Nanker Posted February 19, 2018 Posted February 19, 2018 (edited) So, you're saying the Rooskies would have "backed" Mitt, or Jeb, or Marco, or Ted? Just ABC... right? 2 minutes ago, The Big Cat said: This is a conversation about the two years invested by the Kremlin to unseat that political dynasty. Did you already forget that? And if that was the case, why did B. O. drag his Johnson on putting some pressure on Putin even though he was a lame duck... emphasis on lame. Edited February 19, 2018 by Nanker
The Big Cat Posted February 19, 2018 Posted February 19, 2018 Just now, Nanker said: So, you're saying the Rooskies would have "backed" Mitt, or Jeb, or Marco, or Ted? Just ABC... right? No. Nobody's saying that.
Deranged Rhino Posted February 19, 2018 Posted February 19, 2018 Just now, The Big Cat said: No. Nobody's saying that. You just did.
Nanker Posted February 19, 2018 Posted February 19, 2018 So, it was only Trump. And did Putineski throw the GOP primaries for Trump then too? After all, the jacking off to our election started in 2014 according to sources and B.O. was still the POTUS and the Trumpeter hadn't even declared for the candidacy yet. Oh! It was Putin who talked him in to running for office. Right. Got it.
Deranged Rhino Posted February 19, 2018 Posted February 19, 2018 Just now, Nanker said: So, it was only Trump. And did Putineski throw the GOP primaries for Trump then too? After all, the jacking off to our election started in 2014 according to sources and B.O. was still the POTUS and the Trumpeter hadn't even declared for the candidacy yet. Oh! It was Putin who talked him in to running for office. Right. Got it. That must be it!
The Big Cat Posted February 19, 2018 Posted February 19, 2018 1 minute ago, Deranged Rhino said: Critical thinking is not your strong suit, is it. The indictment made clear the goal was chaos, not one candidate over the other. You never answered the question: do you believe Russia colluded with Trump or his team to fix the election? That's fundamentally incorrect. You're plainly ignoring direct language from the indictment that is impossible to misinterpret Page 17 Section a: https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/4380504/The-Special-Counsel-s-Indictment-of-the-Internet.pdf 2
Nanker Posted February 19, 2018 Posted February 19, 2018 Putin's hiding his SB ring in that photo. Collusion!
GG Posted February 19, 2018 Posted February 19, 2018 25 minutes ago, The Big Cat said: Oh I see. You misspoke. It was an accident when you implied that all of the FB purchasing activity, according to the VP, came after the election. How far are you going to back track this one? Gee, look who's back for his annual beating. Remind me again how happy you were to share a bus with people of color in November 2008?
Warren Zevon Posted February 19, 2018 Posted February 19, 2018 Just now, The Big Cat said: That's fundamentally incorrect. You're plainly ignoring direct language from the indictment that is impossible to misinterpret Page 17 Section a: https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/4380504/The-Special-Counsel-s-Indictment-of-the-Internet.pdf This is correct.
Deranged Rhino Posted February 19, 2018 Posted February 19, 2018 Just now, The Big Cat said: That's fundamentally incorrect. You're plainly ignoring direct language from the indictment that is impossible to misinterpret Page 17 Section a: https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/4380504/The-Special-Counsel-s-Indictment-of-the-Internet.pdf And you're ignoring the rest of the 36 pages which provide context for that cherry picked section. But please, yes, let's get into the weeds with primary source material and see which one of us has read more... Before we get there, why don't you answer the question you've now been dodging for over an hour... Do you, Big Cat, believe that Trump and Russia colluded to fix the election? I'm asking your opinion, not for you to prove it one way or the other.
The Big Cat Posted February 19, 2018 Posted February 19, 2018 Just now, GG said: Gee, look who's back for his annual beating. Remind me again how happy you were to share a bus with people of color in November 2008? I see. Get called out for making stuff up. Insult the person.
GG Posted February 19, 2018 Posted February 19, 2018 9 minutes ago, The Big Cat said: This is a conversation about the two years invested by the Kremlin to unseat that political dynasty. Did you already forget that? No it is not. Out of all the candidates, Hillary would have been the 2nd best for Putin (next to Bernie)
The Big Cat Posted February 19, 2018 Posted February 19, 2018 Just now, Deranged Rhino said: And you're ignoring the rest of the 36 pages which provide context for that cherry picked section. But please, yes, let's get into the weeds with primary source material and see which one of us has read more... Before we get there, why don't you answer the question you've now been dodging for over an hour... Do you, Big Cat, believe that Trump and Russia colluded to fix the election? I'm asking your opinion, not for you to prove it one way or the other. So you acknowledge that words "we support them" in reference to Trump, but that's no indication that they supported one candidate over another. Interesting.
Deranged Rhino Posted February 19, 2018 Posted February 19, 2018 Just now, The Big Cat said: So you acknowledge that words "we support them" in reference to Trump, but that's no indication that they supported one candidate over another. Interesting. And Sanders. Why won't you answer a very simple question posed to you?
The Big Cat Posted February 19, 2018 Posted February 19, 2018 Oh hey! Look who finally decided to get on board! Can't wait to see how you guys twist to acknowledge it was happening all along:
GG Posted February 19, 2018 Posted February 19, 2018 Just now, The Big Cat said: I see. Get called out for making stuff up. Insult the person. Not quite. FB wouldn't have doubled down on their talking points if the pre-election impressions were equally effective. Never mind that if Putin cronies' goal was to help elect Trump, why did they increase FB placements AFTER the election?
The Big Cat Posted February 19, 2018 Posted February 19, 2018 1 minute ago, Deranged Rhino said: And Sanders. Why won't you answer a very simple question posed to you? Great so you understand now that you were unquestionably wrong to say the Russians didn't support Trump.
Deranged Rhino Posted February 19, 2018 Posted February 19, 2018 Just now, GG said: Not quite. FB wouldn't have doubled down on their talking points if the pre-election impressions were equally effective. Never mind that if Putin cronies' goal was to help elect Trump, why did they increase FB placements AFTER the election? Or why they held protests against him. Just now, The Big Cat said: Great so you understand now that you were unquestionably wrong to say the Russians didn't support Trump. Do you believe Trump and Russia actively colluded to fix the election?
GG Posted February 19, 2018 Posted February 19, 2018 Just now, The Big Cat said: Oh hey! Look who finally decided to get on board! Can't wait to see how you guys twist to acknowledge it was happening all along: What in the world are you babbling about?
Recommended Posts