• 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!

Giuliani just confessed to the crime. He also revealed something bigger.

ecofarm said:
If you're gonna do a Glenn Beck Blackboard of evil dooers thing, I'm gonna need the blackboard. With the lines and arrows and everything. Don't half ass six degrees of conspiracy theory. And underline a couple things. Come on.
Click to expand...

This has all been documented. Your unwillingness or inability to pay attention is not my concern except to the extent that I am obligated to respond to your erroneous comments.
 
veritas1 said:
Here you go, for like the 6th time.


Ukrainian efforts to sabotage Trump backfire - POLITICO
Click to expand...

Since you refuse to read the article here is what it states and you are debunked.

But the Republican-controlled Senate Intelligence Committee thoroughly investigated that theory, according to people with direct knowledge of the inquiry, and found no evidence that Ukraine waged a top-down interference campaign akin to the Kremlin’s efforts to help Trump win in 2016.

The committee’s Republican chairman, Richard Burr of North Carolina, said in October 2017 that the panel would be examining “collusion by either campaign during the 2016 elections."

But an interview that fall with the Democratic consultant at the heart of the accusation that Kyiv meddled, Alexandra Chalupa, was fruitless, a committee source said, and Republicans didn’t follow up or request any more witnesses related to the issue.

The Senate interview largely focused on a POLITICO article published in January 2017, according to a person with direct knowledge of the closed-door hearing, in which Chalupa was quoted as saying officials at the Ukrainian Embassy were "helpful" to her effort to raise the alarm about Trump’s campaign chairman Paul Manafort in 2016.
Click to expand...
 
veritas1 said:
This has all been documented. Your unwillingness or inability to pay attention is not my concern except to the extent that I am obligated to respond to your erroneous comments.
Click to expand...

To what extent are you obligated?
 
US&THEM said:
Since you refuse to read the article here is what it states and you are debunked.
Click to expand...

So what? Chalupa was snooping around looking to get dirt on Manafort to injure Trump and Ukrainians helped her. They need to have her testify publicly if this impeachment farce goes to the Senate.
 
veritas1 said:
Because leaving erroneous posts as the last word makes it seem like you might have a point.
Click to expand...

But you lied about the article. It didn't claim what you claimed. So now there's absolutely nothing supporting your asinine conspiracy theory. But it's still all you care about, isn't it? Sad.
 
ecofarm said:
But you lied about the article. It didn't claim what you claimed. So now there's absolutely nothing supporting your asinine conspiracy theory. But it's still all you care about, isn't it? Sad.
Click to expand...

You didn't read the article. You claimed it didn't even exist. Dismissed.
 
veritas1 said:
You didn't read the article. You claimed it didn't even exist. Dismissed.
Click to expand...

Your Ark doesn't exist. There's no Politico article claiming what you claim. Someone here, just now, specifically posted from your supposed proof and made jackassery of your claim.

It's stupid, in the first place, that your grand sweeping political conspiracy rests on a ****ing Politico article. How ****ing braindead is that?

But okay, let's say the house of cards rests on a Politico article. Let's be braindead and pretend broad incriminating political conspiracies rest on Politico articles.

Yours didn't ****ing say that.

So the whole thing is stupid bs and you're wasting everyone's time were it not for the theater of the absurd of it all.



"My Politico article proves all the Dems should be in prison."

Okay. Like that doesn't look ****ing insane.
 
ecofarm said:
Your Ark doesn't exist. There's no Politico article claiming what you claim. Someone here, just now, specifically posted from your supposed proof and made jackassery of your claim.

It's stupid, in the first place, that your grand sweeping political conspiracy rests on a ****ing Politico article. How ****ing braindead is that?

But okay, let's say the house of cards rests on a Politico article. Let's be braindead and pretend broad incriminating political conspiracies rest on Politico articles.

Yours didn't ****ing say that.

So the whole thing is stupid bs and you're wasting everyone's time were it not for the theater of the absurd of it all.



"My Politico article proves all the Dems should be in prison."

Okay. Like that doesn't look ****ing insane.
Click to expand...

I never said a word about Dems going to prison. I said they were dicking around in Ukraine trying to get dirt on Trump. They were, as the article shows.
 
veritas1 said:
I never said a word about Dems going to prison. I said they were dicking around in Ukraine trying to get dirt on Trump. They were, as the article shows.
Click to expand...

I'm gonna give you a little general debate advice. Don't put the evidence in the hands of your opponents. One cannot balloon float "evidence" as you have, asking opposition to smack it into your face.

All issues and other debates aside, you just put the glove in OJ's hands. That's stupid. Work on that presentation.
 
veritas1 said:
So what? Chalupa was snooping around looking to get dirt on Manafort to injure Trump and Ukrainians helped her. They need to have her testify publicly if this impeachment farce goes to the Senate.
Click to expand...

