A simple private transaction

[Pete F.]

Trumps tweet this am

“Democrats can’t find a Smocking
Gun tying the Trump campaign to Russia after James Comey’s testimony. No Smocking Gun...No Collusion.”
@FoxNews
That’s because there was NO COLLUSION. So now the Dems go to a simple private transaction, wrongly call it a campaign contribution,...

A SIMPLE PRIVATE TRANSACTION?
Of course, that's why you:
1) Told Cohen to pay in untraceable cash
2) Signed fake name
3) Set up fake corporations to launder it
4) Routed payments to Cohen through real estate
5) Suborned perjury to deny it
6) Lied like you did about Tower Meeting

[spence]

But he brought back Christmas
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[PaulS]

He has used the word collusion so many times he has learned to spell it correctly. Soon he will learn to spell smoking correctly.

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by PaulS

He has used the word collusion so many times he has learned to spell it correctly. Soon he will learn to spell smoking correctly.

the special counsel investigation has resulted in criminal counts against more than 30 people and three Russian entities. The gun is on fire
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[scottw]

Originally Posted by wdmso

the special counsel investigation has resulted in criminal counts against more than 30 people and three Russian entities. The gun is on fire
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

seems like a squirt gun but we'll see

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by scottw

seems like a squirt gun but we'll see

So far they tried to impeached Clinton for a squirt .. but we'll see

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

So far they tried to impeached Clinton for a squirt .. but we'll see

nope. he was impeached for
lying under oath.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

nope. he was impeached for
lying under oath.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

....as he was trying to dodge a Sexual Assault case. But some people seem to forget that.

Same people that were probably screaming for Kavanaugh's head too.

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

....as he was trying to dodge a Sexual Assault case. But some people seem to forget that.

Same people that were probably screaming for Kavanaugh's head too.

Now it gets deflected to Clinton and Kavanaugh

A SIMPLE PRIVATE TRANSACTION?
Of course, that's why you:
1) Told Cohen to pay in untraceable cash
2) Signed fake name
3) Set up fake corporations to launder it
4) Routed payments to Cohen through real estate
5) Suborned perjury to deny it
6) Lied like you did about Tower Meeting
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

....as he was trying to dodge a Sexual Assault case. But some people seem to forget that.

Same people that were probably screaming for Kavanaugh's head too.

Right, they act like it was the puritan evangelicals upset about the affair. It was the lying under oath.

Kavanaugh, already a disappointment as far as I'm concerned, he was the deciding vote in not letting states cut funding for Planned Parenthood. Wonder if the liberals will stop saying that all the women are going to die.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Now it gets deflected to Clinton and Kavanaugh

A SIMPLE PRIVATE TRANSACTION?
Of course, that's why you:
1) Told Cohen to pay in untraceable cash
2) Signed fake name
3) Set up fake corporations to launder it
4) Routed payments to Cohen through real estate
5) Suborned perjury to deny it
6) Lied like you did about Tower Meeting
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

No ne denies he went to great lengths to keep it private. The question is, is this really a campaign contribution that must be treated as such. And if it is, why isn't anyone asking about the $17 million in taxpayer funds that have been used to pay sexual harassment claims on behalf of scumbag congressmen? If every cent spent to protect the image of a politician is a campaign contribution, then surely that $17 million is a campaign contribution as well?

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by wdmso

So far they tried to impeached Clinton for a squirt .. but we'll see

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Now it gets deflected to Clinton and Kavanaugh

You might want to take that up with wdmso, he's the one that brought Clinton up as a deflection.

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

No ne denies he went to great lengths to keep it private. The question is, is this really a campaign contribution that must be treated as such. And if it is, why isn't anyone asking about the $17 million in taxpayer funds that have been used to pay sexual harassment claims on behalf of scumbag congressmen? If every cent spent to protect the image of a politician is a campaign contribution, then surely that $17 million is a campaign contribution as well?

That’s why Mueller dumped it on SDNY
There’s bigger fish in the Trump world, more relevant to Collusion.
It will be a very interesting political dance.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

That’s why Mueller dumped it on SDNY
There’s bigger fish in the Trump world, more relevant to Collusion.
It will be a very interesting political dance.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

It will be ugly. 99% of Trump supporters will deny he did anything wrong no matter what. 99% of Hilary supporters will insist he should be impeached, no matter what.

[JohnR]

Noose is tightening. We'll see soon how much is fact, speculation, and how much is Resistance Wishcasting.

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

....as he was trying to dodge a Sexual Assault case. But some people seem to forget that.

Same people that were probably screaming for Kavanaugh's head too.

^^^ Yep.

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

It will be ugly. 99% of Trump supporters will deny he did anything wrong no matter what. 99% of Hilary supporters will insist he should be impeached, no matter what.

Gee it would be nice if only we had a trustworthy and unbiased national news media. When (if) the SHTF the news will have punted much of its credibility for us to rely on.

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by JohnR

Noose is tightening. We'll see soon how much is fact, speculation, and how much is Resistance Wishcasting.





^^^ Yep.



