There's some truth there, and also some speculation. I don't know that Wikileaks is a nefarious source, or what exactly Russia did with the campaign info. There appears to be new evidence showing Manafort's intent to relay the info to Russia, so I'll admit being wrong on that. I'm skeptical of the idea this has never happened before. The Clinton campaign was involved with suspected agents of the Chinese government, as well as Chinese military intelligence, and we know one of the key players held classified intelligence he was unqualified to receive. We'll never know the full story since so many witnesses fled the country. There's also new evidence showing Russian infiltration of the Steele investigation and influence on the contents of the dossier. This was extremely damaging, and it and shows that Russia wasn't only interested in undermining Hillary. They're interested in undermining the whole process on multiple fronts. I believe this is something we need to take more seriously, but we need to do it in a truly non-partisan way. Otherwise our opponents will use our divisions against us, as we've just seen.HuMcK said:Sam Lowry said:There was never much attention paid to this kind of thing until lately. Chinagate was an exception, but Clinton was able to brush that off. There's nothing necessarily wrong with getting information from a foreign source. The activities of both the Trump and Hillary campaigns have highlighted the counter-intelligence risks, however.Booray said:Having a campaign manager share private campaign data with proxies for an adversarial foreign government and having insiders say they would welcome any help from that same government raise severely negative inferences. Period; you can't paint it any other way.ATL Bear said:The "facts" are not associated with the inferences they are intended to create. That's how deception works. Sprinkle in enough truth for plausibility and build the lie. Even the inference of intent was a lie. A lie that was damaging enough to initiate spying on US citizens using, sadly ironic, doctored Russian Intel.Booray said:Volunteer said:What's really sad is you actually believe this.HuMcK said:
I hear what you are saying, even though I strongly disagree with your characterization of the stories about Trump as "lies", but I think your message about unjust attacks on character would be better received if we weren't talking about the last holdout proponent of birtherism. I also think you are somewhat attributing cable news sensationalism to print media, which is far more credible.
Trump didn't even get treated as badly as he treated others. The Russia story wasn't made up, they legit caught his campaign manager coordinating with Russian intel and his son accepting offers of help from Russians. And then his next campaign manager (Bannon) was eventually arrested coming off the yacht of a Chinese billionaire before getting a pardon, but that's neither here not there.
He picked fights with the media as a deliberate strategy, so his supporters could dismiss reporting about him as biased "lies" or Fake News (tm). Sad thing is, it mostly worked.
And you still believe the Russia story was factual. Astonishing.
Do you understand that the two things he said about the Russia story actually did happen? As in they are 100% true facts?
Whether those acts or statements raise inferences that should generate surveillance of, and later a criminal investigation into, that campaign is a different question; a question that IMHO can be fairly debated. But in no circumstance should the candidate be allowed to brush off that conduct-the American people deserve an explanation for it.
That's different from establishing a two-way exchange of info, especially when one of the parties is engaging in a criminal espionage campaign to obtain their info. Just accepting information from a nefarious source is one thing, Trump was more than happy to do that by featuring Wikileaks heavily in their campaigning. A campaign manager strategizing with an actual state-sponsored spy is far beyond anything we've seen before.
The Chinese gave Dems money, which is bad enough. The Russians hacked and published the entire Dem party's comms and strategy, and used info provided to them by the Trump campaign to target propaganda at US voters. Then they tried something similar in 2020 with Giuliani as the conduit and Hunter Biden as the target.
At some point you have to ask yourself, what is it about this Trump guy in particular that Russia likes so much? Personally I think we saw the pretty obvious answer throughout Trump's Presidency, culminating on Jauary 6. The threat of that happening again, but much worse, will remain at least as long as Trump(ism) is around.
Never ending Fake News
4,414 Views |
59 Replies |
Last: 2 yr ago by quash
Quite the long game these folks play. Kilimnik worked for years for Manafort, a decade before Trump was a twinkle in your eye. He was only associated with Russian intelligence in the loosest sense of the term, but he was a needed lynch pin for the bogus investigation. Manafort was a sleazeball opportunist who couldn't even last 5 months on the campaign job. He was a walking scandal waiting to happen, but he was projected upon for this false narrative. You're the discord the Russian's wanted, not Manafort.HuMcK said:ATL Bear said:The "facts" are not associated with the inferences they are intended to create. That's how deception works. Sprinkle in enough truth for plausibility and build the lie. Even the inference of intent was a lie. A lie that was damaging enough to initiate spying on US citizens using, sadly ironic, doctored Russian Intel.Booray said:Volunteer said:What's really sad is you actually believe this.HuMcK said:
I hear what you are saying, even though I strongly disagree with your characterization of the stories about Trump as "lies", but I think your message about unjust attacks on character would be better received if we weren't talking about the last holdout proponent of birtherism. I also think you are somewhat attributing cable news sensationalism to print media, which is far more credible.
Trump didn't even get treated as badly as he treated others. The Russia story wasn't made up, they legit caught his campaign manager coordinating with Russian intel and his son accepting offers of help from Russians. And then his next campaign manager (Bannon) was eventually arrested coming off the yacht of a Chinese billionaire before getting a pardon, but that's neither here not there.
He picked fights with the media as a deliberate strategy, so his supporters could dismiss reporting about him as biased "lies" or Fake News (tm). Sad thing is, it mostly worked.
And you still believe the Russia story was factual. Astonishing.
