B-Man Posted February 16, 2018 Posted February 16, 2018 The Left: There is a Trump-Russia Conspiracy Me: They just announced there was no collusion The Left: Yes there was! You’re a conspiracy theorist! It’s really sad watching deranged liberals meltdown on twitter because their Russian collusion fairytale fell apart today. That so many liberal Americans were hoping for a treasonous “collusion” narrative is so deeply troubling that it’s hard to get your arms around it. Mueller busted a few internet trolls for garden variety FRAUD. This isn't even an election law crime.
Deranged Rhino Posted February 16, 2018 Posted February 16, 2018 Just now, B-Man said: The Left: There is a Trump-Russia Conspiracy Me: They just announced there was no collusion The Left: Yes there was! You’re a conspiracy theorist! It’s really sad watching deranged liberals meltdown on twitter because their Russian collusion fairytale fell apart today. That so many liberal Americans were hoping for a treasonous “collusion” narrative is so deeply troubling that it’s hard to get your arms around it. Mueller busted a few internet trolls for garden variety FRAUD. This isn't even an election law crime. The conspiracy theorist label is about to get a new resurgence in popularity in the next several weeks.
Nanker Posted February 16, 2018 Posted February 16, 2018 2 minutes ago, B-Man said: The Left: There is a Trump-Russia Conspiracy Me: They just announced there was no collusion The Left: Yes there was! You’re a conspiracy theorist! It’s really sad watching deranged liberals meltdown on twitter because their Russian collusion fairytale fell apart today. That so many liberal Americans were hoping for a treasonous “collusion” narrative is so deeply troubling that it’s hard to get your arms around it. Mueller busted a few internet trolls for garden variety FRAUD. This isn't even an election law crime. In other words, it’s a nothing burger.
Logic Posted February 16, 2018 Posted February 16, 2018 http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2018/feb/15/russia-investigation-and-donald-trump-timeline-rec/The Russia investigation and Donald Trump: a timeline from on-the-record sources "At least eight Trump associates had contacts with Russian government officials or business people during the campaign and presidential transition. To date, Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation has swept up four members of Trump’s campaign, including two who have agreed to work with Mueller’s team as part of a plea deal. As the investigation has unfolded, we’ve learned that some things the Trump team claimed never happened, actually did happen. Stories have changed, recollections have been refreshed and government officials have come forward with new assessments of the intelligence." (because...ya know...people ALWAYS enter plea deals when everyone involved is innocent and there's nothing to see here!) 1
Deranged Rhino Posted February 16, 2018 Posted February 16, 2018 17 minutes ago, Logic said: (because...ya know...people ALWAYS enter plea deals when everyone involved is innocent and there's nothing to see here!) So what's your explanation for the 14 DOJ and FBI officials so far who have been fired, demoted, or resigned? Coincidence? ************* BTW if anyone wants a more comprehensive timeline with sources, see below. It's an evolving document: https://view.publitas.com/galacticredpill/!@#$ery-timeline/page/1
B-Man Posted February 16, 2018 Posted February 16, 2018 Quote Nick Merrill @NickMerrill FollowFollow @NickMerrill Today's revelations confirm what we've long known. Time will tell us more, but Russia went to great lengths to undermine our democracy, & the President won't protect us. No matter your politics, it's un-American. We have an adversary that is laughing at us, who will act again. Quote Stephen MillerVerified account @redsteeze FollowFollow @redsteeze Your candidate thought the way to deal with Russia was a hotel swimming pool filter button with the wrong mispronounced word on it. Have we been able to determine who was the President in 2016 that allowed this to happen? I've tried Google and everything! .
keepthefaith Posted February 17, 2018 Posted February 17, 2018 On 2/15/2018 at 12:56 PM, Tiberius said: Seems like a good time to revisit this. 2
Tiberius Posted February 17, 2018 Posted February 17, 2018 6 hours ago, keepthefaith said: Seems like a good time to revisit this. Trump was actually using a Russian talking point there. Saying the election was a fraud. DR was using the same Russian talking point. Now we know Russians were doing more than putting words in Trump's mouth. They were actively helping him. Does this cast a pall over the legitimacy of Trump's election? I'd say so. But that doesn't mean we can do much about it at this point.
