Russian Collusion In A Nutshell

[Billo_Really]

Saint Ronnie would have loved too but he couldn't recall....

That was Oliver North, dumbass!

Reagan would've fallen asleep in a closed door meeting with Putin. And if his jelly beans were missing when he woke up, you would've seen a much different meeting in Helsinki.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

A mountain of allegations is not the same thing as a mountain of evidence

The reason Mueller only indicted a bunch of Russian spies and no muricans is because he knows they'll never show up for trial so he never has to produce any evidence

Als funny that those indictments were made just before Trump met with Putin, if one was paranoid one would think the deep state was trying to sabotage the US pretzeldent and his foreign orange 'policy'...

Grand jury's don't indict people on no evidence. And 5 people weren't convicted because there was no evidence.

Not a single one was convicted of collusion DUMB ASS.

 

[Jantje_Smit]

Don't talk to me about stupid.

Sorry, my bad, I didn't realize you're an intellectual

You couldn't spell "cat", if I spotted you the 'c' and the 'a'.

Come on, I can even spell delusional, traumatized Hillary minions without any help

 

[Billo_Really]

Not a single one was convicted of collusion DUMB ASS.

Like know one has ever died from AIDS.

Maybe you're a Russian bot? Maybe you're from the Russian troll farms we've been warned about? You certainly don't act like an American.

 

[Billo_Really]

Come on, I can even spell delusional, traumatized Hillary minions without any help

State the quadratic equation.

 

[Darkwind]

A few years ago, Republicans would hammer Democrats for being soft on countries who attacked America.

Today they rationalize it.

Some maybe. Others, like myself, recognize that this nonsense is counterproductive. No one is going to jail because they were online trolls. They will never be brought to justice making this a big damn waste of my tax dollars. Also of note is the hypocrisy of Americans who ignore the fact that WE DO THIS VERY SAME SHIT TO OTHER NATIONS

This isn't about "trolls."

A foreign government attacked our democratic institutions in an attempt to damage our country.

But because the Republican candidate unexpectedly won - and that candidate is deified almost as a God by his base - Republicans are attacking the people who are investigating those who attacked our country.

A year ago, Trump's worshippers were saying that Russia didn't attack us, that this was all #fakenews. They aren't saying that anymore. Or at least most of them aren't.

What Institutions?

The DNC and the RNC are NOT government institutions. I hope you understand that.

I keep hearing about how Russians formed groups and spent money on ads on social media to sow discontent among the American people. What never seems to get stated is that they spent money against BOTH candidates; not just the Democrat.

No government institution was attacked.

We should always punish other countries for attempting to subvert our nation, but the narrative right now is that ONLY TRUMP is responsible and that is just a flat out lie. No American is responsible and Trump is NOT taking orders from the Kremlin nor is he compromised. He's just an asshole, like many of his predecessors.

 

[Andylusion]

A few years ago, Republicans would hammer Democrats for being soft on countries who attacked America.

Today they rationalize it.

A few years ago The Democrats were sending entreaties to Russia asking for help in defeating Ronald Reagan. Today Russia has thrown off the communist yoke...and Democrats are pissed.

View attachment 204935

Wasn't even that long ago Obama was saying the cold war is over, Mitt Romney's worries about Russia were a throw back of the 80s, and that he supported Putin being more involved in the world stage....

And all the lemming lefties were on this forum saying the same thing in 2012. Anyone who thought that Russia was a problem, was a right-winger war hawk trying to end world peace.

My my.... how things have changed, when the childish left-wingers need someone to blame for hillary's failure against Trump....

 

[Correll]

1. Afghanistan started the war with Afghanistan when they refused to hand over Bin Laden. That you put that on America, shows that you are an anti-American piece of shit.

Wrong! The Taliban offered to hand over UBL and Bush said no. And don't give me this "...they refused to hand over..." bullshit. Do you know who Luis Posada Carriles is? He's a terrorist, that bombed a plane, which killed 73 people, who we refused to turn over to Venezuela.

Link to the Taliban offering to turn him over. Hint: You won't find it, because they did not do it. YOur media is lying to you.

2. Blaming us for Iraq is fair. Though I hope you are saving some of the blame for your side who kept the confrontation going during the Clinton terms, and of course Saddam, who was a suicidal fool. And of course the intelligence agencies that told Bush what he wanted to hear.

