1 hour ago, Deranged Rhino said:

It means someone who talks a great deal

of shite, only to then run away when called out — like a coward... 

 

When did Soleimani die again?

[Deranged Rhino]

@transplantbillsfan right now: 

[transplantbillsfan]

3 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

@transplantbillsfan right now: 

 

More like:

But enjoy your day 

[Deranged Rhino]

Just now, transplantbillsfan said:

 

 

All this time to respond -- and you still haven't. Literally you've posted a half a dozen times over the past 12 hours... 

 

Cowards do what cowards do. Thank you again for proving me correct. 

[Buffalo_Gal]

4 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

@transplantbillsfan right now: 

Ok, I normally find your and @transplantbillsfan squabbles to be and and but that gif is hilarious. 

 

[transplantbillsfan]

On 6/22/2020 at 1:35 PM, Deranged Rhino said:

@transplantbillsfan -- moving this to a more appropriate thread... 

 

 

You asked me to show you where you had ever said anything wrong about Trump/Russia -- and I explained I did not have time over the weekend to dig. Rather than answer my question on your current opinion on the matter so we could cut right to the chase, you wanted to play games. So, game on.  

 

I had time today to look. And boy was it fun. Let's take a trip back through your Journey of Being Wrong from the very first day on Trump/Russia... by the time we get through this, the only question left is whether or not you will admit to being wrong as you said you would.

 

Let's find out! 

 

Starting with, your very first PPP post on the subject in October of 2018: 

 

 

Note two things about this chalk-full-of-wrong post... first, you displayed no understanding of the Butina case and why it was important. What Butina showed was that despite the media narrative at the time, the only actual Russian spy deployed by Putin was identified, charged, and expelled immediately upon the changing of administrations. Not something one would expect from a "puppet" president. It also overlooks the fact that the Obama DOJ knew Butina was a Russian spook for well over a year but let her operate freely anyway... but again, details aren't important. Just feelz. 

 

I don't understand where the posting of an article makes me wrong.

 

Can you explain that?

 

On 6/22/2020 at 1:35 PM, Deranged Rhino said:

 

But where you were demonstrably wrong was with your last statement. You imply Russia did influence the 2016 election. After the Mueller report, the OIG report, all the FBI disclosures and multiple trials and their accompanying discovery, transcripts, and testimonies, it's proven that Russia did NOT influence the election. 

 

Can you post something that proves Russia didn't influence the election? Not something that says there was "insufficient evidence," but instead something that proves it.

 

You claim that proof exists, just provide it and this will be one of the things I admit was wrong about.

 

So just pull out the parts of the Mueller report, OIG report, FBI disclosures and trials that directly stated there's proof Russia had no influence on the election.

 

On 6/22/2020 at 1:35 PM, Deranged Rhino said:

 

*Bolded and numbers are mine

 

1. This is a false statement. Per Mueller's own report, there was no evidence of collusion/conspiracy in his report. None. That was cemented by the later findings of the OIG and the disclosures from the Crossfire Hurricane team and its documents/origin point. They had an open investigation for nearly 3 years and found nada. Zip. Zero.

 

2. The first page of the report shows that this is incorrect. Mueller (really Weissman) makes it clear that collusion is not a legal term even though it's synonymous with conspiracy. Thus they used conspiracy, not collusion in the report. But they're the same thing. And -- guess what, he found zero evidence of it despite your first incorrect statement. 

 

I didn't read the Mueller report and never will. 

 

Maybe Mueller found no evidence of criminal conspiracy, but that could be because Mueller himself was impeded in his investigation by members of the Trump campaign who lied, encrypted and deleted communications, individuals providing false or incomplete info, and Trump dangling pardons in the face of people of interest like Manafort in an effort to interfere with the investigation. Those were claims by Mueller, not me.

 

As for collusion, Mueller's Summary of major findings at least provides several examples of what would surely be considered collusion. And that combined with an impeded investigation shouldn't lead anyone to the conclusion that Trump was proven innocent. Mueller never said that.

 

On 6/22/2020 at 1:35 PM, Deranged Rhino said:

 

1. You were wrong before about this, and you're still wrong in this post. But you're sticking to it regardless, even when others in the thread show you the excerpts in the report proving you're wrong... 

 

What is wrong about it?

 

I just explained it to you.

 

On 6/22/2020 at 1:35 PM, Deranged Rhino said:

 

2. The report was a political operation, not a legal one. Its legal findings all exonerated Trump. Fully. On both conspiracy and obstruction. You're wrong again... 

 

Ummm... no they didn't 

 

On 6/22/2020 at 1:35 PM, Deranged Rhino said:

 

*Bolded and numbers are mine

 

1. Note the weasel way you worded this one. "I never thought would be undeniably proven" -- leaving it wide open for you to argue that it happened, they just couldn't prove it. Which brings us back to the question I asked you the other day and you've been running from ever since: Do you believe Trump or his campaign colluded/conspired with the Russians to steal the 2016 election? Show the class how you're still wrong on this topic by answering that honestly. 

 

Yes. Needs to be undeniably or almost undeniably proven.

 

It hasn't been here.

 

And yes, I believe there was collusion. It's clearly there. I'm not as sure about conspiracy, but sure, I'd say I believe that happened, too.

 

On 6/22/2020 at 1:35 PM, Deranged Rhino said:

 

2. Actually, we know now in light of the OIG report and the declassifications of the ICA source material, that it's proven Russia favored neither side. In fact, they ran operations designed to favor both Trump and Clinton because their goal was to sow chaos, not tilt the scales one way or the other. We know, for a fact now, that John Brennan kept the information about the Russians favoring Clinton out of the ICA in order to deceive the public. So, again, you are undeniably wrong again -- because you were lied to by the same people you're trying to defend. They lied to you because they think you're too stupid to think for yourself... and so far on your Journey of Being Wrong, they seem to be correct in that assessment. 

 

Prove it.

 

I know Russia hacked the Republicans, too. But the information wasn't released in any kind of damaging way as it was for Clinton.

 

Provide me the evidence that the Russians were equal opportunity destroyers of both Clinton and Trump. That's news to me.

 

On 6/22/2020 at 1:35 PM, Deranged Rhino said:

 

3. In reality, it was a very weak obstruction case based on legal fantasy. It was such a weak obstruction case that it was immediately rejected -- not just by Barr but by Rod Rosenstein who was there from the very beginning of the SCO and had no loyalty to Trump whatsoever. So, you're wrong again -- but this is because you're a partisan and not thinking critically. Thus you think this is somehow subjective... it isn't.  

 

Wow this I do NOT agree with.

 

On 6/22/2020 at 1:35 PM, Deranged Rhino said:

 

4. "The Mueller stuff" which you got wrong every step of the way. Laughably so.  

 

Doesn't really seem so so far.

 

On 6/22/2020 at 1:35 PM, Deranged Rhino said:

 

5. Ooops! Wrong again. That case got tossed in the trash by the courts. 

 

On 6/22/2020 at 1:35 PM, Deranged Rhino said:

 

6. Wrong again! This was one that even worked in your favor!  

 

Here ya go. You're right. 

 

I was dead wrong on this one. I absolutely did not think Trump would be impeached.

 

I really didn't think the House would end up going through with it because of political risk.

 

I was dead wrong about that one and will eat crow on it.

 

On 6/22/2020 at 1:35 PM, Deranged Rhino said:

 

*Bolded and numbers are mine

 

1. What's hilarious about this one is that you admit (without really admitting) you were wrong with your very first post already highlighted above.  You admit, almost a year later, that no votes were changed. Russia didn't influence the election -- despite their efforts to do so. Meddle does not = interfere. 

 

This was probably from me reading so much of you my head got twisted all around.

 

This post was wrong, too.

 

On 6/22/2020 at 1:35 PM, Deranged Rhino said:

 

2.  Wrong all the way. He's off the hook (exonerated) and there was no additional CI investigation. That's two wrongs in one statement! 

 

Trump certainly wasn't exonerated.

 

He does hold the power of the Presidency, though.

