You guys need to ignore the Russia bullshit. Stop feeding the TROLLS

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Every trolls power is obtained via YOUR response. Doesn't matter if it's a professional troll on channel 4 or a dipshit on this site.

Rational adults see there is no link, proof or anything to prove collusion. Arguing with the trolls about it & venting your frustration about it serves the trolls agenda and YOU lose. Their intent is to disrupt & cause chaos. For that to happen it takes 2 sides. Stop tangoing with them for fucks sake.

Every trolls power is obtained via YOUR response. Doesn't matter if it's a professional troll on channel 4 or a dipshit on this site.

Rational adults see there is no link, proof or anything to prove collusion. Arguing with the trolls about it & venting your frustration about it serves the trolls agenda and YOU lose. Their intent is to disrupt & cause chaos. For that to happen it takes 2 sides. Stop tangoing with them for fucks sake.

Funny but you remind me of someone.

Analysis | 5 times Donald Trump’s team denied contact with Russia

More Trump advisers disclose meeting with Russia's ambassador - CNNPolitics.com
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/20/us/politics/fbi-investigation-trump-russia-comey.html?_r=0



Trump aides were in constant touch with senior Russian officials during campaign - CNNPolitics.com





Michael Flynn targeted by grand jury subpoenas, sources confirm
Trump fires FBI director James Comey - CNNPolitics.com

When you elect a clown--the circus comes along.

Troll........

Need I supply anymore evidence? This dumbfuck pretended to be a conservative for years. Then when the rubber hit the road in November he exposed himself.

There are several people on this board I have ZERO respect for.

You are one of them....fraud

I never "pretended to be a conservative" that's exactly what I am. I just changed my party status to independent because you didn't nominate a conservative--much less a Republican.
All Along I Thought Trump Wasn’t a Conservative/Republican, But Now I Realize I’m Not

I voted for Hillary Clinton because she is more Conservative than the Ass Clown that is sitting in the Oval office--and has 20 times the brainspace he does.

Hahahahahahahahaha

 

[candycorn]

Every trolls power is obtained via YOUR response. Doesn't matter if it's a professional troll on channel 4 or a dipshit on this site.

Rational adults see there is no link, proof or anything to prove collusion. Arguing with the trolls about it & venting your frustration about it serves the trolls agenda and YOU lose. Their intent is to disrupt & cause chaos. For that to happen it takes 2 sides. Stop tangoing with them for fucks sake.

Every trolls power is obtained via YOUR response. Doesn't matter if it's a professional troll on channel 4 or a dipshit on this site.

Rational adults see there is no link, proof or anything to prove collusion. Arguing with the trolls about it & venting your frustration about it serves the trolls agenda and YOU lose. Their intent is to disrupt & cause chaos. For that to happen it takes 2 sides. Stop tangoing with them for fucks sake.

Funny but you remind me of someone.

Analysis | 5 times Donald Trump’s team denied contact with Russia

More Trump advisers disclose meeting with Russia's ambassador - CNNPolitics.com
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/20/us/politics/fbi-investigation-trump-russia-comey.html?_r=0



Trump aides were in constant touch with senior Russian officials during campaign - CNNPolitics.com





Michael Flynn targeted by grand jury subpoenas, sources confirm
Trump fires FBI director James Comey - CNNPolitics.com

When you elect a clown--the circus comes along.

Troll........

Need I supply anymore evidence? This dumbfuck pretended to be a conservative for years. Then when the rubber hit the road in November he exposed himself.

There are several people on this board I have ZERO respect for.

You are one of them....fraud

Your respect is … worthless.

 

[candycorn]

We should focus our energy more on prevention and less on fake cries of outrage for political gain.... especially given the fact that Russia's meddling had no measurableveffect on the outcome.

How would you know what effect hacked emails had on the election that was decided by the slimmest of margins?

Show me the names of let's say the first 500 or 100.... 50, 20? Let's make it 5.

Five people who decided to vote for Trump - who intended to vote for Hitlary.... But didn't because of the hacked emails!

