• 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!

The Time I Got Recruited to Collude with the Russians

VanceMack said:
Another definitive smoking gun. Well thats pretty awesome. Remember when the feds were ready to act in February? Remember when they were going to issue warrants in March? Remember when Trump JR was ready to be fitted for diamond encrusted handcuffs in April?

This one, boy...THIS is the one thats going to PROVE collusion. Yeaaaaaah booyyyyyyyyyyyyy.........
Click to expand...

Well the headline was basically bull**** from the details of the story.
On top of that, as soon as I saw his twitter, I remembered that he failed to identify some pertinent information within the DNC leaked emails.
People later tried to question him on it, but he blocked them or didn't reply (can't remember).

His story for the time being, is a dud.
 
slo1111 said:
You are trying to tell me that nobody has confirmed that bots confirmed to originate in Russia and Eastern Europe were used to post and spread pro Trump and con Hillary information accross the Internet?

You are so far down the rabbit hole of denial, I don't even think you understand the full alligations of Russian interference.



Sent from my SM-N920T using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

If he is down the rabbit hole of denial, and I don't think he is, then you are further down the rabbit hole of gullibility. :mrgreen:

Have you ever considered that it might have been the Vietnamese who stole our election? Or Ireland?
 
Thoreau72 said:
If he is down the rabbit hole of denial, and I don't think he is, then you are further down the rabbit hole of gullibility. :mrgreen:

Have you ever considered that it might have been the Vietnamese who stole our election? Or Ireland?
Click to expand...
Sure thing boss. You ever consider it could have been the flying spaghetti monster?

Sent from my SM-N920T using Tapatalk
 
Thoreau72 said:
If he is down the rabbit hole of denial, and I don't think he is, then you are further down the rabbit hole of gullibility. :mrgreen:

Have you ever considered that it might have been the Vietnamese who stole our election? Or Ireland?
Click to expand...
The saddest thing is that you can't see the big picture. I suppose the fact that the Republicans on various committees who have seen more evidence than you and I were also fooled by the Vietnamese when deciding to launch their investigations.

Deny, deny, deny

Sent from my SM-N920T using Tapatalk
 
danarhea said:
Smoking gun? This is a smoking Uzi.

This article is by one of the media's "unnamed sources", who has now chosen to reveal himself. He is not a Democrat. In fact, he hates Hillary Clinton, and was looking for material he could compromise her with. Then he was contacted by officials within the Trump campaign. The rest is history. Expect the other shoe to drop on Michael Flynn, and maybe others, very soon, because they assumed that Matt Tait had no ethics either. They were wrong, and that is their impending undoing. Flynn is going to end up doing hard time.

https://lawfareblog.com/time-i-got-recruited-collude-russians
Click to expand...

Looks like that "there is no evidence of collusion" lie is falling apart. Plan B: Collusion is not a crime; is about to be put into effect.
 
slo1111 said:
Sure thing boss. You ever consider it could have been the flying spaghetti monster?

Sent from my SM-N920T using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Yes, entirely possible in this world today.

The one suspect that can be categorically excluded is Hillary herself. :lol:
 
danarhea said:
Smoking gun? This is a smoking Uzi.

This article is by one of the media's "unnamed sources", who has now chosen to reveal himself. He is not a Democrat. In fact, he hates Hillary Clinton, and was looking for material he could compromise her with. Then he was contacted by officials within the Trump campaign. The rest is history. Expect the other shoe to drop on Michael Flynn, and maybe others, very soon, because they assumed that Matt Tait had no ethics either. They were wrong, and that is their impending undoing. Flynn is going to end up doing hard time.

https://lawfareblog.com/time-i-got-recruited-collude-russians
Click to expand...

Smoking gun of what though? This is the annoying thing about this whole ordeal; it's became so convoluted and with so many different accusations that **** like this is stated broadly when it really doesn't apply to everything being accused.

Smoking gun that the Trump campaign was colluding with the Russians?

Smoking gun that the Trump campaign was worked and manipulated by the Russians?

Smoking gun that the Trump campaign was actually involved in the leaking of the information?

Smoking gun that the Trump campaign was attempting to collect information about hacked emails?

Smoking gun that groups connected to the Trump campaign for the purpose of opposition research was attempting to collect information about hacked emails?

Smoking gun that that groups connected to the Trump campaign for the purpose of opposition research were responsible for the information being leaked?

