Investigation at Ecuadorian embassy confirms Assange met with Russians, coordinated election interference from embassy.

[Darth Yan]

Elfdart has dispayed repugnant behavior (downplaying that Assange very likely IS a rapist because he’s fond of the guy,

Stop lying.

or that Mueller did in fact conclude trump was guilty of obstruction of justice) in favor of his own views

Aside from trying to change the subject of this thread, what on earth are you babbling about?

He also was reaching when he put Romulan on the same level as a holocaust denier.

Have you lost the ability to read? TRR is the one who keeps likening "collusion deniers" (i.e. anyone who doesn't believe his pet conspiracy theory) to Holocaust deniers (or AIDS, global warming, vaccine deniers).

No you totally did. You said he shouldn't face the music in Sweden. You claimed it was because you were worried that he would be extradited. However you also ignored that the reason the rape investigation was closed was because he FLED THE COUNTRY. By arguing against him coming back you're arguing in favor of keeping the rape accusations from being investigated. That's disgusting.

I'm "babbling" about the fact that you really think the Mueller report cleared Trump of wrongdoing when Mueller openly said "we would have stated Trump was not guilty of obstruction of justice. We never said that." And also stated that it was mostly do to policy that they didn't charge him with obstruction.

You and Vympel have both cheerfully denied this and implied that Russia wasn't involved at all or that Trump never obstructed justice.

3.) And you called it a pet conspiracy theory. There's ample proof Trump obstructed justice AT THE VERY LEAST and the fact Barr had to redact most of the report implies he has something to hide (that and his long history of covering for people in power.)

You've also made sexist comments about women (one of Stark's old sigs was about you oggling women's boobs in a book store).

The mods DO in fact seem to avoid addressing that Elfdart is being a jackass

[aerius]

I'm "babbling" about the fact that you really think the Mueller report cleared Trump of wrongdoing when Mueller openly said "we would have stated Trump was not guilty of obstruction of justice. We never said that." And also stated that it was mostly do to policy that they didn't charge him with obstruction.

You and Vympel have both cheerfully denied this and implied that Russia wasn't involved at all or that Trump never obstructed justice.

3.) And you called it a pet conspiracy theory. There's ample proof Trump obstructed justice AT THE VERY LEAST and the fact Barr had to redact most of the report implies he has something to hide (that and his long history of covering for people in power.)

I don't think you understand the difference between influence and collusion. None of us have ever made the claim that there was no obstruction of justice or Russian influence of some sort. What we've all been consistent in saying is there's no reasonable proof of Russian collusion, and good luck finding any that will hold up in a court of law.

[Darth Yan]

Vympel actively implied Russia wasn't involved at all. And as stated earlier Elfdart did say that since Assange MIGHT be extradited to the US he shouldn't be sent back EVEN THOUGH IT WOULD PREVENT AN INVESTIGATION INTO HIS RAPE CHARGES. That means Elfdart is a ok with a potential rapist escaping justice if it means that he MIGHT get extradited by the US. That's disgusting. He also implied no obstruction of justice happened.

[The Romulan Republic]

I'm "babbling" about the fact that you really think the Mueller report cleared Trump of wrongdoing when Mueller openly said "we would have stated Trump was not guilty of obstruction of justice. We never said that." And also stated that it was mostly do to policy that they didn't charge him with obstruction.

You and Vympel have both cheerfully denied this and implied that Russia wasn't involved at all or that Trump never obstructed justice.

3.) And you called it a pet conspiracy theory. There's ample proof Trump obstructed justice AT THE VERY LEAST and the fact Barr had to redact most of the report implies he has something to hide (that and his long history of covering for people in power.)

I don't think you understand the difference between influence and collusion. None of us have ever made the claim that there was no obstruction of justice or Russian influence of some sort. What we've all been consistent in saying is there's no reasonable proof of Russian collusion, and good luck finding any that will hold up in a court of law.

I do recall Vympel at least denying interference, though IIRC he has flip-flopped on the point. But that is neither here nor there right now.

And yes, I think we are all aware of the difference between "influence" and "collusion". Influence requires only one party. Collusion requires two. Russian media posting nasty things about Hillary on the internet, for example, would be "influence", but not collusion. The meeting described in this thread's OP would be collusion, as would the Trump Tower meeting to obtain dirt on Hillary (attempted collusion, at least, since it sounds like they didn't get much out of it in the end).

And (to go over this for the billionth time) of course nobody has been or will ever be convicted for "collusion" over the Russian interference in the 2016 election, because "collusion" is not a term in US law (I'm not sure what the correct term is under Italian law). Collusion is a colloquial term which can refer to any coordination/cooperation between the Trump team and Russians/Russian proxies (whether established, like the Trump Tower meeting, or hypothetical/unproven, like the Trump campaign and Russia coordinating their micro-targeting add campaigns), some of which is would be a crime and some of which wouldn't be.

Saying nobody can be convicted of collusion is like saying no mobster has ever been convicted of whacking somebody, because the law uses the term "homicide" instead of "whacking".

Mueller's report looked specifically at the question of a criminal conspiracy, not the more nebulous term of "collusion". His conclusion, in essence, was that there were a bunch of contacts between the Trump team and Russia, but that he didn't feel he could make a solid case for criminal conspiracy with the evidence available, while noting that some evidence was unobtainable for a variety of reasons. Personally I think he erred on the side of caution, though its perhaps understandable that he would do so.

So yes, its hard to get sufficient proof to convict in a court of law. Collusion, however, is undeniable. The emails over the Trump Tower meeting alone conclusively demonstrate collusion. The fact that Mueller didn't feel he could build an airtight criminal case with the facts available says more about the inadequacy of existing law than it does about the Trump campaign or Putin's regime's innocence, in my view.

[Elfdart]

Elfdart: It is not a lie to say that you downplayed the rape allegations against Assange, and that you suggested he should not face justice for those crimes. Would you like me to post quotes?

Still can't stop lying, can you? Now you want to re-litigate an earlier thread that got locked.

Also, got to love how you in one sentence feign bafflement at Darth Yan bringing up your views on the Mueller Report and Collusion and say its changing the topic, and then in the next line call Russian collusion (which is backed up by absolutely massive amounts of thoroughly documented evidence that I and others have repeatedly posted) my "pet conspiracy theory".

I didn't see the relevance. My views on Mueller, his report or the price of tea in China have nothing to do with the subject of this thread: That a security firm that took part in a half-baked attempt to blackmail Assange took their dead horse and got CNN to put a saddle on it and try to jump a fence -with predictable, yet hilarious results.

Oh, and contrary to the dishonest title of the thread, no one has "confirmed" much of anything in this story, let alone that Assange "coordinated election interference". Even the CNN article couches its claims in weasel words ('“The documents build on the possibility, raised by special counsel Robert Mueller in his report on Russian meddling, that couriers brought hacked files to Assange at the embassy.”).

Christ, I remember when someone on this board could be banned for persistently ignoring evidence, lying, and then responding with personal attacks against those who called them on it.

Oh, and don't think I didn't notice the goalpost shift from "TRR is equating everyone who disagrees with him a Holocaust denier" to "TRR is equating everyone who disagrees with him to people who deny (insert lengthy list of things)", you miserable pustule on humanity's rectum.

No, retard -I included the second part because even if one were to make the most favorable case on your behalf (that you weren't necessarily likening "russia, Russia, RUSSIA!" skeptics to Holocaust deniers, but possibly to anti-vaccination lunatics), it's still pretty fucking sick for you lump someone who doesn't buy the ravings of crank conspiracy theorists with (for example) deranged fucktards who are currently helping spread measles to children by scaring parents away from vaccinating their kids.

But yeah, actually, I'd put collusion deniers in the same camp as climate change deniers or the most hard-line anti-vaxers, in that you are all denying the existence of an urgent threat backed up by massive amounts of evidence because it doesn't fit your ideological agenda. And in that you all overlap heavily with the Alt. Reich.

So you do lump them together after all.

Have you lost the ability to read? TRR is the one who keeps likening "collusion deniers" (i.e. anyone who doesn't believe his pet conspiracy theory) to Holocaust deniers (or AIDS, global warming, vaccine deniers).

No you totally did. You said he shouldn't face the music in Sweden.

That's a lie.

You claimed it was because you were worried that he would be extradited.

Extradited to the US, you fucking moron.

