Was your vote affected by Russian interference?

[Harpy Eagle]

If so, please explain.

If not, why all the hoopla?

Nobody will ever know for sure, now will they.

just like with political ads on TV during the elections, I do not know a single person that has ever said "I voted for that person because of the ad on the TV"...yet they keep pay for ads year after year.

 

[rightwinger]

If so, please explain.

If not, why all the hoopla?

Strangely, a lot of that Russian propaganda was spread right on this board

How many got their information from USMB?

 

[easyt65]

Not one vote was changed by the Russians.
The Democrats changed Trump's opponent.
The Democrats did what the Russians could not do.

 

[candycorn]

false

BS. Proven.

Hillary never had any uranium to sell, not that any was ever sent to Russia.

You're lying; as always.

Checkmate.

Hillary sat on the committee responsible for oking the sale to the Russians. Despite knowing of crimes associated with their effort to buy Uranium One she still voted to let them buy it. That was $145 million well spent on the KGB Bank's part...

Nice retreat.

No retreat needed, snowflake.

Then why are you retreating?

Hillary took $145 million from the Russians and they got real uranium.

How much uranium was physically sent to Russia?

 

[candycorn]

easyt65

We've established that the State Department and Ms. Clinton were not responsible for approving the sale since the State Department doesn't do uranium.

But as for the sale itself...

We're waiting. How much uranium was physically sent to Russia?

 

[sealybobo]

If so, please explain.

If not, why all the hoopla?

Colluding with the enemy.

Comey fucked hillary too.

But also why didn’t she campaign in mi wi or pa?

Yes the constant lies republicans have been saying about hillary worked on a lot of Americans. Made them vote for a racist rapist crook reality star. But that’s voters fault they’re so stupid.

Give trump credit for knowing the right buttons to push. What a conman.

America should have punished republicans for blocking Merrill garland. Democrats did a horrible job explaining how important that appointment was. Or now rbg can’t retire till trumps out.

America you get what you deserve.

 

[bripat9643]

Nothing yet disproved...

Re-examining the dossier after a year of indictments & guilty pleas

"Nothing disproved?" You just demonstrated your inability to commit logic.

So what in the Dossier has been proven false?

It has been proven false that Cohen went to Prague. Nothing else has been proven true. It's all a fairy tale. In order to use it to get a FISA warrant the FBI is required to verify the information in it. They obviously did nothing of the sort. The claim that nothing has been proven false is the mating call of an imbecile.

Sorry, Skippy, but Cohen saying he wasn't there proves nothing.

His passport and other tangible evidence proves it, you ******* brain dead moron.

 

[bripat9643]

You haven't proved that Roger Stone knew anything. That tweet proves nothing. It's a prediction based on publicly known facts, and nothing else. Stone was never in Trump's employ. You have your most basic facts wrong. You're a conspiracy theorist.

Stone was a member of the campaign. The tweet proves his foreknowledge of the felony. The connection is being investigated. Cohen flipped. Manafort flipped. Is Stone next?

He was not a member of the campaign, and his tweet doesn't prove a damn thing. Why would Stone "flip?" He hasn't committed any crimes.

Do I really have to show you where he was a member of the campaign? Really? Feel free to look it up yourself and save some embarrassment.

I’m sure you said the same thing about Cohen and Manafort. “Why would he flip?” Both did…..We’ll see what happens to Stone if he’s indicted.

It turns out he was an advisor to the campaign, but that makes little difference. He hasn't broken any laws. Mueller has got nothing on him.

Again, you probably said the same thing about several people.

"Cohen? He worked with Trump but Mueller has nothing on him". Cohen Flipped.
"Manafort? He was Trump's campaign manager but Mueller has nothing on him." Manafort Flipped
"Stone? He was an adviser to Trump but Mueller has nothing on him." Stone....stay tuned.

How many times you been down that road sonny? How many times have you been wrong? Every time....

"Trump? Mueller has nothing on him...." stay tuned...

View attachment 236832

So, to score a point you have to invent fantasies about what I said.

 

[bripat9643]

Really? What was that?

August 21, 2016:

View attachment 236699


October 7, 2016:

View attachment 236700

Somehow Trump adviser Roger Stone knew about the felonious use of a computer network.
Which means the Trump campaign knew about it.

Conspiracy to commit a felony...is a felony which well-satisfies the "high crimes and misdemeanors" hurdle for impeachment.

Not that I think it ever will (or should) come to that. The Senate would likely never vote to remove so it's pointless. And I'd much rather have this as a relevant topic in 2020 myself.

But its vivid that Stone/Trump Campaign knew about the felonies that would benefit them. The question is whether they were sponsoring it or not or if it was just a happy coincidence.

Now...that has been established.

Stone also had another buddy. Guccifer2.0. Guccifer is a front for Russian Intel agencies (Mil-int I think).

Hacker Releases More Democratic Party Documents

Stone is in close contact with Guccifer2.0 even calling Guccifer2.0's banning from Twitter outrageous:

View attachment 236701

Why Trump employed someone who is coordinating with hackers is something that should be investigated; especially since Guccifer2.0 hacked the DNC.

