Why do you always take these Russians at face value, are you really that naive? There are legit rumors that she is why Flynn was fired by Obama, not anything having to do with Iran policy differences. I don't know if those rumors are true (he was def banging that Russian tho, and he did end up eating dinner next to Putin and Jill Stein a short time later...) but I damn sure wouldn't take her word for it.

HuMcK said:

---

Why do you always take these Russians at face value, are you really that naive? There are legit rumors that she is why Flynn was fired by Obama, not anything having to do with Iran policy differences. I don't know if those rumors are true (he was def banging that Russian tho, and he did end up eating dinner next to Putin and Jill Stein a short time later...) but I damn sure wouldn't take her word for it.

---

You literally just made that up...!?

There would be loads of uncovered meddling with Russia if it actually took place. Take the tin foil off bro

"legit rumors"

They emailed each other using pet names (she called him Misha) after meeting in London in 2014 (which Flynn was supposed to report as DIA but didn't, not a huge deal in and of itself but he didn't report his ongoing contact with her either), then he asked her to be his translator in Moscow, and then poof Flynn gets fired not long after. Then Flynn meets Putin in Moscow in 2015 and 2 months after that he joins the Trump campaign.

Seriously, this is out-of-the-county level of wack.

All based on open source reporting and admissions by the parties...

HuMcK said:

---

All based on open source reporting and admissions by the parties...

---

Translation: You don't have any proof to back up your story

We already knew that.

Flynn and Trump are going to learn the same lesson at about the same time. You may get by but you won't get away.

HuMcK said:

---

All based on open source reporting and admissions by the parties...

---

Bring the receipts.

cinque said:

---

Flynn and Trump are going to learn the same lesson at about the same time. You may get by but you won't get away.

---

This account is hilarious

This actually included a part I had forgotten: right after leaving DIA Flynn went to work for Russia Today, before going to a dinner with Putin (which he did not disclose as required that he was paid for) and then 2 months later joining the Trump campaign.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/mar/31/michael-flynn-new-evidence-spy-chiefs-had-concerns-about-russian-ties

Doc Holliday said:

---

cinque said:

---

Flynn and Trump are going to learn the same lesson at about the same time. You may get by but you won't get away.

---

This account is hilarious

---

Flynn is likely to be charged with felonies he copped to that Mueller forgave. He's nowhere close to being off the hook. And Trump...it will probably be easier deciding what not to charge him with once he is driven from office.

The Left is more delusional than usual today.

Maybe their "internal polls" say a few things that worry them.

Wow. Just wow.

Oldbear83 said:

---

The Left is more delusional than usual today.

Maybe their "internal polls" say a few things that worry them.

---

Trump would trade his internal polls with the Dems in a heartbeat.

cinque said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

The Left is more delusional than usual today.

Maybe their "internal polls" say a few things that worry them.

---

Trump would trade his internal polls with the Dems in a heartbeat.

---

Nope.

But thanks for continuing the story, it's fun to watch you guys squirm in denial.

Oldbear83 said:

---

cinque said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

The Left is more delusional than usual today.

Maybe their "internal polls" say a few things that worry them.

---

Trump would trade his internal polls with the Dems in a heartbeat.

---

Nope.

But thanks for continuing the story, it's fun to watch you guys squirm in denial.

---

Why would any poll anywhere make Democrats squirm?

cinque said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

cinque said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

The Left is more delusional than usual today.

Maybe their "internal polls" say a few things that worry them.

---

Trump would trade his internal polls with the Dems in a heartbeat.

---

Nope.

But thanks for continuing the story, it's fun to watch you guys squirm in denial.

---

Why would any poll anywhere make Democrats squirm?

---

Good question. Maybe some polls don't say what we read from, say, ABC or CNN?

Oldbear83 said:

---

cinque said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

cinque said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

The Left is more delusional than usual today.

Maybe their "internal polls" say a few things that worry them.

---

Trump would trade his internal polls with the Dems in a heartbeat.

---

Nope.

But thanks for continuing the story, it's fun to watch you guys squirm in denial.

---

Why would any poll anywhere make Democrats squirm?

---

Good question. Maybe some polls don't say what we read from, say, ABC or CNN?