 

I think losing the election in November is just the first of his worries to come.

 

On 6/22/2020 at 1:35 PM, Deranged Rhino said:

 

3. We know now Trump was not fully briefed on the threats. This is proven by multiple declassifications and congressional testimonies. You were wrong again -- but it sure is a nice piece of fiction to string those things together like that (while omitting the fact that what he said on stage was A) a joke and B) not right after being briefed by the FBI. Starting to see how you were programmed VERY EARLY ON? 

 

Bill Barr himself admits Trump was warned Russia was trying to meddle.

 

Don't see how this is incorrect.

 

On 6/22/2020 at 1:35 PM, Deranged Rhino said:

*Bolded and numbers are mine

 

1) A prosecutor doesn't exonerate, so Mueller's words were improper. The result of the Mueller probe was a declaration of innocence. No charges brought, no indictment. And we live in a country where we are innocent until proven guilty. Trump was found innocent in full. Even on obstruction which both RR and Barr ruled on despite Weissman's punting. 

 

No.

 

No.

 

No.

 

So much wrong with this.

 

No.

 

On 6/22/2020 at 1:35 PM, Deranged Rhino said:

 

2) We in fact do know exactly what they briefed him on, and per Comey's own testimony they did not brief Trump in full deliberately. Why? Because he was a target of their CI investigation. This is not speculation, it's now proven fact. You were wrong about that and the timing of the email release. But again, why bother learning the facts when you can be lazy and let the Legacy Media tell you how to think instead? 

 

Trump WAS told the elections were meddling and were trying to meddle, plain and simple.

 

On 6/22/2020 at 1:35 PM, Deranged Rhino said:

 

******************************************

 

This is not really the end of your Journey of Being wrong, but it's a good stopping point. I'm certain there's more stupidity in the year that followed but I think 17 clear examples of times you, @transplantbillsfan were demonstrably wrong about the Trump/Russia story and its outcome is more than enough to prove my point.

 

You were wrong from your very first day down here on this topic... 

 

And you've never copped to it. Not once. 

 

Here's your chance to remedy that.

 

 

 

You're right. And that's why I just admitted those parts where I was proven wrong. Keep the rest of that proof coming and you'll get even more of that validation you seem to need. 

 

For now I think you should step outside and get some Sun, though. Just some friendly advice.

 

We both surf a lot, you just do waaAAaaayyy too much of this:

[Deranged Rhino]

You’re wrong about every single thing you’ve written above. Every one. 
 

And you’re so dumb you think you scored after hiding for two days. GTFOH  

[Foxx]

7 hours ago, transplantbillsfan said:

Can you post something that proves Russia didn't influence the election? Not something that says there was "insufficient evidence," but instead something that proves it.

 

7 hours ago, transplantbillsfan said:

Provide me the evidence that the Russians were equal opportunity destroyers

so... you want DR to prove a negative.

 

7 hours ago, transplantbillsfan said:

And yes, I believe there was collusion. It's clearly there. I'm not as sure about conspiracy, but sure, I'd say I believe that happened, too.

you know that there is no legal standard or crime regarding collusion, right? you have so clearly been conditioned by the propagandists.

 

7 hours ago, transplantbillsfan said:

Maybe Mueller found no evidence of criminal conspiracy, but that could be because Mueller himself was impeded in his investigation by members of the Trump campaign who lied, encrypted and deleted communications, individuals providing false or incomplete info, and Trump dangling pardons in the face of people of interest like Manafort in an effort to interfere with the investigation. Those were claims by Mueller, not me.

 

As for collusion, Mueller's Summary of major findings at least provides several examples of what would surely be considered collusion. And that combined with an impeded investigation shouldn't lead anyone to the conclusion that Trump was proven innocent. Mueller never said that.

oye! you don't prove innocence you dolt (said in the most loving way)! it's like asking someone to prove a negative, it doesn't work that way. you should be glad it doesn't too. what if someone said you molest your students? unless your proven innocent, you are then guilty? believe all women, amiright?

[Westside]

8 hours ago, transplantbillsfan said:

 

I don't understand where the posting of an article makes me wrong.

