• Please read the Announcement concerning missing posts from 10/8/25-10/15/25.
  • 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!

Why haven't I seen one Republican put country over party, and condemn the Russian attacks?

I have never seen anyone presenting specific compelling evidence to the specific charges of Russian collusion here in the court of public opinion but I have seen wild mobs of leftist democrats clamoring for a finding of "guilty" based upon nothing but hearsay evidence from highly questionable sources.

The topic is Russian attacks to influence our elections, not "collusion".
 
That's the stupid story line democrats have been pushing for three years. It is a lie invented by democrats in an effort to control the damage done to Hillary and her pals in the DNC when Seth Rich gave the DNC emails to Assange to publish to the whole world.

Here is how the democrat mind works:

'We don't need no evidence to declare George Zimmerman guilty or O.J. Simpson innocent, and we don't need to look deeply into the facts which supposedly support the Russian conspiracy theory allegations, because we already know the truth and condemn to hell anyone wanting the see the facts first before issuing a judgment.'

Democrats once claimed the whole world believed the earth is flat but they refuse to back off the unsupported claims that "19 intelligence agencies" all agreed with the Russian collusion conspiracy claims before the investigation was even begun into the facts. There was never any unanimous support from intelligence officials and there were never any 19 intelligence agencies to begin with. It is all a democrat lie, just like the flat earth nonsense.

No,marke..It's your truth. You posted it. You own it.
 
The topic is Russian attacks to influence our elections, not "collusion".

OK. Give the court of public opinion your facts and evidence and let us decide who did what and who may or may not have been guilty of breaking any laws. Do not condemn "Russians" as though just the stupid allegation is warrant to attack Russia. Sensible men need to see the specifics and weigh the evidence before jumping onto stupid some lynch mob wagon in search of a hanging victim.
 
That's Republican politicians.

I haven't seen any Republican posters condemn the Russian attacks on our election.

Identify our Republican DP posters then. I can identify exactly one. How many can you identify?
 
Identify our Republican DP posters then. I can identify exactly one. How many can you identify?

I've seen many people say they're trump supporters, which is actually who I'm referring to.
 
LOL. Republicans hate to criticize Obama for anything. Just like lions ignore zebras because they hate to bother them.



You do realize that sort of makes my point. But good to hear.

Yu do realize you ignored the fact that the problem with the election occurred under Obama's term.
 
Yu do realize you ignored the fact that the problem with the election occurred under Obama's term.

I didn't ignore that any more than I ignored the fact that LBJ used to use the restroom in front of people. It's not relevant to the topic.
 
How did she do that? Steele was British and spying on the Russians.

First, a Republican candidate hired a firm to do opposition research on trump, and they hired Steele. They dropped out of the race, and then Hillary hired them to continue the research. I don't know whether Steele was 'spying' on Russians, but he was collecting information from them, and reported it, with caveats it was not verified and needed to be researched. He ran across strong evidence of Putin's attacks and reported them to the US IIRC.
 
I didn't ignore that any more than I ignored the fact that LBJ used to use the restroom in front of people. It's not relevant to the topic.

WASHINGTON — In an extraordinary break with President Donald Trump, the top two Republicans in Congress said unequivocally Tuesday that Russia meddled in the 2016 presidential election and suggested that lawmakers may pass legislation to make sure it doesn’t happen again.

GOP leaders: No doubt that Russia meddled in presidential election

Seems you have forgotten some old news. One of many stories in the news found with a simple search.:mrgreen:
 
The dishonesty in your comment, at least partly, is in conflating Russian *sources* largely telling the truth, in a search for truth, with Russian *agents* lying and propagandizing, working for a Putin project to interfere in our elections.

In other words, when an investigator learns about the Putin efforts from a Russian source and alerts US authorities, that's a good thing. When Putin's agents spread lies to millions of Americans, that's a bad thing. It's unfortunate you can't tell the two apart.

You did not condemn the Russians who interfered in our elections at Putin's direction. You condemned the Russians who interfered by telling the truth, which you call lies.

Raw intelligence doesn't always contain 100% truth. That doesn't mean that if some of it was wrong, that it wasn't vetted, that Hillary repeated it and spread it. That's what Republicans did, knowingly, with lies, and that's what Putin's attacks did, which I haven't seen one Republican condemn. To be clear, the issue isn't that the Russian info was all lies - even if it was true information, it's still a problem for a foreign power to offer help of value to a candidate.

Ok-- so we trust anonymous Russian sources when they are anti-Trump.
The reality remains true: the only consequential Russian campaign contact in 2016 was the Steele Dossier. And That was a Clinton campaign document.
 