So it's pretty clear that the felony--unauthorized use of a computer network--was done by people who had ties to the Trump campaign. Whether you wish to acknowledge it or scream "nun-unh" is not important.

You haven't proved that Roger Stone knew anything. That tweet proves nothing. It's a prediction based on publicly known facts, and nothing else. Stone was never in Trump's employ. You have your most basic facts wrong. You're a conspiracy theorist.

Stone was a member of the campaign. The tweet proves his foreknowledge of the felony. The connection is being investigated. Cohen flipped. Manafort flipped. Is Stone next?

His tweet proves nothing of the sort. A judge would laugh you out of court if you tried to use that as evidence, and Mueller knows it.

That's true. Mueller is apparently being very thorough; and successful.
You are happy that these felons are being brought to justice. Right?

By "thorough." you mean he is inventing crimes that having nothing to do with the supposed subject of his "investigation."

 

[Wyatt earp]

If so, please explain.

If not, why all the hoopla?

Nobody will ever know for sure, now will they.

just like with political ads on TV during the elections, I do not know a single person that has ever said "I voted for that person because of the ad on the TV"...yet they keep pay for ads year after year.

But Mueller thinks they were by memes on Facebook...

The clown indicated 13 Russians for this..

.

 

[candycorn]

Stone was a member of the campaign. The tweet proves his foreknowledge of the felony. The connection is being investigated. Cohen flipped. Manafort flipped. Is Stone next?

He was not a member of the campaign, and his tweet doesn't prove a damn thing. Why would Stone "flip?" He hasn't committed any crimes.

Do I really have to show you where he was a member of the campaign? Really? Feel free to look it up yourself and save some embarrassment.

I’m sure you said the same thing about Cohen and Manafort. “Why would he flip?” Both did…..We’ll see what happens to Stone if he’s indicted.

It turns out he was an advisor to the campaign, but that makes little difference. He hasn't broken any laws. Mueller has got nothing on him.

Again, you probably said the same thing about several people.

"Cohen? He worked with Trump but Mueller has nothing on him". Cohen Flipped.
"Manafort? He was Trump's campaign manager but Mueller has nothing on him." Manafort Flipped
"Stone? He was an adviser to Trump but Mueller has nothing on him." Stone....stay tuned.

How many times you been down that road sonny? How many times have you been wrong? Every time....

"Trump? Mueller has nothing on him...." stay tuned...

View attachment 236832

So, to score a point you have to invent fantasies about what I said.

So you knew Mueller had the goods on those guys and supported their persecution?

 

[candycorn]

August 21, 2016:

View attachment 236699


October 7, 2016:

View attachment 236700

Somehow Trump adviser Roger Stone knew about the felonious use of a computer network.
Which means the Trump campaign knew about it.

Conspiracy to commit a felony...is a felony which well-satisfies the "high crimes and misdemeanors" hurdle for impeachment.

Not that I think it ever will (or should) come to that. The Senate would likely never vote to remove so it's pointless. And I'd much rather have this as a relevant topic in 2020 myself.

But its vivid that Stone/Trump Campaign knew about the felonies that would benefit them. The question is whether they were sponsoring it or not or if it was just a happy coincidence.

Now...that has been established.

Stone also had another buddy. Guccifer2.0. Guccifer is a front for Russian Intel agencies (Mil-int I think).

Hacker Releases More Democratic Party Documents

Stone is in close contact with Guccifer2.0 even calling Guccifer2.0's banning from Twitter outrageous:

View attachment 236701

Why Trump employed someone who is coordinating with hackers is something that should be investigated; especially since Guccifer2.0 hacked the DNC.

So it's pretty clear that the felony--unauthorized use of a computer network--was done by people who had ties to the Trump campaign. Whether you wish to acknowledge it or scream "nun-unh" is not important.

You haven't proved that Roger Stone knew anything. That tweet proves nothing. It's a prediction based on publicly known facts, and nothing else. Stone was never in Trump's employ. You have your most basic facts wrong. You're a conspiracy theorist.

Stone was a member of the campaign. The tweet proves his foreknowledge of the felony. The connection is being investigated. Cohen flipped. Manafort flipped. Is Stone next?

His tweet proves nothing of the sort. A judge would laugh you out of court if you tried to use that as evidence, and Mueller knows it.

That's true. Mueller is apparently being very thorough; and successful.
You are happy that these felons are being brought to justice. Right?

By "thorough." you mean he is inventing crimes that having nothing to do with the supposed subject of his "investigation."

too damn funny...

If he's inventing crimes; their guilty pleas must be imaginary too? Was manafort's conviction imaginary too?

Again, you are happy that these felons are being brought to justice, right?

 

[bripat9643]

He was not a member of the campaign, and his tweet doesn't prove a damn thing. Why would Stone "flip?" He hasn't committed any crimes.

Do I really have to show you where he was a member of the campaign? Really? Feel free to look it up yourself and save some embarrassment.

