Jump to content

Trump and Russia

Benjamin Franklin
 Share

Recommended Posts

Deranged Rhino Hall of Famer

Deranged Rhino

Posted
Posted
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. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 8.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Golden Goat
Golden Goat
/dev/null
/dev/null

mollie and some schmuck on a football message board sub forum  

Deranged Rhino
Deranged Rhino

They knew in JANUARY 2017 that there was nothing there. This is TEN months later...    It was always a coup. 

Posted Images

transplantbillsfan All Pro

transplantbillsfan

Posted
Posted
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  :huh:

 

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. :lol: 

 

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. 

 

:blink:

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

 

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

 

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. :lol: 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.

 

:beer: 

 

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:

giphy.gif

  • Haha (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Foxx All Pro

Foxx

Posted
Posted
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?

  • Like (+1) 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Westside Veteran

Westside

Posted
Posted
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  :huh:

 

 

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.

 

 

:blink:

 

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:

giphy.gif

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.

  • Like (+1) 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
njbuff All Pro

njbuff

Posted
Posted
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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...