View Single Post
Old 03-17-2017, 09:56 AM   #93
Jim in CT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,428
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulS View Post
The White House has tried to soothe an angry Britain after suggesting that President Barack Obama used London’s spy agency to conduct secret surveillance on President Trump while he was a candidate last year.

A spokesman for Prime Minister Theresa May said on Friday that “we’ve received assurances from the White House that these allegations would not be repeated.”

The GCHQ quickly and vehemently denied the contention in a rare statement issued by the spy agency on Thursday, calling the assertions “nonsense” and “utterly ridiculous.”
"Nothing they (the media) did was illegal".

There is an amazing tendency of liberals, when backed into a corner, of answering a question that bears no resemblance to what was asked. I didn't ask if it was illegal. It was not illegal for CNN to get debate questions ahead of time to Hilary. But if when that story breaks, all you care about is how it broke, and you could care less about the ethics of what was done, that shows blatant bias. If the election was influenced by the email release, the blame doesn't lie with who revealed the truth, the blame lies with the folks who acted in a way that would offend portion of the electorate. Don't blame the messenger.

"They thought she had a better chance".

So who cares if a majority of registered democrats wanted someone else? That's the difference between the 2 sides. No one in the GOP thought Trump had the best chance. That didn't motivate us to rig the primary against him. When the leaders of your side put their thumbs on the scales to get the candidate they want, regardless of what the citizens want, please tell me how that's different from fascism?

"They are not saying that so don't lie".

Hyperbole for laughs Paul. Is the media hellbent on connecting Trump to the Russians, despite the fact that there is zero evidence? How is that any different than Trump claiming that Obama wiretapped him, without evidence? Instead of taking my exaggeration literally, perhaps you could respond to the point that you well knew I was making?
Jim in CT is offline