• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Hannity Doubles Down on Seth Rich

Jack Fabulous said:
Which is exactly my opinion of this Trump/Russia collusion B.S. If that whopper can get packaged and presented as legitimate news then I guess anything goes.
Click to expand...

So, I'll take that as a nyet.
 
calamity said:
Former CIA Chief: Russia Brazenly interfered in the the US Election.

Trey Gowdy: Was there a collusion with the Trump campaign?

CIA Chief: People from the Trump campaign were communicating with the Russians.

:roll:
Click to expand...

People from the Trump campaign would be expected to communicate with their future contemporaries. There dozens of legitimate reasons for people in Trump's campaign to have lines of communication with Russians.

Please tell me that you're not pinning your hopes on something so flimsy.(I'll even spare you the childish eye roll.)
 
Jack Fabulous said:
People from the Trump campaign would be expected to communicate with their future contemporaries. There dozens of legitimate reasons for people in Trump's campaign to have lines of communication with Russians.

Please tell me that you're not pinning your hopes on something so flimsy.(I'll even spare you the childish eye roll.)
Click to expand...

We get it. You like Russia!
 
Parrish said:
So, I'll take that as a nyet.
Click to expand...

My opinion is that it is every bit as legitimate as the "news" that Seth Rich was murdered because he leaked DNC emails to Wikileaks.
 
Jack Fabulous said:
No there isn't.

Everyone involved with the investigation has said that zero evidence, let me repeat that... ZERO EVIDENCE has been found of anyone in the Trump campaign working with Russia to impact the election.
Click to expand...

Laughable on the face of it. No, not 'everyone involved with the investigation' has said that zero evidence has been found.
 
Jack Fabulous said:
People from the Trump campaign would be expected to communicate with their future contemporaries. There dozens of legitimate reasons for people in Trump's campaign to have lines of communication with Russians.

Please tell me that you're not pinning your hopes on something so flimsy.(I'll even spare you the childish eye roll.)
Click to expand...

There were numerous and frequent contacts between Trump campgain officials and Russian intelligence agents, not just 'the Russians'.

And the Trump officials have lied about it.

Paying attention has its benefits.
 
Tanngrisnir said:
Laughable on the face of it. No, not 'everyone involved with the investigation' has said that zero evidence has been found.
Click to expand...

Show me ONE person involved with the investigation that says evidence has been found that Trump's campaign colluded with Russia to influence the election.
 
Tanngrisnir said:
There were numerous and frequent contacts between Trump campgain officials and Russian intelligence agents, not just 'the Russians'.

And the Trump officials have lied about it.

Paying attention has its benefits.
Click to expand...

Paying attention does have it's benefits. Maybe you could actually start paying attention to the question at hand.

The question at hand is: Is there any evidence that Trump's campaign colluded with Russia to influence the election? BFD if members of his team talked to Russians. So did members of Hillary's team.
 
Parrish said:
no. But if you're fine with Russian inference make your case.
Click to expand...

The real problem here is that you don't seem to be fine with the idea that there is no evidence of what you want there to be evidence of.

Keep wishing. Keep hoping.
 
Fletch said:
The left seems to be doing everything they can to shut down this story and obstruct justice for Seth Rich. Perhaps a special prosecutor is warranted to find out what Hillary knew and when she knew it. There is a lot of smoke here and where there is smoke there is fire.
Click to expand...

Grasping for straws??? Faux Noise retracted their story, the parents have asked the rabid right to quit using their son's death as a political football... (but the rabid doesn't care about the family when it gets in the way of trying to divert focus off the Trump crap fest...)

The left ain't doing squat, the rabid right is doing everything it can to attempt to make a story out of a family's loss... :peace
 
Jack Fabulous said:
Show me ONE person involved with the investigation that says evidence has been found that Trump's campaign colluded with Russia to influence the election.
Click to expand...

Sorry, you don't get to change your story now. You claimed that 'everyone involved' had made the claim about zero evidence.
 
Jack Fabulous said:
Paying attention does have it's benefits. Maybe you could actually start paying attention to the question at hand.
Click to expand...

