Kemp Posted May 8, 2018 Posted May 8, 2018 20 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said: To entrap Trump so that he could be prosecuted once Hillary won. That was the goal. That was her end game. If that is accurate, it will come out in the Mueller investigation, so let's wait and see.
Kemp Posted May 8, 2018 Posted May 8, 2018 5 minutes ago, GG said: This means you haven't been following Greggy's posts. For a while, he's been claiming that Manafort was a plant in the Trump campaign and the Russian meeting at Trump Tower was a set up to nail Trump down the road. As time goes by and when you start connecting the dots, the theory becomes more plausible by the day. Are you saying this is solely his theory or that he has posted evidence to support it? 2 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said: Your ignorance has nothing to do with homosexuality unless you're working up to some kind of a confession here. It's ok, we judge you for your mind, not where you like to stick your dick. And yet another.....
3rdnlng Posted May 8, 2018 Posted May 8, 2018 4 minutes ago, Kemp said: Are you saying this is solely his theory or that he has posted evidence to support it? And yet another..... This thread is 108 pages. It didn't begin when you arrived here. Instead of asking other people to bring you up to date why don't you read the thread? We are not the Huffington Post, who tells you what to think.
GG Posted May 8, 2018 Posted May 8, 2018 Just now, Kemp said: Are you saying this is solely his theory or that he has posted evidence to support it? At this point it's all circumstantial evidence since there are no legal proceedings and everything is under gag orders. But you'd have to be a gator-level partisan hack not to be troubled by what is known - Manafort was not a close Trump ally or family friend. He suddenly appeared on the scene in early 2016 and clearly wasn't vetted by Trump's campaign. Manafort's history is much more aligned with Clinton's circle than Trump's. The Russia collusion story picked up more steam after he came onboard. The meeting with the Russian lawyer is getting weirder, especially when you start asking about her visa approval and the meetings she had that week. You don't have to believe 100% of Greggy's theories, but even if you only took 1/2 of them, they would paint a very scary picture of Fed gov't abuse. 4 1
Kemp Posted May 8, 2018 Posted May 8, 2018 37 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said: This thread is 108 pages. It didn't begin when you arrived here. Instead of asking other people to bring you up to date why don't you read the thread? We are not the Huffington Post, who tells you what to think. I was a simple question. It only requires a Yes or No answer. Why attempt to demean, instead? 36 minutes ago, GG said: At this point it's all circumstantial evidence since there are no legal proceedings and everything is under gag orders. But you'd have to be a gator-level partisan hack not to be troubled by what is known - Manafort was not a close Trump ally or family friend. He suddenly appeared on the scene in early 2016 and clearly wasn't vetted by Trump's campaign. Manafort's history is much more aligned with Clinton's circle than Trump's. The Russia collusion story picked up more steam after he came onboard. The meeting with the Russian lawyer is getting weirder, especially when you start asking about her visa approval and the meetings she had that week. You don't have to believe 100% of Greggy's theories, but even if you only took 1/2 of them, they would paint a very scary picture of Fed gov't abuse. Are you saying this is all theory or that evidence has been published to support it?
GG Posted May 8, 2018 Posted May 8, 2018 37 minutes ago, Kemp said: I was a simple question. It only requires a Yes or No answer. Why attempt to demean, instead? Are you saying this is all theory or that evidence has been published to support it? Read this thread, Greggy provides evidence. Look at who is Manafort's longtime business partner. Look at the name of the firm where he worked. Look at who they worked for on both sides of the Atlantic. Why did that outfit immediately close up shop after Manafort's indictment? Look at the timeline of the Russian lawyer's visa approval. Then come back and say there's nothing there 1
3rdnlng Posted May 8, 2018 Posted May 8, 2018 39 minutes ago, Kemp said: I was a simple question. It only requires a Yes or No answer. Why attempt to demean, instead? Are you saying this is all theory or that evidence has been published to support it? Yes.
boyst Posted May 8, 2018 Posted May 8, 2018 1 hour ago, Kemp said: I am unclear about your point but would appreciate links to your various points so I could evaluate them. Thank you in advance. Another homosexual reference from this team of thought. Pattern is certainly intriguing. Wonder why. Coincidence? Self-loathing? Retard. Just because you're late to the party doesn't mean you can ask everyone to get you up to speed. Do your own diligence and go back through this thread. If you're unwilling to do so than don't request others do your leg work. There is a search function, a back button and a log out button. Use at least one.
Deranged Rhino Posted May 8, 2018 Posted May 8, 2018 3 hours ago, Kemp said: I am unclear about your point but would appreciate links to your various points so I could evaluate them. Thank you in advance. Apologies, I'm west coast based so I'm always later to join in... GG has been doing a good job of laying out the main point of my questions. I laid out those questions about the Trump Tower meeting to (hopefully) spark your own curiosity to do your own digging into what I was laying out. I did it that way not to be difficult, but because the information will be more impactful if you dig/learn it for yourself rather than have an anonymous internet guy regurgitate it. When the latter happens, it tends to shift people into debate mode (as you see happens down here), and prohibits actual conversation. That aside, I'll spell it out a bit more with links: The timeline of events is important to remember. Fusion GPS was hired in late April of '16 by the DNC through Perkins Coie. Without bogging us down in WHY Fusion was hired, though that's the starting point for this whole thing, it's important to note that at the time of the meeting the DNC and Clinton campaign already knew they had been "hacked" (it was really a leak but we'll leave that aside) and that her emails and the DNC's were in the "wild". This is crucial to remember as we move on... The Trump Tower meeting happened less than two weeks after Fusion was hired. It's my contention/speculation that this meeting was arranged and designed to entrap Don Jr and Trump's campaign in a manufactured scandal. It was dirty pool, political trickery. They laid out juicy bait that the political neophytes couldn't resist: the offer of Clinton emails. As noted above, the campaign and Fusion already knew the emails were going to surface eventually, this was one of two attempts to get out in front of it and launch a political counter punch. This counter punch would involve entrapping the campaign with the Trump Tower meeting and tainting them with Russian stink, and also the creation of Gucifer 2.0... which happened just 6 days after this meeting. Manafort (who as GG has pointed out I speculate - with circumstantial evidence - was a plant by the DNC/Clintons) was present, and approved Don Jr being there, as well as Kushner. But there was a problem for Fusion GPS and the DNC. Natalia, the lawyer they were using as a cut out/honeypot, had no way into the country since she was in "visa jail" because the administration and State Department viewed her (rightfully) as a Russian intelligence asset. Then, at the 11th hour, a miracle happened. The State Department intervened and her visa was approved just in time to make the meeting. Think about that before you brush it aside. We know now that in June of 16 the administration and FBI were so concerned about Russian interference in our election they had opened up a counter intelligence investigation into several of Trump's team members... yet despite this they moved heaven and earth to get a known Russian intelligence asset into the country and into a room with the opposition party? Put a pin in that... We also now now, Johnathan Winer at the State Department was instrumental in working with Fusion GPS to disseminate the dossier to the FBI in October of '16... is it possible (likely) that Winer played a role in helping Fusion GPS get the bait into the country as well? http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/373131-former-obama-official-confirms-steele-dossier-was-given-to-state So - where does that leave us? With a completely different picture of what the Trump Tower meeting was really about and how it came together. It's one the general media isn't covering because it cuts against the entire narrative that's been foisted on the public since January '17. Look at the facts without the politics: Fusion GPS was hired to compile opposition research on Trump just days before the meeting; the woman at the center of it all, Natalia, has a history with Fusion GPS and Simpson personally; she met with Simpson hours before the meeting and after per Simpson's testimony to congress; the translator used in the meeting was Hillary Clinton's personal favorite. That's called stacking the deck with friendly witnesses - all of whom could feed friendly journalists scoop after scoop, leak after leak, to score political points against Trump. Then, when the meeting starts, there's no mention of emails or offer made to help. There are no crimes committed. No collusion. Just the illusion of it - when filtered through the 24 hour news cycle and hyperbolic headlines. Natalia's goal in that meeting wasn't to help Trump, it wasn't to help her "clients"... it was to entrap