Reply With Quote
Seriously. Do you think only one Country at a time is allowed to hack?Oh look, it's the TSA shook go to response.
Oh look, it's the TSA shook go to response.
Seriously. Do you think only one Country at a time is allowed to hack?Oh look, it's the TSA shook go to response.
Goalpost moving. Another TSA shook trademark.
This is about Russia and their hacking and the US coming to a complete consensus it was them. Not a 400 pound dude or any other country.
Do you think only one Democrat at a time is allowed to eat babies?
No. You commented on China hacking Clinton servers and are now trying to say that wouldn’t be possible because Russia hacked them. Again, do you think only one Country at a time is allowed to hack?
muh Russia crew terrified to actually discuss muh Russia in the muh Russia thread
You keep talking about Clinton and China.muh Russia crew terrified to actually discuss muh Russia in the muh Russia thread
Just like you talked about Podesta and art.
Just like you talked about Rice and indictments.
Just like you talked about Silby.
All here.
In the Russia thread.
lol
I never said China hacked Clinton. That is your and your ilk new narrative.
Get your straight, pizzaboy.
I said this new theory of your is already debunked by multiple fronts.
I didn’t bring up Clinton and China but I’m more than happy to stop if you’d like to get back to discussing Trump/Russian collusion. Do you want to discuss Trump/Russian collusion or do you want to whatabout your way into the weeds?
coming from someone who’s pushed the muh Russia for two years
Is this supposed to help?
Maybe just link a specific post.
You're the one who has whataboutted this thread for over a year and you're doing it now.
Do you want to discuss Trump/Russian collusion or do you want to whatabout your way into the weeds?
I'm down with discussing Trump/Russia. What do you want to discuss about it, TSA?
You mean like that time senior campaign officials met with Russians to get dirt on their opponent?
or the secret meetings that they all keep lying about for some reason?
That collusion?
he don’t wanna talk about it. He will pivot to Steele
You really want to talk about the meeting that Clinton funded Fusion GPS set up?
Why did the muh Russia crew suddenly stop discussing muh Russia?
Because the Manafort and Cohen cases have been dominating the news cycles and you've gone off on your Ohr and China distractions.
You didn’t need to get five words into the latest calls for Donald Trump’s impeachment to discover it’s over the same objectionable qualities that we’ve heard about for three years. Michael Cohen’s payments to Stephanie Clifford and Karen McDougal are a pretext.
At least it isn’t Russia. This turning of the page is sad for Craig Unger, author of a just-released book about Mr. Trump’s business history, full of sentences like “we do not know exactly when the KGB first opened a file on Donald Trump.” Or how about his description of Oleg Kalugin, the 83-year-old ex-KGB agent living in the U.S. who knows nothing about Mr. Trump, as “a master of the tradecraft that was used to ensnare Trump.”
Such sentences are exercises in the fallacy of begging the question—presuming the truth of an unsubstantiated claim. Unfortunately for Mr. Unger, Mr. Trump’s enemies are throwing aside their Russia crutches. Mr. Trump’s longtime CFO, Allen Weisselberg, has received immunity from a federal prosecutor in New York. No, this does not mean every Trump tax return, loan application, conservation easement or cash transfer now will be scrutinized. But it could. And smart Democrats have known all along that Mr. Trump’s businesses are his real vulnerability.
The sad face that Mr. Trump made on election night after winning, it’s easy to believe, was born of a realization. Nobody has an incentive to invest unreasonable sums of time and money to create legal jeopardy for a loser. A president is different. And Mr. Trump is a fat target. Bill Clinton involved himself in one real-estate deal in his life. Imagine a Whitewater a week for 40 years.
To this columnist, it was inevitable that Mr. Trump’s past would come into collision with our vast regulatory state, which can find something on anybody if it looks hard enough, even somebody more scrupulously honest than Mr. Trump.
Harvard law professor and Bloomberg contributor Noah Feldman positively chortles that the Cohen plea now invites the U.S. attorney in Manhattan to seek more crimes and eventually to “indict the Trump Organization itself and seize assets derived from criminal activity.”
I wonder how this might play in the possibly more nuanced mind of Manafort juror Paula Duncan, who was capable of both appreciating that Paul Manafort was guilty and realizing that the government prosecuted him only because of his connection to President Trump.
Donald Trump, by a Manhattan mile, was better known than any presidential candidate in history—his personal life, his business life, his tics, his mannerisms. A bit dull are those pundits who have spent the past three years flogging and reflogging his demerits as if they discovered them. To anybody with historical imagination, the telling fact was that the American people elected him anyway. They put him in office with a clear democratic will to see how this unusual experiment runs.
While it would be problematic to assume voters gave Mr. Trump a pass for prior crimes, it’s equally problematic to launch a hunt for crimes that didn’t seem worthwhile to the myrmidons of the state before he was elected president.
It also behooves us to take a fresh look at how different Mr. Trump really is—or perhaps better said, in what way he is different and what way he is not. Friday’s headline in the Washington Post, “Trump undermining legal system, critics fear,” has that born-yesterday quality to anybody who’s been paying attention the past few decades. Half of America surely will recall hearing an FBI chief say that Hillary Clinton violated the law in relation to her official duties and it wasn’t worth prosecuting.
The risk of going down this road, thankfully, will be limited as long as Republicans remain a sizeable power in the Senate. A vote to convict after impeachment would be unlikely unless GOP voters themselves decide Mr. Trump has betrayed their cause.
What we’re also going to learn is that even if the federal government is paralyzed for the next two years, even if our politics is more deeply embittered, Mr. Trump can flourish in such an environment.
In the meantime, goodbye to Russia. You served your purpose. Vladimir Putin’s effect on the 2016 election, we can now admit, was trivial—his real influence has come almost entirely through the willingness of U.S. combatants to exploit Russia in pursuit of their own power ambitions and vendettas.
https://outline.com/DjNbv5
Darrin works exclusively in his echo chamber.
Delusional to the last. I have little doubt that someone like you was first in line for the Koolaid at Jonestown.
Collusion proven, so you have to get with the new spin. "It isn't a crime", and "Hillary made us do it".
The Flynn Tapes: A New Tell
The White House did indeed send someone over to review the intercepts.
As the special counsel knows, that person was John Eisenberg.
And what Eisenberg learned, the special counsel also knows,
the president understood when he fired Flynn.
https://www.nybooks.com/daily/2018/0...A%20New%20Tell
Last edited by boutons_deux; 08-29-2018 at 04:29 PM.
Whoopsies.Everything is panning out as expected, not a single charge, indictment, or arrest. Even Flynn isn't in major trouble.
There are currently 4 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 4 guests)
Posting Permissions