Last edited:
First, a Republican candidate hired a firm to do opposition research on trump, and they hired Steele. They dropped out of the race, and then Hillary hired them to continue the research. I don't know whether Steele was 'spying' on Russians, but he was collecting information from them, and reported it, with caveats it was not verified and needed to be researched. He ran across strong evidence of Putin's attacks and reported them to the US IIRC.

Steele was hired by Fusion after Fusion was dropped by the GOP.
 
Ok-- so we trust anonymous Russian sources when they are anti-Trump.
The reality remains true: the only consequential Russian campaign contact in 2016 was the Steele Dossier. And That was a Clinton campaign document.

Highly dishonest post. This source was cultivated by the CIA for years. It wasn't a random phone call and the CIA said 'hey, it's against trump, let's believe it!'

The consequential contacts involved the Putin attacks on the election, which trump welcomed and did not report to authorities. Instead, he orchestrated lies to hide them.
 
WASHINGTON — In an extraordinary break with President Donald Trump, the top two Republicans in Congress said unequivocally Tuesday that Russia meddled in the 2016 presidential election and suggested that lawmakers may pass legislation to make sure it doesn’t happen again.

GOP leaders: No doubt that Russia meddled in presidential election

Seems you have forgotten some old news. One of many stories in the news found with a simple search.:mrgreen:

Some Republican politicians have taken some positions against the Russians on this. I have not seen one trump supporter - the public - in hundreds of forum trump supporters, in everyday life - condemn the attacks.
 
There's no denying that Putin launched a "sweeping and systemic" attack on our elections in 2016, as the Mueller report proved.

Why has every single Republican I've ever seen say anything about the topic, never once objected to the Putin attacks which help their side win, showing that they all are willing to cheat to win?

They are the beneficiaries of Russian interference. If the Dems were they would be raising hell over it. Party power is all that matters to them.
 
Highly dishonest post. This source was cultivated by the CIA for years. It wasn't a random phone call and the CIA said 'hey, it's against trump, let's believe it!'

The consequential contacts involved the Putin attacks on the election, which trump welcomed and did not report to authorities. Instead, he orchestrated lies to hide them.

Steele wasnt the source. He compiled his report from numerous sources of whom he has said he doesn't know the identity of many.
Trump knew when everyone else knew.
 
Steele wasnt the source. He compiled his report from numerous sources of whom he has said he doesn't know the identity of many.
Trump knew when everyone else knew.

That's correct.

Don't know what you're saying about trump. The issue now is the risk of trump learning the source and telling Putin. But that's another topic, this is about Republicans not condemning the attacks.
 
That's correct.

Don't know what you're saying about trump. The issue now is the risk of trump learning the source and telling Putin. But that's another topic, this is about Republicans not condemning the attacks.

The problem has been the unwarranted conflation:
Russian interference=Trump complicity
We know that isn't true.

Trump had no special insight into Russian activity.
That's why no conspiracy.

Why are we assuming the Steele Dossier is 'legit' and not the product of the Russian interference?
 
Some Republican politicians have taken some positions against the Russians on this. I have not seen one trump supporter - the public - in hundreds of forum trump supporters, in everyday life - condemn the attacks.

I suggest you broaden your contacts with Republicans. "Why has every single Republican I've ever seen say anything about the topic, never once objected to the Putin attacks which help their side win, showing that they all are willing to cheat to win? " Your statement was proven false. Some Republicans have objected to Russian interference.
 
I have never seen anyone presenting specific compelling evidence to the specific charges of Russian collusion here in the court of public opinion but I have seen wild mobs of leftist democrats clamoring for a finding of "guilty" based upon nothing but hearsay evidence from highly questionable sources.

Two different issues.
 
Thread: Why haven't I seen one Republican put country over party, and condemn the Russian attacks?

Answer 1: Because they benefitted.

Answer 2: They're committed to denying anything happened. They know the base will say whatever they say, so they feed the base the most outrageous positions to repeat. Why settle "ok, we agree that Russia interfered to Trump's benefit and we agree that Team Trump knew this was going on, but we don't think Trump should be impeached absence proof of an explicit agreement with Russia" when they could just go whole hog and say "nothing happens, haha libtards!"? It's not like they're going to call each other out for dishonesty.
 
As I previously posted in this thread, there have been Republicans who condemned Russian intrusion in our elections. Maybe some of you need to get better news sources.
 
I suggest you broaden your contacts with Republicans. "Why has every single Republican I've ever seen say anything about the topic, never once objected to the Putin attacks which help their side win, showing that they all are willing to cheat to win? " Your statement was proven false. Some Republicans have objected to Russian interference.

Actually, it wasn't. I did clarify that I'm talking about trump supporters in the public. My statement I haven't seen one condemn Putin's attacks. If one does, that will change, it's not wrong. And we haven't seen one post on this forum condemn the attacks from a trump supporter, proving my point.
 
Back
Top Bottom