It Is None Of Our Business

[jknowgood]

Just imagine... he might have assured Putin that he'd have more flexibility after the election!

I saw that fly over their heads

No you didn't. We see your lame deflection every time. We choose to ignore it.

Yeah because Obama had the most transparent presidency in history. Opp's another Obama lie.

 

[OldLady]

Listen up! The WAPO (also known as the Washington compost) is reporting that President Trump ordered the interpreter for his private meeting with Putin to destroy her notes and to not discuss the meeting with any of his senior advisors.

So what!! The president is entitled to absolute privacy when meeting with foreign leaders. We have no right to know what was discussed and it is perfectly fine that no official records of the meeting have been kept.

Geez!

Did SHE say that or is this another anonymous source?
If SHE said that, wow.
And when was that meeting again--that meeting in Moscow when he defended Putin and threw US intelligence under the bus?

I'll say this one time.

When a major media publication such as the Washington Post says that they have anonymous sources, they ABSOLUTELY HAVE ACTUAL SOURCES AND CAN CORROBORATE THE CLAIMS.

They DO NOT make up sources. You hinting that they do is evidence that you might be a moron.

I was not hinting at any such thing, and you are the moron for thinking I did.
Okay, so name calling finished, I realize the paper confirms its sources and doesn't simply fabricate stories. The public, however, is not going to respond to this the way they should unless the interpreter steps forward herself. It would actually be nice, for once, if the people ratting out the President would put their names to their stories.

 

[Crepitus]

Just imagine... he might have assured Putin that he'd have more flexibility after the election!

I saw that fly over their heads

We just ignored the idiocy.

 

[OldLady]

Just imagine... he might have assured Putin that he'd have more flexibility after the election!

I saw that fly over their heads

No you didn't. We see your lame deflection every time. We choose to ignore it.

Yeah because Obama had the most transparent presidency in history. Opp's another Obama lie.

We're talking about a private meeting between our current President, Trump, and Putin.

 

[jknowgood]

Just imagine... he might have assured Putin that he'd have more flexibility after the election!

I saw that fly over their heads

No you didn't. We see your lame deflection every time. We choose to ignore it.

Yeah because Obama had the most transparent presidency in history. Opp's another Obama lie.

We're talking about a private meeting between our current President, Trump, and Putin.

Did we know everything that was said between Putin and Obama? I bet you didn't care then. Even when Obama wanted Putin to have patience to wait. So he could really kiss his ass. Also traitor Obama was the one that wanted to transform america, not Trump.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Listen up! The WAPO (also known as the Washington compost) is reporting that President Trump ordered the interpreter for his private meeting with Putin to destroy her notes and to not discuss the meeting with any of his senior advisors.

So what!! The president is entitled to absolute privacy when meeting with foreign leaders. We have no right to know what was discussed and it is perfectly fine that no official records of the meeting have been kept.

Geez!

Did SHE say that or is this another anonymous source?
If SHE said that, wow.
And when was that meeting again--that meeting in Moscow when he defended Putin and threw US intelligence under the bus?

I'll say this one time.

When a major media publication such as the Washington Post says that they have anonymous sources, they ABSOLUTELY HAVE ACTUAL SOURCES AND CAN CORROBORATE THE CLAIMS.

They DO NOT make up sources. You hinting that they do is evidence that you might be a moron.

I was not hinting at any such thing, and you are the moron for thinking I did.
Okay, so name calling finished, I realize the paper confirms its sources and doesn't simply fabricate stories. The public, however, is not going to respond to this the way they should unless the interpreter steps forward herself. It would actually be nice, for once, if the people ratting out the President would put their names to their stories.

Do you believe the reporting found in the Washington Post when they use anonymous sources?

 

[LoneLaugher]

Just imagine... he might have assured Putin that he'd have more flexibility after the election!

I saw that fly over their heads

No you didn't. We see your lame deflection every time. We choose to ignore it.

Yeah because Obama had the most transparent presidency in history. Opp's another Obama lie.

We're talking about a private meeting between our current President, Trump, and Putin.

Did we know everything that was said between Putin and Obama? I bet you didn't care then. Even when Obama wanted Putin to have patience to wait. So he could really kiss his ass. Also traitor Obama was the one that wanted to transform america, not Trump.

There are records kept of every meeting between Obama and Putin.

 

[jknowgood]

I saw that fly over their heads

No you didn't. We see your lame deflection every time. We choose to ignore it.

Yeah because Obama had the most transparent presidency in history. Opp's another Obama lie.

We're talking about a private meeting between our current President, Trump, and Putin.

Did we know everything that was said between Putin and Obama? I bet you didn't care then. Even when Obama wanted Putin to have patience to wait. So he could really kiss his ass. Also traitor Obama was the one that wanted to transform america, not Trump.

