Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...
Moderator: PoFo North America Mods
Godstud wrote:@BlutoSays You're making shit up.
In Q3 ’21, CNN averaged 822,000 total viewers in prime time (No. 8 on basic cable), a -10% loss from Q2. The network also averaged 598,000 viewers in total day (No. 4 on basic cable), a -9% loss from Q2 . The network also averaged 188,000 adults 25-54 in primetime (where TV networks set premium advertising rates) and 130,000 adults 25-54 in total day. That’s down -16% and -19%, respectively, from what the network averaged in those measurements in the second quarter. In fact, those are the smallest average audiences in the demo since 2014. While the trend is poor, CNN still averaged more A25-54 viewers than rival MSNBC.
https://www.adweek.com/tvnewser/q3-21-r ... 54/489955/
Godstud wrote:@Istanbuller No, I won't be silent because you simply don't like what I have to say. You should STFU.
Lying isn't against the law, and you're probably one of those freedom of speech guys only when it's convenient, right?
Filing a false police report is illegal. Lying to the media, is not.
Key Findings of the Mueller Report
The Special Counsel investigation uncovered extensive criminal activity
The investigation produced 37 indictments; seven guilty pleas or convictions; and compelling evidence that the president obstructed justice on multiple occasions. Mueller also uncovered and referred 14 criminal matters to other components of the Department of Justice.
Trump associates repeatedly lied to investigators about their contacts with Russians, and President Trump refused to answer questions about his efforts to impede federal proceedings and influence the testimony of witnesses.
A statement signed by over 1,000 former federal prosecutors concluded that if any other American engaged in the same efforts to impede federal proceedings the way Trump did, they would likely be indicted for multiple charges of obstruction of justice.
Russia engaged in extensive attacks on the U.S. election system in 2016
Russian interference in the 2016 election was “sweeping and systemic.”
Major attack avenues included a social media “information warfare” campaign that “favored” candidate Trump and the hacking of Clinton campaign-related databases and release of stolen materials through Russian-created entities and Wikileaks.
Russia also targeted databases in many states related to administering elections gaining access to information for millions of registered voters.
The investigation “identified numerous links between the Russian government and the Trump Campaign” and established that the Trump Campaign “showed interest in WikiLeaks's releases of documents and welcomed their potential to damage candidate Clinton”
see article for details
Special Counsel Mueller declined to exonerate President Trump and instead detailed multiple episodes in which he engaged in obstructive conduct
see article for details
Congress needs to continue investigating and assessing elements of the Mueller Report
The redactions of the Mueller Report appear to conceal the extent to which the Trump campaign had advance knowledge of the release of hacked emails by WikiLeaks. For instance, redactions conceal content of discussions that the Report states occurred between Trump, Cohen, and Manafort in July 2016 shortly after Wikileaks released hacked emails; the Report further notes, “Trump told Gates that more releases of damaging information would be coming,” but redacts the contextual information around that statement.
A second issue the Report does not examine is the fact that the President was involved in conduct that was the subject of a case the Special Counsel referred to the Southern District of New York – which the Report notes “ultimately led to the conviction of Cohen in the Southern District of New York for campaign-finance offenses related to payments he said he made at the direction of the President.”
The Report also redacts in entirety its discussion of 12 of the 14 matters Mueller referred to other law enforcement authorities.
Further, the Report details non-cooperation with the inquiry by the President, including refusing requests by the Special Counsel for an interview; providing written responses that the Office of the Special Counsel considered “incomplete” and “imprecise” and that involved the President stating on “more than 30 occasions that he ‘does not recall’ or ‘remember’ or ‘have an independent recollection.’”
https://www.acslaw.org/projects/the-pre ... er-report/
Sure, maybe the Clinton campaign yelled, "Fire!", but where there was smoke there turned out to be a conflagration. The only problem is that they couldn't prove that Trump started the fire, so now Trumpanzees like you @Istanbuller are looking for anything, in desperation, to draw attention away from your loser of an idol.
BlutoSays wrote:@Godstud - The context is YOU don't even know about the text conversation until I point it out to you. Efff your "context".So you won't link the conversation, so we can see the whole dialogue, because it would disprove what you're saying. Check.
BlutoSays wrote:The information is out there. That it's not convenient to your argument, so you don't look for it, is the problem. It's not my job to defend what you say by searching for the information.That's up to you to present a source verifying what you say. The onus is upon you to prove your arguments, and other people aren't going to do it for you. Are you going to go looking for information to support my argument, or are you going to have me present it?
Godstud wrote:So you won't link the conversation, so we can see the whole dialogue, because it would disprove what you're saying. Check.
I never said FBI was wholesome. The investigations into Russian collusion and corruption links to the Trump campaign results in 34 indictments, so it was not a fraud, like you claim.
That's up to you to present a source verifying what you say. The onus is upon you to prove your arguments, and other people aren't going to do it for you. Are you going to go looking for information to support my argument, or are you going to have me present it?
Think on that.
You might want to stop with memes and Youtube videos of idiots like Joe Rogan, too. Those sources are rarely accurate, or even factual.
BlutoSays wrote:BTW, your 34 indictments never led to ANY convictions of collusion between Trump, the Trump campaign and Russians. Not one.That's irrelevant. The fact is that Russiagate was not a fraud, as people in Trump's camp were the ones indicted. That he wasn't, only means that they couldn't find the evidence to convict.
BlutoSays wrote:Hillary Clinton and John Podesta were closer to collusion with Russians through Chris Steele, Igor Danchenko and Fusion GPS than any Trump official ever was.They're in jail, so that's a false statement. People don't go to jail when there is no evidence. An opinion not based on fact is simply a misguided belief.
As they say, you can indict a ham sandwich.
1) I am not lazy. You unwilling to support your arguments shows us all that you are the lazy one.
2) I am not a Democrat. Who I am is irrelevant to the discussion. I don't have a horse in this race, but you do, it seems.
3) I will not make your arguments for you.
4) Please quote the relevant text that supports your argument. I am not going to scour a 165 page report just to find out that it doesn't say what you think it does. This is very common when people don't want to support their arguments with facts. I doubt you've read the testimony yourself.
That's irrelevant. The fact is that Russiagate was not a fraud, as people in Trump's camp were the ones indicted. That he wasn't, only means that they couldn't find the evidence to convict.
They're in jail, so that's a false statement. People don't go to jail when there is no evidence. An opinion not based on fact is simply a misguided belief.
I am all for investigations into Hillary Clinton, if there is any indication of collusion. You think I am supporting the Democrats, when I am not.
BlutoSays wrote:Russiagate was a fraud between the FBI and The Clinton Campaign and her surrogates.So you say... Everyone has an opinion.
Not worried about crop yields. Because they have[…]
Why was he let in if there were going to be issues[…]
Let me remind everyone: This is how it started: […]
In Canada, it's all about CUTS to social services.[…]