However you also ignored that the reason the rape investigation was closed was because he FLED THE COUNTRY. By arguing against him coming back you're arguing in favor of keeping the rape accusations from being investigated. That's disgusting.

No dipshit, what's "disgusting" is what a diseased liar you are. What's also disgusting is how you and TRR are obsessed with re-fighting a thread that was locked weeks ago -and thinking you'll fare better this time.

I'm "babbling" about the fact that you really think the Mueller report cleared Trump of wrongdoing when Mueller openly said "we would have stated Trump was not guilty of obstruction of justice. We never said that." And also stated that it was mostly do to policy that they didn't charge him with obstruction.

That's funny, I don't remember writing much of anything about Mueller or his report. You must have me confused with someone else.

You and Vympel have both cheerfully denied this and implied that Russia wasn't involved at all or that Trump never obstructed justice.

I have? Where?

3.) And you called it a pet conspiracy theory. There's ample proof Trump obstructed justice AT THE VERY LEAST and the fact Barr had to redact most of the report implies he has something to hide (that and his long history of covering for people in power.)

I'm referring to the charge that Trump is Putin's agent, which IS a nutty conspiracy theory.

You've also made sexist comments about women (one of Stark's old sigs was about you oggling women's boobs in a book store).

WTF?

The mods DO in fact seem to avoid addressing that Elfdart is being a jackass

They must be "Russian assets" too!

[The Romulan Republic]

Still can't stop lying, can you? Now you want to re-litigate an earlier thread that got locked.

I'm not the one who brought it up. But since you decided to lie about it in this thread, I decided to correct the record.

I'm not the only one who remembers what you said. I'm not the only one who can quote what you said. And I do not appreciate being falsely called a liar, but I've already reported you for lying and defamation in this thread, so doing so again seems redundant at this point.

I didn't see the relevance. My views on Mueller, his report or the price of tea in China have nothing to do with the subject of this thread: That a security firm that took part in a half-baked attempt to blackmail Assange took their dead horse and got CNN to put a saddle on it and try to jump a fence -with predictable, yet hilarious results.

Yes, because the 2016 election, the subsequent investigation, and Julian Assange are all totally unrelated topics...

Oh, and contrary to the dishonest title of the thread, no one has "confirmed" much of anything in this story, let alone that Assange "coordinated election interference". Even the CNN article couches its claims in weasel words ('“The documents build on the possibility, raised by special counsel Robert Mueller in his report on Russian meddling, that couriers brought hacked files to Assange at the embassy.”).

If you want to accuse me of dishonesty, then do like I did, have the guts to put your money where your mouth is, and report me.

Otherwise, shut the fuck up.

Don't worry, I'm sure you'll face no lasting consequences for your persistent campaigns of conspiracy theorist apologism and defamation against me.

No, retard

Abelist slur.

-I included the second part because even if one were to make the most favorable case on your behalf (that you weren't necessarily likening "russia, Russia, RUSSIA!" skeptics to Holocaust deniers, but possibly to anti-vaccination lunatics), it's still pretty fucking sick for you lump someone who doesn't buy the ravings of crank conspiracy theorists with (for example) deranged fucktards who are currently helping spread measles to children by scaring parents away from vaccinating their kids.

You both deny objective fact backed by evidence because it does not fit your ideology. If the shoe fits...

And once again, you rely entirely on arguing character and motives (or rather straw men of them) rather than facts and evidence. Gee, its almost like you have no valid case to make and are desperately trying to distract from that fact by smearing the credibility of your opponents.

So you do lump them together after all.

In your attempt to shame and ridicule me, you inadvertently stumbled on a very apt comparison, and I embrace it willingly.

No dipshit, what's "disgusting" is what a diseased liar you are. What's also disgusting is how you and TRR are obsessed with re-fighting a thread that was locked weeks ago -and thinking you'll fare better this time.

Yes, how disgusting that we object to the idea that a rapist should receive more lenient treatment because he happens to be an enemy of America.

Besides, I didn't bring it up. But if you're going to start lying about it again, I'm going to fucking call you on it. If the mods have more of a problem with me calling you on your lies than on you lying, then they can do whatever they want with me.

They must be "Russian assets" too!

More like they know this board only has about twenty active members left, and if they banned everyone who deserved it there wouldn't be much of a board left. At least that's my guess.