Trump and sink him in Russian scandal. They - Fusion GPS and the DNC - knew the Russian stuff was going to blow big back in June because they were building their entire last gasp of the campaign around blaming Russia for the hacks/leaks and tainting Trump with a Russian brush. In the hyped environment, all it would take to get the media to go nuts would be to get Trump inner circle members into a room with a known Russian intelligence asset - which Natalia was. Circling back to our pin... 44 and the State Department knew her history. And if you believe their own after action report, they knew at that time the Russians were trying to influence the election... yet they approved an 11th hour visa for a known Russian asset to meet with a member of one of the two campaigns running for office? That's either a sign of their utter failure to secure the election... or complicity in dirty political tricks. There's no other explanation that's plausible. Here are some links - but they are starting points, more digging is required: * Here's a good starting article on the visa issues - notice the names involved, and the details of the case she was working on in addition to everything else. It's a case that Fusion GPS had done work with Veselnitskaya and her client on before: https://www.reuters.com/article/legal-us-otc-veselnitskaya/how-did-russian-lawyer-veselnitskaya-get-into-u-s-for-trump-tower-meeting-idUSKBN1D62Q2 https://www.law.com/nationallawjournal/sites/nationallawjournal/2018/01/11/what-does-baker-hostetler-have-to-do-with-the-fusion-gps-controversy/?slreturn=20180408113212 Quote The firm was tapped beginning in at least 2013 to defend a Cypriot company, Prevezon Holdings Ltd., against U.S. money laundering accusations. Natalia Veselnitskaya, the Russian lawyer who met Donald Trump Jr. in June 2016—reportedly with the intent to provide information damaging to Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign—was also working for Prevezon. And Fusion GPS, the company that produced the infamous Steele dossier on President Donald Trump and Russia, was also retained by Baker Hostetler amid the Prevezon litigation. * Here's a starting link to show she met with Simpson just hours before the Trump Tower meeting... and then the day after: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/11/07/fusion-gps-official-met-with-russian-operative-before-and-after-trump-jr-sit-down.html * Per Simpson's testimony to Congress, he does not speak Russian. Natalia does not speak English, allegedly... so what did they meet about? Here's a clue: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/trump-dossier-firm-also-supplied-info-used-meeting-russians-trump-n819526 So, the information Natalia spoke to Don Jr. about came from Fusion and Simpson... * Here's a link to the translator's history: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/anatoli-samochornov-translator-donald-trump-jr-meeting/ https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-11-28/translator-from-trump-tower-meeting-is-said-to-meet-house-panel The translator was Hillary Clinton's personal translator of choice while she was Secretary of State. He's since moved on to Meridian - a NGO with heavy Clinton influence. 2 hours ago, Kemp said: Are you saying this is all theory or that evidence has been published to support it? What is happening now is one of the biggest political scandals in our history. It's happening in real time, and has caused an avalanche of criminal investigations and proceedings. As such, much of this is not being reported on (because much of the media is complicit in this, knowingly or unknowingly) and requires digging through available open source material on your own to find the truth. That's something not many are willing to do, which is how the game works. So this is speculative, without question, but it's speculation backed up by a lot of circumstantial evidence. I've been working on unraveling it for over a year now, with multiple posts and rabbit holes chased. I don't know everything nor do I have access to everything, but it's becoming harder and harder to deny that some !@#$kery was afoot... and it wasn't based in Moscow. 1
B-Man Posted May 8, 2018 Posted May 8, 2018 STUDY: Trump TV Coverage 90% Negative... https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/rich-noyes/2018/05/08/media-get-trumped-presidents-polls-improve-despite-90-negative
DC Tom Posted May 8, 2018 Posted May 8, 2018 55 minutes ago, B-Man said: STUDY: Trump TV Coverage 90% Negative... https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/rich-noyes/2018/05/08/media-get-trumped-presidents-polls-improve-despite-90-negative That low? Where the hell is the 10% hiding?