Your BS Politico 2016 Ukraine article has been debunked by the GOP Senate, yet you keep talking about it like it proves something. Get it?
 
veritas1 said:
That the Dems were all over Ukraine trying to get dirt and damage Trump in 2016, is not up for dispute. It was thoroughly covered by Politico.
Click to expand...

Yup, gloss right over your boys' 25th amendment audition.

Y'all won't touch that one with a liberal's dick.
 
veritas1 said:
Here you go, for like the 6th time.


Ukrainian efforts to sabotage Trump backfire - POLITICO
Click to expand...

I actually do not believe this piece was later disavowed by Politico or corrected by Politico though I think I saw that offered in an earlier post. I could be wrong on that.

That said, it should have been disavowed. Any piece that offers shock that anybody was offering evidence of Manafort's staggering corruption should be taken down, burned and never acknowledged again. Any piece that calls Maligned Russian Election Interference "Meddling" is peddling a false equivalency.

All of our Allies meddle. See Nigel Farage speaking from the podium of a recent Trump rally. They all meddle. Russia is not an ally and they were not meddling. Maligned Russian Election Interference managed and supported from the very top of government of an adversarial nation state goes far far far beyond the meddling of an ally.
 
ecofarm said:
I'm gonna give you a little general debate advice. Don't put the evidence in the hands of your opponents. One cannot balloon float "evidence" as you have, asking opposition to smack it into your face.

All issues and other debates aside, you just put the glove in OJ's hands. That's stupid. Work on that presentation.
Click to expand...

Translated: I don't have anything so I'll talk about the other guy.
 
US&THEM said:
Your BS Politico 2016 Ukraine article has been debunked by the GOP Senate, yet you keep talking about it like it proves something. Get it?
Click to expand...

Did the Senate bring in its authors? The credulousness of liberals in not owning up to all the crap the Dems have tried against Trump since 2016, is quite a spectacle to watch.
 
veritas1 said:
Translated: I don't have anything so I'll talk about the other guy.
Click to expand...

How snowflake.

I'm talking about what you did. You claimed to have damning evidence. Held it aloft. Failed to actually act on it in any way. Handed the glove to OJ. And looked the fool.

Eco's helpful debate hint #428: Don't hand the glove to OJ.
 
ecofarm said:
How snowflake.

I'm talking about what you did. You claimed to have damning evidence. Held it aloft. Failed to actually act on it in any way. Handed the glove to OJ. And looked the fool.

Eco's helpful debate hint #428: Don't hand the glove to OJ.
Click to expand...

You didn't even know the Politico article existed though it's been talked about for months. You're the last person who should be offering up advice to anybody. This reminds me of how the left kept saying that the dossier wasn't central to the FISA applications but, now that Horowitz has issued his report and testified, we know that it was. Without it, there would have been no warrants. Yet, the dossier is based on the musings of some guy in a Russian bar. That's the type of nonsense the Dems used to spy on a campaign and try to subvert it. They failed, of course, and will continue to fail.
 
veritas1 said:
Did the Senate bring in its authors? The credulousness of liberals in not owning up to all the crap the Dems have tried against Trump since 2016, is quite a spectacle to watch.
Click to expand...

Politico reported both articles you are hanging your hat on. Jesus.
 
veritas1 said:
You didn't even know the Politico article existed though it's been talked about for months. You're the last person who should be offering up advice to anybody. This reminds me of how the left kept saying that the dossier wasn't central to the FISA applications but, now that Horowitz has issued his report and testified, we know that it was. Without it, there would have been no warrants. Yet, the dossier is based on the musings of some guy in a Russian bar. That's the type of nonsense the Dems used to spy on a campaign and try to subvert it. They failed, of course, and will continue to fail.
Click to expand...

Something interesting was mentioned in the hearing yesterday. The FISA applications in one year alone were riddled with mistakes, something like 75 applications were suspect. This happens every year. So the GOP is dwelling on Carter Page who is anyway an extremely shady guy and a complete bonehead. Furthermore, a surveillance application that happened 3 years ago with no relation to Ukraine in no way exonerates the president from current impeachable acts. Total spin and distraction.
 
The AntiDonald said:
Something interesting was mentioned in the hearing yesterday. The FISA applications in one year alone were riddled with mistakes, something like 75 applications were suspect. This happens every year. So the GOP is dwelling on Carter Page who is anyway an extremely shady guy and a complete bonehead. Furthermore, a surveillance application that happened 3 years ago with no relation to Ukraine in no way exonerates the president from current impeachable acts. Total spin and distraction.
Click to expand...

The topic wasn't Trump and Ukraine. It was dishonesty by the FBI in getting the FISA warrants. Carter Page is shady? Why, because you say so? He's never been charged with a damn thing and will, no doubt, be winning quite the settlement once he sues the parties responsible for wiretapping and defaming him.
 
tres borrachos said:
Then why do you want him "investigated"?
Click to expand...

I want the circumstances surrounding Burisma and the China deal investigated. That goes more toward Joe than his son. His son is basically incompetent. Joe pulled all the strings.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom