- Moderator
- #361
I give two shits about what was reported, no? It doesn't prove anything at all and didn't hurt him at all. So, trying to deflect are you? why aren't you outraged that one of two political parties is working a corrupt platform? why is that acceptable to you? Debbie Wasserman and Donna Brazil two that were exposed, not to menthion all the hitlery stuff. Why doesn't that bother you? how can you accept that? wow. I thank wikileaks for exposing the operation of corruption. you're saddened by it. I don't get it.what was illegal? the content of the emails? why does it matter how they were reported, I see that the info in them doesn't bother you and that you're ok with corruption in our country and a MSM driving a political party or vice versa.Illegal?
so...was leaking Trump's tax returns (illegally) ok by you then?
I think I've explained this before but here goes. You are only outraged when it's Democrats, that much is definate.
First- Primaries aren't fare. That's a fact. Primaries aren't about candidates, they're about parties. Parties routinely throw their weight behind candidates they think have the BEST chance of winning the GENERAL election. Never heard any whining from you snowflakes about that. In fact, they can even nominate a candidate that didn't win the primary election. How about that? And, it's PERFECTLY LEGAL - because primary elections are about parties. You got that yet?
Second - there is no way of knowing if the material hacked by Russia and leaked to wikileaks is complete, accurate and unmodified. You would be questioning it if the target had been Trump, but since it wasn't - you're all up in a faux outrage over it aren't you?
You believe Wikileaks? Why are they any more believable than politicians? They aren't. Assange has his own agenda and he has been known to lie.
Then why haven't the RatZ released the real unhacked ones? Afterall, the presidency was at stake.
Why aren't you demanding the same from the Trump campaign or the Republicans?