Do you understand that the two things he said about the Russia story actually did happen? As in they are 100% true facts?
Lol then what do those facts "associate with" in your mind? Is that what y'all are reduced to, can't deny the existence of the evidence at this stage, so you just stubbornly disagree with "the inferences"? I seriously don't understand your compulsive need to paint the evidence as something different than what it is. His campaign manager knowingly met with a Russian spy to discuss campaign strategy, that's not an inference it's an admission, and it isn't really up for any interpretation.
Ironically the GOP led Senate Intel committee ended up generating the most useful report on the matter, although the committee's Republican members (like you) tried to tell people their eyes lie and the evidence didn't show what it shows when they presented it to the public:
"The Committee found that Manafort's presence on the Campaign and proximity to
Trump created opportunities for the Russian intelligence services to exert influence over, and
acquire confidential information on, the Trump Campaign. The Committee assesses that
Kilimnik likely served as a channel to Manafort for Russian intelligence services, and that those
services likely sought to exploit Manafort's access to gain insight info the Campaign. Taken as a
whole, Manafort's high-level access and willingness to share information with individuals
closely affiliated with the Russian intelligence services, particularly Kilimnik, represented a
grave counterintelligence threat."
And since you've brought up spying on Americans, I guess I must have missed your criticism of the revelation that Trump's DoJ spied on members of the House Intel Committee and one of their minor children hunting leaks. Leaks of information that was totally made up of course, according to you.
And I can't have a rational discussion with someone equating domestic subpoena's for information, and wiretapping for Foreign Intelligence purposes. I might not agree with either, but they aren't on the same level of privacy and legal violation.
He was a former employee who he probably was looking to work some back door financial deal for. Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy this was not. But you'd think we were dealing with Aldrich Ames according to some posters. Now, we repeatedly share that type of campaign information with foreign "friends" without batting an eye, or letting them provide thought and opinion on our elections.Booray said:Having a campaign manager share private campaign data with proxies for an adversarial foreign government and having insiders say they would welcome any help from that same government raise severely negative inferences. Period; you can't paint it any other way.ATL Bear said:The "facts" are not associated with the inferences they are intended to create. That's how deception works. Sprinkle in enough truth for plausibility and build the lie. Even the inference of intent was a lie. A lie that was damaging enough to initiate spying on US citizens using, sadly ironic, doctored Russian Intel.Booray said:Volunteer said:What's really sad is you actually believe this.HuMcK said:
I hear what you are saying, even though I strongly disagree with your characterization of the stories about Trump as "lies", but I think your message about unjust attacks on character would be better received if we weren't talking about the last holdout proponent of birtherism. I also think you are somewhat attributing cable news sensationalism to print media, which is far more credible.
Trump didn't even get treated as badly as he treated others. The Russia story wasn't made up, they legit caught his campaign manager coordinating with Russian intel and his son accepting offers of help from Russians. And then his next campaign manager (Bannon) was eventually arrested coming off the yacht of a Chinese billionaire before getting a pardon, but that's neither here not there.
He picked fights with the media as a deliberate strategy, so his supporters could dismiss reporting about him as biased "lies" or Fake News (tm). Sad thing is, it mostly worked.
And you still believe the Russia story was factual. Astonishing.
Do you understand that the two things he said about the Russia story actually did happen? As in they are 100% true facts?
Whether those acts or statements raise inferences that should generate surveillance of, and later a criminal investigation into, that campaign is a different question; a question that IMHO can be fairly debated. But in no circumstance should the candidate be allowed to brush off that conduct-the American people deserve an explanation for it.
And Carter Page was spied on using bogus information from a foreign source, and opened this entire can of worms. We still don't have answers for that.
My goodness.Porteroso said:
What? What is even going on? Plenty of people strive to report the truth. Most journalists are doing their very best.
Indeed. Most journalists aren't anything more than partisan hack pundits who hide or de-emphasize information that is harmful to their narrative and hype information that helps it. There are very few journalists left in the world who are worthy of the moniker.BaylorOkie said:My goodness.Porteroso said:
What? What is even going on? Plenty of people strive to report the truth. Most journalists are doing their very best.
Among the good Trump did over the last 4 years, was to cause the media to show precisely who they are and how little they are tethered to objective truth.
He had that effect on a lot of people.Canon said:Among the good Trump did over the last 4 years, was to cause the media to show precisely who they are and how little they are tethered to objective truth.BaylorOkie said:My goodness.Porteroso said:
What? What is even going on? Plenty of people strive to report the truth. Most journalists are doing their very best.
Sam Lowry said:He had that effect on a lot of people.Canon said:Among the good Trump did over the last 4 years, was to cause the media to show precisely who they are and how little they are tethered to objective truth.BaylorOkie said:My goodness.Porteroso said:
What? What is even going on? Plenty of people strive to report the truth. Most journalists are doing their very best.
He did. But only the media controls the national narrative.
I wish I could quit you!!
FYI tonight is now the 12th night in a row where Don Lemon is leading his show by talking about Donald Trump.
— Steve Krakauer (@SteveKrak) June 15, 2021
It is an addiction that he and his network can’t kick. pic.twitter.com/cQTNvdspok
If there is one thing CNN does consistently is doubling down on stupid.Jack Bauer said:
I wish I could quit you!!FYI tonight is now the 12th night in a row where Don Lemon is leading his show by talking about Donald Trump.
— Steve Krakauer (@SteveKrak) June 15, 2021
It is an addiction that he and his network can’t kick. pic.twitter.com/cQTNvdspok
Jack Bauer said:
I wish I could quit you!!FYI tonight is now the 12th night in a row where Don Lemon is leading his show by talking about Donald Trump.
— Steve Krakauer (@SteveKrak) June 15, 2021
It is an addiction that he and his network can’t kick. pic.twitter.com/cQTNvdspok
Porteroso said:JXL said:Porteroso said:What is your point, you think that the media got thingswrong more often with Trump, and so....JXL said:Porteroso said:
Yes, it turns out the media gets some stuff about Trump wrong. Should we start bringing up all the stuff Trump got wrong, or is that rent free living in my head? I think I'm getting this game!
You should compare the media to the media, not the media to Trump. Did they make that many mistakes with Obama? Are they making that many mistakes with Biden?
Did they make as many mistakes with other presidents, or did they not?
You're not getting it. I don't know the answer to that, I think the foxes and cnns of the world aren't worth bothering with. I'm asking, if what you say is true, so what? What does that mean, or what should people do?
I guess it depends on whether or not you think that the press lying about the President is a problem.
as the big guy said, Truth not facts!JXL said:Porteroso said:JXL said:Porteroso said:What is your point, you think that the media got thingswrong more often with Trump, and so....JXL said:Porteroso said:
Yes, it turns out the media gets some stuff about Trump wrong. Should we start bringing up all the stuff Trump got wrong, or is that rent free living in my head? I think I'm getting this game!
You should compare the media to the media, not the media to Trump. Did they make that many mistakes with Obama? Are they making that many mistakes with Biden?
Did they make as many mistakes with other presidents, or did they not?
You're not getting it. I don't know the answer to that, I think the foxes and cnns of the world aren't worth bothering with. I'm asking, if what you say is true, so what? What does that mean, or what should people do?
I guess it depends on whether or not you think that the press lying about the President is a problem.
BearFan33 said:If there is one thing CNN does consistently is doubling down on stupid.Jack Bauer said:
I wish I could quit you!!FYI tonight is now the 12th night in a row where Don Lemon is leading his show by talking about Donald Trump.
— Steve Krakauer (@SteveKrak) June 15, 2021
It is an addiction that he and his network can’t kick. pic.twitter.com/cQTNvdspok
Rawhide said:I remember that time when the clinton's paid for a dossier. written by a foreign national. that was fake.Booray said:Is that the standard we need to expect? It is not illegal?Volunteer said:Not illegal to meet with a foreign national. Remember the Mueller Commission after months of research and millions of dollars found no evidence of collusion.Booray said:Volunteer said:What's really sad is you actually believe this.HuMcK said:
I hear what you are saying, even though I strongly disagree with your characterization of the stories about Trump as "lies", but I think your message about unjust attacks on character would be better received if we weren't talking about the last holdout proponent of birtherism. I also think you are somewhat attributing cable news sensationalism to print media, which is far more credible.
Trump didn't even get treated as badly as he treated others. The Russia story wasn't made up, they legit caught his campaign manager coordinating with Russian intel and his son accepting offers of help from Russians. And then his next campaign manager (Bannon) was eventually arrested coming off the yacht of a Chinese billionaire before getting a pardon, but that's neither here not there.
He picked fights with the media as a deliberate strategy, so his supporters could dismiss reporting about him as biased "lies" or Fake News (tm). Sad thing is, it mostly worked.
And you still believe the Russia story was factual. Astonishing.
Do you understand that the two things he said about the Russia story actually did happen? As in they are 100% true facts?
And I remember there was no evidence of collusion. There was evidence of a willingness to collude; that the Trump campaign would accept any help the Russian government would give them. I don't care if that is illegal, it is wrong.
Yeah, good times.
I remember when a Republican group financed the same dossier. Free Beacon? Fusion GPS?
I also remember reading the second half of the Mueller Report where obstruction of justice was painstakingly laid out. Sure, the evidence of collusion was lacking (although Stone got convicted and then pardoned for lying about it so we'll never know. But I love the way MAGABros just sail right past obstruction to focus on collusion. It's like cheering a jury verdict that acquits one charge and convicts on another as if it were a complete victory.
“Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.” (The Law, p.6) Frederic Bastiat
Cool story... if you want to change the subject (as you often try to do), start a new thread.quash said:Rawhide said:I remember that time when the clinton's paid for a dossier. written by a foreign national. that was fake.Booray said:Is that the standard we need to expect? It is not illegal?Volunteer said:Not illegal to meet with a foreign national. Remember the Mueller Commission after months of research and millions of dollars found no evidence of collusion.Booray said:Volunteer said:What's really sad is you actually believe this.HuMcK said:
I hear what you are saying, even though I strongly disagree with your characterization of the stories about Trump as "lies", but I think your message about unjust attacks on character would be better received if we weren't talking about the last holdout proponent of birtherism. I also think you are somewhat attributing cable news sensationalism to print media, which is far more credible.
Trump didn't even get treated as badly as he treated others. The Russia story wasn't made up, they legit caught his campaign manager coordinating with Russian intel and his son accepting offers of help from Russians. And then his next campaign manager (Bannon) was eventually arrested coming off the yacht of a Chinese billionaire before getting a pardon, but that's neither here not there.
He picked fights with the media as a deliberate strategy, so his supporters could dismiss reporting about him as biased "lies" or Fake News (tm). Sad thing is, it mostly worked.
And you still believe the Russia story was factual. Astonishing.
Do you understand that the two things he said about the Russia story actually did happen? As in they are 100% true facts?
And I remember there was no evidence of collusion. There was evidence of a willingness to collude; that the Trump campaign would accept any help the Russian government would give them. I don't care if that is illegal, it is wrong.
Yeah, good times.
I remember when a Republican group financed the same dossier. Free Beacon? Fusion GPS?
I also remember reading the second half of the Mueller Report where obstruction of justice was painstakingly laid out. Sure, the evidence of collusion was lacking (although Stone got convicted and then pardoned for lying about it so we'll never know. But I love the way MAGABros just sail right past obstruction to focus on collusion. It's like cheering a jury verdict that acquits one charge and convicts on another as if it were a complete victory.
Now back to the fake dossier written by a foreign national and paid for by the clinton campaign... big deal? or no big deal?
quash said:Rawhide said:I remember that time when the clinton's paid for a dossier. written by a foreign national. that was fake.Booray said:Is that the standard we need to expect? It is not illegal?Volunteer said:Not illegal to meet with a foreign national. Remember the Mueller Commission after months of research and millions of dollars found no evidence of collusion.Booray said:Volunteer said:What's really sad is you actually believe this.HuMcK said:
I hear what you are saying, even though I strongly disagree with your characterization of the stories about Trump as "lies", but I think your message about unjust attacks on character would be better received if we weren't talking about the last holdout proponent of birtherism. I also think you are somewhat attributing cable news sensationalism to print media, which is far more credible.
Trump didn't even get treated as badly as he treated others. The Russia story wasn't made up, they legit caught his campaign manager coordinating with Russian intel and his son accepting offers of help from Russians. And then his next campaign manager (Bannon) was eventually arrested coming off the yacht of a Chinese billionaire before getting a pardon, but that's neither here not there.
He picked fights with the media as a deliberate strategy, so his supporters could dismiss reporting about him as biased "lies" or Fake News (tm). Sad thing is, it mostly worked.
And you still believe the Russia story was factual. Astonishing.
Do you understand that the two things he said about the Russia story actually did happen? As in they are 100% true facts?
And I remember there was no evidence of collusion. There was evidence of a willingness to collude; that the Trump campaign would accept any help the Russian government would give them. I don't care if that is illegal, it is wrong.
Yeah, good times.
Iremember when a Republican group financed the same dossier. Free Beacon? Fusion GPS?
I also remember reading the second half of the Mueller Report where obstruction of justice was painstakingly laid out. Sure, the evidence of collusion was lacking (although Stone got convicted and then pardoned for lying about it so we'll never know. But I love the way MAGABros just sail right past obstruction to focus on collusion. It's like cheering a jury verdict that acquits one charge and convicts on another as if it were a complete victory.
You are remembering incorrectly. Fusion GPS did not start putting the dossier together until after the Washington Free Beacon severed ties.
In October 2015, Fusion GPS was contracted by conservative political website The Washington Free Beacon to provide general opposition research on Trump and other Republican presidential candidates. Separately, in April 2016, an attorney for Hillary Clinton's campaign and the Democratic National Committee (DNC) hired Fusion GPS to investigate Trump, while the Free Beacon stopped its backing in May 2016.[8] In June 2016, Fusion GPS subcontracted Steele's firm to compile the dossier.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steele_dossier
NBC News: Don't believe your lying eyes pic.twitter.com/oJpwAlV1yE
— Tom Elliott (@tomselliott) June 15, 2021
JXL said:Porteroso said:JXL said:Porteroso said:What is your point, you think that the media got thingswrong more often with Trump, and so....JXL said:Porteroso said:
Yes, it turns out the media gets some stuff about Trump wrong. Should we start bringing up all the stuff Trump got wrong, or is that rent free living in my head? I think I'm getting this game!
You should compare the media to the media, not the media to Trump. Did they make that many mistakes with Obama? Are they making that many mistakes with Biden?
Did they make as many mistakes with other presidents, or did they not?
You're not getting it. I don't know the answer to that, I think the foxes and cnns of the world aren't worth bothering with. I'm asking, if what you say is true, so what? What does that mean, or what should people do?
I guess it depends on whether or not you think that the press lying about the President is a problem.
I'm asking you though, what do you think?
JXL said:quash said:Rawhide said:I remember that time when the clinton's paid for a dossier. written by a foreign national. that was fake.Booray said:Is that the standard we need to expect? It is not illegal?Volunteer said:Not illegal to meet with a foreign national. Remember the Mueller Commission after months of research and millions of dollars found no evidence of collusion.Booray said:Volunteer said:What's really sad is you actually believe this.HuMcK said:
I hear what you are saying, even though I strongly disagree with your characterization of the stories about Trump as "lies", but I think your message about unjust attacks on character would be better received if we weren't talking about the last holdout proponent of birtherism. I also think you are somewhat attributing cable news sensationalism to print media, which is far more credible.
Trump didn't even get treated as badly as he treated others. The Russia story wasn't made up, they legit caught his campaign manager coordinating with Russian intel and his son accepting offers of help from Russians. And then his next campaign manager (Bannon) was eventually arrested coming off the yacht of a Chinese billionaire before getting a pardon, but that's neither here not there.
He picked fights with the media as a deliberate strategy, so his supporters could dismiss reporting about him as biased "lies" or Fake News (tm). Sad thing is, it mostly worked.
And you still believe the Russia story was factual. Astonishing.
Do you understand that the two things he said about the Russia story actually did happen? As in they are 100% true facts?
And I remember there was no evidence of collusion. There was evidence of a willingness to collude; that the Trump campaign would accept any help the Russian government would give them. I don't care if that is illegal, it is wrong.
Yeah, good times.
Iremember when a Republican group financed the same dossier. Free Beacon? Fusion GPS?
I also remember reading the second half of the Mueller Report where obstruction of justice was painstakingly laid out. Sure, the evidence of collusion was lacking (although Stone got convicted and then pardoned for lying about it so we'll never know. But I love the way MAGABros just sail right past obstruction to focus on collusion. It's like cheering a jury verdict that acquits one charge and convicts on another as if it were a complete victory.
You are remembering incorrectly. Fusion GPS did not start putting the dossier together until after the Washington Free Beacon severed ties.
In October 2015, Fusion GPS was contracted by conservative political website The Washington Free Beacon to provide general opposition research on Trump and other Republican presidential candidates. Separately, in April 2016, an attorney for Hillary Clinton's campaign and the Democratic National Committee (DNC) hired Fusion GPS to investigate Trump, while the Free Beacon stopped its backing in May 2016.[8] In June 2016, Fusion GPS subcontracted Steele's firm to compile the dossier.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steele_dossier
Thanks for confirming my memory. WB paid to get it started at Fusion.
“Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.” (The Law, p.6) Frederic Bastiat
Your subject: the dossierRawhide said:Cool story... if you want to change the subject (as you often try to do), start a new thread.quash said:Rawhide said:I remember that time when the clinton's paid for a dossier. written by a foreign national. that was fake.Booray said:Is that the standard we need to expect? It is not illegal?Volunteer said:Not illegal to meet with a foreign national. Remember the Mueller Commission after months of research and millions of dollars found no evidence of collusion.Booray said:Volunteer said:What's really sad is you actually believe this.HuMcK said:
I hear what you are saying, even though I strongly disagree with your characterization of the stories about Trump as "lies", but I think your message about unjust attacks on character would be better received if we weren't talking about the last holdout proponent of birtherism. I also think you are somewhat attributing cable news sensationalism to print media, which is far more credible.
Trump didn't even get treated as badly as he treated others. The Russia story wasn't made up, they legit caught his campaign manager coordinating with Russian intel and his son accepting offers of help from Russians. And then his next campaign manager (Bannon) was eventually arrested coming off the yacht of a Chinese billionaire before getting a pardon, but that's neither here not there.
He picked fights with the media as a deliberate strategy, so his supporters could dismiss reporting about him as biased "lies" or Fake News (tm). Sad thing is, it mostly worked.
And you still believe the Russia story was factual. Astonishing.
Do you understand that the two things he said about the Russia story actually did happen? As in they are 100% true facts?
And I remember there was no evidence of collusion. There was evidence of a willingness to collude; that the Trump campaign would accept any help the Russian government would give them. I don't care if that is illegal, it is wrong.
Yeah, good times.
I remember when a Republican group financed the same dossier. Free Beacon? Fusion GPS?
I also remember reading the second half of the Mueller Report where obstruction of justice was painstakingly laid out. Sure, the evidence of collusion was lacking (although Stone got convicted and then pardoned for lying about it so we'll never know. But I love the way MAGABros just sail right past obstruction to focus on collusion. It's like cheering a jury verdict that acquits one charge and convicts on another as if it were a complete victory.
Now back to the fake dossier written by a foreign national and paid for by the clinton campaign... big deal? or no big deal?
My subject: the dossier, with facts you omitted.
I forgot how triggered you get by facts.
“Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.” (The Law, p.6) Frederic Bastiat
An no, it's not omitted fact...... we're talking about the dossier written by a foreign national and paid for by the Clintons..... try to stay on the subject, mmmmkay?quash said:Your subject: the dossierRawhide said:Cool story... if you want to change the subject (as you often try to do), start a new thread.quash said:Rawhide said:I remember that time when the clinton's paid for a dossier. written by a foreign national. that was fake.Booray said:Is that the standard we need to expect? It is not illegal?Volunteer said:Not illegal to meet with a foreign national. Remember the Mueller Commission after months of research and millions of dollars found no evidence of collusion.Booray said:Volunteer said:What's really sad is you actually believe this.HuMcK said:
I hear what you are saying, even though I strongly disagree with your characterization of the stories about Trump as "lies", but I think your message about unjust attacks on character would be better received if we weren't talking about the last holdout proponent of birtherism. I also think you are somewhat attributing cable news sensationalism to print media, which is far more credible.
Trump didn't even get treated as badly as he treated others. The Russia story wasn't made up, they legit caught his campaign manager coordinating with Russian intel and his son accepting offers of help from Russians. And then his next campaign manager (Bannon) was eventually arrested coming off the yacht of a Chinese billionaire before getting a pardon, but that's neither here not there.
He picked fights with the media as a deliberate strategy, so his supporters could dismiss reporting about him as biased "lies" or Fake News (tm). Sad thing is, it mostly worked.
And you still believe the Russia story was factual. Astonishing.
Do you understand that the two things he said about the Russia story actually did happen? As in they are 100% true facts?
And I remember there was no evidence of collusion. There was evidence of a willingness to collude; that the Trump campaign would accept any help the Russian government would give them. I don't care if that is illegal, it is wrong.
Yeah, good times.
I remember when a Republican group financed the same dossier. Free Beacon? Fusion GPS?
I also remember reading the second half of the Mueller Report where obstruction of justice was painstakingly laid out. Sure, the evidence of collusion was lacking (although Stone got convicted and then pardoned for lying about it so we'll never know. But I love the way MAGABros just sail right past obstruction to focus on collusion. It's like cheering a jury verdict that acquits one charge and convicts on another as if it were a complete victory.
Now back to the fake dossier written by a foreign national and paid for by the clinton campaign... big deal? or no big deal?
My subject: the dossier, with facts you omitted.
I forgot how triggered you get by facts.
Let me guess... you're the guy that would represent someone charged with murder and then try argue that the victim used to play cops and robbers when he was a child? After all, wouldn't that be an omitted fact in your pea brain?
Now back to the fake dossier bought and paid for democrats.... big deal or no big deal? Bad or not bad?
I forgot how you get triggered by the subject at hand.
Rawhide said:An no, it's not omitted fact...... we're talking about the dossier written by a foreign national and paid for by the Clintons..... try to stay on the subject, mmmmkay?quash said:Your subject: the dossierRawhide said:Cool story... if you want to change the subject (as you often try to do), start a new thread.quash said:Rawhide said:I remember that time when the clinton's paid for a dossier. written by a foreign national. that was fake.Booray said:Is that the standard we need to expect? It is not illegal?Volunteer said:Not illegal to meet with a foreign national. Remember the Mueller Commission after months of research and millions of dollars found no evidence of collusion.Booray said:Volunteer said:What's really sad is you actually believe this.HuMcK said:
I hear what you are saying, even though I strongly disagree with your characterization of the stories about Trump as "lies", but I think your message about unjust attacks on character would be better received if we weren't talking about the last holdout proponent of birtherism. I also think you are somewhat attributing cable news sensationalism to print media, which is far more credible.
Trump didn't even get treated as badly as he treated others. The Russia story wasn't made up, they legit caught his campaign manager coordinating with Russian intel and his son accepting offers of help from Russians. And then his next campaign manager (Bannon) was eventually arrested coming off the yacht of a Chinese billionaire before getting a pardon, but that's neither here not there.
He picked fights with the media as a deliberate strategy, so his supporters could dismiss reporting about him as biased "lies" or Fake News (tm). Sad thing is, it mostly worked.
And you still believe the Russia story was factual. Astonishing.
Do you understand that the two things he said about the Russia story actually did happen? As in they are 100% true facts?
And I remember there was no evidence of collusion. There was evidence of a willingness to collude; that the Trump campaign would accept any help the Russian government would give them. I don't care if that is illegal, it is wrong.
Yeah, good times.
I remember when a Republican group financed the same dossier. Free Beacon? Fusion GPS?
I also remember reading the second half of the Mueller Report where obstruction of justice was painstakingly laid out. Sure, the evidence of collusion was lacking (although Stone got convicted and then pardoned for lying about it so we'll never know. But I love the way MAGABros just sail right past obstruction to focus on collusion. It's like cheering a jury verdict that acquits one charge and convicts on another as if it were a complete victory.
Now back to the fake dossier written by a foreign national and paid for by the clinton campaign... big deal? or no big deal?
My subject: the dossier, with facts you omitted.
I forgot how triggered you get by facts.
Let me guess... you're the guy that would represent someone charged with murder and then try argue that the victim used to play cops and robbers when he was a child? After all, wouldn't that be an omitted fact in your pea brain?
Now back to the fake dossier bought and paid for democrats.... big deal or no big deal? Bad or not bad?
I forgot how you get triggered by the subject at hand.
Same dossier.
“Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.” (The Law, p.6) Frederic Bastiat
Not going to answer my question? democrats paying for a fake dossier written by a foreign national to influence an American election with lies......big deal or no big deal?quash said:Rawhide said:An no, it's not omitted fact...... we're talking about the dossier written by a foreign national and paid for by the Clintons..... try to stay on the subject, mmmmkay?quash said:Your subject: the dossierRawhide said:Cool story... if you want to change the subject (as you often try to do), start a new thread.quash said:Rawhide said:I remember that time when the clinton's paid for a dossier. written by a foreign national. that was fake.Booray said:Is that the standard we need to expect? It is not illegal?Volunteer said:Not illegal to meet with a foreign national. Remember the Mueller Commission after months of research and millions of dollars found no evidence of collusion.Booray said:Volunteer said:What's really sad is you actually believe this.HuMcK said:
I hear what you are saying, even though I strongly disagree with your characterization of the stories about Trump as "lies", but I think your message about unjust attacks on character would be better received if we weren't talking about the last holdout proponent of birtherism. I also think you are somewhat attributing cable news sensationalism to print media, which is far more credible.
Trump didn't even get treated as badly as he treated others. The Russia story wasn't made up, they legit caught his campaign manager coordinating with Russian intel and his son accepting offers of help from Russians. And then his next campaign manager (Bannon) was eventually arrested coming off the yacht of a Chinese billionaire before getting a pardon, but that's neither here not there.
He picked fights with the media as a deliberate strategy, so his supporters could dismiss reporting about him as biased "lies" or Fake News (tm). Sad thing is, it mostly worked.
And you still believe the Russia story was factual. Astonishing.
Do you understand that the two things he said about the Russia story actually did happen? As in they are 100% true facts?
And I remember there was no evidence of collusion. There was evidence of a willingness to collude; that the Trump campaign would accept any help the Russian government would give them. I don't care if that is illegal, it is wrong.
Yeah, good times.
I remember when a Republican group financed the same dossier. Free Beacon? Fusion GPS?
I also remember reading the second half of the Mueller Report where obstruction of justice was painstakingly laid out. Sure, the evidence of collusion was lacking (although Stone got convicted and then pardoned for lying about it so we'll never know. But I love the way MAGABros just sail right past obstruction to focus on collusion. It's like cheering a jury verdict that acquits one charge and convicts on another as if it were a complete victory.
Now back to the fake dossier written by a foreign national and paid for by the clinton campaign... big deal? or no big deal?
My subject: the dossier, with facts you omitted.
I forgot how triggered you get by facts.
Let me guess... you're the guy that would represent someone charged with murder and then try argue that the victim used to play cops and robbers when he was a child? After all, wouldn't that be an omitted fact in your pea brain?
Now back to the fake dossier bought and paid for democrats.... big deal or no big deal? Bad or not bad?
I forgot how you get triggered by the subject at hand.
Same dossier.
Rawhide said:Not going to answer my question? democrats paying for a fake dossier written by a foreign national to influence an American election with lies......big deal or no big deal?quash said:Rawhide said:An no, it's not omitted fact...... we're talking about the dossier written by a foreign national and paid for by the Clintons..... try to stay on the subject, mmmmkay?quash said:Your subject: the dossierRawhide said:Cool story... if you want to change the subject (as you often try to do), start a new thread.quash said:Rawhide said:I remember that time when the clinton's paid for a dossier. written by a foreign national. that was fake.Booray said:Is that the standard we need to expect? It is not illegal?Volunteer said:Not illegal to meet with a foreign national. Remember the Mueller Commission after months of research and millions of dollars found no evidence of collusion.Booray said:Volunteer said:What's really sad is you actually believe this.HuMcK said:
I hear what you are saying, even though I strongly disagree with your characterization of the stories about Trump as "lies", but I think your message about unjust attacks on character would be better received if we weren't talking about the last holdout proponent of birtherism. I also think you are somewhat attributing cable news sensationalism to print media, which is far more credible.
Trump didn't even get treated as badly as he treated others. The Russia story wasn't made up, they legit caught his campaign manager coordinating with Russian intel and his son accepting offers of help from Russians. And then his next campaign manager (Bannon) was eventually arrested coming off the yacht of a Chinese billionaire before getting a pardon, but that's neither here not there.
He picked fights with the media as a deliberate strategy, so his supporters could dismiss reporting about him as biased "lies" or Fake News (tm). Sad thing is, it mostly worked.
And you still believe the Russia story was factual. Astonishing.
Do you understand that the two things he said about the Russia story actually did happen? As in they are 100% true facts?
And I remember there was no evidence of collusion. There was evidence of a willingness to collude; that the Trump campaign would accept any help the Russian government would give them. I don't care if that is illegal, it is wrong.
Yeah, good times.
I remember when a Republican group financed the same dossier. Free Beacon? Fusion GPS?
I also remember reading the second half of the Mueller Report where obstruction of justice was painstakingly laid out. Sure, the evidence of collusion was lacking (although Stone got convicted and then pardoned for lying about it so we'll never know. But I love the way MAGABros just sail right past obstruction to focus on collusion. It's like cheering a jury verdict that acquits one charge and convicts on another as if it were a complete victory.
Now back to the fake dossier written by a foreign national and paid for by the clinton campaign... big deal? or no big deal?
My subject: the dossier, with facts you omitted.
I forgot how triggered you get by facts.
Let me guess... you're the guy that would represent someone charged with murder and then try argue that the victim used to play cops and robbers when he was a child? After all, wouldn't that be an omitted fact in your pea brain?
Now back to the fake dossier bought and paid for democrats.... big deal or no big deal? Bad or not bad?
I forgot how you get triggered by the subject at hand.
Same dossier.
It is a big or small deal exactly in proportion to its influence. Did this cause you to vote for Hillary? No? No big deal.
“Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.” (The Law, p.6) Frederic Bastiat
So, if Trump had colluded with Russia and you didn't vote for him, no big deal then, right?quash said:Rawhide said:Not going to answer my question? democrats paying for a fake dossier written by a foreign national to influence an American election with lies......big deal or no big deal?quash said:Rawhide said:An no, it's not omitted fact...... we're talking about the dossier written by a foreign national and paid for by the Clintons..... try to stay on the subject, mmmmkay?quash said:Your subject: the dossierRawhide said:Cool story... if you want to change the subject (as you often try to do), start a new thread.quash said:Rawhide said:I remember that time when the clinton's paid for a dossier. written by a foreign national. that was fake.Booray said:Is that the standard we need to expect? It is not illegal?Volunteer said:Not illegal to meet with a foreign national. Remember the Mueller Commission after months of research and millions of dollars found no evidence of collusion.Booray said:Volunteer said:What's really sad is you actually believe this.HuMcK said:
I hear what you are saying, even though I strongly disagree with your characterization of the stories about Trump as "lies", but I think your message about unjust attacks on character would be better received if we weren't talking about the last holdout proponent of birtherism. I also think you are somewhat attributing cable news sensationalism to print media, which is far more credible.
Trump didn't even get treated as badly as he treated others. The Russia story wasn't made up, they legit caught his campaign manager coordinating with Russian intel and his son accepting offers of help from Russians. And then his next campaign manager (Bannon) was eventually arrested coming off the yacht of a Chinese billionaire before getting a pardon, but that's neither here not there.
He picked fights with the media as a deliberate strategy, so his supporters could dismiss reporting about him as biased "lies" or Fake News (tm). Sad thing is, it mostly worked.
And you still believe the Russia story was factual. Astonishing.
Do you understand that the two things he said about the Russia story actually did happen? As in they are 100% true facts?
And I remember there was no evidence of collusion. There was evidence of a willingness to collude; that the Trump campaign would accept any help the Russian government would give them. I don't care if that is illegal, it is wrong.
Yeah, good times.
I remember when a Republican group financed the same dossier. Free Beacon? Fusion GPS?
I also remember reading the second half of the Mueller Report where obstruction of justice was painstakingly laid out. Sure, the evidence of collusion was lacking (although Stone got convicted and then pardoned for lying about it so we'll never know. But I love the way MAGABros just sail right past obstruction to focus on collusion. It's like cheering a jury verdict that acquits one charge and convicts on another as if it were a complete victory.
Now back to the fake dossier written by a foreign national and paid for by the clinton campaign... big deal? or no big deal?
My subject: the dossier, with facts you omitted.
I forgot how triggered you get by facts.
Let me guess... you're the guy that would represent someone charged with murder and then try argue that the victim used to play cops and robbers when he was a child? After all, wouldn't that be an omitted fact in your pea brain?
Now back to the fake dossier bought and paid for democrats.... big deal or no big deal? Bad or not bad?
I forgot how you get triggered by the subject at hand.
Same dossier.
It is a big or small deal exactly in proportion to its influence. Did this cause you to vote for Hillary? No? No big deal.
So, if a drunk ass SOB is out on the highway, as long he doesn't hurt anyone, then no big deal, right?
You're a strange little man
Both of those are different calculations as phrased.Rawhide said:So, if Trump had colluded with Russia and you didn't vote for him, no big deal then, right?quash said:Rawhide said:Not going to answer my question? democrats paying for a fake dossier written by a foreign national to influence an American election with lies......big deal or no big deal?quash said:Rawhide said:An no, it's not omitted fact...... we're talking about the dossier written by a foreign national and paid for by the Clintons..... try to stay on the subject, mmmmkay?quash said:Your subject: the dossierRawhide said:Cool story... if you want to change the subject (as you often try to do), start a new thread.quash said:Rawhide said:I remember that time when the clinton's paid for a dossier. written by a foreign national. that was fake.Booray said:Is that the standard we need to expect? It is not illegal?Volunteer said:Not illegal to meet with a foreign national. Remember the Mueller Commission after months of research and millions of dollars found no evidence of collusion.Booray said:Volunteer said:What's really sad is you actually believe this.HuMcK said:
I hear what you are saying, even though I strongly disagree with your characterization of the stories about Trump as "lies", but I think your message about unjust attacks on character would be better received if we weren't talking about the last holdout proponent of birtherism. I also think you are somewhat attributing cable news sensationalism to print media, which is far more credible.
Trump didn't even get treated as badly as he treated others. The Russia story wasn't made up, they legit caught his campaign manager coordinating with Russian intel and his son accepting offers of help from Russians. And then his next campaign manager (Bannon) was eventually arrested coming off the yacht of a Chinese billionaire before getting a pardon, but that's neither here not there.
He picked fights with the media as a deliberate strategy, so his supporters could dismiss reporting about him as biased "lies" or Fake News (tm). Sad thing is, it mostly worked.
And you still believe the Russia story was factual. Astonishing.
Do you understand that the two things he said about the Russia story actually did happen? As in they are 100% true facts?
And I remember there was no evidence of collusion. There was evidence of a willingness to collude; that the Trump campaign would accept any help the Russian government would give them. I don't care if that is illegal, it is wrong.
Yeah, good times.
I remember when a Republican group financed the same dossier. Free Beacon? Fusion GPS?
I also remember reading the second half of the Mueller Report where obstruction of justice was painstakingly laid out. Sure, the evidence of collusion was lacking (although Stone got convicted and then pardoned for lying about it so we'll never know. But I love the way MAGABros just sail right past obstruction to focus on collusion. It's like cheering a jury verdict that acquits one charge and convicts on another as if it were a complete victory.
Now back to the fake dossier written by a foreign national and paid for by the clinton campaign... big deal? or no big deal?
My subject: the dossier, with facts you omitted.
I forgot how triggered you get by facts.
Let me guess... you're the guy that would represent someone charged with murder and then try argue that the victim used to play cops and robbers when he was a child? After all, wouldn't that be an omitted fact in your pea brain?
Now back to the fake dossier bought and paid for democrats.... big deal or no big deal? Bad or not bad?
I forgot how you get triggered by the subject at hand.
Same dossier.
It is a big or small deal exactly in proportion to its influence. Did this cause you to vote for Hillary? No? No big deal.
So, if a drunk ass SOB is out on the highway, as long he doesn't hurt anyone, then no big deal, right?
You're a strange little man
#1. The consequence of a US president colluding with an enemy to subvert an election is a big deal. Duh.
#2. I have already said as much here a couple of times.
“Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.” (The Law, p.6) Frederic Bastiat