There are records kept of every meeting between Obama and Putin.

Lol, we wouldn't of known about Obama wanting to be more flexible if it wasn't for a hot mic. So you're full of shit.

 

[OldLady]

Just imagine... he might have assured Putin that he'd have more flexibility after the election!

I saw that fly over their heads

No you didn't. We see your lame deflection every time. We choose to ignore it.

Yeah because Obama had the most transparent presidency in history. Opp's another Obama lie.

We're talking about a private meeting between our current President, Trump, and Putin.

Did we know everything that was said between Putin and Obama? I bet you didn't care then. Even when Obama wanted Putin to have patience to wait. So he could really kiss his ass. Also traitor Obama was the one that wanted to transform america, not Trump.

Once again, this thread is not about Obama.

 

[LoneLaugher]

No you didn't. We see your lame deflection every time. We choose to ignore it.

Yeah because Obama had the most transparent presidency in history. Opp's another Obama lie.

We're talking about a private meeting between our current President, Trump, and Putin.

Did we know everything that was said between Putin and Obama? I bet you didn't care then. Even when Obama wanted Putin to have patience to wait. So he could really kiss his ass. Also traitor Obama was the one that wanted to transform america, not Trump.

There are records kept of every meeting between Obama and Putin.

Lol, we wouldn't of known about Obama wanting to be more flexible if it wasn't for a hot mic. So you're full of shit.

I'm sorry. Was he talking to Putin when he said that?

 

[jknowgood]

I saw that fly over their heads

No you didn't. We see your lame deflection every time. We choose to ignore it.

Yeah because Obama had the most transparent presidency in history. Opp's another Obama lie.

We're talking about a private meeting between our current President, Trump, and Putin.

Did we know everything that was said between Putin and Obama? I bet you didn't care then. Even when Obama wanted Putin to have patience to wait. So he could really kiss his ass. Also traitor Obama was the one that wanted to transform america, not Trump.

Once again, this thread is not about Obama.

I know Russia collusion. Which is amusing Putin and also showing how gullible and stupid some americans are.

 

[jknowgood]

Yeah because Obama had the most transparent presidency in history. Opp's another Obama lie.

We're talking about a private meeting between our current President, Trump, and Putin.

Did we know everything that was said between Putin and Obama? I bet you didn't care then. Even when Obama wanted Putin to have patience to wait. So he could really kiss his ass. Also traitor Obama was the one that wanted to transform america, not Trump.

There are records kept of every meeting between Obama and Putin.

Lol, we wouldn't of known about Obama wanting to be more flexible if it wasn't for a hot mic. So you're full of shit.

I'm sorry. Was he talking to Putin when he said that?

Might as well been. Sorry but facts isn't your friend on this one.

 

[OldLady]

Listen up! The WAPO (also known as the Washington compost) is reporting that President Trump ordered the interpreter for his private meeting with Putin to destroy her notes and to not discuss the meeting with any of his senior advisors.

So what!! The president is entitled to absolute privacy when meeting with foreign leaders. We have no right to know what was discussed and it is perfectly fine that no official records of the meeting have been kept.

Geez!

Did SHE say that or is this another anonymous source?
If SHE said that, wow.
And when was that meeting again--that meeting in Moscow when he defended Putin and threw US intelligence under the bus?

I'll say this one time.

When a major media publication such as the Washington Post says that they have anonymous sources, they ABSOLUTELY HAVE ACTUAL SOURCES AND CAN CORROBORATE THE CLAIMS.

They DO NOT make up sources. You hinting that they do is evidence that you might be a moron.

I was not hinting at any such thing, and you are the moron for thinking I did.
Okay, so name calling finished, I realize the paper confirms its sources and doesn't simply fabricate stories. The public, however, is not going to respond to this the way they should unless the interpreter steps forward herself. It would actually be nice, for once, if the people ratting out the President would put their names to their stories.

Do you believe the reporting found in the Washington Post when they use anonymous sources?

I find it interesting. More like gossip, which can be true but you are never sure. I'm not implying WaPo makes it up, but if it is anonymous, how are they sure it is accurate, either?

 

[beagle9]

Just imagine... he might have assured Putin that he'd have more flexibility after the election!

I saw that fly over their heads

No you didn't. We see your lame deflection every time. We choose to ignore it.

Yeah because Obama had the most transparent presidency in history. Opp's another Obama lie.

We're talking about a private meeting between our current President, Trump, and Putin.

What about Obama and Iran ??

 

[LoneLaugher]

Listen up! The WAPO (also known as the Washington compost) is reporting that President Trump ordered the interpreter for his private meeting with Putin to destroy her notes and to not discuss the meeting with any of his senior advisors.