Bush said he was going to fix the intel to go after Iraq and that's just what he did. BTW, one of the reasons I withdrew my support for Clinton was due to her vote on the Iraq Liberation Act. I was against that war from the very beginning and I'm still pretty pissed off about it....[/QUOTE]


Your media is lying to you. The now vaunted intelligence agencies told Bush what he wanted to hear. They dropped the ball. AGAIN.

3. The neo-cons do want war with Iran. They lose hugely in the last Republican primaries. I voted against them.

I'd like to believe that. However, I absolutely detest neocons. That's why I can't stand Zionists. Because they remind me of neocons.[/QUOTE]


Err, I'm not sure which republican candidate was the darling of the neo-cons, but it was certainly not Trump.

Trump ran on a platform of non-intervention.


Remember when he was in South Carolina and denounced the Iraq War? That was one of the times all the talking heads predicted he was done, because South Carolina is so pro-military.


He won.


How Donald Trump blasted George W. Bush in S.C. -- and won - CNNPolitics


"the Republican presidential front-runner stood on the debate stage in South Carolina and accused former President George W. Bush of lying about the existence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. He also faulted the former president for the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, that brought down the World Trade Center.
"That's not keeping us safe," Trump argued.
Right away, it was clear that those charges would not sit well with many in this Southern state, home to a large population of military personnel and veterans. The audience in the Greenville auditorium booed the New York businessman, and undecided voters expressed a mixture of disbelief and disdain in the days that followed.
For any other politician, it could have been a campaign-ending moment. Instead, it underscored Trump's unique ability to make statements that would sink anyone else but still come out on top. He easily won the South Carolina primary on Saturday, beating the runner-up by about 10 points. And the former president's brother, Jeb, dropped his bid for the presidency after a disappointing showing."



By attacking Trump, you are weakening the man that defeated the neo-cons in the Republican Party.

4. Hillary wanted to give orders to US pilots to shot down Russian planes. You voted for her. Who is the warmonger now.

I didn't vote for her. She's a closet neocon and a war hawk.[/QUOTE]



So very many on your side deny that. Kudos for you for admitting it. You have gained a small point of credibility with me. I will consider your posts slightly more seriously from now on.

 

[Jantje_Smit]

State the quadratic equation.

Hillary + server2 = Comey + Lynch = tarmac meeting = extremely careless

 

[Billo_Really]

Link to the Taliban offering to turn him over. Hint: You won't find it, because they did not do it. YOur media is lying to you.

Bush rejects Taliban offer to hand Bin Laden over​

Your media is lying to you. The now vaunted intelligence agencies told Bush what he wanted to hear. They dropped the ball. AGAIN.

It wasn't the media that removed those infamous 16 words from the SOTU address, it was Cheney.

Err, I'm not sure which republican candidate was the darling of the neo-cons, but it was certainly not Trump.

Trump ran on a platform of non-intervention.

Remember when he was in South Carolina and denounced the Iraq War? That was one of the times all the talking heads predicted he was done, because South Carolina is so pro-military.

He won.

How Donald Trump blasted George W. Bush in S.C. -- and won - CNNPolitics

"the Republican presidential front-runner stood on the debate stage in South Carolina and accused former President George W. Bush of lying about the existence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. He also faulted the former president for the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, that brought down the World Trade Center.
"That's not keeping us safe," Trump argued.
Right away, it was clear that those charges would not sit well with many in this Southern state, home to a large population of military personnel and veterans. The audience in the Greenville auditorium booed the New York businessman, and undecided voters expressed a mixture of disbelief and disdain in the days that followed.
For any other politician, it could have been a campaign-ending moment. Instead, it underscored Trump's unique ability to make statements that would sink anyone else but still come out on top. He easily won the South Carolina primary on Saturday, beating the runner-up by about 10 points. And the former president's brother, Jeb, dropped his bid for the presidency after a disappointing showing."

By attacking Trump, you are weakening the man that defeated the neo-cons in the Republican Party.

Trump is a liar. He always has been and always will be.

So very many on your side deny that. Kudos for you for admitting it. You have gained a small point of credibility with me. I will consider your posts slightly more seriously from now on.

Don't kiss my ass! God, I hate people who stroke me!

 

[Billo_Really]

Hillary + server2 = Comey + Lynch = tarmac meeting = extremely careless

What else can you do with bananas?

 

[DOTR]

1. Afghanistan started the war with Afghanistan when they refused to hand over Bin Laden. That you put that on America, shows that you are an anti-American piece of shit.

