ALL HAIL PRESIDENT TRUMP
" Xav, you keep using the wrong words. Collusion is not a crime here in the USA. What you are referring to is conspiracy. The Merriam-Webster definition of collusion is :secret agreement or cooperation especially for an illegal or deceitful purpose acting in collusion with the enemy. By that definition the Trump campaign colluded with Russia in the 2016 election. Russia and the Trump campaign cooperated to their mutual benefit to get Trump elected. This is stated in the Mueller report. There was no conspiracy found because the investigation could not find any evidence of an agreement and the investigators do not believe that any such agreement was made. Over 430 threads discussing labyrinth problems with over 1040 posters in support (thread # 1702621) Thank you all! GGG will implement a different method for ascension in PoE2. Retired!
|
|
" I don't see why this matters. We are all talking about the same thing. Which is criminal activity. It's not like any of us called it anything different in the last 20 posts. " tbh, there is probably a good behavioral biologist, out there that can explain the evolutionary reason for this. (⌐■_■)
|
|
" The point is that collusion is NOT necessarily referring to a criminal activity. It can be reasonably argued that Trump and Russia colluded or cooperated on the 2016 campaign to get Trump elected. Based on the Mueller report the controversial part of that conversation would be what definition of "collusion" is being used. The Mueller report makes it clear that Trump and Russia did not conspire on the 2016 campaign however. True that within the context of this thread in the last 20 posts as you say, it wouldn't make a big difference here. It is reasonably possible that it could be the source of communication break down in general when discussing this topic in the general context though. Over 430 threads discussing labyrinth problems with over 1040 posters in support (thread # 1702621) Thank you all! GGG will implement a different method for ascension in PoE2. Retired!
|
|
" "So by default then, you are alleging cooperation between the Trump campaign and Russian operatives. Considering that the definition of cooperation is much looser than I believed (per MW, the first definition is "the actions of someone who is being helpful by doing what is wanted or asked for"), well, it's actually kind of difficult to argue with that. I guess modern usage has stretched the definition to the point that it covers pretty much anything. Did Russia want the more russophobic candidate to become President, or the less russophobic one? Check. Did Trump want WikiLeaks to dump a bunch of dirt on Clinton? Also check. Collusion confirmed. We should all collude with each other more often. All it means is secretly being helpful to people by doing things they want. You can even keep it a secret from the person(s) you're helping, so long as you know what they desire. Colluders are awesome; they're like Secret Santas. I don't get how they've gotten such a bad rap. When Stephen Colbert was killed by HYDRA's Project Insight in 2014, the comedy world lost a hero. Since his life model decoy isn't up to the task, please do not mistake my performance as political discussion. I'm just doing what Steve would have wanted. Last edited by ScrotieMcB#2697 on Apr 19, 2019, 10:52:38 PM
|
|
" He bungled the job, looking in the wrong direction for collusion
Spoiler
(should have been looking at the Side of Beef)
"Comey and Mueller badly bungled the biggest case they ever handled. They botched the investigation of the 2001 anthrax letter attacks that took five lives and infected 17 other people, shut down the U.S. Capitol and Washington’s mail system, solidified the Bush administration’s antipathy for Iraq, and eventually, when the facts finally came out, made the FBI look feckless, incompetent, and easily manipulated by outside political pressure. This, too, was an enormously complex case. But here are some facts: Despite the jihadist slogans accompanying the mailed anthrax, it had nothing to do with Saddam Hussein or any foreign element; the FBI ignored a 2002 tip from a scientific colleague of the actual anthrax killer, who turned out to be a Fort Detrick scientist named Bruce Edwards Ivins; the reason is that they had quickly obsessed on an innocent man named Steven Hatfill; the bureau was bullied into focusing on the government scientist by Democratic Sen. Patrick Leahy (whose office, along with that of Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, was targeted by an anthrax-laced letter) and was duped into focusing on Hatfill by two sources – a conspiracy-minded college professor with a political agenda who’d never met Hatfill and by Nicholas Kristof, who put his conspiracy theories in the paper while mocking the FBI for not arresting Hatfill. In truth, Hatfill was an implausible suspect from the outset. He was a virologist who never handled anthrax, which is a bacterium. (Ivins, by contrast, shared ownership of anthrax patents, was diagnosed as having paranoid personality disorder, and had a habit of stalking and threatening people with anonymous letters – including the woman who provided the long-ignored tip to the FBI). So what evidence did the FBI have against Hatfill? There was none, so the agency did a Hail Mary, importing two bloodhounds from California whose handlers claimed could sniff the scent of the killer on the anthrax-tainted letters. These dogs were shown to Hatfill, who promptly petted them. When the dogs responded favorably, their handlers told the FBI that they’d “alerted” on Hatfill and that he must be the killer. You’d think that any good FBI agent would have kicked these quacks in the fanny and found their dogs a good home. Or at least checked news accounts of criminal cases in California where these same dogs had been used against defendants who’d been convicted -- and later exonerated. As Pulitzer Prize-winning Los Angeles Times investigative reporter David Willman detailed in his authoritative book on the case, a California judge who’d tossed out a murder conviction based on these sketchy canines called the prosecution’s dog handler “as biased as any witness that this court has ever seen.” Instead, Mueller, who micromanaged the anthrax case and fell in love with the dubious dog evidence, personally assured Ashcroft and presumably George W. Bush that in Steven Hatfill the bureau had its man. Comey, in turn, was asked by a skeptical Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz if Hatfill was another Richard Jewell – the security guard wrongly accused of the Atlanta Olympics bombing. Comey replied that he was “absolutely certain” they weren’t making a mistake. Such certitude seems to be Comey’s default position in his professional life. Mueller didn’t exactly distinguish himself with contrition, either. In 2008, after Ivins committed suicide as he was about to be apprehended for his crimes, and the Justice Department had formally exonerated Hatfill – and paid him $5.82 million in a legal settlement – Mueller could not be bothered to walk across the street to attend the press conference announcing the case’s resolution. When reporters did ask him about it, Mueller was graceless. “I do not apologize for any aspect of the investigation,” he said, adding that it would be erroneous “to say there were mistakes.” https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2017/05/21/when_comey_and_mueller_bungled_the_anthrax_case_133953.html Oddly enough - Mueller's wikipedia page says NOTHING about the Anthrax case, doesn't mention it at all. It's like it didn't exist. Memory Holed for future generations. Wikipedia is lying to people. They know what happened, they just don't want you to know. Maybe Wikipedia thinks it is a conspiracy? Maybe they just can't trust those people at the FBI.gov website - Especially Mueller himself - that it happened. https://archives.fbi.gov/archives/news/pressrel/press-releases/statement-of-director-mueller-on-fbi-investigations-into-anthrax-exposures-and-suspected-anthrax-exposure The left will believe anything if its on CNN  PoE Origins - Piety's story http://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/2081910
|
|
" This is peak cognitive dissonance, you state two literally opposing statements and believe in both at the same time. Trump truly broke you. Big yikes my dude. GGG banning all political discussion shortly after getting acquired by China is a weird coincidence.
|
|
" Truly Turtle's Ana Navarro moment. There are two types of POE players:
1) Those who want to walk uphill both ways barefoot on broken glass wearing a blindfold 2) F*cking noobs I identify as transnational Chinese. May I have access to their QOL features, please? |
|
" You really are being very dense. They are not opposing statements. You just don't know what collusion means. That is the point that you keep missing because you are so dedicated to believing the lies of a pathological liar. I'll try again although I freely admit that you are not worth my time. The Merriam-Webster definition of collusion is :secret agreement or cooperation especially for an illegal or deceitful purpose acting in collusion with the enemy. Russia and Trump both wanted Trump to win in 2016. They cooperated in that effort. Russia stole the emails and published them on Wikileaks and Trump used that constantly especially in the last few weeks of his campaign. Therefore by the above definition they colluded in the 2016 election. I know the pathological liar has told you there was "no collusion", just see if you can put that out of your mind for just a moment, look at the definition of the word collusion and try to understand that it is really very simple. If you can't handle the horrible thought that maybe Trump is lying to you then maybe it would be easier for your mind to follow if you convinced yourself that maybe instead Trump is just using a different definition for the word "collusion" when he says "NO COLLUSION!". Over 430 threads discussing labyrinth problems with over 1040 posters in support (thread # 1702621) Thank you all! GGG will implement a different method for ascension in PoE2. Retired! Last edited by Turtledove#4014 on Apr 20, 2019, 10:03:50 AM
|
|
" I know it's hard to process information when you suffer from such intense cognitive dissonance, but you can still try. Here's the relevant part from Mueller's report:  No conspiracy, no coordination. By the way, cherry picking one word out of a definition is not how definitions work, you have to view them as a whole. There was no secret cooperation for an illegal or deceitful purpose. Deal with it. Oh and by your "definition", Hillary colluded with Russia since she hired a foreign agent to get Russian disinfo on Trump. Just a fun fact. GGG banning all political discussion shortly after getting acquired by China is a weird coincidence.
|
|
|
Do you guys not ever take a holiday from this, or what?
Xav: Is that quote from the Mueller report actually? Or Barr's 4 page 'summary'? |
|