Five people who were NOT affected by the video of Trump saying *grab em by the pussy* but WERE affected by Hitlarys leaked emails.

Name em.

Can't find five?

Just give me ONE.

LOL wtf? Seriously?

I can give you plenty of names I personally know that stayed home because they didn't feel like voting for the shiniest of two turds and it's pretty much impossible to pinpoint the exact moment lackluster support turns into dislike.

Let me teach you something very valuable to know about people: They often THEMSELVES do not know precise reasons they arrive at decisions and positions they do.

It really doesn't matter if Russia hackings changed a single vote, it's still TREASON. Collusion with a foreign adversary to interfere into an American election is Treason.

But while we're on this topic--the most damage was the leak of Debbie Wasserman's emails showing her anixety toward Bernie Sanders and the manner in which he was campaigning because he was also campaigning on a rigged election even though he got his ass kicked on 3,775,437 popular votes. There were Sanders supporters so angry about that email--that they were on this board--threatening if he did not win they would vote for Trump. Trump campaigned on that and was sweeping up the collateral damage appealing to Sander's supporters who bought into it. Whether they did or not we'll never know.

But I do agree with you that most people do not think--nor know why they came to a conclusion (other than letting their emotions take over--while sitting on their BRAINS.)

A neuroscientist explains what may be wrong with Trump supporters’ brains

Still waiting any evidence of your alleged collusion too.

A billionaire businessman doing legal transactions with other businesses overseas before he later ran for office is not an act of treason. So, you are going to need a little more than that.

Just for the humor that I know will be laced in the response let me ask you:

Why do you think Roger Stone interacted via twitter with a Russian Hacker named Guccifer 2?

How do you think Roger Stone knew Jon Podesta would be hacked six weeks before his e-mails were released?

 

[Chuz Life]

How would you know what effect hacked emails had on the election that was decided by the slimmest of margins?

Show me the names of let's say the first 500 or 100.... 50, 20? Let's make it 5.

Five people who decided to vote for Trump - who intended to vote for Hitlary.... But didn't because of the hacked emails!

Five people who were NOT affected by the video of Trump saying *grab em by the pussy* but WERE affected by Hitlarys leaked emails.

Name em.

Can't find five?

Just give me ONE.

LOL wtf? Seriously?

I can give you plenty of names I personally know that stayed home because they didn't feel like voting for the shiniest of two turds and it's pretty much impossible to pinpoint the exact moment lackluster support turns into dislike.

Let me teach you something very valuable to know about people: They often THEMSELVES do not know precise reasons they arrive at decisions and positions they do.

It really doesn't matter if Russia hackings changed a single vote, it's still TREASON. Collusion with a foreign adversary to interfere into an American election is Treason.

But while we're on this topic--the most damage was the leak of Debbie Wasserman's emails showing her anixety toward Bernie Sanders and the manner in which he was campaigning because he was also campaigning on a rigged election even though he got his ass kicked on 3,775,437 popular votes. There were Sanders supporters so angry about that email--that they were on this board--threatening if he did not win they would vote for Trump. Trump campaigned on that and was sweeping up the collateral damage appealing to Sander's supporters who bought into it. Whether they did or not we'll never know.

But I do agree with you that most people do not think--nor know why they came to a conclusion (other than letting their emotions take over--while sitting on their BRAINS.)

A neuroscientist explains what may be wrong with Trump supporters’ brains

Still waiting any evidence of your alleged collusion too.

A billionaire businessman doing legal transactions with other businesses overseas before he later ran for office is not an act of treason. So, you are going to need a little more than that.

Just for the humor that I know will be laced in the response let me ask you:

Why do you think Roger Stone interacted via twitter with a Russian Hacker named Guccifer 2?

How do you think Roger Stone knew Jon Podesta would be hacked six weeks before his e-mails were released?

An allegation is not evidence. Is it?

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Show me the names of let's say the first 500 or 100.... 50, 20? Let's make it 5.

Five people who decided to vote for Trump - who intended to vote for Hitlary.... But didn't because of the hacked emails!

Five people who were NOT affected by the video of Trump saying *grab em by the pussy* but WERE affected by Hitlarys leaked emails.

Name em.

Can't find five?

Just give me ONE.

LOL wtf? Seriously?

I can give you plenty of names I personally know that stayed home because they didn't feel like voting for the shiniest of two turds and it's pretty much impossible to pinpoint the exact moment lackluster support turns into dislike.

Let me teach you something very valuable to know about people: They often THEMSELVES do not know precise reasons they arrive at decisions and positions they do.

It really doesn't matter if Russia hackings changed a single vote, it's still TREASON. Collusion with a foreign adversary to interfere into an American election is Treason.

But while we're on this topic--the most damage was the leak of Debbie Wasserman's emails showing her anixety toward Bernie Sanders and the manner in which he was campaigning because he was also campaigning on a rigged election even though he got his ass kicked on 3,775,437 popular votes. There were Sanders supporters so angry about that email--that they were on this board--threatening if he did not win they would vote for Trump. Trump campaigned on that and was sweeping up the collateral damage appealing to Sander's supporters who bought into it. Whether they did or not we'll never know.

But I do agree with you that most people do not think--nor know why they came to a conclusion (other than letting their emotions take over--while sitting on their BRAINS.)

A neuroscientist explains what may be wrong with Trump supporters’ brains

Still waiting any evidence of your alleged collusion too.

A billionaire businessman doing legal transactions with other businesses overseas before he later ran for office is not an act of treason. So, you are going to need a little more than that.

Just for the humor that I know will be laced in the response let me ask you:

Why do you think Roger Stone interacted via twitter with a Russian Hacker named Guccifer 2?

How do you think Roger Stone knew Jon Podesta would be hacked six weeks before his e-mails were released?

An allegation is not evidence. Is it?

Put her on ignore...

Thank me later

 

[candycorn]

Show me the names of let's say the first 500 or 100.... 50, 20? Let's make it 5.

Five people who decided to vote for Trump - who intended to vote for Hitlary.... But didn't because of the hacked emails!

Five people who were NOT affected by the video of Trump saying *grab em by the pussy* but WERE affected by Hitlarys leaked emails.

Name em.

Can't find five?

Just give me ONE.

LOL wtf? Seriously?

I can give you plenty of names I personally know that stayed home because they didn't feel like voting for the shiniest of two turds and it's pretty much impossible to pinpoint the exact moment lackluster support turns into dislike.

Let me teach you something very valuable to know about people: They often THEMSELVES do not know precise reasons they arrive at decisions and positions they do.

It really doesn't matter if Russia hackings changed a single vote, it's still TREASON. Collusion with a foreign adversary to interfere into an American election is Treason.

But while we're on this topic--the most damage was the leak of Debbie Wasserman's emails showing her anixety toward Bernie Sanders and the manner in which he was campaigning because he was also campaigning on a rigged election even though he got his ass kicked on 3,775,437 popular votes. There were Sanders supporters so angry about that email--that they were on this board--threatening if he did not win they would vote for Trump. Trump campaigned on that and was sweeping up the collateral damage appealing to Sander's supporters who bought into it. Whether they did or not we'll never know.

But I do agree with you that most people do not think--nor know why they came to a conclusion (other than letting their emotions take over--while sitting on their BRAINS.)

A neuroscientist explains what may be wrong with Trump supporters’ brains

Still waiting any evidence of your alleged collusion too.

A billionaire businessman doing legal transactions with other businesses overseas before he later ran for office is not an act of treason. So, you are going to need a little more than that.

Just for the humor that I know will be laced in the response let me ask you:

Why do you think Roger Stone interacted via twitter with a Russian Hacker named Guccifer 2?

How do you think Roger Stone knew Jon Podesta would be hacked six weeks before his e-mails were released?

An allegation is not evidence. Is it?

Screen caps of his tweets are.

Here he is protesting Guccifer_2’s banning from twitter for admiringly hacking person’s accounts…

And…

Your move.

 

[candycorn]

LOL wtf? Seriously?

I can give you plenty of names I personally know that stayed home because they didn't feel like voting for the shiniest of two turds and it's pretty much impossible to pinpoint the exact moment lackluster support turns into dislike.

Let me teach you something very valuable to know about people: They often THEMSELVES do not know precise reasons they arrive at decisions and positions they do.

It really doesn't matter if Russia hackings changed a single vote, it's still TREASON. Collusion with a foreign adversary to interfere into an American election is Treason.

But while we're on this topic--the most damage was the leak of Debbie Wasserman's emails showing her anixety toward Bernie Sanders and the manner in which he was campaigning because he was also campaigning on a rigged election even though he got his ass kicked on 3,775,437 popular votes. There were Sanders supporters so angry about that email--that they were on this board--threatening if he did not win they would vote for Trump. Trump campaigned on that and was sweeping up the collateral damage appealing to Sander's supporters who bought into it. Whether they did or not we'll never know.

But I do agree with you that most people do not think--nor know why they came to a conclusion (other than letting their emotions take over--while sitting on their BRAINS.)

A neuroscientist explains what may be wrong with Trump supporters’ brains

Still waiting any evidence of your alleged collusion too.

A billionaire businessman doing legal transactions with other businesses overseas before he later ran for office is not an act of treason. So, you are going to need a little more than that.

Just for the humor that I know will be laced in the response let me ask you:

Why do you think Roger Stone interacted via twitter with a Russian Hacker named Guccifer 2?

How do you think Roger Stone knew Jon Podesta would be hacked six weeks before his e-mails were released?

An allegation is not evidence. Is it?

Put her on ignore...

Thank me later

Grumps is my bitch!

 

[Chuz Life]

LOL wtf? Seriously?

I can give you plenty of names I personally know that stayed home because they didn't feel like voting for the shiniest of two turds and it's pretty much impossible to pinpoint the exact moment lackluster support turns into dislike.

Let me teach you something very valuable to know about people: They often THEMSELVES do not know precise reasons they arrive at decisions and positions they do.

It really doesn't matter if Russia hackings changed a single vote, it's still TREASON. Collusion with a foreign adversary to interfere into an American election is Treason.

But while we're on this topic--the most damage was the leak of Debbie Wasserman's emails showing her anixety toward Bernie Sanders and the manner in which he was campaigning because he was also campaigning on a rigged election even though he got his ass kicked on 3,775,437 popular votes. There were Sanders supporters so angry about that email--that they were on this board--threatening if he did not win they would vote for Trump. Trump campaigned on that and was sweeping up the collateral damage appealing to Sander's supporters who bought into it. Whether they did or not we'll never know.

But I do agree with you that most people do not think--nor know why they came to a conclusion (other than letting their emotions take over--while sitting on their BRAINS.)

A neuroscientist explains what may be wrong with Trump supporters’ brains

Still waiting any evidence of your alleged collusion too.

A billionaire businessman doing legal transactions with other businesses overseas before he later ran for office is not an act of treason. So, you are going to need a little more than that.

Just for the humor that I know will be laced in the response let me ask you:

Why do you think Roger Stone interacted via twitter with a Russian Hacker named Guccifer 2?

How do you think Roger Stone knew Jon Podesta would be hacked six weeks before his e-mails were released?

An allegation is not evidence. Is it?

Screen caps of his tweets are.

Here he is protesting Guccifer_2’s banning from twitter for admiringly hacking person’s accounts…

And…



Your move.

Your so called evidence is more vague than most of the predictions by Nostradomas.

Is this Raunchy Rachel Madcow?

 

[candycorn]

It really doesn't matter if Russia hackings changed a single vote, it's still TREASON. Collusion with a foreign adversary to interfere into an American election is Treason.

But while we're on this topic--the most damage was the leak of Debbie Wasserman's emails showing her anixety toward Bernie Sanders and the manner in which he was campaigning because he was also campaigning on a rigged election even though he got his ass kicked on 3,775,437 popular votes. There were Sanders supporters so angry about that email--that they were on this board--threatening if he did not win they would vote for Trump. Trump campaigned on that and was sweeping up the collateral damage appealing to Sander's supporters who bought into it. Whether they did or not we'll never know.

But I do agree with you that most people do not think--nor know why they came to a conclusion (other than letting their emotions take over--while sitting on their BRAINS.)

A neuroscientist explains what may be wrong with Trump supporters’ brains

Still waiting any evidence of your alleged collusion too.

A billionaire businessman doing legal transactions with other businesses overseas before he later ran for office is not an act of treason. So, you are going to need a little more than that.

Just for the humor that I know will be laced in the response let me ask you:

Why do you think Roger Stone interacted via twitter with a Russian Hacker named Guccifer 2?

How do you think Roger Stone knew Jon Podesta would be hacked six weeks before his e-mails were released?

An allegation is not evidence. Is it?

Screen caps of his tweets are.

Here he is protesting Guccifer_2’s banning from twitter for admiringly hacking person’s accounts…

And…



Your move.

Your so called evidence is more vague than most of the predictions by Nostradomas.

Is this Raunchy Rachel Madcow?

Ahh, another intellectually dishonest Trump enabler. How very not surprising.

Well, at least you no longer deny the obvious links between the hackers and Stone.

Again, why would this 60+ y/o who is one of Trump’s top advisors remotely care about if Twitter bans a hacker?
How would he know Podesta was going to be hacked 6 weeks before Podesta’s documents were released?

 

[Chuz Life]

It really doesn't matter if Russia hackings changed a single vote, it's still TREASON. Collusion with a foreign adversary to interfere into an American election is Treason.

But while we're on this topic--the most damage was the leak of Debbie Wasserman's emails showing her anixety toward Bernie Sanders and the manner in which he was campaigning because he was also campaigning on a rigged election even though he got his ass kicked on 3,775,437 popular votes. There were Sanders supporters so angry about that email--that they were on this board--threatening if he did not win they would vote for Trump. Trump campaigned on that and was sweeping up the collateral damage appealing to Sander's supporters who bought into it. Whether they did or not we'll never know.

But I do agree with you that most people do not think--nor know why they came to a conclusion (other than letting their emotions take over--while sitting on their BRAINS.)

A neuroscientist explains what may be wrong with Trump supporters’ brains

Still waiting any evidence of your alleged collusion too.

A billionaire businessman doing legal transactions with other businesses overseas before he later ran for office is not an act of treason. So, you are going to need a little more than that.

Just for the humor that I know will be laced in the response let me ask you:

Why do you think Roger Stone interacted via twitter with a Russian Hacker named Guccifer 2?

How do you think Roger Stone knew Jon Podesta would be hacked six weeks before his e-mails were released?

An allegation is not evidence. Is it?

Screen caps of his tweets are.

Here he is protesting Guccifer_2’s banning from twitter for admiringly hacking person’s accounts…

And…



Your move.

Your so called evidence is more vague than most of the predictions by Nostradomas.

Still waiting any evidence of your alleged collusion too.

A billionaire businessman doing legal transactions with other businesses overseas before he later ran for office is not an act of treason. So, you are going to need a little more than that.

Just for the humor that I know will be laced in the response let me ask you:

Why do you think Roger Stone interacted via twitter with a Russian Hacker named Guccifer 2?

How do you think Roger Stone knew Jon Podesta would be hacked six weeks before his e-mails were released?

An allegation is not evidence. Is it?

Screen caps of his tweets are.

Here he is protesting Guccifer_2’s banning from twitter for admiringly hacking person’s accounts…

And…



Your move.

Your so called evidence is more vague than most of the predictions by Nostradomas.

Is this Raunchy Rachel Madcow?

Ahh, another intellectually dishonest Trump enabler. How very not surprising.

Well, at least you no longer deny the obvious links between the hackers and Stone.

Again, why would this 60+ y/o who is one of Trump’s top advisors remotely care about if Twitter bans a hacker?
How would he know Podesta was going to be hacked 6 weeks before Podesta’s documents were released?

I can neither confirm nor deny any of it. Have you considered that maybe someone could have hacked Stones account too? Has he confirmed his association with the hacker?

You said yourself.... it seems farfetched.

You should trust your gut on that.

 

[oreo]

Still waiting any evidence of your alleged collusion too.

A billionaire businessman doing legal transactions with other businesses overseas before he later ran for office is not an act of treason. So, you are going to need a little more than that.

Just for the humor that I know will be laced in the response let me ask you:

Why do you think Roger Stone interacted via twitter with a Russian Hacker named Guccifer 2?

How do you think Roger Stone knew Jon Podesta would be hacked six weeks before his e-mails were released?

An allegation is not evidence. Is it?

Screen caps of his tweets are.

Here he is protesting Guccifer_2’s banning from twitter for admiringly hacking person’s accounts…

And…



Your move.

Your so called evidence is more vague than most of the predictions by Nostradomas.

Just for the humor that I know will be laced in the response let me ask you:

Why do you think Roger Stone interacted via twitter with a Russian Hacker named Guccifer 2?

How do you think Roger Stone knew Jon Podesta would be hacked six weeks before his e-mails were released?

An allegation is not evidence. Is it?

Screen caps of his tweets are.

Here he is protesting Guccifer_2’s banning from twitter for admiringly hacking person’s accounts…

And…



Your move.

Your so called evidence is more vague than most of the predictions by Nostradomas.

Is this Raunchy Rachel Madcow?

Ahh, another intellectually dishonest Trump enabler. How very not surprising.

Well, at least you no longer deny the obvious links between the hackers and Stone.

Again, why would this 60+ y/o who is one of Trump’s top advisors remotely care about if Twitter bans a hacker?
How would he know Podesta was going to be hacked 6 weeks before Podesta’s documents were released?

I can neither confirm nor deny any of it. Have you considered that maybe someone could have hacked Stones account too? Has he confirmed his association with the hacker?

You said yourself.... it seems farfetched.

You should trust your gut on that.

It's what came out of Roger Stone's mouth that implicates him.

"President Donald Trump's former campaign adviser and longtime confidante Roger Stone said he exchanged private messages with a hacker implicated in a massive cyberattack that targeted the Democratic National Commitee last year.

Stone told Business Insider in an email late Thursday night that he had a private conversation on Twitter with the person, nicknamed "Guccifer 2.0," and that the interaction was so "brief and banal, I had forgotten it."
Top Trump confidante admits to speaking privately with Guccifer 2.0, an alleged Russian cyberspy

Then Stone claimed he had a back door into Wikileaks

"In the final months of the 2016 campaign, longtime Donald Trump associate Roger Stone repeatedly discussed his backchannel communications with WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange and claimed knowledge of forthcoming leaks from the group, a CNN KFile review of his public statements shows.

Stone's comments about WikiLeaks have come under increased scrutiny as the FBI and congressional committees investigate whether Trump associates were involved in Russian efforts to interfere in the 2016 election.

Stone has repeatedly and publicly denied that he had any contact with Russian officials during the campaign. Stone declined to answer questions from CNN for this story. After this story was published, WikiLeaks tweeted, "WikiLeaks & Assange have repeatedly confirmed that they have never communicated with Stone."

But Stone's many statements have fueled suspicions that figures in Trump's orbit played a role in releases of hacked emails from the Democratic National Committee and Hillary Clinton's campaign chairman, John Podesta.

On July 22 of last year, on the eve of the Democratic National Convention, WikiLeaks released nearly 20,000 internal DNC emails, which ultimately sparked the resignation of DNC chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz.
Trump adviser Roger Stone repeatedly claimed to know of forthcoming WikiLeaks dumps - CNNPolitics.com

 

[LoneLaugher]

Still no accounting of how "Russians" caused ballot levers to be pushed for Trump instead of Hillary, no accounting of how they altered the tallies, and no accounting of what vodoo brain waves were unleashed upon Hillary voters

Absent that, bug spray time

Nobody claimed that. Next.