Gee it would be nice if only we had a trustworthy and unbiased national news media. When (if) the SHTF the news will have punted much of its credibility for us to rely on.

We do but conservatives have have done a fantastic job of promoting a narrative that does not exist They have done the same with the CIA The FBI and others

Basically if the facts don’t show the outcome they want it’s fake news
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

You might want to take that up with wdmso, he's the one that brought Clinton up as a deflection.

Seems you missed the joke
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by wdmso

Seems you missed the joke
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Seems you missed the point

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

We do but conservatives have have done a fantastic job of promoting a narrative that does not exist They have done the same with the CIA The FBI and others

Basically if the facts don’t show the outcome they want it’s fake news
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

so the mainstream media doesn’t have a serious left wing bias in it’s reporting? fox is right leaning, everyone else is in the tank for the democrats. that’s not true?

Have you ever said anything complimentary about the right, or critical about the left?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

We do but conservatives have have done a fantastic job of promoting a narrative that does not exist They have done the same with the CIA The FBI and others

Basically if the facts don’t show the outcome they want it’s fake news
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

if you google “statistics media bias”, you’ll see all manner of data that makes it crystal clear. here’s a study done by UCLA, Stanford, University of Chicago, and UPenn. they found significant liberal bias in the media. these are not right-wing schools.

Obviously not every report that praises liberals or attacks conservatives is biased. but there’s an agenda there, an obvious agenda to help democrats get elected. Do you really not see that? how stupid would it be, if i denied that Sean Hannity is in the GOPs pocket?

http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/GrosecloseMilyo.pdf
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

96% if media donations to the 2016 presidential election, went to Hilary...nah, no bias there...

https://www.dailywire.com/news/18054...-aaron-bandler
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

96% if media donations to the 2016 presidential election, went to Hilary...nah, no bias there...

https://www.dailywire.com/news/18054...-aaron-bandler
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Google was accused of having "programmed" bias against conservative views into its algorithms.

The makeup of US television and news media staff may skew Democrat, but its power is conservative – and has been since way before Trump came along

Only conservatives see bias as untruthful

And only a conservative would see donations as bias ..

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...&noredirect=on
There are no campaign trail reporters on the list of Clinton contributors named

Do you ever do research ? On the big picture
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

if you google “statistics media bias”, you’ll see all manner of data that makes it crystal clear. here’s a study done by UCLA, Stanford, University of Chicago, and UPenn. they found significant liberal bias in the media. these are not right-wing schools.

Obviously not every report that praises liberals or attacks conservatives is biased. but there’s an agenda there, an obvious agenda to help democrats get elected. Do you really not see that? how stupid would it be, if i denied that Sean Hannity is in the GOPs pocket?

http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/GrosecloseMilyo.pdf
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

what agenda ..... your way to paranoid for me
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

Seems you missed the point

Are you suggesting you made one for a change
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

if you google “statistics media bias”, you’ll see all manner of data that makes it crystal clear. here’s a study done by UCLA, Stanford, University of Chicago, and UPenn. they found significant liberal bias in the media. these are not right-wing schools.

Obviously not every report that praises liberals or attacks conservatives is biased. but there’s an agenda there, an obvious agenda to help democrats get elected. Do you really not see that? how stupid would it be, if i denied that Sean Hannity is in the GOPs pocket?

http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/GrosecloseMilyo.pdf
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

That report is interesting but incomplete
The majority of people get their news from the three cable news networks Fon, CNN, MSNBC
Of the three, the one with right wing bias holds the largest share
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

Google was accused of having "programmed" bias against conservative views into its algorithms.

The makeup of US television and news media staff may skew Democrat, but its power is conservative – and has been since way before Trump came along

Only conservatives see bias as untruthful

And only a conservative would see donations as bias ..

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...&noredirect=on
There are no campaign trail reporters on the list of Clinton contributors named

Do you ever do research ? On the big picture
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

"The makeup of US television and news media staff may skew Democrat, but its power is conservative "

Prove that, please? I'd just love to see data to support that.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

That report is interesting but incomplete
The majority of people get their news from the three cable news networks Fon, CNN, MSNBC
Of the three, the one with right wing bias holds the largest share
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

And that share is about 1% of the US population.

Here is a sincere question...do more people get news from cable news, than network news?

And Fox isn't as right-leaning, as the other two are left. Fox has some shows (Fox and Friends, Hannity) that are as biased as it gets. Fox also has shows like the 6:00 Brett Baier show, that aren't very biased. Does CNN or MSNBC have a show on in prime time, that's not in the tank for liberals?

Fox's 8:00 PM show is hosted by a guy who really dislikes Trump.

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by wdmso

Are you suggesting you made one for a change
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

That's what I thought, missed the point.

you also might want to leave the jokes to me as well, you're not very good at that either

[paradoxjim]

Gee it would be nice if only we had a trustworthy and unbiased national news media. When (if) the SHTF the news will have punted much of its credibility for us to rely on.[/QUOTE]

Yeah, SNL should be investigated!!! NOT FAIR! Damn left leaning comedians using the Trump name to better themselves (boo hoo, Melania).