So what!! The president is entitled to absolute privacy when meeting with foreign leaders. We have no right to know what was discussed and it is perfectly fine that no official records of the meeting have been kept.

Geez!

Did SHE say that or is this another anonymous source?
If SHE said that, wow.
And when was that meeting again--that meeting in Moscow when he defended Putin and threw US intelligence under the bus?

I'll say this one time.

When a major media publication such as the Washington Post says that they have anonymous sources, they ABSOLUTELY HAVE ACTUAL SOURCES AND CAN CORROBORATE THE CLAIMS.

They DO NOT make up sources. You hinting that they do is evidence that you might be a moron.

I was not hinting at any such thing, and you are the moron for thinking I did.
Okay, so name calling finished, I realize the paper confirms its sources and doesn't simply fabricate stories. The public, however, is not going to respond to this the way they should unless the interpreter steps forward herself. It would actually be nice, for once, if the people ratting out the President would put their names to their stories.

Do you believe the reporting found in the Washington Post when they use anonymous sources?

I find it interesting. More like gossip, which can be true but you are never sure. I'm not implying WaPo makes it up, but if it is anonymous, how are they sure it is accurate, either?

Would you really like to know how they are sure?

 

[LoneLaugher]

Just imagine... he might have assured Putin that he'd have more flexibility after the election!

I saw that fly over their heads

No you didn't. We see your lame deflection every time. We choose to ignore it.

Yeah because Obama had the most transparent presidency in history. Opp's another Obama lie.

We're talking about a private meeting between our current President, Trump, and Putin.

What about Obama and Iran ??

What about them?

 

[OldLady]

LL, I can't get into WaPo. Can you copy the article for us? I looked back at the last time I knew of a private meeting with Putin--July 2017. At that time, only the Russian translator was involved.
Is that the one we are talking about now? Did Putin order the record burned?
What meeting are we talking about?

 

[OldLady]

Did SHE say that or is this another anonymous source?
If SHE said that, wow.
And when was that meeting again--that meeting in Moscow when he defended Putin and threw US intelligence under the bus?

I'll say this one time.

When a major media publication such as the Washington Post says that they have anonymous sources, they ABSOLUTELY HAVE ACTUAL SOURCES AND CAN CORROBORATE THE CLAIMS.

They DO NOT make up sources. You hinting that they do is evidence that you might be a moron.

I was not hinting at any such thing, and you are the moron for thinking I did.
Okay, so name calling finished, I realize the paper confirms its sources and doesn't simply fabricate stories. The public, however, is not going to respond to this the way they should unless the interpreter steps forward herself. It would actually be nice, for once, if the people ratting out the President would put their names to their stories.

Do you believe the reporting found in the Washington Post when they use anonymous sources?

I find it interesting. More like gossip, which can be true but you are never sure. I'm not implying WaPo makes it up, but if it is anonymous, how are they sure it is accurate, either?

Would you really like to know how they are sure?

Sure. How do you know how sure they are?

 

[LoneLaugher]

I'll say this one time.

When a major media publication such as the Washington Post says that they have anonymous sources, they ABSOLUTELY HAVE ACTUAL SOURCES AND CAN CORROBORATE THE CLAIMS.

They DO NOT make up sources. You hinting that they do is evidence that you might be a moron.

I was not hinting at any such thing, and you are the moron for thinking I did.
Okay, so name calling finished, I realize the paper confirms its sources and doesn't simply fabricate stories. The public, however, is not going to respond to this the way they should unless the interpreter steps forward herself. It would actually be nice, for once, if the people ratting out the President would put their names to their stories.

Do you believe the reporting found in the Washington Post when they use anonymous sources?

I find it interesting. More like gossip, which can be true but you are never sure. I'm not implying WaPo makes it up, but if it is anonymous, how are they sure it is accurate, either?

Would you really like to know how they are sure?

Sure. How do you know how sure they are?

Simple. I researched the question. I am very confident that the Washington Post, the NYT and other major media outlets fully corroborate their sources. They don't get phone calls from unknown people and then report what they say. THEY KNOW WHO THE SOURCE IS. They just promise to keep their name out of the story.

Finally, reliable sources print corrections when errors are made. Both the WP and the NYT do this.

How The Times Uses Anonymous Sources

When To Trust A Story That Uses Unnamed Sources

How Do We Verify Anonymous Sources? — ProPublica

 

[LoneLaugher]

LL, I can't get into WaPo. Can you copy the article for us? I looked back at the last time I knew of a private meeting with Putin--July 2017. At that time, only the Russian translator was involved.
Is that the one we are talking about now? Did Putin order the record burned?
What meeting are we talking about?

Helsinki.