The Wow I Can't Believe That News Story Thread

[Anteater]

Originally Posted by Chula Vista

Do you spend you entire days trying to find **** that will deflect from what's going on with your boy and his hood?

You never post about the legal stuff via Indictments, and plea deals, that actually damages Trump and his posse. Only stuff that you feel deflects. Why is that Ant?

In other news:

https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/01/polit...nts/index.html

Because the indictments are irrelevant unless they actually come up with an end result of political consequence. The mainstream media is fixated on them because they're the new shiny object in the room.

Manafort and Cohen or anyone who isn't critical to Trump's administration going away or being fined is meaningless unless they had some critical information to pin down Trump. And based on how much backtracking Cohen's lawyer did after making false claims about the Trump Tower meeting, it appears that Mueller didn't get what he wanted from these exchanges or his team would have gone ahead and trumpeted an announcement immediately after his trial.

The Deripaska story, on the other hand, was only reported by The New York Times yesterday until it got picked up by other outlets half a day later. It was at the top of Google's search results for 'Trump' just yesterday. Not a hard thing to uncover unless you think .2 seconds is too much time. In that story, the relationship between Ohr, Steele and others are explored in greater detail, and it doesn't look good because it also illustrates that the dossier was critical to establishing the special counsel's investigation and that FBI hoped to flip Russian oligarchs (eventually) to siding with them because they had no way to validate any of the information that Steele had supposedly uncovered. If they play their cards wrong (since they were already looking into Trump in 2015), it will come off as a validation of Trump's witch hunt commentary.

If you want to know how this will actually play out, you need to understand the arguments being made on both sides. And when I say arguments, I mean REAL arguments that cover legalities. The Democrats make a good moral case for removing Trump but it has some serious issues, so I don't see it holding up if literal Russian oligarchs are showing up and saying "The FBI tried to turn us into assets to result in a specific outcome, even if that outcome isn't based on evidence.". I haven't seen anything yet presented by the Dems that justify what we are learning about how the FBI, the DNC and how other organizations conducted themselves. If you are going to say your opponent directly colluded with a foreign government, you need something else other than character attacks and "B-b-but he must be in debt with the Russians! CNN told me so111".

The reality is that the special counsel and the FBI have gotten multiple people seeking immunity because these people (the ones seeking immunity) are afraid Mueller will financially ruin their lives if they fight it in court. It's a lot easier to say "I'll tell you what I know" even if they don't have anything to say because it will cost them the least amount of money to take that road. Strong-arming people to ensure cooperation is a common tactic.

[[MERIT]]

Originally Posted by elphenor

not letting in refugees is effectively sentencing people to death remember that

Then wouldn't every country that didn't offer to take them in have blood on their hands by that edict?

[[MERIT]]

Originally Posted by elphenor

that's what I'm sayin

I'm hungry. If I starve to death, is every person who didn't offer to buy me some KFC guilty of my death?

[Frownland]

Got em!

[Frownland]

Deputy shoots suspect at Del Mar Fairgrounds

Wow that's crazy. I had no idea that Ice Cube was doing a free show.

[Frownland]

Video: https://twitter.com/andrea_m0ren0/st...44445816762368

[[MERIT]]

That Twitter link doesn't work. Here are some archived versions of it:

https://archive.is/WZinW

https://web.archive.org/web/20180903...44445816762368

And here is link to a video that might be congruent to what it might have shown:

https://www.liveleak.com/view?t=EAut_1535944989

[Frownland]

Ja the Liveleak one is it. From the comments:

[The Batlord]

Originally Posted by [MERIT]

I'm hungry. If I starve to death, is every person who didn't offer to buy me some KFC guilty of my death?

If you sat back and watched someone starve to death while you ate a bucket of KFC would you be guilty of something?

[OccultHawk]

Originally Posted by 66Sexy

If you sat back and watched someone starve to death while you ate a bucket of KFC would you be guilty of something?

Church’s > Popeyes > KFC

Poor decision making skills