 

[candycorn]

I can neither confirm nor deny any of it. Have you considered that maybe someone could have hacked Stones account too? Has he confirmed his association with the hacker?

You said yourself.... it seems farfetched.

You should trust your gut on that.

Yes he has.

From the Associated Press:

Your reaction?

 

[candycorn]

crickets...

 

[Lakhota]

Much like a child, Felonious gets upset when his spam is being ignored.

 

[Syriusly]

GOP / separating themselves from Trump ~ Trump feeds the fire with his twitters/ actions and we are suppose to ignore it?

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/14/us/politics/trump-republican-senators.html

This thread isn't about the GOP or really even Trump. It's about Trolling with unsubstantiated bullshit.

As to your post, the GOP was never "with" Trump. As many that supported him, there were equal amounts like me that didnt. The man says & tweets retarded shit that causes himself problems. But at the end of the day that has NOTHING to do with Russia or this thread.

They need to be allowed to finish the investigation cleanly, and present a final report, and that ends it. So far, you and others don't seem to want that given you are labeling them "trolls".

Just out of curiosity.

If the report comes back in favor of Trump, will you accept it?

I would.

If the FBI comes back and says that they found no evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia- I will absolutely accept it.

Now- if the FBI comes back and says there was collusion- will you accept it?

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

GOP / separating themselves from Trump ~ Trump feeds the fire with his twitters/ actions and we are suppose to ignore it?

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/14/us/politics/trump-republican-senators.html

This thread isn't about the GOP or really even Trump. It's about Trolling with unsubstantiated bullshit.

As to your post, the GOP was never "with" Trump. As many that supported him, there were equal amounts like me that didnt. The man says & tweets retarded shit that causes himself problems. But at the end of the day that has NOTHING to do with Russia or this thread.

They need to be allowed to finish the investigation cleanly, and present a final report, and that ends it. So far, you and others don't seem to want that given you are labeling them "trolls".

Just out of curiosity.

If the report comes back in favor of Trump, will you accept it?

I would.

If the FBI comes back and says that they found no evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia- I will absolutely accept it.

Now- if the FBI comes back and says there was collusion- will you accept it?

I will.

 

[Syriusly]

GOP / separating themselves from Trump ~ Trump feeds the fire with his twitters/ actions and we are suppose to ignore it?

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/14/us/politics/trump-republican-senators.html

This thread isn't about the GOP or really even Trump. It's about Trolling with unsubstantiated bullshit.

As to your post, the GOP was never "with" Trump. As many that supported him, there were equal amounts like me that didnt. The man says & tweets retarded shit that causes himself problems. But at the end of the day that has NOTHING to do with Russia or this thread.

They need to be allowed to finish the investigation cleanly, and present a final report, and that ends it. So far, you and others don't seem to want that given you are labeling them "trolls".

Just out of curiosity.

If the report comes back in favor of Trump, will you accept it?

I would.

If the FBI comes back and says that they found no evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia- I will absolutely accept it.

Now- if the FBI comes back and says there was collusion- will you accept it?

I will.

I believe you.

 

[Chuz Life]

I can neither confirm nor deny any of it. Have you considered that maybe someone could have hacked Stones account too? Has he confirmed his association with the hacker?

You said yourself.... it seems farfetched.

You should trust your gut on that.

Yes he has.

From the Associated Press:

View attachment 126787

Your reaction?

Simple.

Innocent until proven guilty.

Having a brief contact with someone is not a crime. Not even if they go on to criminal acts after your conversation. Don't like it? Tough shit. That's the way the "innocent until PROVEN guilty" system works.

You could have Hucifer testify under oath, that Trump himself offeredbhim money to hack the dnc and you would still have to PROVE he actually did so, before you would have a conviction.

 

[Chuz Life]

crickets...

Some of us have a life and a job and can only afford the time to feed the trolls while on lunch, a break or between other responsibilities.