• 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!

This John Brennan quote on Russia just made Donald Trump's life much harder

poweRob said:
What are you talking about? He said politicians talk to the russians all the time. I said yes... but they don't usually lie .
Click to expand...

Not so much.

Claire McCaskill accused of lying in attack on Jeff Sessions

"WASHINGTON — Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., who fired off one of the harshest criticisms of Attorney General Jeff Sessions over his meetings with a Russian ambassador, faced blowback herself Thursday when the senator's own tweets contradicted her claim that she never had met the ambassador."

https://www.google.com/amp/amp.usatoday.com/story/98630572/

All that's publicly known history.
 
akyron said:
Well that's it then. If heads of state have no contact with Russia then they all need to be fired immediately and replaced with people who can do their jobs.
Click to expand...
If you bothered to read the article, you would have learned that they weren't in office yet and were involved in the campaign.
 
akyron said:
Not so much.

Claire McCaskill accused of lying in attack on Jeff Sessions

"WASHINGTON — Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., who fired off one of the harshest criticisms of Attorney General Jeff Sessions over his meetings with a Russian ambassador, faced blowback herself Thursday when the senator's own tweets contradicted her claim that she never had met the ambassador."

https://www.google.com/amp/amp.usatoday.com/story/98630572/

All that's publicly known history.
Click to expand...

McCaskill defends meeting Russian envoy amid Twitter flap

McCaskill defended her comments by later noting she had never had a one-on-one meeting with Kislyak, unlike Sessions. She also said Republicans were seizing on a close reading of her tweets to distract from the political trouble they face over the attorney general's apparent misrepresentation of his interactions with Kislyak during his confirmation hearing.

"The Russian ambassador never called me. The Russian ambassador has never asked for a meeting with me," McCaskill told reporters, adding later that "you cannot say that having a one-on-one meeting with the Russian ambassador was a common thing to occur."​
 
Napoleon said:
No, he just has a wonderful way of making it appear that way by asking questions he already knows the answers to and cannot be answered in a public hearing.
Click to expand...

Oh really? :lol:
 
poweRob said:
Well Trumpettes have been saying for months that there was no proof of contact. If we can just get that over the bar then at least there is movement of some sort. It seems that they've settled on that there was contact and the deflection is now... "SO?????!!!!!???!?!?!!!" and "But... but.. but... was there collusion?"

As if an investigation this size will dump all that this early. Based on what I've read thus far I have my suspicions but we'll have to wait out the investigation.
Click to expand...

We have? Now, you know that isn't true. Don't you?
 
poweRob said:
OMG what a perspective. Brennan did not do any politicization of his answers. As far as Gowdy and all his sunlight powers... he was clearly trying hard to cover trump by attempting to get Brennan to say that "there was no evidence of collusion" by the way he worded his question so specifically.. he was trying to phrase it as a yes/no question. Brennan didn't bite and now Gowdy didn't get the cover for his savior, Trump the way he clearly intended to.
Click to expand...

Nice spin.
 
apdst said:
We have? Now, you know that isn't true. Don't you?
Click to expand...

yeah sure... other than the links I've provided. Keep reading the thread beyond the OP.
 
poweRob said:
No spin. Just watch the video and you'll see what I said is true.
Click to expand...

I watched the hearing, and it is obvious to me those who are yearning for a crumb of evidence to claim collusion are up a creek without a paddle.
 
vesper said:
Oh really? :lol:
Click to expand...

Yes, really. Brennan had to repeatedly state that he could not answer the question because it is classified information and had already been provided to the committee anyway.
 
poweRob said:
yeah sure... other than the links I've provided. Keep reading the thread beyond the OP.
Click to expand...

The only thing I've said is that thete's no proof of President Trump breaking the law.
 
vesper said:
I watched the hearing, and it is obvious to me those who are yearning for a crumb of evidence to claim collusion are up a creek without a paddle.
Click to expand...

You all are jumping to "collusion" as a way to move the goal posts away from the past where ya'll were busy having denied any communication what so ever between the trump campaign and russia. That lie just got exploded and now you want proof of collusion at the beginning of the investigation. Patience.

Maybe there was, maybe there wasn't... but other activity other than collusion is going to get exposed. Like Manaforts business dealings with russia via the murderous last prez of ukraine/russian stooge... did trump try to block investigations? Well its not looking good for trump... then there's Flynn and his dealings with turkey and russia as an unregistered foreign agent... Then we'll find out more about Kushner and Carter Page. Like I said... Patience.
 
Last edited:
apdst said:
The only thing I've said is that thete's no proof of President Trump breaking the law.
Click to expand...

So let's stop the investigation now. apdst says there's no proof anywhere to be found. :lol:
 
poweRob said:
McCaskill defends meeting Russian envoy amid Twitter flap

McCaskill defended her comments by later noting she had never had a one-on-one meeting with Kislyak, unlike Sessions. She also said Republicans were seizing on a close reading of her tweets to distract from the political trouble they face over the attorney general's apparent misrepresentation of his interactions with Kislyak during his confirmation hearing.

"The Russian ambassador never called me. The Russian ambassador has never asked for a meeting with me," McCaskill told reporters, adding later that "you cannot say that having a one-on-one meeting with the Russian ambassador was a common thing to occur."​
Click to expand...

That's some hair splitting there.


Did you meet?

No.

Oh. Yeah but not one on one.

Oh. Yeah but not as a surrogate.

Twins but Both treated very differently.
 
MTAtech said:
If you bothered to read the article, you would have learned that they weren't in office yet and were involved in the campaign.
Click to expand...

It's called preparing for a job.
 
akyron said:
That's some hair splitting there.


Did you meet?

No.

Oh. Yeah but not one on one.

Oh. Yeah but not as a surrogate.

Twins but Both treated very differently.
Click to expand...

She shouldn't have said she never met. That being said, kind of a big difference between having stood next to someone and having meetings with them.
 
akyron said:
It's called preparing for a job.
Click to expand...

Then lying about the preparing? hrrrmmmm... :lol:

you are stretching your deflection defense soooooo thin.
 
poweRob said:
So let's stop the investigation now. apdst says there's no proof anywhere to be found. :lol:
Click to expand...

Is that what I said?

But, at some point they're going to have to accept reality.
 
poweRob said:
Then lying about the preparing? hrrrmmmm... :lol:

you are stretching your deflection defense soooooo thin.
Click to expand...

Do you have proof of a crime?
 
poweRob said:
That's clearly where you are going with this all.



Do tell us what this apdst reality is.
Click to expand...

Reality, at this point, is that there's no evidence of a crime.
 
apdst said:
Do you have proof of a crime?
Click to expand...

Patience....

There's an investigation going on. You had all the patience in the world while you awaited a zillion investigations of Benghazi that didn't have the desired results you wanted. You can wait for just this one.
 
poweRob said:
She shouldn't have said she never met. That being said, kind of a big difference between having stood next to someone and having meetings with them.
Click to expand...

If you want to hold a secret meeting don't let the state department set it all up for you.
 
akyron said:
If you want to hold a secret meeting don't let the state department set it all up for you.
Click to expand...

How'd that work out for trump's folks? :lol:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom