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: 1 4.2%
  • Seriously?

    Votes: 4 16.7%
  • ... are we in some crappy technothriller?

    Votes: 18 75.0%
  • WTF?

    Votes: 1 4.2%

  • Total voters
    24

Baron Steakpuncher

Proletarian Puncher of Steaks
Author
For starters, regime is in your country. Putin is legally elected president of Russian Federation.
Well. Lets be honest here, Putin could get 1% of the vote and be the legally elected president because no one would have the balls to insinuate otherwise. Mans a dictator, but one with a democratic facade.

I do not observe any such attempts, and regarding Russian government's conduct, it's certainly more rational and less confrontational than for example US government's. I especially dislike the strong ideological tones of rationale behind West's confrontation with Russia, that's the old USSR just in the opposite direction.
You see, I was writing about propaganda, and you ask me a question that's just loaded with it. It's obvious that we see reality very differently.
The Ukraine *might* disagree with you here.

As would Georgia. And more recently Belarus. Putin doesn't want the whole former Soviet, but hes carving his own sphere of influence when everyone else is looking the other way.
I hope that was shade at the media, because that is some pathetic conspiracy-tier fearmongering. Lame!
It is, if Georgia and Ukraine are to be looked at, at least partially true.
 

Vorpal

Administrator
Administrator
Well. Lets be honest here, Putin could get 1% of the vote and be the legally elected president because no one would have the balls to insinuate otherwise. Mans a dictator, but one with a democratic facade.
Yeah, the Western media has this idiotic tendency to treat the Darkest One as some sort of god. With the political system dominated by United Russia, if Putin's popularity was anywhere near that low, they would absolutely have no problem with spitting out someone else to beat him, every reason to do so, and the political connection to make it so.

And more recently Belarus.
Lukashenko is salty because Belarus makes a whole bunch of money from arbitrage and being in a common market and customs union, and Russia wants to limit it. This is in all directions, e.g. when Russia counter-sanctioned EU food products, Belarus suddenly developed many seafood products, etc., but the current spat is caused by oil. Specifically, what Russia's trying to do is have export taxes for oil applied at the source and not at the borders, with rebates for domestic consumption to keep internal prices low. Which is indeed an aggression to the Belorussian budget, since it would mean that the Belarus making bank on reselling Russian oil abroad would not be as profitable.

Ultimately, that's what it's about, because Russia offered the same for Belorussian domestic consumption, too—so prices within Belarus wouldn't spike either. What it would hurt is specifically the Belorussian arbitrage. I suppose in a general sense, Russia's re-evaluating how much it's worth to keep buying off Lukashenko with oil subsidies, the estimated cost of which is comparable to the Russian federal health budget.

However, Ukraine is its much more complicated kettle of fish, though I generally agree with @Wakko that Russia's actions were very rational, at least in the sense that I would consider most alternatives given the hands they were played foolish (though generally this depends on how benefit of hindsight one has, if one is going with some sort of alt-history hypothetical ‘what would yo do’ kind of thing).
 

Wakko

Well-known member
Ultimately, that's what it's about, because Russia offered the same for Belorussian domestic consumption, too—so prices within Belarus wouldn't spike either. What it would hurt is specifically the Belorussian arbitrage. I suppose in a general sense, Russia's re-evaluating how much it's worth to keep buying off Lukashenko with oil subsidies, the estimated cost of which is comparable to the Russian federal health budget.
Nah, it's not - at least according to Baron here. Before you got in here, there was a much more heated discussion, which got scrapped by forum restore, and I don't like Mr. Steakpuncher enough to write it all again. But ask him about the Russian bases that got built in Belarus against Belarussians' will, I dare you :) Or about how Crimeans totally don't want to be part of Russia. You'll learn a lot of new things :D
 

Baron Steakpuncher

Proletarian Puncher of Steaks
Author
Nah, it's not - at least according to Baron here. Before you got in here, there was a much more heated discussion, which got scrapped by forum restore, and I don't like Mr. Steakpuncher enough to write it all again. But ask him about the Russian bases that got built in Belarus against Belarussians' will, I dare you :) Or about how Crimeans totally don't want to be part of Russia. You'll learn a lot of new things :D
Well the Belarusian government DID indicate they didn't want more bases. And the Crimeans certainly were, well, invaded.

Also, honey, cut down on the emoji's and passive agressive language. It won't get a reaction.

Though apparently stating the man who poisons his opponents tea with radioactive material and of whom we have literal videos of suspicious events at elections isn't a dictator. You learn something new every day.
 

Wakko

Well-known member
Well the Belarusian government DID indicate they didn't want more bases.
Ah, and that translates in your head to "Russia built bases in Belarus against its will?" Nice, very creative. Just not anywhere close to reality.

And the Crimeans certainly were, well, invaded.
No, according to them - the only people whose opinion matters in this case - they were liberated. That's a fact confirmed by several independent opinion polls since 2014.

Though apparently stating the man who poisons his opponents tea with radioactive material
And I guess you have anything else for this than the "we think so" of a panel of British russophobes? For you that may be enough, for rational people it's certainly not. Especially since that theory makes zero sense.

Still zero references in your posts... where are the Belarusian bases, and where are your facts on Transnistria?
 

Baron Steakpuncher

Proletarian Puncher of Steaks
Author
Ah, and that translates in your head to "Russia built bases in Belarus against its will?" Nice, very creative. Just not anywhere close to reality.


No, according to them - the only people whose opinion matters in this case - they were liberated. That's a fact confirmed by several independent opinion polls since 2014.


And I guess you have anything else for this than the "we think so" of a panel of British russophobes? For you that may be enough, for rational people it's certainly not. Especially since that theory makes zero sense.

Still zero references in your posts... where are the Belarusian bases, and where are your facts on Transnistria?

1 : When someone says they don't want something, and then you do it anyways, yes I'd say the choices of the Belarussian government didn't overly matter in the situation.

2: Ah yes, liberated. Wait, no hang on, Invaded. That was the word I was looking for. If you doubt the words of an actual british committee (I don't actualy know who you are reffering to here) then pardon me for declining to beleieve a vote held in conqered territory, by the conquerer. Also, i imagine the Georgian majority of Abkhazia distinctly disagree that they were liberated when they were expelled.

3 : No, I think this because the fellow in question, said it was Putin on his death bed. I'd say thats a fairly rational indication of what happened.

4: Transnistria is the only thing where you have a point, those people legitimately do wish to be part of the Soviet Union, and perhaps the Russian federation. As to the references, well from long history of these sorts of debates, I know that sources I bring up will either be ignored and have some vague source brought up which you are is superior, or declared biased/lying/etc if they are even slightly critical. But I shall take faith that you are not like, well literally every other debator i've faced on this subject, and provide you with a source from Belarus's government website. https://www.belarus.by/en/press-center/speeches-and-interviews/lukashenko-sees-no-need-in-foreign-military-bases-in-belarus_i_0000088646.html Which seems to indicate that, no, they didn't want more military bases, in polite diplomatic language.
 

Wakko

Well-known member
As to the references, well from long history of these sorts of debates, I know that sources I bring up will either be ignored and have some vague source brought up which you are is superior, or declared biased/lying/etc if they are even slightly critical.
So, your argument is "I won't provide sources because you will ignore them?" OK, so you won't provide sources. Then excuse me but I will just consider you an ignorant troll who will shout loudly his opinions and when he's asked to back them up makes a bullshit excuse why he won't do it.
And how is your only source backing up your theory of Russian bases built in Belarus against its will? The title itself says that Lukashenko sees no need for foreign military bases in Belarus. I don't dispute the source (see?) but your representation of it, since it says something completely different than what you claimed. Get real and stop lying, you obviously can read and it has to be clear to you what are the facts.

3 : No, I think this because the fellow in question, said it was Putin on his death bed. I'd say thats a fairly rational indication of what happened.
That "fellow" has a name, it's Alexander Litvinenko, and while he may have believed what he said, it was just his opinion. One that is not supported by any facts, only by the wish of many to blame Putin (and of some to forego any serious investigation), and by the circular reasoning "Putin is bad so he must have done it; he did it so he is bad." That is for silly sheep, not for me. Also, as I said, it does not make any sense for Putin to have ordered Litvinenko's murder, that guy wasn't any different from thousands of others making money in the West by spouting bullshit about Russia and Putin. If you base your opinion of Putin on this "case" then you have a problem.

Ah yes, liberated. Wait, no hang on, Invaded. That was the word I was looking for. If you doubt the words of an actual british committee (I don't actualy know who you are reffering to here) then pardon me for declining to beleieve a vote held in conqered territory, by the conquerer.
You've mixed up two of my responses with the committee. And I didn't reference the referendum itself, I've referenced (with sources in my previous post that didn't survive the restore) several follow-up independent (as in performed by western agencies) opinion polls which confirmed the results of the referendum. Here, have them again:
Gallup, June 2014, read form page 25
ZOiS, Germany, March 2017
Both those polls clearly confirm that Crimeans overwhelmingly consider the 2014 referendum legit and support its results. Do you have some data disproving this or are you, once again, just stating your opinion?

Either start discussing seriously, and provide sources for your arguments, or I will stop this derail and consider you without arguments.
 