I’m sure you said the same thing about Cohen and Manafort. “Why would he flip?” Both did…..We’ll see what happens to Stone if he’s indicted.

It turns out he was an advisor to the campaign, but that makes little difference. He hasn't broken any laws. Mueller has got nothing on him.

Again, you probably said the same thing about several people.

"Cohen? He worked with Trump but Mueller has nothing on him". Cohen Flipped.
"Manafort? He was Trump's campaign manager but Mueller has nothing on him." Manafort Flipped
"Stone? He was an adviser to Trump but Mueller has nothing on him." Stone....stay tuned.

How many times you been down that road sonny? How many times have you been wrong? Every time....

"Trump? Mueller has nothing on him...." stay tuned...

View attachment 236832

So, to score a point you have to invent fantasies about what I said.

So you knew Mueller had the goods on those guys and supported their persecution?

Is it really necessary for me to point out that you are full of shit and logically challenged?

 

[candycorn]

Do I really have to show you where he was a member of the campaign? Really? Feel free to look it up yourself and save some embarrassment.

I’m sure you said the same thing about Cohen and Manafort. “Why would he flip?” Both did…..We’ll see what happens to Stone if he’s indicted.

It turns out he was an advisor to the campaign, but that makes little difference. He hasn't broken any laws. Mueller has got nothing on him.

Again, you probably said the same thing about several people.

"Cohen? He worked with Trump but Mueller has nothing on him". Cohen Flipped.
"Manafort? He was Trump's campaign manager but Mueller has nothing on him." Manafort Flipped
"Stone? He was an adviser to Trump but Mueller has nothing on him." Stone....stay tuned.

How many times you been down that road sonny? How many times have you been wrong? Every time....

"Trump? Mueller has nothing on him...." stay tuned...

View attachment 236832

So, to score a point you have to invent fantasies about what I said.

So you knew Mueller had the goods on those guys and supported their persecution?

Is it really necessary for me to point out that you are full of shit and logically challenged?

Well, which was it? You thought Cohen was guilty? No. You thought Manafort was guilty? No. You think Stone is clean? Right? Stay tuned....

 

[Harpy Eagle]

If so, please explain.

If not, why all the hoopla?

Nobody will ever know for sure, now will they.

just like with political ads on TV during the elections, I do not know a single person that has ever said "I voted for that person because of the ad on the TV"...yet they keep pay for ads year after year.

But Mueller thinks they were by memes on Facebook...

The clown indicated 13 Russians for this..

.

and politicians think that a 30 second ad does it, they believe it so much that they spent more than 3 billion dollars on ads in the 2018 mid-terms.

If an ad can do it, why can misinformation on FB not?

We have seen how quickly the people from both side are to believe fake news, people post fake stories on here all the time, still thinking they are true.

 

[Clipper]

You honestly believe that the GOP was hack-proof but Marriott, Sony, the DNC, Experian etc... are all rubes? Yeah..you full of shit.

Not too sure about hack-proof, but sure haven't heard of a GOP aide giving out their password.

Also haven't heard of high level HRC operatives having meetings with Russians...only Trump's.

Sorry to hear FakeBook and/or CNN doesn't cover these things.
John Podesta and the Russians

John Podesta, in bed with the Russians all along

I'm sure they would have covered it if their meetings in 1990 were news. It's not.
Meanwhile back in reality and relevance....

Trump's son is having meetings with the Russians while the Russians are hacking the DNC computers.

Even if that were true, which it isn't, it's not illegal. It's perfectly legal for Americans to talk to Russian citizens. I challenge you to find a law that says otherwise.

Then why did Comrade Trump & his goons deny, deny, deny?

 

[Claudette]

If so, please explain.

If not, why all the hoopla?

Nope. Didn't affect my vote at all.

 

[Stratford57]

If so, please explain.

If not, why all the hoopla?

Nope. Didn't affect my vote at all.

 

[Seawytch]

Was your vote affected by Russian interference?

No, and neither was anyone else's.

So if ad campaigns don't work, why do candidates spend so much money on them?

I give up, why?

You should give up. You can’t think logically, obviously.

 

[Seawytch]

Nothing yet disproved...

Re-examining the dossier after a year of indictments & guilty pleas

"Nothing disproved?" You just demonstrated your inability to commit logic.

So what in the Dossier has been proven false?

It has been proven false that Cohen went to Prague. Nothing else has been proven true. It's all a fairy tale. In order to use it to get a FISA warrant the FBI is required to verify the information in it. They obviously did nothing of the sort. The claim that nothing has been proven false is the mating call of an imbecile.

Sorry, Skippy, but Cohen saying he wasn't there proves nothing.

His passport and other tangible evidence proves it, you ******* brain dead moron.

Not really. Manafort had three or four passports. Cohen is cut from the same cloth so he, too, could have multiple passports.

So, again, nothing from the Steele Dossier has been disproven, but much has been proven. More and more with every new indictment.

https://www.msnbc.com/deadline-whi...ear-of-indictments-guilty-pleas-1407774787776