---

Of course they do. Even Fox can't hide the truth.

cinque said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

cinque said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

cinque said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

The Left is more delusional than usual today.

Maybe their "internal polls" say a few things that worry them.

---

Trump would trade his internal polls with the Dems in a heartbeat.

---

Nope.

But thanks for continuing the story, it's fun to watch you guys squirm in denial.

---

Why would any poll anywhere make Democrats squirm?

---

Good question. Maybe some polls don't say what we read from, say, ABC or CNN?

---

Of course they do. Even Fox can't hide the truth.

---

You Liberals gave a strong effort to do that in 2016, no surprise you are trying hard again.

Oldbear83 said:

---

cinque said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

cinque said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

cinque said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

The Left is more delusional than usual today.

Maybe their "internal polls" say a few things that worry them.

---

Trump would trade his internal polls with the Dems in a heartbeat.

---

Nope.

But thanks for continuing the story, it's fun to watch you guys squirm in denial.

---

Why would any poll anywhere make Democrats squirm?

---

Good question. Maybe some polls don't say what we read from, say, ABC or CNN?

---

Of course they do. Even Fox can't hide the truth.

---

You Liberals gave a strong effort to do that in 2016, no surprise you are trying hard again.

---

The polls reflect what we all know. America has had enough.

cinque said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

cinque said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

cinque said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

cinque said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

The Left is more delusional than usual today.

Maybe their "internal polls" say a few things that worry them.

---

Trump would trade his internal polls with the Dems in a heartbeat.

---

Nope.

But thanks for continuing the story, it's fun to watch you guys squirm in denial.

---

Why would any poll anywhere make Democrats squirm?

---

Good question. Maybe some polls don't say what we read from, say, ABC or CNN?

---

Of course they do. Even Fox can't hide the truth.

---

You Liberals gave a strong effort to do that in 2016, no surprise you are trying hard again.

---

The polls reflect what we all know. America has had enough.

---

Keep telling yourself that. You might convince yourself.

Oldbear83 said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

All based on open source reporting and admissions by the parties...

---

Translation: You don't have any proof to back up your story

We already knew that.

---

In a shocking turn of events, HuMcK posted his proof and Oldbear ignored it to banter with Cinque.

quash said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

All based on open source reporting and admissions by the parties...

---

Translation: You don't have any proof to back up your story

We already knew that.

---

In a shocking turn of events, HuMcK posted his proof and Oldbear ignored it to banter with Cinque.

---

That was hardly "proof".

But please, continue to pretend you are not a Progressive as you side with them in all threads.

Oldbear83 said:

---

quash said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

All based on open source reporting and admissions by the parties...

---

Translation: You don't have any proof to back up your story

We already knew that.

---

In a shocking turn of events, HuMcK posted his proof and Oldbear ignored it to banter with Cinque.

---

That was hardly "proof".

But please, continue to pretend you are not a Progressive as you side with them in all threads.

---

You got what you asked for. You ignored it. And now you claim that because I called you on your hypocrisy that makes me a Progressive.

At least you are consistent.

quash said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

quash said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

All based on open source reporting and admissions by the parties...

---

Translation: You don't have any proof to back up your story

We already knew that.

---

In a shocking turn of events, HuMcK posted his proof and Oldbear ignored it to banter with Cinque.

---

That was hardly "proof".

But please, continue to pretend you are not a Progressive as you side with them in all threads.

---

You got what you asked for. You ignored it. And now you claim that because I called you on your hypocrisy that makes me a Progressive.

At least you are consistent.

---

No, I got a link to a paper known to be hostile to Trump, which provided nothing in the way of proof.

But to speak of 'consistent', you continue to play your hypocrisy and imagine anyone buys it. Guess that's some kind of hobby for you,

Oldbear83 said:

---

quash said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

quash said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

All based on open source reporting and admissions by the parties...

---

Translation: You don't have any proof to back up your story

We already knew that.

---

In a shocking turn of events, HuMcK posted his proof and Oldbear ignored it to banter with Cinque.

---

That was hardly "proof".

But please, continue to pretend you are not a Progressive as you side with them in all threads.