 

Can you explain that?

 

 

Can you post something that proves Russia didn't influence the election? Not something that says there was "insufficient evidence," but instead something that proves it.

 

You claim that proof exists, just provide it and this will be one of the things I admit was wrong about.

 

So just pull out the parts of the Mueller report, OIG report, FBI disclosures and trials that directly stated there's proof Russia had no influence on the election.

 

 

I didn't read the Mueller report and never will. 

 

Maybe Mueller found no evidence of criminal conspiracy, but that could be because Mueller himself was impeded in his investigation by members of the Trump campaign who lied, encrypted and deleted communications, individuals providing false or incomplete info, and Trump dangling pardons in the face of people of interest like Manafort in an effort to interfere with the investigation. Those were claims by Mueller, not me.

 

As for collusion, Mueller's Summary of major findings at least provides several examples of what would surely be considered collusion. And that combined with an impeded investigation shouldn't lead anyone to the conclusion that Trump was proven innocent. Mueller never said that.

 

 

What is wrong about it?

 

I just explained it to you.

 

 

Ummm... no they didn't 

 

 

Yes. Needs to be undeniably or almost undeniably proven.

 

It hasn't been here.

 

And yes, I believe there was collusion. It's clearly there. I'm not as sure about conspiracy, but sure, I'd say I believe that happened, too.

 

 

Prove it.

 

I know Russia hacked the Republicans, too. But the information wasn't released in any kind of damaging way as it was for Clinton.

 

Provide me the evidence that the Russians were equal opportunity destroyers of both Clinton and Trump. That's news to me.

 

 

Wow this I do NOT agree with.

 

 

Doesn't really seem so so far.

 

 

 

Here ya go. You're right. 

 

I was dead wrong on this one. I absolutely did not think Trump would be impeached.

 

I really didn't think the House would end up going through with it because of political risk.

 

I was dead wrong about that one and will eat crow on it.

 

 

This was probably from me reading so much of you my head got twisted all around.

 

This post was wrong, too.

 

 

Trump certainly wasn't exonerated.

 

He does hold the power of the Presidency, though.

 

I think losing the election in November is just the first of his worries to come.

 

 

Bill Barr himself admits Trump was warned Russia was trying to meddle.

 

Don't see how this is incorrect.

 

 

No.

 

No.

 

No.

 

So much wrong with this.

 

No.

 

 

Trump WAS told the elections were meddling and were trying to meddle, plain and simple.

 

 

You're right. And that's why I just admitted those parts where I was proven wrong. Keep the rest of that proof coming and you'll get even more of that validation you seem to need. 

 

For now I think you should step outside and get some Sun, though. Just some friendly advice.

 

We both surf a lot, you just do waaAAaaayyy too much of this:

The burden of proof is on the accuser. That is how the law is set up. If you information that no one else has, I would like to hear it. I keep an open mind. As of today, that evidence doesn't exist.

[Buffalo_Gal]

FLYNN IS FREE!!!!


Appeals court orders judge to dismiss Flynn charges

 

 

[Deranged Rhino]

 

Sorry, @transplantbillsfan -- there's now written notes to prove you're wrong. And that Joe and Obama abused their powers not to keep the country safe, but to persecute their political enemies. This is a crime. 

 

No Chance Joe is about to feel a world of hurt. 

[njbuff]

2 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

Sorry, @transplantbillsfan -- there's now written notes to prove you're wrong. And that Joe and Obama abused their powers not to keep the country safe, but to persecute their political enemies. This is a crime. 

 

No Chance Joe is about to feel a world of hurt. 

 

Not if MSM has anything to do with it.

 

He will be allowed to skate that mile long rink.

[Deranged Rhino]

 

[Deranged Rhino]

 

[Deranged Rhino]

 

They knew in JANUARY 2017 that there was nothing there. This is TEN months later... 

 

It was always a coup. 

[Doc]

...and the MSM will ignore it.

[Buffalo_Gal]

Flynn must have some info...

 

Filing doc
 

 

[Deranged Rhino]