I am, thanks! It's how I know you're not.
The question at hand is: Is there any evidence that Trump's campaign colluded with Russia to influence the election? BFD if members of his team talked to Russians. So did members of Hillary's team.
Click to expand...

There are arkloads of circumstantial evidence availble to those who aren't intellectually lazy, and once the investigations wrap up, there will be (or will not be) direct evidence.

And, again, since you're not paying attention, there were numerous and frequent contacts between Trump campgain officials and Russian intelligence agents, not just 'the Russians'.
 
Tanngrisnir said:
Sorry, you don't get to change your story now. You claimed that 'everyone involved' had made the claim about zero evidence.
Click to expand...

I'll give you one more chance to be honest.

The question at hand is: Has any evidence been produced showing that Trump's campaign colluded with the Russians to influence the election?

Showing that a Trump staffer or even Trump himself had a conversation with a Russian is meaningless as it relates to this question. I would, and any reasonable person would, expect that Trump and his associates would be having conversations with global leaders of many nations prior to and after the election.

Now, are you going to address this honestly or not?
 
Jack Fabulous said:
The real problem here is that you don't seem to be fine with the idea that there is no evidence of what you want there to be evidence of.

Keep wishing. Keep hoping.
Click to expand...

No. I'm happy I'm not bat-s***-crazy as you appear to be, Jack.
 
Tanngrisnir said:
I am, thanks! It's how I know you're not.

There are arkloads of circumstantial evidence availble to those who aren't intellectually lazy, and once the investigations wrap up, there will be (or will not be) direct evidence.

And, again, since you're not paying attention, there were numerous and frequent contacts between Trump campgain officials and Russian intelligence agents, not just 'the Russians'.
Click to expand...

There is plenty of circumstantial evidence that Seth Rich was the Wikileaks source, too, yet that one is to be treated as a joke and fake news.

Hmmm....
 
So Hannity promised so much for his show tonite.....and, as usual......nothing.

Get a new hero Trumpanzies...
 
Parrish said:
No. I'm happy I'm not bat-s***-crazy as you appear to be, Jack.
Click to expand...

Bat**** crazy for not buying into a media driven frenzy that has not produced a shred of tangible proof in almost a year?:lol:
 
Jack Fabulous said:
I'll give you one more chance to be honest.

The question at hand is: Has any evidence been produced showing that Trump's campaign colluded with the Russians to influence the election?

Showing that a Trump staffer or even Trump himself had a conversation with a Russian is meaningless as it relates to this question. I would, and any reasonable person would, expect that Trump and his associates would be having conversations with global leaders of many nations prior to and after the election.

Now, are you going to address this honestly or not?
Click to expand...

Already addressed, and it's ridiculously dishonest to imply that I've been anything BUT honest.

And, again, it was Russian intelligence, not simply 'Russians'.
 
Putin?

Duterte?

Erdowan?

Lil' kim?

Marine?

King Salman?

He loves him a despot and anti-Semite.
 
Jack Fabulous said:
People from the Trump campaign would be expected to communicate with their future contemporaries. There dozens of legitimate reasons for people in Trump's campaign to have lines of communication with Russians.

Please tell me that you're not pinning your hopes on something so flimsy.(I'll even spare you the childish eye roll.)
Click to expand...

nonsense. There is no legitimate reason for a campaign to be in contact with Russian spies. You're spinning bull****.
 
Jack Fabulous said:
There is plenty of circumstantial evidence that Seth Rich was the Wikileaks source, too, yet that one is to be treated as a joke and fake news.

Hmmm....
Click to expand...

Not even remotely comparable on any rational basis. You can spare your false equivalencies for someone dumb enough to accept them.

You're either simply feigning ignorance on this matter or you simply can't be bothered to be honest and find out the detials that address your concerns.

Either way, you incuriosity isn't worth my time.
 
calamity said:
nonsense. There is no legitimate reason for a campaign to be in contact with Russian spies. You're spinning bull****.
Click to expand...
You have no basis for making this claim. YOU'RE spinning bull****.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom