Printable View
You think Trump cheated to win the election against Hillary? Really?? Even Obama, Comey, etc. said not one vote was changed due to interference.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
Democrats have a history of cheating at elections and getting caught and being jailed.
Then there's that pesky IRS thingy.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
You are a fountain of dumb partisan spin.
They did not say that. That is a blatant lie.Quote:
Originally Posted by FriscoDog
My bad.. do you have proof that votes were changed or that Trump stole the election?Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
Do you even realize how stupid you sound?Quote:
Originally Posted by FriscoDog
If information didn’t drive votes and turnout, there would not be political campaigns and the hundreds of millions of dollars spent on them. Think about that for one moment.
Wikileaks was a defining message for Trump when he attacked Hillary which helped mobilize his base and sew seeds of doubt in those that would have been inclined to turnout for Hillary. That is not debatable
Manafort gave information to Russia to help them target the ads where they were most likely to make a difference.
And then there is this study.
https://theconversation.com/russian-...n-polls-119444
She was an unlikable arrogant candidate who didn't really try to win. Russia and other enemies needed her to win.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
And then there is James Clapper who under oath and just a few min ago on CNN admitted there was no Trump/ Russia collusion.. You really are eat up with TDS... zero credibility... :laugh::laugh:
That is another blatant lie. FoxNews is yanking your chain again.Quote:
Originally Posted by FriscoDog
https://news.yahoo.com/former-dni-ja...230517504.htmlQuote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
“I never saw any direct empirical evidence that the Trump campaign or someone in it was plotting [or] conspiring with the Russians to meddle with the election,” Clapper said.
“That’s not to say that there weren’t concerns about the evidence we were seeing, anecdotal evidence…[redacted],” Clapper added. “But I do not recall any instance when I had direct evidence of the content of these meetings. It’s just the frequency and prevalence of them was of concern.”
So they apparently had a "conspiracy theory" that Russia and Trump were colluding :)
Yeah, there is nothing new here. Just an effort to deliberately falsely characterize what was actually said.Quote:
Originally Posted by MoonPieBlue
This is under oath. What DID he say under oath?Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
What is your point?Quote:
Originally Posted by PawDawg
Wasn’t this essentially what was borne out in the Mueller report? No direct evidence of an agreement. Just that Trump wanted help, tried to get it, and Russia gave it.
If there was direct (rather than circumstantial) evidence of an agreement, it never came out because Trump obstructed. But Mueller said he was not allowed to bring these charges because of the OSC opinion. He punted to Congress and they chose not to take it. And we know why. We saw what happens when Trump obstructs - Republicans won’t hold him accountable.
I guess I could see why this seems like news to you guys - y’all never actually read the Mueller report.
At last we are in agreement. Numerous Democrats, with their primary sounding board being Schiff, did falsely characterize what was said under oath.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
Your opinion.. period.. was not in articles of impeachment. If they had all of the "Plain Clear Overwhelming Evidence" as Schiff has screeched for 3 years of a crime, it would have been in the articles of impeachment just as it was with Clinton and Johnson. BTW, the HOUSE (democrat controlled) brings articles of impeachment, the House could have put anything on the articles that they wanted to.... Republicans didn't hold him accountable because the evidence on the charges did not warrant it.. Sorry Charlie...
There ya go again, confusing Goosey with the facts. He's like his blow buddy Biden, they want the "truth" and facts be damned!Quote:
Originally Posted by FriscoDog
An informed opinion, and the only one on this thread given that I am the only person here that read the report.Quote:
Originally Posted by FriscoDog
Well, maybe not the only one. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
An informed opinion? Written by a bunch of democratic hacks. As usual, you are wrong. You’re not known as Hamilton Berger for nothing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
Open your eyes, Magoo.Quote:
Originally Posted by glm47
Says the unbiased impartial independent... :laugh:Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
Truth!Quote:
Originally Posted by TYLERTECHSAS
I want to see a "perp walk". I mean, I literally want to see people arrested, handcuffed and walked thru a gauntlet of arresting officers and DOJ officials, in front of the cameras for all of America to see and witness. We have plenty of viable candidates for this picture, including James Comey, Peter Strzok, John Brennan, Lisa Page, Joe Pientka, Tashina Gauhar, Jim Clapper, Andrew McCabe, Hilary Clinton, Barack Obama and MORE! This could be fun.......
This group of people --along with some others not named here-- perpetrated one of the worst and most costly crimes ever against the United States. This was literally a coup attempt by a bunch of rogue, power-hungry, deviants, hell-bent on overthrowing a duly elected President of the United States. This is serious, and someone has GOT to pay for these lies and misdeeds.
I want to see the PERP WALK, and I want everyone in America to see it too.
https://thefederalist.com/2019/03/08/35-key-people-involved-russia-hoax-need-investigated/
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/202...-from-talking/
Guillotine!
That would work, but the hangman or a firing squad would be OK too.Quote:
Originally Posted by dawg80
Amen! At least the UK and Fox are reporting this breaking news about Obama and Biden that’s been news for almost two weeks. Not the commie CNN, MSNBC, CBS, ABC NPR and every news outlet under DNC orders.
Trump demands jail for 'corrupt' Obama and Biden over unmasking of 'hero' Michael Flynn, and says Biden LIED to ABC's George Stephanopoulos when he denied knowing anything about case
By Katelyn Caralle, U.s. Political Reporter For Dailymail.com
11:15 EDT 17 May 2020 , updated 12:11 EDT 17 May 2020
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ave-house.html
How is this newsworthy?
Good point! Yeah, how is obummer and Biden committing criminal acts "news"? The sun rises in the east...Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
What was the crime?Quote:
Originally Posted by dawg80
This is one of those trick questions, ain't it! You ole dog you. Almost got me to take the bait.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
I guess it is a trick to get you to acknowledge that you don’t actually know of any crimes that were committed.Quote:
Originally Posted by dawg80
Only idiots believed in a Russian collusion.
Rosenstein admits: Mueller had no evidence of collusion early in probe
https://www.wnd.com/2020/06/4826458/
Goosey believed it...and still does.
Ted Cruse had Rod R. admit yesterday that emails were changed in order to "create evidence". Even a non legal layperson could understand that fabricating evidence is illegal.Quote:
Originally Posted by dawg80
That is not a crime in Goosey's demented world....not when it serves the purpose to damage the bad "Orange Man!" The end justifies the means.Quote:
Originally Posted by FriscoDog
Graham: "The whole concept, that the campaign was colluding with the Russians, there was no 'there' there in August of 2017, do you agree or not?"Quote:
Originally Posted by TYLERTECHSAS
“I agree with the general statement.” - Rosenstein.
An odd answer, probably owing to the fact that “collusion” itself is an ambiguous term not having a legal definition. Obviously what Rosenstein is saying is that there wasn’t proof of a criminal conspiracy at the time.
Of course, if the FBI has proof of a criminal act at the time, you could have just skipped the investigation.
What we do know:
Trump wanted help.
Trump solicited help.
Trump got the help he solicited.
Trump new in advance that the help he wanted was coming.
Now, was there proof that Trump and Russia reached an agreement vs. both parties acting unilaterally in their own interest? That evidence wasn’t produced, but we know there was an effort to establish back channel communications.
And wasn’t that lawyer fired and under criminal investigation for that?Quote:
Originally Posted by FriscoDog
I am glad I took Goosey off of ignore...he offers so many chuckles.
You don’t get tired of the “my dad can run faster than your dad!” Argument? I have been for some time.
Update
Published 9 hours ago
Barr appoints John Durham as special counsel to investigate origins of Russia probe
Barr appointed Durham as special counsel on Oct. 19--before Election Day
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/bar...f-russia-probe
Shifty Schiff says a new AD (presumably under a Harris-Biden admin) will just fire Durham. Hmmm....wasn't he one of those screaming "obstruction of justice" when Trump muttered once, out of frustration, that maybe he should fire Mueller! Now, Shifty Schiff just says matter-of-factly, no big deal, "they" will just fire Durham.Quote:
Originally Posted by TYLERTECHSAS
Why did Barr wait until now to appoint him as special counsel?Quote:
Originally Posted by dawg80
Just a guess on my part, but obviously Barr was hoping that Trump would have a 2nd term, and that he, Barr, would continue as AG and that he, Barr, would not fire Durham or otherwise interfere in his investigation. But, with the WH still up for grabs, Barr cannot be sure who will be in charge so as a defensive measure, he appoints Durham special counsel so his work will continue into 2021.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
Of course, as soon as I heard the news I had this figured out immediately. But, I am happy to explain this to you.
I think you are right. Barr knows he is own the way out so he is trying to hamstring his successor. Mnuchin has done the same with the Treasury funds that were provided to the Fed. Trump’s gang still has 6 more weeks to carry out their scorched earth tactics and I would expect nothing less from a guy that cares more about his own self interest than what is best for Americans.Quote:
Originally Posted by dawg80
There you go again...being stupid. I will give you the benefit of doubt and assume you are purposely being stupid...Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
And the commie lame stream media will never point that out.Quote:
Originally Posted by dawg80
I imagine the Deep State has been hiding the guy,
Published 1 hour ago
Who's hiding 'Russiagate' informant Stephen Halper, and why?
Questions raised over what became of the subpoena -- and no-show -- of FBI informant Stefan Halper and his handler, Stephen Somma.
As Special Counsel John Durham carries on with the investigation into the origins of the Russia investigation, widening his prosecutorial team, critical questions linger over the role played by FBI informant Stefan Halper and his longtime FBI handler, Stephen Somma.
Halper emerged in the middle of the firestorm in May 2018, when his identity as the secret FBI informant embroiled in Crossfire Hurricane was exposed. It cast a dark shadow on his prestigious career as a foreign policy expert, Cambridge professor, author and analyst with deep ties to intelligence figureheads and sources spawning the globe.
But since then he appears to have been hidden from public view. The whereabouts of Somma, who subsequently was exposed as his handler and shared blame for Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) mishaps against Trump campaign aide Carter Page, also have been unclear.
More
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/ste...sia-hiding-why
One of the many Deep State characters, Peter Stzrok, will head to criminal Senate hearings for the scam Russian corruption by the Dems. I bet. And the real Hillary and Obama/Biden culprits will be truly exposed.
Published 1 hour ago
Nunes calls for new criminal referral over Peter Stzrok texts
New messages from Peter Stzrok dealing with the Russia investigation were released earlier this month
Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Calif., is calling for a criminal referral to investigate why the FBI and Department of Justice failed to previously turn over certain text messages from former FBI agent Peter Strzok that he said would have been key for Republicans’ investigation of the Russia probe.
made public in the past, but the DOJ released additional messages earlier this month after Sens. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., and Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, requested their release. Nunes complained that they should have already been released to members of Congress.
STZROK SAID STEELE DOSSIER 'INTENDED TO INFLUENCE' AS WELL AS INFORM, DECLASSIFIED TEXTS REVEAL
"This is clearly lying and obstructing Congress. This is information that we asked for numerous times," Nunes said.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/nun...r-stzrok-texts
So the question is why didn’t the FBI and DOJ turn over certain Stzrok texts that were so important and pertinent?Quote:
Originally Posted by TYLERTECHSAS
You said Nunes.lol
CNN's Zakaria: 'Dirty Little Secret'—Trump Was Tough on Russia!
quote:
With the liberal media apparently feeling confident that President Trump will be leaving office, they seem to be acknowledging inconvenient truths about the president that they have kept buried for the last four years.
Take CNN host Fareed Zakaria, on this morning's New Day. Discussing how foreign policy might be different under a Biden administration, Zakaria began with platitudes about other countries being hopeful that the US would get "back in the game" and "help organize cooperative solutions around the world, get engaged with problem solving," on "climate change" and other issues.
But then Zakaria dropped a bombshell. Asked how things would be different with Russia, he said: I think in general, there isn’t going to be as much difference as people imagine. The Biden folks are pretty tough on Russia, Iran, North Korea. You know, the dirty little secret about the Trump administration was that while Donald Trump had clearly had a kind of soft spot for Putin, the Trump Administration was pretty tough on the Russians. They armed Ukraine, they armed the Poles. They extended NATO operations and exercises in ways that even the Obama Administration had not done. They maintained the sanctions. So I don’t think it will be that different."
Wait a second! It was a "dirty little secret" that Trump was tough on Russia? WHY?? Who kept it a secret and for what purpose??
You should watch Zakarias’s weekend program. You might learn something.Quote:
Originally Posted by FriscoDog
I don't have to watch Zakarias' show to KNOW Trump has been tough on Russia...and China...and ISIS, oh! they were obliterated...and Iran...and any and all of our enemies.
But if you, Goosey, learned that Trump has been tough on Russia, then good for you buddy! Welcome to reality.