3rdnlng Posted February 17, 2018 Posted February 17, 2018 45 minutes ago, Tiberius said: Trump was actually using a Russian talking point there. Saying the election was a fraud. DR was using the same Russian talking point. Now we know Russians were doing more than putting words in Trump's mouth. They were actively helping him. Does this cast a pall over the legitimacy of Trump's election? I'd say so. But that doesn't mean we can do much about it at this point. When they weren't actively promoting rallies against him. Are you incapable of ever telling the truth? Dishonesty just oozes from you.
Bob in Mich Posted February 17, 2018 Posted February 17, 2018 1 minute ago, 3rdnlng said: When they weren't actively promoting rallies against him. Are you incapable of ever telling the truth? Dishonesty just oozes from you. Timing means a lot here. What I heard was that the primary goal was to sow discord and to promote divisiveness. PRIOR to the November 2016 election, the Russians favored Trump. After all, Trump as our president has certainly promoted divisiveness. Then, AFTER the election, in order to continue to promote divisions, the Russians promoted rallies for and against Trump. The anti Trump rallies were not leading into the election.
Nanker Posted February 17, 2018 Posted February 17, 2018 7 hours ago, keepthefaith said: Seems like a good time to revisit this. and this too: Just now, Bob in Mich said: Timing means a lot here. What I heard was that the primary goal was to sow discord and to promote divisiveness. PRIOR to the November 2016 election, the Russians favored Trump. After all, Trump as our president has certainly promoted divisiveness. Then, AFTER the election, in order to continue to promote divisions, the Russians promoted rallies for and against Trump. The anti Trump rallies were not leading into the election. And B.O. and Hillary were great uniters?
Bob in Mich Posted February 17, 2018 Posted February 17, 2018 If you want to have a real discussion, stop with the 'yeah but whatabouts'
Nanker Posted February 17, 2018 Posted February 17, 2018 Sure. EVERYTHING would be different if Hillary won, now wouldn't it? You really can't see the forest for the trees.
Bob in Mich Posted February 17, 2018 Posted February 17, 2018 I can't tell what that means. Care to explain? Just to repeat, my point was that the 'yeah whatabouts' are just an attempt to turn the discussion from the prior point. This is not to say you are bringing up invalid points. The point may be valid but during this discussion you are using that a tool to avoid the prior point. If you want to actually have a reasonable discussion, that sort of 'yeah whatabout' crap is worse than useless, it discourages honest discussions.
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted February 17, 2018 Posted February 17, 2018 34 minutes ago, Bob in Mich said: Timing means a lot here. What I heard was that the primary goal was to sow discord and to promote divisiveness. PRIOR to the November 2016 election, the Russians favored Trump. After all, Trump as our president has certainly promoted divisiveness. Then, AFTER the election, in order to continue to promote divisions, the Russians promoted rallies for and against Trump. The anti Trump rallies were not leading into the election. In excess of 60 million people chose to vote for someone other than obama's high-name recognition, hand-selected, gift and bubble-wrapped candidate pitched as the successor to HIS presidency and chose a brash, combatative imperfect businessman from New *#%¥ing York city as an alternative to lead the nation forward. This in spite of copious amounts of evidence that the dems cooked the books against all comers from their own party, a steady public relations campaign that characterized him as sexist, racist, homophobic, hypermaculine, micro and macro aggressive toward every person on the planet. While i I would prefer a President that could be less divisive and bring more centrist democrats into the mix (if there are any left out there), you do yourself a disservice by failing to recognize the divisiveness of the former president. It's part of the job, it's just that Trump uses a sledgehammer and Obama plays smooth jazz while smoking a pack of Camels. For additional evidence, see Election, The, 2016.
Bob in Mich Posted February 17, 2018 Posted February 17, 2018 You make a good point. Under Obama the divide certainly widened a great deal.
GG Posted February 17, 2018 Posted February 17, 2018 1 hour ago, Bob in Mich said: Timing means a lot here. What I heard was that the primary goal was to sow discord and to promote divisiveness. PRIOR to the November 2016 election, the Russians favored Trump. After all, Trump as our president has certainly promoted divisiveness. Then, AFTER the election, in order to continue to promote divisions, the Russians promoted rallies for and against Trump. The anti Trump rallies were not leading into the election. Facts aren't your strong suit, are they? Why do you ignore that Russians first act was to help Bernie?
Recommended Posts