Wrong! The Taliban offered to hand over UBL and Bush said no. And don't give me this "...they refused to hand over..." bullshit. Do you know who Luis Posada Carriles is? He's a terrorist, that bombed a plane, which killed 73 people, who we refused to turn over to Venezuela.

Link to the Taliban offering to turn him over. Hint: You won't find it, because they did not do it. YOur media is lying to you.

2. Blaming us for Iraq is fair. Though I hope you are saving some of the blame for your side who kept the confrontation going during the Clinton terms, and of course Saddam, who was a suicidal fool. And of course the intelligence agencies that told Bush what he wanted to hear.

Bush said he was going to fix the intel to go after Iraq and that's just what he did. BTW, one of the reasons I withdrew my support for Clinton was due to her vote on the Iraq Liberation Act. I was against that war from the very beginning and I'm still pretty pissed off about it....

Your media is lying to you. The now vaunted intelligence agencies told Bush what he wanted to hear. They dropped the ball. AGAIN.

3. The neo-cons do want war with Iran. They lose hugely in the last Republican primaries. I voted against them.

I'd like to believe that. However, I absolutely detest neocons. That's why I can't stand Zionists. Because they remind me of neocons.[/QUOTE]


Err, I'm not sure which republican candidate was the darling of the neo-cons, but it was certainly not Trump.

Trump ran on a platform of non-intervention.


Remember when he was in South Carolina and denounced the Iraq War? That was one of the times all the talking heads predicted he was done, because South Carolina is so pro-military.


He won.


How Donald Trump blasted George W. Bush in S.C. -- and won - CNNPolitics


"the Republican presidential front-runner stood on the debate stage in South Carolina and accused former President George W. Bush of lying about the existence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. He also faulted the former president for the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, that brought down the World Trade Center.
"That's not keeping us safe," Trump argued.
Right away, it was clear that those charges would not sit well with many in this Southern state, home to a large population of military personnel and veterans. The audience in the Greenville auditorium booed the New York businessman, and undecided voters expressed a mixture of disbelief and disdain in the days that followed.
For any other politician, it could have been a campaign-ending moment. Instead, it underscored Trump's unique ability to make statements that would sink anyone else but still come out on top. He easily won the South Carolina primary on Saturday, beating the runner-up by about 10 points. And the former president's brother, Jeb, dropped his bid for the presidency after a disappointing showing."



By attacking Trump, you are weakening the man that defeated the neo-cons in the Republican Party.

4. Hillary wanted to give orders to US pilots to shot down Russian planes. You voted for her. Who is the warmonger now.

I didn't vote for her. She's a closet neocon and a war hawk.[/QUOTE]



So very many on your side deny that. Kudos for you for admitting it. You have gained a small point of credibility with me. I will consider your posts slightly more seriously from now on.[/QUOTE]

Yes your media is lying to you. A nation half filled worth the brain dead who don’t remember that a few years ago the media was pummeling Romney for saying Russia was the enemy while praising Obama and Clinton for their giant “reset button”. A chat room then would have seen a screaming mass of liberals spitting and yelling that Romney was a warmonger because Russia was no threat.

“But that was merely a piece of furtive knowledge, which he happened to possess because his memory was not satisfactorily under control. Officially the change of partners had never happened. Oceania was at war with Eurasia: therefore Oceania had always been at war with Eurasia. The enemy of the moment always represented absolute evil, and it followed that any past or future agreement with him was impossible” Orwell 1984

There is a reason liberals eliminate these books from education.

 

[edthecynic]

Link to the Taliban offering to turn him over. Hint: You won't find it, because they did not do it. YOur media is lying to you.

And you Right-wingers call yourself the high-information voters.

Bush rejects Taliban offer to hand Bin Laden over

President George Bush rejected as "non-negotiable" an offer by the Taliban to discuss turning over Osama bin Laden

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Link to the Taliban offering to turn him over. Hint: You won't find it, because they did not do it. YOur media is lying to you.

And you Right-wingers call yourself the high-information voters.

Bush rejects Taliban offer to hand Bin Laden over

President George Bush rejected as "non-negotiable" an offer by the Taliban to discuss turning over Osama bin Laden

That does not say what the headline says, The Taliban demanded proof and even then they would not hand him over to the US but a third Country. So 2 outs.

 

[edthecynic]

Link to the Taliban offering to turn him over. Hint: You won't find it, because they did not do it. YOur media is lying to you.

