What's new
Frozen In Carbonite

Welcome to FIC! Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

The Trump-Russia Investigation Thread: Mueller Goes Terminator Edition

Reaction..

  • Huh?

    Votes: 2 6.7%
  • Seriously?

    Votes: 5 16.7%
  • ... are we in some crappy technothriller?

    Votes: 22 73.3%
  • WTF?

    Votes: 1 3.3%

  • Total voters
    30

Lerticus

Senile Old Coot
Communism
Hey, if we are going to live in a shitty movie, at least put actors I enjoy.
Stallone is American-born and raised. Think of how effective he would be as president after bringing down the Soviet Union with a speech! (I can't even be mad about that, it was a great speech *snicker*)
 

Alcibiades

Active member
Really, just one side? For two years we've been watching the Bob Mueller's Dog and Pony Show and listened to respected democrats telling us that Trump is Putin's man, that Putin has him in his pocket, that the Steele Dossier is basically the word of God and that the peepee tape is real. That any day now Trump will be in prison, or at least impeached, because it's absolutely certain that he colluded with the Russians. That all, instead of thinking "why do half of US voters feel so disenfranchised they would willingly vote for a sexist orange?"
So, yeah, it's not just one side. There is a better side and a worse side in all this, but both have abandoned reason some time ago.
amen my Slovakian brother.

The dems and the media that were pushing this Russiagate stuff have simply resulted in Trump looking vindicated (because he is). If they keep running with it, they will accomplish nothing but give Trump lots of opportunity to say that he was vindicated. This whole thing was a giant present to Trump (as people like Aaron Mate have been saying from the beginning). He now has a truly enormous example of demonstrably fake news to point at. Tucker Carlson and all those guys saying this was a sham were demonstrably correct.

Going after him for "obstruction of justice" is not going to work, because for the average guy Trump was obstructing not justice but a politically-motivated attack.

That won't stop them though. They're already attacking Tulsi Gabbard as a Russian agent.
 

Tithed_Verse

What's bugging you?
Author
Look, since we're electing people who are bad at money and have no idea what it's like to live in poverty anyway, let's all just write in Keanu Reeves for president.

He now has a truly enormous example of demonstrably fake news to point at. Tucker Carlson and all those guys saying this was a sham were demonstrably correct.
It's just like how the Democrats were complaining about Trump firing Comry, a guy who clearly was biting the hands of both sides just because he wanted to become the next J Edgar Hoover.... without the experience, talent for intrigue, or smarts to actually make congress afraid of him.
 

Alcibiades

Active member
Look, since we're electing people who are bad at money and have no idea what it's like to live in poverty anyway, let's all just write in Keanu Reeves for president.


It's just like how the Democrats were complaining about Trump firing Comry, a guy who clearly was biting the hands of both sides just because he wanted to become the next J Edgar Hoover.... without the experience, talent for intrigue, or smarts to actually make congress afraid of him.
What's even funnier is that before Comey was the Devil. Remember?
 

Wakko

Well-known member
They're already attacking Tulsi Gabbard as a Russian agent.
That's a pity. When I listen to her, I hear an American patriot who is not afraid to speak the truth as she sees it - and she has a 10/10 vision IMO.
The angle that "she's bad because the Russians like her" is hilarious. They like her because she's not using russophobia to get points, she's talking about actual real issues in US society.
 

Chatokay

Self-proclaimed FiC official absinthe provider :)
No. Let's consider your logic on another case: "Either the Sun rises tomorrow or it doesn't? Therefore 50 %."

Do you see the issue? Not all possibilities have equal probability.
Ah @Rufus Shinra, I'm telling you this as a friend, you should relax a bit. This situation is simply out of our control, us non-US citizens, so we should at least put some humour in it rather than fall into despair, you don't think ?
 
Last edited:

Alcibiades

Active member
That's a pity. When I listen to her, I hear an American patriot who is not afraid to speak the truth as she sees it - and she has a 10/10 vision IMO.
The angle that "she's bad because the Russians like her" is hilarious. They like her because she's not using russophobia to get points, she's talking about actual real issues in US society.
The real enemy of the Dem establishment, in my view, is not Trump, but people like Gabbard and Sanders. But that's a different subject.
 

IndyFront

Yokkiziikzekker
Author
At this point Id almost willing to say we'd have a better shot impeaching and removing Trump than Democrats getting their shit together in time to beat him in the election
 

Tithed_Verse

What's bugging you?
Author
What's even funnier is that before Comey was the Devil. Remember?
Yeah. That's what I was commenting on. On Spacebattles, I actually got a lot of heat for supporting Trump firing Comry while it was happening. It's kinda hilarious that Spacebattles has consistently believed me to be a Republican Stooge :p.
 

Alcibiades

Active member
Yeah. That's what I was commenting on. On Spacebattles, I actually got a lot of heat for supporting Trump firing Comry while it was happening. It's kinda hilarious that Spacebattles has consistently believed me to be a Republican Stooge :p.
Leo1 was consistently completely correct about the Russiagate thing, but can't even say "I told you so" because he was banned for having the unpopular position of being right.
 

Aaron Fox

SB's Minor Junker Descendant and Hunter of Nazis
Author
At this point Id almost willing to say we'd have a better shot impeaching and removing Trump than Democrats getting their shit together in time to beat him in the election
That won't happen as long as the GOP base is synonymous as the Trump base.
 