PPP Is Full of Racism Posted May 8, 2018 Posted May 8, 2018 57 minutes ago, B-Man said: STUDY: Trump TV Coverage 90% Negative... https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/rich-noyes/2018/05/08/media-get-trumped-presidents-polls-improve-despite-90-negative 91% dont sell them short
Deranged Rhino Posted May 8, 2018 Posted May 8, 2018 3 minutes ago, DC Tom said: That low? Where the hell is the 10% hiding? In PPP.
njbuff Posted May 8, 2018 Posted May 8, 2018 1 hour ago, B-Man said: STUDY: Trump TV Coverage 90% Negative... https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/rich-noyes/2018/05/08/media-get-trumped-presidents-polls-improve-despite-90-negative I thought it would be about 99% with all the braindead coverage of Stormy, Stormy, Stormy.
Albwan Posted May 8, 2018 Posted May 8, 2018 9 hours ago, /dev/null said: Breaking news from The Most Trusted Name in Muted Airport TVs... Melania Trump is not "culturally American" LOL...my god things will never be better than these days since trump won the election... dems/liberals are so funny...the looniness is awesome cake...
Kemp Posted May 8, 2018 Posted May 8, 2018 6 hours ago, GG said: Read this thread, Greggy provides evidence. Look at who is Manafort's longtime business partner. Look at the name of the firm where he worked. Look at who they worked for on both sides of the Atlantic. Why did that outfit immediately close up shop after Manafort's indictment? Look at the timeline of the Russian lawyer's visa approval. Then come back and say there's nothing there I asked for a link to anything. You're saying to look at this and that statement by a poster. There must be something on the Internet about these things other than statements in a Buffalo Bills thread. Could you or someone else point me to it so I can read about it? Seems like a fair request.
TakeYouToTasker Posted May 8, 2018 Posted May 8, 2018 2 minutes ago, Kemp said: I asked for a link to anything. You're saying to look at this and that statement by a poster. There must be something on the Internet about these things other than statements in a Buffalo Bills thread. Could you or someone else point me to it so I can read about it? Seems like a fair request. Is there something about you that makes you unable to verify or examine what has been provided for you? The links have been posted in this thread an others, all on the first page of this forum; and there is tons of information out there. GG has explicitly told you what to look for. Why are you unable to do this?
GG Posted May 8, 2018 Posted May 8, 2018 4 minutes ago, Kemp said: I asked for a link to anything. You're saying to look at this and that statement by a poster. There must be something on the Internet about these things other than statements in a Buffalo Bills thread. Could you or someone else point me to it so I can read about it? Seems like a fair request. Now you're being obtuse. There are plenty of links in this thread. Do your own homework, Sue
Kemp Posted May 8, 2018 Posted May 8, 2018 6 hours ago, Boyst62 said: Retard. Just because you're late to the party doesn't mean you can ask everyone to get you up to speed. Do your own diligence and go back through this thread. If you're unwilling to do so than don't request others do your leg work. There is a search function, a back button and a log out button. Use at least one. I am not reading 108 pages to find a link to something when you can simply provide it. I presume it exists, so what's the big deal? Calling me a retard isn't a link to anything. It's just another tiresome Internet person typing away. In less time you could point me to something of some value.
DC Tom Posted May 8, 2018 Posted May 8, 2018 Just now, TakeYouToTasker said: Is there something about you that makes you unable to verify or examine what has been provided for you? The links have been posted in this thread an others, all on the first page of this forum; and there is tons of information out there. GG has explicitly told you what to look for. Why are you unable to do this? Typical liberal. If you don't do everything for them, they feel oppressed. Just now, Kemp said: In less time you could point me to something of some value. They did. This thread. You walk in to movies late and tell them to start the movie over, don't you?
Recommended Posts