And you Right-wingers call yourself the high-information voters.

Bush rejects Taliban offer to hand Bin Laden over

President George Bush rejected as "non-negotiable" an offer by the Taliban to discuss turning over Osama bin Laden

That does not say what the headline says, The Taliban demanded proof and even then they would not hand him over to the US but a third Country. So 2 outs.

So you admit the Taliban was willing to hand your hero Osama to a third country and Bush refused the offer so he could keep bombing women and children.
Thank you.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Link to the Taliban offering to turn him over. Hint: You won't find it, because they did not do it. YOur media is lying to you.

And you Right-wingers call yourself the high-information voters.

Bush rejects Taliban offer to hand Bin Laden over

President George Bush rejected as "non-negotiable" an offer by the Taliban to discuss turning over Osama bin Laden

That does not say what the headline says, The Taliban demanded proof and even then they would not hand him over to the US but a third Country. So 2 outs.

So you admit the Taliban was willing to hand your hero Osama to a third country and Bush refused the offer so he could keep bombing women and children.
Thank you.

Yeah, the Taliban sure outsmarted Bush, eh?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Link to the Taliban offering to turn him over. Hint: You won't find it, because they did not do it. YOur media is lying to you.

And you Right-wingers call yourself the high-information voters.

Bush rejects Taliban offer to hand Bin Laden over

President George Bush rejected as "non-negotiable" an offer by the Taliban to discuss turning over Osama bin Laden

That does not say what the headline says, The Taliban demanded proof and even then they would not hand him over to the US but a third Country. So 2 outs.

So you admit the Taliban was willing to hand your hero Osama to a third country and Bush refused the offer so he could keep bombing women and children.
Thank you.

You claimed the Taliban offered to hand him over TO US. A BLATANT LIE.

 

[edthecynic]

Link to the Taliban offering to turn him over. Hint: You won't find it, because they did not do it. YOur media is lying to you.

And you Right-wingers call yourself the high-information voters.

Bush rejects Taliban offer to hand Bin Laden over

President George Bush rejected as "non-negotiable" an offer by the Taliban to discuss turning over Osama bin Laden

That does not say what the headline says, The Taliban demanded proof and even then they would not hand him over to the US but a third Country. So 2 outs.

So you admit the Taliban was willing to hand your hero Osama to a third country and Bush refused the offer so he could keep bombing women and children.
Thank you.

You claimed the Taliban offered to hand him over TO US. A BLATANT LIE.

No I didn't, you worthless lying scum POS.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Link to the Taliban offering to turn him over. Hint: You won't find it, because they did not do it. YOur media is lying to you.

And you Right-wingers call yourself the high-information voters.

Bush rejects Taliban offer to hand Bin Laden over

President George Bush rejected as "non-negotiable" an offer by the Taliban to discuss turning over Osama bin Laden

That does not say what the headline says, The Taliban demanded proof and even then they would not hand him over to the US but a third Country. So 2 outs.

So you admit the Taliban was willing to hand your hero Osama to a third country and Bush refused the offer so he could keep bombing women and children.
Thank you.

You claimed the Taliban offered to hand him over TO US. A BLATANT LIE.

No I didn't, you worthless lying scum POS.

Your claiming they offered to turn him over is right there in the posts you replied too. You can not even get your story straight. The Taliban did NOT offer to turn Osama Bin Laden over to us, they also demanded proof he was responsible for 9/11 before they would even discuss turning him over to a third party.

 

[edthecynic]

And you Right-wingers call yourself the high-information voters.

Bush rejects Taliban offer to hand Bin Laden over

President George Bush rejected as "non-negotiable" an offer by the Taliban to discuss turning over Osama bin Laden

That does not say what the headline says, The Taliban demanded proof and even then they would not hand him over to the US but a third Country. So 2 outs.

So you admit the Taliban was willing to hand your hero Osama to a third country and Bush refused the offer so he could keep bombing women and children.
Thank you.

You claimed the Taliban offered to hand him over TO US. A BLATANT LIE.

No I didn't, you worthless lying scum POS.

Your claiming they offered to turn him over is right there in the posts you replied too. You can not even get your story straight. The Taliban did NOT offer to turn Osama Bin Laden over to us, they also demanded proof he was responsible for 9/11 before they would even discuss turning him over to a third party.

Nowhere did I say they would turn him over "TO US" as you falsely claimed, but you knew that already when you lied, you are just too dishonest to admit YOU added the "to us" part.