Democrat ties to Russian lawyer are now coming out.....

[Lewdog]

Do you have any iota of an idea how long it takes to do a well worked government investigation? It doesn't happen over a few months... and Obama made sure to order his people to preserve the evidence.. for like what Mueller is doing now.

What did you expect Obama to do at the time? Cancel the election?

No but as you said if they'd known about anything fishy they'd have used it and they didn't. That must mean that they were clueless or there was nothing to see. Don't tell me that the DNC wasn't watching the Trump camp's every move before the election, of course they were. The Russia non incident is just the left putting obstacles in the way of the Trump agenda rather than doing what's right for the people they care so little about and doing productive legislature. The Leftards are whining because their efforts to throw money at the problem didn't work this time. Being whiney bitches won't work either because the people are tired of this shit. The only thing the left is doing now is ensuring that the right wins the next election. Thanks and keep it up.

What do you mean nothing fishy? If it was a set up like you numbnuts keep implying, they had him dead to rights when he set up the meeting after being told the Russian government wanted to help his dad win...

I'm talking about the whole thing not just Trump Jr. BTW if you think Hillary wouldn't have taken that bait had the Russian's approached her about dirt on Trump you're out of your mind, of course she would have. Again Obama was in charge and didn't find anything funny going on so according to the liberal Messiah there's nothing to see here AKA the Dimocraps are grasping at Russian straws trying to mislead the public because they are a bunch of butt hurt babies. Now do they think they can get back to doing what the public hired them for and do some actual work? Only one I see working up there, Democrat or republican, is Trump. Time for these Idiots to tackle a workable healthcare bill. I have the perfect solution. I think everybody in the USA should have the exact same heath coverage Congress has. Problem solved.

I have no idea if Hillary would have, and quite honestly not a single person on this planet knows that answer definitely. And guess what? If the roles were reversed in this situation I'd be calling for her head.

The fact you Trumpbots come up with these EXTREMELY crazy conspiracy theories yet ignore evidence about Trump's team and ties to the Russians that are RIGHT IN FRONT OF YOUR FACE... tells me you are either brain dead, brainwashed by your partisanship, or you are such a deep denial you can't use any sense of logic or reasoning.

Wow you really did drink the liberal Koolaid if you think there's a possibility that she wouldn't have. Any politican would have.

Oh as crazy as you Dimbots coming up with non existent Russian crap that had no bearing on the election? If every charge the Dims have put forward was true where are the criminal charges? There aren't any because nothing criminal was done. last time I heard having "ties" to Russians isn't Illegal. Lots of business men have business in Russia. I'll bet old Hillary even does. No Crime has been committed which is why Trump hasn't been charged. It's all sour grapes on the part of the Democrats who are trying to sabotage the Trump Presidency hoping it will influence the next election. Guess what,it will. People are so fed up with this crap and nothing getting done the Democrats are handing the next election to the republicans on a silver platter. The 2020 dems be painted as obstructionist and ineffectual. Thanks for making Trump 2020 a victory. Keep up the good work.

I can't say if she would have or not. NOT A SINGLE PERSON ON THIS FORUM CAN SAY THAT.

I can say with 100% accuracy that Trump Jr. set up and went to the meeting. Step deflecting.

 

[Marianne]

No but as you said if they'd known about anything fishy they'd have used it and they didn't. That must mean that they were clueless or there was nothing to see. Don't tell me that the DNC wasn't watching the Trump camp's every move before the election, of course they were. The Russia non incident is just the left putting obstacles in the way of the Trump agenda rather than doing what's right for the people they care so little about and doing productive legislature. The Leftards are whining because their efforts to throw money at the problem didn't work this time. Being whiney bitches won't work either because the people are tired of this shit. The only thing the left is doing now is ensuring that the right wins the next election. Thanks and keep it up.

What do you mean nothing fishy? If it was a set up like you numbnuts keep implying, they had him dead to rights when he set up the meeting after being told the Russian government wanted to help his dad win...

I'm talking about the whole thing not just Trump Jr. BTW if you think Hillary wouldn't have taken that bait had the Russian's approached her about dirt on Trump you're out of your mind, of course she would have. Again Obama was in charge and didn't find anything funny going on so according to the liberal Messiah there's nothing to see here AKA the Dimocraps are grasping at Russian straws trying to mislead the public because they are a bunch of butt hurt babies. Now do they think they can get back to doing what the public hired them for and do some actual work? Only one I see working up there, Democrat or republican, is Trump. Time for these Idiots to tackle a workable healthcare bill. I have the perfect solution. I think everybody in the USA should have the exact same heath coverage Congress has. Problem solved.

I have no idea if Hillary would have, and quite honestly not a single person on this planet knows that answer definitely. And guess what? If the roles were reversed in this situation I'd be calling for her head.

The fact you Trumpbots come up with these EXTREMELY crazy conspiracy theories yet ignore evidence about Trump's team and ties to the Russians that are RIGHT IN FRONT OF YOUR FACE... tells me you are either brain dead, brainwashed by your partisanship, or you are such a deep denial you can't use any sense of logic or reasoning.

Wow you really did drink the liberal Koolaid if you think there's a possibility that she wouldn't have. Any politican would have.

Oh as crazy as you Dimbots coming up with non existent Russian crap that had no bearing on the election? If every charge the Dims have put forward was true where are the criminal charges? There aren't any because nothing criminal was done. last time I heard having "ties" to Russians isn't Illegal. Lots of business men have business in Russia. I'll bet old Hillary even does. No Crime has been committed which is why Trump hasn't been charged. It's all sour grapes on the part of the Democrats who are trying to sabotage the Trump Presidency hoping it will influence the next election. Guess what,it will. People are so fed up with this crap and nothing getting done the Democrats are handing the next election to the republicans on a silver platter. The 2020 dems be painted as obstructionist and ineffectual. Thanks for making Trump 2020 a victory. Keep up the good work.

I can't say if she would have or not. NOT A SINGLE PERSON ON THIS FORUM CAN SAY THAT.

I can say with 100% accuracy that Trump Jr. set up and went to the meeting. Step deflecting.

She's a crooked as the come so yes she would have. Anybody that would rig the DNC most certainly would.

I'm not denying Trump Jr. He admitted to it. I'm saying it's not a crime. Digging up dirt is an age old practice of all people running for office in the USA, where do you think all the mud slinging comes from? Russia says they got something on Hillary, Trump Jr. investigates, it gets used against Hillary if it exists. If it doesn't, no harm no foul. If you think it hasn't happened before think again. It's not "Russian influence" if Hillary actually did do something wrong to find because, like her deleted E-mails, it never should have happened. In the end she's the one responsible for having committed whatever she's being accused of. Now what came of Trump Jr's Russian visit?

 

[JoeB131]

So you don't care if Hillary and Bill's greed inadvertantly caused 911, Afghan war, Iraq war, Isis, and maybe Syria crisis?

Nope, I'd probably think that someone who said something so silly should be laughed at.

What caused 9/11 is 70 years of the US Sticking it's dick in the Hornet's Nest of the Middle East... starting with the recognition of the Zionist Entity. You can't keep jumping into other people's fights and then whine about getting punched in the nose.

Bin Laden slip away scott free when we (he) had him under grasp & targeted in 1998? Even Bill himself said he could have removed him or caotured him and regreted it. He said this at a speach in Australia on
9/10 our time zone but you forget Australia is ahead of our time. So did he think 911 already occured and felt guilty and compelled to mention his regret or was it a coincidence but his speach triggered the event?

Okay, now you are going into weirdo conspiracy theories, and frankly, I don't have time for that shit. Take your fucking medications.

 

[HaShev]

What do you mean nothing fishy? If it was a set up like you numbnuts keep implying, they had him dead to rights when he set up the meeting after being told the Russian government wanted to help his dad win...

I'm talking about the whole thing not just Trump Jr. BTW if you think Hillary wouldn't have taken that bait had the Russian's approached her about dirt on Trump you're out of your mind, of course she would have. Again Obama was in charge and didn't find anything funny going on so according to the liberal Messiah there's nothing to see here AKA the Dimocraps are grasping at Russian straws trying to mislead the public because they are a bunch of butt hurt babies. Now do they think they can get back to doing what the public hired them for and do some actual work? Only one I see working up there, Democrat or republican, is Trump. Time for these Idiots to tackle a workable healthcare bill. I have the perfect solution. I think everybody in the USA should have the exact same heath coverage Congress has. Problem solved.

I have no idea if Hillary would have, and quite honestly not a single person on this planet knows that answer definitely. And guess what? If the roles were reversed in this situation I'd be calling for her head.

The fact you Trumpbots come up with these EXTREMELY crazy conspiracy theories yet ignore evidence about Trump's team and ties to the Russians that are RIGHT IN FRONT OF YOUR FACE... tells me you are either brain dead, brainwashed by your partisanship, or you are such a deep denial you can't use any sense of logic or reasoning.

Wow you really did drink the liberal Koolaid if you think there's a possibility that she wouldn't have. Any politican would have.

Oh as crazy as you Dimbots coming up with non existent Russian crap that had no bearing on the election? If every charge the Dims have put forward was true where are the criminal charges? There aren't any because nothing criminal was done. last time I heard having "ties" to Russians isn't Illegal. Lots of business men have business in Russia. I'll bet old Hillary even does. No Crime has been committed which is why Trump hasn't been charged. It's all sour grapes on the part of the Democrats who are trying to sabotage the Trump Presidency hoping it will influence the next election. Guess what,it will. People are so fed up with this crap and nothing getting done the Democrats are handing the next election to the republicans on a silver platter. The 2020 dems be painted as obstructionist and ineffectual. Thanks for making Trump 2020 a victory. Keep up the good work.

I can't say if she would have or not. NOT A SINGLE PERSON ON THIS FORUM CAN SAY THAT.

I can say with 100% accuracy that Trump Jr. set up and went to the meeting. Step deflecting.

She's a crooked as the come so yes she would have. Anybody that would rig the DNC most certainly would.

I'm not denying Trump Jr. He admitted to it. I'm saying it's not a crime. Digging up dirt is an age old practice of all people running for office in the USA, where do you think all the mud slinging comes from? Russia says they got something on Hillary, Trump Jr. investigates, it gets used against Hillary if it exists. If it doesn't, no harm no foul. If you think it hasn't happened before think again. It's not "Russian influence" if Hillary actually did do something wrong to find because, like her deleted E-mails, it never should have happened. In the end she's the one responsible for having committed whatever she's being accused of. Now what came of Trump Jr's Russian visit?

It's also important the full context of what the attorney claimed the info was to be about that tied in with Clinton's other connection to Russia which makes it our duty to find out (criminal acts) then just dirt on an opponent. You don't hear about what that info was to be about by MSM, because it's reverse of how they are deflecting the meeting from being about Clinton's ties to Russian Gov't getting help from Russia to being about Trumps son getting gov't info to help his father.
See how they twist it?
I wonder if she played the reverse game to get her lobbyist foot in Dems doors and that's where this Russian conspiracy nonsense stems from. Now that would be funny and eggs on their faces, but who should we give the bill to in the end and how do you price valuable lost gov't time.

 

[HaShev]

So you don't care if Hillary and Bill's greed inadvertantly caused 911, Afghan war, Iraq war, Isis, and maybe Syria crisis?

Nope, I'd probably think that someone who said something so silly should be laughed at.

What caused 9/11 is 70 years of the US Sticking it's dick in the Hornet's Nest of the Middle East... starting with the recognition of the Zionist Entity. You can't keep jumping into other people's fights and then whine about getting punched in the nose.

Bin Laden slip away scott free when we (he) had him under grasp & targeted in 1998? Even Bill himself said he could have removed him or caotured him and regreted it. He said this at a speach in Australia on
9/10 our time zone but you forget Australia is ahead of our time. So did he think 911 already occured and felt guilty and compelled to mention his regret or was it a coincidence but his speach triggered the event?

Okay, now you are going into weirdo conspiracy theories, and frankly, I don't have time for that shit. Take your fucking medications.

I see, you can't read, As I said INADVERTANTLY CAUSED, and YOU refuse to have civil discussions. Trolling forums are at the bottom of the forum. THE 4000 PLUS NY VICTIMS THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONCERN.
The hundreds of thousands over seas in many countries thank you for your concern.
The Millions displaced thank you.
Party of tolerance and concern for
(Polar bears ) but humans, not so much.

 

[JoeB131]

I see, you can't read, As I said INADVERTANTLY CAUSED, and YOU refuse to have civil discussions. Trolling forums are at the bottom of the forum. THE 4000 PLUS NY VICTIMS THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONCERN.
The hundreds of thousands over seas in many countries thank you for your concern.
The Millions displaced thank you.
Party of tolerance and concern for
(Polar bears ) but humans, not so much.

I refuse to feed nuts.

Here's the thing. there's nothing inadvertant about this war. Bin Laden was very clear why he attacked us. We support Israel. We support the Saudi Regime. We waged war on Iraq. That was our policy long before the Clintons got there.

 

[HaShev]

I see, you can't read, As I said INADVERTANTLY CAUSED, and YOU refuse to have civil discussions. Trolling forums are at the bottom of the forum. THE 4000 PLUS NY VICTIMS THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONCERN.
The hundreds of thousands over seas in many countries thank you for your concern.
The Millions displaced thank you.
Party of tolerance and concern for
(Polar bears ) but humans, not so much.

I refuse to feed nuts.

Here's the thing. there's nothing inadvertant about this war. Bin Laden was very clear why he attacked us. We support Israel. We support the Saudi Regime. We waged war on Iraq. That was our policy long before the Clintons got there.

I know about our poor choices and cause and affect, I have discussed this before myself.
And there you go ad hominem response again, showing why you aren't
the party of tolerance, how you guys support criminals and terrorist yourselves over patriotism, and country's well being. How you can't ever admit anything (learned from the best at denying everything you do).
You can't go around responding to issues raised by calling people stupid and nuts, your demonization of those you can't refute content or disagree with proves the point about needing to demonize your opponent, because you have no substance in which to
win your argument. Clinton lost for this very reason, her poor choices and acts and what those caused has made her only hope to be through throwing her apponent under the bus she has already shown she can't drive.
You have shown you can't win an argument so you too resort to ad hominem tactics.
She offered no solutions, you offer no refutation or solutions. She deflects, so you deflect. She admits nothing and denies everything so you do the same.
You mimick your candidate because it's not about the susbstance, it's about affiliation pride. You have become party first and country last, that's how you can say who cares about 911, and Afghan, Iraq war, and Isis. You could care less because you are not a NYer and have the same attitude Ted Cruz had about NY, because it's not your gang (affiliation). Afghan and Iraq doesn't matter because it's not your affiliation.
Affiliation pride makes your party heartless.
Enough to attack disabled people after claiming your opponent did that(deflecting).
Enough to attack national heroes (after claiming your opponent did that=deflecting).
Enough to resort to hate and violent acts including borderline terrorist threats and acts. Your the party that beats up people with Red hats, snd support gangs who beat up people with red or blue bandannas.
The party that beats up disabled people and posts them online. The
party of lawlessness and disrespect for law enforcenent. The party of online paid
trolling that deflects and blames others as trolling. Party of Xenophobes.
Party of sore losers who claimed this is how their opponent would behave like.
Yet you are not losers if you choose to participate in the country becoming better and healed instead of obstructing and preventing it from moving forward just for sake of power, affiliation pride placing your party above the people & country.
=Losers by choice when nobody has to be a loser in a country that works together.

 

[JoeB131]

I know about our poor choices and cause and affect, I have discussed this before myself.
And there you go ad hominem response again, showing why you aren't
the party of tolerance, how you guys support criminals and terrorist yourselves over patriotism, and country's well being. How you can't ever admit anything (learned from the best at denying everything you do).

No, guy, I don't think that the well being of the oil companies and the Jews is the well-being of America. If we took the money we spent propping up Exxon and Israel and spent it on alternative energy, we'd be a lot better off.

 

[JoeB131]

You can't go around responding to issues raised by calling people stupid and nuts, your demonization of those you can't refute content or disagree with proves the point about needing to demonize your opponent, because you have no substance in which to
win your argument.

absolutely I can. you are a nut. Deal with it. Get help.

 

[Faun]

Even the Dems admit it's not treason, please read the definition, we are not at war with Russia.
Once again, it's not Russian dirt on Hillary it was supposed to be "info on Russia" interfering the election "by helping Hillary", the exact thing you dems claim to want to know about yet suddenly ignore when it's other countries like Ukraine or Mexico. -oops.

Guy, you need to stop obsessing over Hillary, okay. I realize that you've been doing this for 25 years now, and you've pretty much just fucked the country with your obsession, but that's not the topic here.

The topic here is, did Trump and his team collude with the Russians. You guys have gone from "No, never, never, never!" to , "Well, maybe, but that isn't a crime and eeek, Hillary."

In my best Reagan voice: "Well there you go again", using plural tense Russians to make the narrative about a gov't or country instead of "a" Russian lobbyist.

So you don't care if Hillary and Bill's greed inadvertantly caused 911, Afghan war, Iraq war, Isis, and maybe Syria crisis?
Through the emails which you also don't care about we positively know the Saudis gave the Clinton's money for favors.
Your party doesn't care to know what those favors were. Well then tell us caring person, why exactly did Bill Clinton let
Bin Laden slip away scott free when we (he) had him under grasp & targeted in 1998? Even Bill himself said he could have removed him or caotured him and regreted it. He said this at a speach in Australia on
9/10 our time zone but you forget Australia is ahead of our time. So did he think 911 already occured and felt guilty and compelled to mention his regret or was it a coincidence but his speach triggered the event? Or neither but his greed and favor to Saudis was to let Bin Laden go which he regreted even before he knew the traggic outcome? Why regret something before the guy became a regret?
How would a normal compassionate feeling human being say the trigger of events don't matter and mean nothing?
That makes you a sick individual.
View attachment 139182

Debunked by the Republican-led 9.11 commission...

In late 1995,when Bin Ladin was still in Sudan, the State Department and the CIA learned that Sudanese officials were discussing with the Saudi government the possibility of expelling Bin Ladin. U.S.Ambassador Timothy Carney encouraged the Sudanese to pursue this course. The Saudis, however, did not want Bin Ladin, giving as their reason their revocation of his citizenship.

Sudan’s minister of defense, Fatih Erwa, has claimed that Sudan offered to hand Bin Ladin over to the United States. The Commission has found no credible evidence that this was so. Ambassador Carney had instructions only to push the Sudanese to expel Bin Ladin. Ambassador Carney had no legal basis to ask for more from the Sudanese since, at the time, there was no indictment outstanding.

9/11 Commission Report, chapter 4, pg 109-110

http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report.pdf​

 

[HaShev]

I know about our poor choices and cause and affect, I have discussed this before myself.
And there you go ad hominem response again, showing why you aren't
the party of tolerance, how you guys support criminals and terrorist yourselves over patriotism, and country's well being. How you can't ever admit anything (learned from the best at denying everything you do).

No, guy, I don't think that the well being of the oil companies and the Jews is the well-being of America. If we took the money we spent propping up Exxon and Israel and spent it on alternative energy, we'd be a lot better off.

You mean losing all that money to the failed solar companies like Obama did? Brilliant.

Remember you are the one who INADVERTANTLY called your own party conspiracy nuts by saying:
"weirdo conspiracy theories"
in regard to what Bill Clinton himself admitted, and I reviewed all the possible reasons for his action that caused all that carnage in the end, yet your party views subjectively one possibility=a conspiracy.
The fact you don't know the difference between reasoning by looking at all possibilities and that of jumping the gun on one view is quite disturbing. You should know the difference between honest review and subjective placed biased proud
opinions.
I guess you think Chelsea is a nut case conspiracy seeker, because she hired a private investigator on her own parents.
Now according to Dems, enough smoke means you need to investigate if there is a fire, unless YOU WANT TO ADMIT that
you're the party of tin foil hat conspiracy enthusiasts.

Fact this whole conspiracy rant from the left claims it's to find out and prevent countries from manipulating our elections, however if that was true you'd be equally outraged and investigating the Ukraine and Mexico interference.=caught lying about motive and unbias.

 

[HaShev]

Even the Dems admit it's not treason, please read the definition, we are not at war with Russia.
Once again, it's not Russian dirt on Hillary it was supposed to be "info on Russia" interfering the election "by helping Hillary", the exact thing you dems claim to want to know about yet suddenly ignore when it's other countries like Ukraine or Mexico. -oops.

Guy, you need to stop obsessing over Hillary, okay. I realize that you've been doing this for 25 years now, and you've pretty much just fucked the country with your obsession, but that's not the topic here.

The topic here is, did Trump and his team collude with the Russians. You guys have gone from "No, never, never, never!" to , "Well, maybe, but that isn't a crime and eeek, Hillary."

In my best Reagan voice: "Well there you go again", using plural tense Russians to make the narrative about a gov't or country instead of "a" Russian lobbyist.

So you don't care if Hillary and Bill's greed inadvertantly caused 911, Afghan war, Iraq war, Isis, and maybe Syria crisis?
Through the emails which you also don't care about we positively know the Saudis gave the Clinton's money for favors.
Your party doesn't care to know what those favors were. Well then tell us caring person, why exactly did Bill Clinton let
Bin Laden slip away scott free when we (he) had him under grasp & targeted in 1998? Even Bill himself said he could have removed him or caotured him and regreted it. He said this at a speach in Australia on
9/10 our time zone but you forget Australia is ahead of our time. So did he think 911 already occured and felt guilty and compelled to mention his regret or was it a coincidence but his speach triggered the event? Or neither but his greed and favor to Saudis was to let Bin Laden go which he regreted even before he knew the traggic outcome? Why regret something before the guy became a regret?
How would a normal compassionate feeling human being say the trigger of events don't matter and mean nothing?
That makes you a sick individual.
View attachment 139182

Debunked by the Republican-led 9.11 commission...

In late 1995,when Bin Ladin was still in Sudan, the State Department and the CIA learned that Sudanese officials were discussing with the Saudi government the possibility of expelling Bin Ladin. U.S.Ambassador Timothy Carney encouraged the Sudanese to pursue this course. The Saudis, however, did not want Bin Ladin, giving as their reason their revocation of his citizenship.

Sudan’s minister of defense, Fatih Erwa, has claimed that Sudan offered to hand Bin Ladin over to the United States. The Commission has found no credible evidence that this was so. Ambassador Carney had instructions only to push the Sudanese to expel Bin Ladin. Ambassador Carney had no legal basis to ask for more from the Sudanese since, at the time, there was no indictment outstanding.

9/11 Commission Report, chapter 4, pg 109-110

http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report.pdf​

My point with Joe is Bill Clinton's 1998 incident where he mysteriously let Bin Laden slip away, something he himself admitted regretting ironically a day before 911.
Fact: we now know Clinton foundation took money for favors from the Saudis, I even showed a pic of one such open hand off money envelope. My point to Joe is his lack of concern to what those favors were especially if letting Bin Laden go was one of those favors that is the doosey of all crimes committed in the name of greed and power.

 

[Faun]

Even the Dems admit it's not treason, please read the definition, we are not at war with Russia.
Once again, it's not Russian dirt on Hillary it was supposed to be "info on Russia" interfering the election "by helping Hillary", the exact thing you dems claim to want to know about yet suddenly ignore when it's other countries like Ukraine or Mexico. -oops.

Guy, you need to stop obsessing over Hillary, okay. I realize that you've been doing this for 25 years now, and you've pretty much just fucked the country with your obsession, but that's not the topic here.

The topic here is, did Trump and his team collude with the Russians. You guys have gone from "No, never, never, never!" to , "Well, maybe, but that isn't a crime and eeek, Hillary."

In my best Reagan voice: "Well there you go again", using plural tense Russians to make the narrative about a gov't or country instead of "a" Russian lobbyist.

So you don't care if Hillary and Bill's greed inadvertantly caused 911, Afghan war, Iraq war, Isis, and maybe Syria crisis?
Through the emails which you also don't care about we positively know the Saudis gave the Clinton's money for favors.
Your party doesn't care to know what those favors were. Well then tell us caring person, why exactly did Bill Clinton let
Bin Laden slip away scott free when we (he) had him under grasp & targeted in 1998? Even Bill himself said he could have removed him or caotured him and regreted it. He said this at a speach in Australia on
9/10 our time zone but you forget Australia is ahead of our time. So did he think 911 already occured and felt guilty and compelled to mention his regret or was it a coincidence but his speach triggered the event? Or neither but his greed and favor to Saudis was to let Bin Laden go which he regreted even before he knew the traggic outcome? Why regret something before the guy became a regret?
How would a normal compassionate feeling human being say the trigger of events don't matter and mean nothing?
That makes you a sick individual.
View attachment 139182

Debunked by the Republican-led 9.11 commission...

In late 1995,when Bin Ladin was still in Sudan, the State Department and the CIA learned that Sudanese officials were discussing with the Saudi government the possibility of expelling Bin Ladin. U.S.Ambassador Timothy Carney encouraged the Sudanese to pursue this course. The Saudis, however, did not want Bin Ladin, giving as their reason their revocation of his citizenship.

Sudan’s minister of defense, Fatih Erwa, has claimed that Sudan offered to hand Bin Ladin over to the United States. The Commission has found no credible evidence that this was so. Ambassador Carney had instructions only to push the Sudanese to expel Bin Ladin. Ambassador Carney had no legal basis to ask for more from the Sudanese since, at the time, there was no indictment outstanding.

9/11 Commission Report, chapter 4, pg 109-110

http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report.pdf​

My point with Joe is Bill Clinton's 1998 incident where he mysteriously let Bin Laden slip away, something he himself admitted regretting ironically a day before 911.
Fact: we now know Clinton foundation took money for favors from the Saudis, I even showed a pic of one such open hand off money envelope. My point to Joe is his lack of concern to what those favors were especially if letting Bin Laden go was one of those favors that is the doosey of all crimes committed in the name of greed and power.

Not only do you not possess any evidence whatsoever that the Saudis paid Clinton money to let OBL go; even suggesting such nonsense requires you to ignore the reality that the Saudis were not friends of OBL. They earlier revoked his citizenship and later, wouldn't allow him to return.

 

[CMike]

WHY WOULD THE DNC SET UP TRUMP'S CAMPAIGN AND NOT USE IT BEFORE THE ELECTION AND INSTEAD WAIT UNTIL JULY THE FOLLOWING YEAR? IT MAKES NO FUCKING SENSE. THEY WOULD HAVE RELEASED THE INFO BEFORE THE ELECTION TO HELP CLINTON WIN.

GIVE IT UP... IT WAS NOT SOME KIND OF TRICKY SET UP!

Because they were probably afraid that all their links to the Russian lawyer would be revealed.

However, who knows how criminals think?

 

[CMike]

It could be a set up by the DNC. After rigging the primary it sounds like something they might do. Why didn't it come out before the election? Because the DNC realized Trump Jr. had done nothing wrong. Even if he intended to use info from the Kremlin, since none existed he did nothing illegal. You can't be arrested for intending to rob a bank if you never do. After the election they needed to throw fuel on the sputtering collusion fire and knew their mindless snowflake minions would swallow it up.

Even if he did use the information, that is not illegal eitehr.

This whole thing is another example of Dimms yelling 'There's smoke, there's smoke!' but never any fire.

Never any smoke either. They falsely write that it's there.

 

[CMike]

So now we have a former Russian intelligence agent also at that meeting. But you 'Conservative' assholes are still defending the little treasonous cocksuck. There is absolutely nothing the Trump family will not do to further their power and finances. And that, obviously, includes treason.

The one owned by the Obama Administration.

 

[HaShev]

Even the Dems admit it's not treason, please read the definition, we are not at war with Russia.
Once again, it's not Russian dirt on Hillary it was supposed to be "info on Russia" interfering the election "by helping Hillary", the exact thing you dems claim to want to know about yet suddenly ignore when it's other countries like Ukraine or Mexico. -oops.

Guy, you need to stop obsessing over Hillary, okay. I realize that you've been doing this for 25 years now, and you've pretty much just fucked the country with your obsession, but that's not the topic here.

The topic here is, did Trump and his team collude with the Russians. You guys have gone from "No, never, never, never!" to , "Well, maybe, but that isn't a crime and eeek, Hillary."

In my best Reagan voice: "Well there you go again", using plural tense Russians to make the narrative about a gov't or country instead of "a" Russian lobbyist.

So you don't care if Hillary and Bill's greed inadvertantly caused 911, Afghan war, Iraq war, Isis, and maybe Syria crisis?
Through the emails which you also don't care about we positively know the Saudis gave the Clinton's money for favors.
Your party doesn't care to know what those favors were. Well then tell us caring person, why exactly did Bill Clinton let
Bin Laden slip away scott free when we (he) had him under grasp & targeted in 1998? Even Bill himself said he could have removed him or caotured him and regreted it. He said this at a speach in Australia on
9/10 our time zone but you forget Australia is ahead of our time. So did he think 911 already occured and felt guilty and compelled to mention his regret or was it a coincidence but his speach triggered the event? Or neither but his greed and favor to Saudis was to let Bin Laden go which he regreted even before he knew the traggic outcome? Why regret something before the guy became a regret?
How would a normal compassionate feeling human being say the trigger of events don't matter and mean nothing?
That makes you a sick individual.
View attachment 139182

Debunked by the Republican-led 9.11 commission...

In late 1995,when Bin Ladin was still in Sudan, the State Department and the CIA learned that Sudanese officials were discussing with the Saudi government the possibility of expelling Bin Ladin. U.S.Ambassador Timothy Carney encouraged the Sudanese to pursue this course. The Saudis, however, did not want Bin Ladin, giving as their reason their revocation of his citizenship.

Sudan’s minister of defense, Fatih Erwa, has claimed that Sudan offered to hand Bin Ladin over to the United States. The Commission has found no credible evidence that this was so. Ambassador Carney had instructions only to push the Sudanese to expel Bin Ladin. Ambassador Carney had no legal basis to ask for more from the Sudanese since, at the time, there was no indictment outstanding.

9/11 Commission Report, chapter 4, pg 109-110

http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report.pdf​

My point with Joe is Bill Clinton's 1998 incident where he mysteriously let Bin Laden slip away, something he himself admitted regretting ironically a day before 911.
Fact: we now know Clinton foundation took money for favors from the Saudis, I even showed a pic of one such open hand off money envelope. My point to Joe is his lack of concern to what those favors were especially if letting Bin Laden go was one of those favors that is the doosey of all crimes committed in the name of greed and power.

Not only do you not possess any evidence whatsoever that the Saudis paid Clinton money to let OBL go; even suggesting such nonsense requires you to ignore the reality that the Saudis were not friends of OBL. They earlier revoked his citizenship and later, wouldn't allow him to return.

You obviously do not take precise wording into account (as in you have not read me correctly[perhaps you were rushed?]), which is why I'm guessing you are one of the people easily swayed by fake news lack of proper tenses and wording to reshape how you view the news. To answer your post anyway;
1)Using Dem standards there's enough smoke to require investigation otherwise admit there is no evidence of collusion says the 3 intelligence agencies and over a year investigation.
2) it's serious enough to mandate investigating further. You and assuming your fellow party posters are sgowing zero concern which is disturbing.
3)There is evidence in Hillary's emails and picture evidence of pay to play favors given the Saudis, all I did was ask did that include letting OBL slip away? And since she destroyed evidence how can you conclude there is/was no evidence of the favors?
You say no, without evidence (using your own standard) but never explain
1-why he let him slup away in 1998
2-why did his concious feel guilty to confess to an Australian audience a day before 911?
3-what were all theworthys and are some of them just as cringe worthy.

INSTEAD OF ADDRESSING THESE issues, people would rather ad hominem smokescreen
reply and avoid honest discussion, even as far as avoiding what Bill Clinton himself admited in COULD HAVE Captured or kill ObL in 1998. PLUS you guys keep making excuses and have an unusual disturbing acceptance of criminal greed.

 

[Faun]

Guy, you need to stop obsessing over Hillary, okay. I realize that you've been doing this for 25 years now, and you've pretty much just fucked the country with your obsession, but that's not the topic here.

The topic here is, did Trump and his team collude with the Russians. You guys have gone from "No, never, never, never!" to , "Well, maybe, but that isn't a crime and eeek, Hillary."

In my best Reagan voice: "Well there you go again", using plural tense Russians to make the narrative about a gov't or country instead of "a" Russian lobbyist.

So you don't care if Hillary and Bill's greed inadvertantly caused 911, Afghan war, Iraq war, Isis, and maybe Syria crisis?
Through the emails which you also don't care about we positively know the Saudis gave the Clinton's money for favors.
Your party doesn't care to know what those favors were. Well then tell us caring person, why exactly did Bill Clinton let
Bin Laden slip away scott free when we (he) had him under grasp & targeted in 1998? Even Bill himself said he could have removed him or caotured him and regreted it. He said this at a speach in Australia on
9/10 our time zone but you forget Australia is ahead of our time. So did he think 911 already occured and felt guilty and compelled to mention his regret or was it a coincidence but his speach triggered the event? Or neither but his greed and favor to Saudis was to let Bin Laden go which he regreted even before he knew the traggic outcome? Why regret something before the guy became a regret?
How would a normal compassionate feeling human being say the trigger of events don't matter and mean nothing?
That makes you a sick individual.
View attachment 139182

Debunked by the Republican-led 9.11 commission...

In late 1995,when Bin Ladin was still in Sudan, the State Department and the CIA learned that Sudanese officials were discussing with the Saudi government the possibility of expelling Bin Ladin. U.S.Ambassador Timothy Carney encouraged the Sudanese to pursue this course. The Saudis, however, did not want Bin Ladin, giving as their reason their revocation of his citizenship.

Sudan’s minister of defense, Fatih Erwa, has claimed that Sudan offered to hand Bin Ladin over to the United States. The Commission has found no credible evidence that this was so. Ambassador Carney had instructions only to push the Sudanese to expel Bin Ladin. Ambassador Carney had no legal basis to ask for more from the Sudanese since, at the time, there was no indictment outstanding.

9/11 Commission Report, chapter 4, pg 109-110

http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report.pdf​

My point with Joe is Bill Clinton's 1998 incident where he mysteriously let Bin Laden slip away, something he himself admitted regretting ironically a day before 911.
Fact: we now know Clinton foundation took money for favors from the Saudis, I even showed a pic of one such open hand off money envelope. My point to Joe is his lack of concern to what those favors were especially if letting Bin Laden go was one of those favors that is the doosey of all crimes committed in the name of greed and power.

Not only do you not possess any evidence whatsoever that the Saudis paid Clinton money to let OBL go; even suggesting such nonsense requires you to ignore the reality that the Saudis were not friends of OBL. They earlier revoked his citizenship and later, wouldn't allow him to return.

You obviously do not take precise wording into account (as in you have not read me correctly[perhaps you were rushed?]), which is why I'm guessing you are one of the people easily swayed by fake news lack of proper tenses and wording to reshape how you view the news. To answer your post anyway;
1)Using Dem standards there's enough smoke to require investigation otherwise admit there is no evidence of collusion says the 3 intelligence agencies and over a year investigation.
2) it's serious enough to mandate investigating further. You and assuming your fellow party posters are sgowing zero concern which is disturbing.
3)There is evidence in Hillary's emails and picture evidence of pay to play favors given the Saudis, all I did was ask did that include letting OBL slip away? And since she destroyed evidence how can you conclude there is/was no evidence of the favors?
You say no, without evidence (using your own standard) but never explain
1-why he let him slup away in 1998
2-why did his concious feel guilty to confess to an Australian audience a day before 911?
3-what were all theworthys and are some of them just as cringe worthy.

INSTEAD OF ADDRESSING THESE issues, people would rather ad hominem smokescreen
reply and avoid honest discussion, even as far as acoiding what Bill Clinton himself admited in COULD HAVE Captured or kill ObL in 1998. PLUS you guys keep making excuses and have an unusual disturbing acceptance of criminal greed.

What you describe as letting him "slup away in 1998," is in reality, Clinton choosing between killing OBL along with hundreds of innocent civilians plus political leaders versus not killing OBL that day. We can argue over which would have been the right thing to do, but he offered that explanation and it was his choice to make. And given Clinton fired missiles at OBL just a few months earlier and doing so didn't kill OBL, choosing not to repeat that is a reasonable position. And again, you possess zero evidence he did so because the Saudis (who were no friends of OBL) paid him. For you to suggest he might have is nothing but your over-active imagination hard at work.

As far as him discussing that the day before 9.11, there is nothing to explain. Him saying what he did and Al-Qaeda attacking us the next day are unrelated.

 

[HaShev]

In my best Reagan voice: "Well there you go again", using plural tense Russians to make the narrative about a gov't or country instead of "a" Russian lobbyist.

So you don't care if Hillary and Bill's greed inadvertantly caused 911, Afghan war, Iraq war, Isis, and maybe Syria crisis?
Through the emails which you also don't care about we positively know the Saudis gave the Clinton's money for favors.
Your party doesn't care to know what those favors were. Well then tell us caring person, why exactly did Bill Clinton let
Bin Laden slip away scott free when we (he) had him under grasp & targeted in 1998? Even Bill himself said he could have removed him or caotured him and regreted it. He said this at a speach in Australia on
9/10 our time zone but you forget Australia is ahead of our time. So did he think 911 already occured and felt guilty and compelled to mention his regret or was it a coincidence but his speach triggered the event? Or neither but his greed and favor to Saudis was to let Bin Laden go which he regreted even before he knew the traggic outcome? Why regret something before the guy became a regret?
How would a normal compassionate feeling human being say the trigger of events don't matter and mean nothing?
That makes you a sick individual.
View attachment 139182

Debunked by the Republican-led 9.11 commission...

In late 1995,when Bin Ladin was still in Sudan, the State Department and the CIA learned that Sudanese officials were discussing with the Saudi government the possibility of expelling Bin Ladin. U.S.Ambassador Timothy Carney encouraged the Sudanese to pursue this course. The Saudis, however, did not want Bin Ladin, giving as their reason their revocation of his citizenship.

Sudan’s minister of defense, Fatih Erwa, has claimed that Sudan offered to hand Bin Ladin over to the United States. The Commission has found no credible evidence that this was so. Ambassador Carney had instructions only to push the Sudanese to expel Bin Ladin. Ambassador Carney had no legal basis to ask for more from the Sudanese since, at the time, there was no indictment outstanding.

9/11 Commission Report, chapter 4, pg 109-110

http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report.pdf​

My point with Joe is Bill Clinton's 1998 incident where he mysteriously let Bin Laden slip away, something he himself admitted regretting ironically a day before 911.
Fact: we now know Clinton foundation took money for favors from the Saudis, I even showed a pic of one such open hand off money envelope. My point to Joe is his lack of concern to what those favors were especially if letting Bin Laden go was one of those favors that is the doosey of all crimes committed in the name of greed and power.

Not only do you not possess any evidence whatsoever that the Saudis paid Clinton money to let OBL go; even suggesting such nonsense requires you to ignore the reality that the Saudis were not friends of OBL. They earlier revoked his citizenship and later, wouldn't allow him to return.

You obviously do not take precise wording into account (as in you have not read me correctly[perhaps you were rushed?]), which is why I'm guessing you are one of the people easily swayed by fake news lack of proper tenses and wording to reshape how you view the news. To answer your post anyway;
1)Using Dem standards there's enough smoke to require investigation otherwise admit there is no evidence of collusion says the 3 intelligence agencies and over a year investigation.
2) it's serious enough to mandate investigating further. You and assuming your fellow party posters are sgowing zero concern which is disturbing.
3)There is evidence in Hillary's emails and picture evidence of pay to play favors given the Saudis, all I did was ask did that include letting OBL slip away? And since she destroyed evidence how can you conclude there is/was no evidence of the favors?
You say no, without evidence (using your own standard) but never explain
1-why he let him slup away in 1998
2-why did his concious feel guilty to confess to an Australian audience a day before 911?
3-what were all theworthys and are some of them just as cringe worthy.

INSTEAD OF ADDRESSING THESE issues, people would rather ad hominem smokescreen
reply and avoid honest discussion, even as far as acoiding what Bill Clinton himself admited in COULD HAVE Captured or kill ObL in 1998. PLUS you guys keep making excuses and have an unusual disturbing acceptance of criminal greed.

What you describe as letting him "slup away in 1998," is in reality, Clinton choosing between killing OBL along with hundreds of innocent civilians plus political leaders versus not killing OBL that day. We can argue over which would have been the right thing to do, but he offered that explanation and it was his choice to make. And given Clinton fired missiles at OBL just a few months earlier and doing so didn't kill OBL, choosing not to repeat that is a reasonable position. And again, you possess zero evidence he did so because the Saudis (who were no friends of OBL) paid him. For you to suggest he might have is nothing but your over-active imagination hard at work.

As far as him discussing that the day before 9.11, there is nothing to explain. Him saying what he did and Al-Qaeda attacking us the next day are unrelated.

And who created the figures to number of innocents at risk when we had precision bombs, are they the same wild eye propaganda figures they use for healthcare casualties *L*
SERIOUSLY, YOU TRUST THAT EXCUSE which inflates casualties to save face?
This is the king of lying Bill Clinton you are talking about, spin doctor supreme you are trusting. ONCE AGAIN, even he admitted the bad decision and choice before 911, before Afghan, Iraq wars before Isis, & before Syria unrest. Imagine now knowing the trade off.
-oops.=argument failed and is still smokescreening the millions of dollars question: "what favors were performed or what was overlooked for the Saudis "donations"?
Stop avoiding the question and admit it's being swept under the rug in embarassment and protection of a former sitting teflon president.

 

[Faun]

Debunked by the Republican-led 9.11 commission...

In late 1995,when Bin Ladin was still in Sudan, the State Department and the CIA learned that Sudanese officials were discussing with the Saudi government the possibility of expelling Bin Ladin. U.S.Ambassador Timothy Carney encouraged the Sudanese to pursue this course. The Saudis, however, did not want Bin Ladin, giving as their reason their revocation of his citizenship.

Sudan’s minister of defense, Fatih Erwa, has claimed that Sudan offered to hand Bin Ladin over to the United States. The Commission has found no credible evidence that this was so. Ambassador Carney had instructions only to push the Sudanese to expel Bin Ladin. Ambassador Carney had no legal basis to ask for more from the Sudanese since, at the time, there was no indictment outstanding.

9/11 Commission Report, chapter 4, pg 109-110

http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report.pdf​

My point with Joe is Bill Clinton's 1998 incident where he mysteriously let Bin Laden slip away, something he himself admitted regretting ironically a day before 911.
Fact: we now know Clinton foundation took money for favors from the Saudis, I even showed a pic of one such open hand off money envelope. My point to Joe is his lack of concern to what those favors were especially if letting Bin Laden go was one of those favors that is the doosey of all crimes committed in the name of greed and power.

Not only do you not possess any evidence whatsoever that the Saudis paid Clinton money to let OBL go; even suggesting such nonsense requires you to ignore the reality that the Saudis were not friends of OBL. They earlier revoked his citizenship and later, wouldn't allow him to return.

You obviously do not take precise wording into account (as in you have not read me correctly[perhaps you were rushed?]), which is why I'm guessing you are one of the people easily swayed by fake news lack of proper tenses and wording to reshape how you view the news. To answer your post anyway;
1)Using Dem standards there's enough smoke to require investigation otherwise admit there is no evidence of collusion says the 3 intelligence agencies and over a year investigation.
2) it's serious enough to mandate investigating further. You and assuming your fellow party posters are sgowing zero concern which is disturbing.
3)There is evidence in Hillary's emails and picture evidence of pay to play favors given the Saudis, all I did was ask did that include letting OBL slip away? And since she destroyed evidence how can you conclude there is/was no evidence of the favors?
You say no, without evidence (using your own standard) but never explain
1-why he let him slup away in 1998
2-why did his concious feel guilty to confess to an Australian audience a day before 911?
3-what were all theworthys and are some of them just as cringe worthy.

INSTEAD OF ADDRESSING THESE issues, people would rather ad hominem smokescreen
reply and avoid honest discussion, even as far as acoiding what Bill Clinton himself admited in COULD HAVE Captured or kill ObL in 1998. PLUS you guys keep making excuses and have an unusual disturbing acceptance of criminal greed.

What you describe as letting him "slup away in 1998," is in reality, Clinton choosing between killing OBL along with hundreds of innocent civilians plus political leaders versus not killing OBL that day. We can argue over which would have been the right thing to do, but he offered that explanation and it was his choice to make. And given Clinton fired missiles at OBL just a few months earlier and doing so didn't kill OBL, choosing not to repeat that is a reasonable position. And again, you possess zero evidence he did so because the Saudis (who were no friends of OBL) paid him. For you to suggest he might have is nothing but your over-active imagination hard at work.

As far as him discussing that the day before 9.11, there is nothing to explain. Him saying what he did and Al-Qaeda attacking us the next day are unrelated.

And who created the figures to number of innocents at risk when we had precision bombs, are they the same wild eye propaganda figures they use for healthcare casualties *L*
SERIOUSLY, YOU TRUST THAT EXCUSE which inflates casualties to save face?
This is the king of lying Bill Clinton you are talking about, spin doctor supreme you are trusting. ONCE AGAIN, even he admitted the bad decision and choice before 911, before Afghan, Iraq wars before Isis, & before Syria unrest. Imagine now knowing the trade off.
-oops.=argument failed and is still smokescreening the millions of dollars question: "what favors were performed or what was overlooked for the Saudis "donations"?
Stop avoiding the question and admit it's being swept under the rug in embarassment and protection of a former sitting teflon president.

^^^ Mindless drivel.

If collateral damage was not a factor, as you suggest, Clinton would have not mentioned the incident at all. He was under no obligation to do so and offered it freely. And like your hollow suggestion that he could have been paid by enemies of OBL to let OBL go free, you again have no evidence to confirm your empty claims.

And why on Earth would anyone entertain your Clinton is the devil masturbation? Had you had any actual evidence, I'd be more than happy to engage it. I'm not about to waste bandwidth to fuel your delusions.