---

You got what you asked for. You ignored it. And now you claim that because I called you on your hypocrisy that makes me a Progressive.

At least you are consistent.

---

No, I got a link to a paper known to be hostile to Trump, which provided nothing in the way of proof.

But to speak of 'consistent', you continue to play your hypocrisy and imagine anyone buys it. Guess that's some kind of hobby for you,

---

No, that's not how it works. You have to read the article and then point out the flaws.

quash said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

quash said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

quash said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

All based on open source reporting and admissions by the parties...

---

Translation: You don't have any proof to back up your story

We already knew that.

---

In a shocking turn of events, HuMcK posted his proof and Oldbear ignored it to banter with Cinque.

---

That was hardly "proof".

But please, continue to pretend you are not a Progressive as you side with them in all threads.

---

You got what you asked for. You ignored it. And now you claim that because I called you on your hypocrisy that makes me a Progressive.

At least you are consistent.

---

No, I got a link to a paper known to be hostile to Trump, which provided nothing in the way of proof.

But to speak of 'consistent', you continue to play your hypocrisy and imagine anyone buys it. Guess that's some kind of hobby for you,

---

No, that's not how it works. You have to read the article and then point out the flaws.

---

No, your side made the contention, it remains your job to prove it.

Just posting a link to someone who tells the same story is not worth the spit you spray on your screen when you post against the President.

Oldbear83 said:

---

quash said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

quash said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

quash said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

All based on open source reporting and admissions by the parties...

---

Translation: You don't have any proof to back up your story

We already knew that.

---

In a shocking turn of events, HuMcK posted his proof and Oldbear ignored it to banter with Cinque.

---

That was hardly "proof".

But please, continue to pretend you are not a Progressive as you side with them in all threads.

---

You got what you asked for. You ignored it. And now you claim that because I called you on your hypocrisy that makes me a Progressive.

At least you are consistent.

---

No, I got a link to a paper known to be hostile to Trump, which provided nothing in the way of proof.

But to speak of 'consistent', you continue to play your hypocrisy and imagine anyone buys it. Guess that's some kind of hobby for you,

---

No, that's not how it works. You have to read the article and then point out the flaws.

---

No, your side made the contention, it remains your job to prove it.

Just posting a link to someone who tells the same story is not worth the spit you spray on your screen when you post against the President.

---

Calm down. Read the article. If you see flaws point them out.

quash said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

quash said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

quash said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

quash said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

All based on open source reporting and admissions by the parties...

---

Translation: You don't have any proof to back up your story

We already knew that.

---

In a shocking turn of events, HuMcK posted his proof and Oldbear ignored it to banter with Cinque.

---

That was hardly "proof".

But please, continue to pretend you are not a Progressive as you side with them in all threads.

---

You got what you asked for. You ignored it. And now you claim that because I called you on your hypocrisy that makes me a Progressive.

At least you are consistent.

---

No, I got a link to a paper known to be hostile to Trump, which provided nothing in the way of proof.

But to speak of 'consistent', you continue to play your hypocrisy and imagine anyone buys it. Guess that's some kind of hobby for you,

---

No, that's not how it works. You have to read the article and then point out the flaws.

---

No, your side made the contention, it remains your job to prove it.

Just posting a link to someone who tells the same story is not worth the spit you spray on your screen when you post against the President.

---

Calm down. Read the article. If you see flaws point them out.

---

I'm fine, boyo. Still up to you to support your claim.

Or just admit you cannot do that.

ScruffyD said:

---

Was George W Bush part of the cabal? He was president for most of the last decade.

Honestly get some help.

---

This.

Nothing to see here...

Doc Holliday said:

---

What they accused President Trump of is actually what they themselves did. Paying foreign countries to interfere.

---

That's what they always do. Blame the other wide for what they did to cover it up. It's Dem politics 101.

We had weak Republicans in charge back in 2016/2017 and they caved to the dems & media and allowed the Mueller investigation. Now Durham likely won't be done before the election and people won't know what happened in time. What a disaster Republican leadership has become. Bunch of cowards at the top who won't grow a pair and fight back. The media & Dems colluded together back then and it looks like they are going to get away w/ it.