Baron Steakpuncher

Proletarian Puncher of Steaks
Author
So, your argument is "I won't provide sources because you will ignore them?" OK, so you won't provide sources. Then excuse me but I will just consider you an ignorant troll who will shout loudly his opinions and when he's asked to back them up makes a bullshit excuse why he won't do it.
And how is your only source backing up your theory of Russian bases built in Belarus against its will? The title itself says that Lukashenko sees no need for foreign military bases in Belarus. I don't dispute the source (see?) but your representation of it, since it says something completely different than what you claimed. Get real and stop lying, you obviously can read and it has to be clear to you what are the facts.


That "fellow" has a name, it's Alexander Litvinenko, and while he may have believed what he said, it was just his opinion. One that is not supported by any facts, only by the wish of many to blame Putin (and of some to forego any serious investigation), and by the circular reasoning "Putin is bad so he must have done it; he did it so he is bad." That is for silly sheep, not for me. Also, as I said, it does not make any sense for Putin to have ordered Litvinenko's murder, that guy wasn't any different from thousands of others making money in the West by spouting bullshit about Russia and Putin. If you base your opinion of Putin on this "case" then you have a problem.


You've mixed up two of my responses with the committee. And I didn't reference the referendum itself, I've referenced (with sources in my previous post that didn't survive the restore) several follow-up independent (as in performed by western agencies) opinion polls which confirmed the results of the referendum. Here, have them again:
Gallup, June 2014, read form page 25
ZOiS, Germany, March 2017
Both those polls clearly confirm that Crimeans overwhelmingly consider the 2014 referendum legit and support its results. Do you have some data disproving this or are you, once again, just stating your opinion?

Either start discussing seriously, and provide sources for your arguments, or I will stop this derail and consider you without arguments.
Darling its quite obvious we'll get nowhere on this. Thanks to our mutual lack of respect and personal biases. So i'm going to do us both a favour, and stop.
 

Kinetic

Vivere est militare!
Darling its quite obvious we'll get nowhere on this. Thanks to our mutual lack of respect and personal biases. So i'm going to do us both a favour, and stop.
If you want to discuss Litvinenko, start with the international criminal enterprise(and case) colloquially known as the Spanish Laundry.
 
Michael Cohen subpoenaed by Senate Intelligence committee - CNN, January 24, 2019, 11:27 AM EST, updated 11:54 AM EST

Aaron Fox

SB's Minor Junker Descendant and Hunter of Nazis
Author
Michael Cohen subpoenaed by Senate Intelligence committee - CNN, January 24, 2019, 11:27 AM EST, updated 11:54 AM EST
President Donald Trump's former personal lawyer Michael Cohen was subpoenaed Thursday to testify before the Senate Intelligence Committee in mid-February, according to a source close to Cohen.

It is not clear how Cohen will respond. The source said that Cohen has the same concerns regarding the safety of his family that led him to postpone his scheduled public appearance before the House Oversight Committee next month.
...
House Oversight Chairman Elijah Cummings of Maryland and House Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff of California both said this week that they expect Cohen to testify before their panels — House Oversight in public and House Intelligence behind closed doors.
Well, it has begun ladies and gents.
 

Lerticus

Senile Old Coot
Well, it has begun ladies and gents.
Mmmm, yes... going before a Republican-controlled committee. That has worked so well at exposing the truth in the past.

House Oversight is a different matter. We will see if he has the balls to show for that one. Though it would be fun to see Trumpie's Best People start getting cited for Contempt of Congress.
 
Roger Stone indicted on charges brought by special counsel - CNN, January 25, 2019, 6:34 AM EST

Aaron Fox

SB's Minor Junker Descendant and Hunter of Nazis
Author
He's been indicted as well:
Roger Stone indicted on charges brought by special counsel - CNN, January 25, 2019, 6:34 AM EST
Longtime Donald Trump associate Roger Stone has been indicted by a grand jury on charges brought by special counsel Robert Mueller. He was arrested by the FBI Friday morning, his lawyer tells CNN.

Stone is indicted on seven counts, including one count of obstruction of an official proceeding, five counts of false statements, and one count of witness tampering.

Law enforcement raided Stone's house, and CNN witnessed uniformed and armed law enforcement approach his house just after 6 a.m. ET in Fort Lauderdale, Florida.

Pounding on his door, one agent said: "FBI. Open the door."

Stone opened the door.
 

ScreenXSurfer

Ain't no bitch who can do it like me

Apparently they can tie him to wikileaks and to Bannon as the middleman between wikileaks and the campaign. Which he lied about previously. Also charges of witness tampering.
Apparently he's going to fall on his sword for Trump tho.

Stop him from erasing digital evidence, duh.
The former prosecutor said that when this happens, it's to send a message and to disorient the suspect.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 1, Guests: 0)

Top