Smoking gun that groups connected to the Trump campaign were offered information from the hacks?

Smoking gun that said groups didn't care if the information was legitimate or not?

I can go on and on.

"Smoking uzi" in regards to WHAT exactly? Because there's some things that this article says that are enlightening, some that are pretty much a given, and some that have nothing to do with some of the accusations being thrown around. So it's hard to actually comment on it without knowing WHAT you're actually trying to say.
 
I just find it amazing that some of our Elected Political Leaders choose to look the other way when it comes to National Security and choose not to believe our own National Security Agencies.

It's .... well ... Amazing.
 
RAMOSS said:
How long did the Republicans have investigations against Hillary Clinton?
Click to expand...

How many times did Hillary fail to comply with those investigations ??
 
Cigar said:
I just find it amazing that some of our Elected Political Leaders choose to look the other way when it comes to National Security and choose not to believe our own National Security Agencies.

It's .... well ... Amazing.
Click to expand...

I choose not to believe Crowdstrike. The FBI did no forensic analysis of the DNC's server/s.
 
hanger4 said:
How many times did Hillary fail to comply with those investigations ??
Click to expand...

You tell me, and document your claims with some other than right wing news sources.
 
hanger4 said:
I choose not to believe Crowdstrike. The FBI did no forensic analysis of the DNC's server/s.
Click to expand...

And you know this because??
 
danarhea said:
Smoking gun? This is a smoking Uzi.

This article is by one of the media's "unnamed sources", who has now chosen to reveal himself. He is not a Democrat. In fact, he hates Hillary Clinton, and was looking for material he could compromise her with. Then he was contacted by officials within the Trump campaign. The rest is history. Expect the other shoe to drop on Michael Flynn, and maybe others, very soon, because they assumed that Matt Tait had no ethics either. They were wrong, and that is their impending undoing. Flynn is going to end up doing hard time.

https://lawfareblog.com/time-i-got-recruited-collude-russians
Click to expand...

Flynn is going down. I'm just waiting to see what it will take for the trump administration to throw him under the bus to cover their own asses on this.
 
RAMOSS said:
You tell me, and document your claims with some other than right wing news sources.
Click to expand...

When did Hillary turn over all relevant documents to a Bengahzi investigation ??
 
hanger4 said:
When did Hillary turn over all relevant documents to a Bengahzi investigation ??
Click to expand...

When they asked her to. She gave all the documents that were allowed to be given .. the FBI had certain thigns withheld. .. but that wast he FBI's decision.
 
RAMOSS said:
When they asked her to. She gave all the documents that were allowed to be given .. the FBI had certain thigns withheld. .. but that wast he FBI's decision.
Click to expand...

She was asked for all relevant documents at the first hearing, she failed to turn over her emails. In fact she assured the chairman of said committee she had and she lied.
 
hanger4 said:
She was asked for all relevant documents at the first hearing, she failed to turn over her emails. In fact she assured the chairman of said committee she had and she lied.
Click to expand...

Prove it. The key is 'relevant'.. show that those emails were relevant.
 
danarhea said:
You are right, Comrade. Now let's go kill Moose and Squirrel. :mrgreen:
Click to expand...

'Cuz with Bernie president, that's all we got to eat!

BTW, my wife is finishing her newest song: "five little chipmunks sitting in a pan"
 
RAMOSS said:
And, what does that have to do with the Benghazi investigation??? Absolutely zero.
Click to expand...

You've mixed two train's of responses. Start with post #33 to understand my links to your post.
 
RAMOSS said:
Prove it. The key is 'relevant'.. show that those emails were relevant.
Click to expand...

Prove what ?? That she supplied relevant emails ?? I don't understand ?? If she'd supplied all relevant emails then we'd have known of her secret server at the first hearing in September, 2014.
 
hanger4 said:
Prove what ?? That she supplied relevant emails ?? I don't understand ?? If she'd supplied all relevant emails then we'd have known of her secret server at the first hearing in September, 2014.
Click to expand...

Shrug.. You aren't providing support for your claims..
 
slo1111 said:
You are trying to tell me that nobody has confirmed that bots confirmed to originate in Russia and Eastern Europe were used to post and spread pro Trump and con Hillary information accross the Internet?

You are so far down the rabbit hole of denial, I don't even think you understand the full alligations of Russian interference.



Sent from my SM-N920T using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

What I'm telling you, is that no one has confirmed that the Russian government is directly responsible.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom