Liberals, if Trump sold uranium to Russia and Ivanka was paid $500K by Russians for a speech...

K9Buck

Platinum Member
Dec 25, 2009
15,907
6,509
390
...what would you say about that? Would you be saying it was "pay for play"? Would you say it was "corrupt"? Would you say it was collusion between the Russian government and a president that was willing to sell out his country for profit?
 
...what would you say about that? Would you be saying it was "pay for play"? Would you say it was "corrupt"? Would you say it was collusion between the Russian government and a president that was willing to sell out his country for profit?

I say youre a fucking moron.

:popcorn:
 
...what would you say about that? Would you be saying it was "pay for play"? Would you say it was "corrupt"? Would you say it was collusion between the Russian government and a president that was willing to sell out his country for profit?

I say youre a fucking moron.

:popcorn:

As if you calling someone a moron is an insult.
 
...what would you say about that? Would you be saying it was "pay for play"? Would you say it was "corrupt"? Would you say it was collusion between the Russian government and a president that was willing to sell out his country for profit?

I say youre a fucking moron.

:popcorn:
/---/ Why won't you answer his perfectly legitimate question? Eh Spanky?
 
...what would you say about that? Would you be saying it was "pay for play"? Would you say it was "corrupt"? Would you say it was collusion between the Russian government and a president that was willing to sell out his country for profit?

I'd say you're profoundly less clever than you think you are.
 
...what would you say about that? Would you be saying it was "pay for play"? Would you say it was "corrupt"? Would you say it was collusion between the Russian government and a president that was willing to sell out his country for profit?

I say youre a fucking moron.

:popcorn:

I see these questions hurt your k*nt.
 
...what would you say about that? Would you be saying it was "pay for play"? Would you say it was "corrupt"? Would you say it was collusion between the Russian government and a president that was willing to sell out his country for profit?

I say youre a fucking moron.

:popcorn:
American Patriot Steve McGarrett would say you're a hypocrite!
 
...what would you say about that? Would you be saying it was "pay for play"? Would you say it was "corrupt"? Would you say it was collusion between the Russian government and a president that was willing to sell out his country for profit?

I'd say you're profoundly less clever than you think you are.

I didn't say I was clever. I simply asked some simple questions that you're too disingenuous to honestly answer.
 
Hey liberals, should we presume that you would say it's fine that Ivanka makes a $500K speech in Moscow right around the time that Trump agrees to sell uranium to Moscow, not to mention a hefty donation to Trump's personal foundation? How about it?
 
Hey liberals, should we presume that you would say it's fine that Ivanka makes a $500K speech in Moscow right around the time that Trump agrees to sell uranium to Moscow, not to mention a hefty donation to Trump's personal foundation? How about it?
We all know the answer to that. If they accuse him of treason and run a perpetual investigation based on no evidence, of course they would be screaming their liberal asses off just like you said. But none of the lying shitwads will ever give you an honest answer.
 
Hey liberals, should we presume that you would say it's fine that Ivanka makes a $500K speech in Moscow right around the time that Trump agrees to sell uranium to Moscow, not to mention a hefty donation to Trump's personal foundation? How about it?

Depends on the details. Ivanka has no authority over uranium reserves to start with, but assuming that she did; If the departments of Treasury, Defense, Justice, Commerce, Energy and Homeland Security, and two White House agencies (Office of the U.S. Trade Representative and Office of Science and Technology Policy). each has equal authority with her in the decision, and the uranium was guaranteed to never leave the US, I don't think I would see it as a problem, especially since she, or the heads of each of the other agencies didn't do anything but make recommendations. None of them had authority to approve or deny the sale. As far as being paid for a speech, I don't see a problem if the person paying for the speech was completely separated from the company buying the uranium about 5 years before anything was even mentioned about the deal.
 
Hey liberals, should we presume that you would say it's fine that Ivanka makes a $500K speech in Moscow right around the time that Trump agrees to sell uranium to Moscow, not to mention a hefty donation to Trump's personal foundation? How about it?
We all know the answer to that. If they accuse him of treason and run a perpetual investigation based on no evidence, of course they would be screaming their liberal asses off just like you said. But none of the lying shitwads will ever give you an honest answer.

How many years did that Benghazi investigation last? What evidence of intentional wrong doing did they find?
 
What evidence of intentional wrong doing did they find?

That's how they discovered Hillary's secret server in which she was conducting official government business and transmitting classified material. All violations of the law. She skated.
 
What evidence of intentional wrong doing did they find?

That's how they discovered Hillary's secret server in which she was conducting official government business and transmitting classified material. All violations of the law. She skated.

You saying that all those republicans on that republican controlled investigation were all Hillary shills?
 

Forum List

Back
Top