IndyFront

Yokkiziikzekker
Author
That's a pity. When I listen to her, I hear an American patriot who is not afraid to speak the truth as she sees it - and she has a 10/10 vision IMO.
The angle that "she's bad because the Russians like her" is hilarious. They like her because she's not using russophobia to get points, she's talking about actual real issues in US society.
Reasons why "Gabbard is an Assad toadie!" is a stupid argument:
1567103149741.png
1567103159642.png
1567103169112.png
1567103178608.png
 

IndyFront

Yokkiziikzekker
Author
That won't happen as long as the GOP base is synonymous as the Trump base.
Weren't you arguing for impeachment back when I was arguing against it, and now that I (reluctantly) support it you're on the other side now? Wat?
 

Aaron Fox

SB's Minor Junker Descendant and Hunter of Nazis
Author
Weren't you arguing for impeachment back when I was arguing against it, and now that I (reluctantly) support it you're on the other side now? Wat?
No, I'm saying that as long as the GOP base is synonymous with the Trump base, the GOP will ensure that impeachment will not happen. They're too tied to the base that it is even an option.
 

IndyFront

Yokkiziikzekker
Author
No, I'm saying that as long as the GOP base is synonymous with the Trump base, the GOP will ensure that impeachment will not happen. They're too tied to the base that it is even an option.
Oh, well on that we agree. Still, my point stands the Democrats are on the way to defeat again (at least Presidential, but it looks like Senatorial as well, so we'll probably have to wait until the early 2020's at the earliest before we start seeing signs of a Trump defeat)
 

Aaron Fox

SB's Minor Junker Descendant and Hunter of Nazis
Author
Oh, well on that we agree. Still, my point stands the Democrats are on the way to defeat again (at least Presidential, but it looks like Senatorial as well, so we'll probably have to wait until the early 2020's at the earliest before we start seeing signs of a Trump defeat)
Actually, the odds are against Trump so far... but we have to wait closer to election season to see what actually happens.
 

Alcibiades

Active member
Trying for impeachment is the worst idea ever. Continuously mentioning that Trump tried to block Mueller (but actually didn't wind up doing it) is just going to give Trump endless opportunities to say that he was falsely accused of a crime because his political enemies didn't like the results of the election. This will be very persuasive because it's true. It makes the Dems look much worse than Trump to anyone who isn't already a partisan establishment Dem.
 

Ravan

Gone
Trying for impeachment is the worst idea ever. Continuously mentioning that Trump tried to block Mueller (but actually didn't wind up doing it) is just going to give Trump endless opportunities to say that he was falsely accused of a crime because his political enemies didn't like the results of the election. This will be very persuasive because it's true. It makes the Dems look much worse than Trump to anyone who isn't already a partisan establishment Dem.
Except that’s a lie, as you’ve been repeatedly told, with proof, across multiple sites and threads. The investigation explicitly didn’t clear Trump, and Mueller explicitly said that if he had been legally able to indict a president, Trump would have been indicted. You are a liar, and your entire argument is in bad faith.
 

Alcibiades

Active member
Except that’s a lie, as you’ve been repeatedly told, with proof, across multiple sites and threads. The investigation explicitly didn’t clear Trump, and Mueller explicitly said that if he had been legally able to indict a president, Trump would have been indicted. You are a liar, and your entire argument is in bad faith.
Of course the investigation didn't clear Trump. That's not what a prosecutor's job is. His job is to establish whether there are grounds for a criminal investigation -- which were not found.

The fact of the matter is that no evidence was found of collusion. Obstruction of justice is a completely different issue. And following this angle is a very bad idea for reasons that I have laid out.

I never argue in bad faith, and never accuse others of doing do, so why don't you fuck off you gibbering monkey-creature.

Fixed your spelling. You are welcome.
Well, that's more or less what anyone who isn't a partisan establishment Dem is going to see, minus the all caps. We know what the motivation was -- the Steele Dossier (worthless), Papadopolous said something to someone in a bar (worthless), and some people in the int services didn't like Trump's statements on foreign policy (scary). That's literally it. That was pushed for political reasons. This is all known. It's not a secret.
 
Last edited:

Ravan

Gone
Of course the investigation didn't clear Trump. That's not what a prosecutor's job is. His job is to establish whether there are grounds for a criminal investigation -- which were not found.

The fact of the matter is that no evidence was found of collusion. Obstruction of justice is a completely different issue. And following this angle is a very bad idea for reasons that I have laid out.

I never argue in bad faith, and never accuse others of doing do, so why don't you fuck off you gibbering monkey-creature.



Well, that's more or less what anyone who isn't a partisan establishment Dem is going to see, minus the all caps. We know what the motivation was -- the Steele Dossier (worthless), Papadopolous said something to someone in a bar (worthless), and some people in the int services didn't like Trump's statements on foreign policy (scary). That's literally it. That was pushed for political reasons. This is all known. It's not a secret.
Except there explicitly were grounds for an indictment. He literally said exactly that. The only thing stopping him was the policy stating that the DOJ can’t indict a president.

Again: you are a liar.
 

Alcibiades

Active member
Except there explicitly were grounds for an indictment. He literally said exactly that. The only thing stopping him was the policy stating that the DOJ can’t indict a president.
Grounds for an indictment for obstruction of justice.

See, I'm not calling you a liar, because I think that you really don't know that.
 

Top