Fusion GPS

[spence]

Originally Posted by JohnR

Proof.

We know that very senior members of the campaign met with Russians hoping to get dirty emails...

And as for Trump's love fest for mother Russia. Occam's Razor.

[JohnR]

Originally Posted by spence

We know that very senior members of the campaign met with Russians hoping to get dirty emails...

And as for Trump's love fest for mother Russia. Occam's Razor.

Proof. People are talking about impeaching a President of the United States, Congress (one party anyway) is pressing to impeach Trump.

If you do not see real hard concrete everyone agrees proof you will have a Civil War and then Putin really does win. Stakes are to high for anything other than solid, irrefutable proof.

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by JohnR

Proof. People are talking about impeaching a President of the United States, Congress (one party anyway) is pressing to impeach Trump.

If you do not see real hard concrete everyone agrees proof you will have a Civil War and then Putin really does win. Stakes are to high for anything other than solid, irrefutable proof.

Republicans wanted and impeached Clinton for lying under oath about a BJ let me say again lying about a BJ ...trump lying no big deal ..

But the current Republicans and Trump supporters proclaim where's the proof ... when its Crystal clear they will only wont accept the Truth rather only the truth they want to see ...

it shows here all the time Benghazi, the uranium deal , the Clinton foundation .. over and over... each one has been de bunked at every turn .. but still breath life on the right .. facts dont matter

now Bannon book is out .. this is what happens when you dont pay your bills

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by wdmso

Republicans wanted and impeached Clinton for lying under oath about a BJ let me say again lying about a BJ ...trump lying no big deal ..

Uh, oh, this is a whataboutism . . . according to you, whastaboutisms are not valid or not something good or something.

But the current Republicans and Trump supporters proclaim where's the proof ... when its Crystal clear they will only wont accept the Truth rather only the truth they want to see ...

Pretty much sounds like the current Republicans are a lot like you.

it shows here all the time Benghazi, the uranium deal , the Clinton foundation .. over and over... each one has been de bunked at every turn .. but still breath life on the right .. facts dont matter

See, there you go again . . . bringing up Benghazi. You just can't let it go. It still has a breath of life for you.

now Bannon book is out .. this is what happens when you dont pay your bills

A Washington Post review pretty much says that it should be read with a grain of salt . . . that a lot of the stuff in it is literally unbelievable. But it will probably have a long breath of life for you.

[spence]

Originally Posted by detbuch

Uh, oh, this is a whataboutism . . . according to you, whastaboutisms are not valid or not something good or something.

I'd say he made a very valid comparison. If the standard for impeachment is lying about a consensual (if unethical) little tryst I'd say Trump has likely reached far, far beyond.

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by spence

I'd say he made a very valid comparison. If the standard for impeachment is lying about a consensual (if unethical) little tryst I'd say Trump has likely reached far, far beyond.

Valid or not, it's still a whataboutism. WDMSO scoffs at what others consider valid comparisons and calls them whataboutisms. I like to remind him of his hypocrisy.

The difference, so far, is the "under oath" bit. It wasn't about the tryst, it was about lying under oath. I don't know if Trump has even reached that far yet.

[wdmso]

just more of the same... Republicans demanding proof and evidence
against Trump ...

however Republicans do not demanding proof or evidence against a democrat or any investigation or hearing they lead ... the love painting an Impressionism portrait 1st.. then try to get the pieces to fit

why is that ?



why are they trying to discredit Muller at every turn? if they support MAGA

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by wdmso

Republicans wanted and impeached Clinton for lying under oath about a BJ let me say again lying about a BJ

Proof

"Did you have Sexual Relations with that girl"

"No"

"Then what's this on her dress"

"Doh!!!"
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

We know that very senior members of the campaign met with Russians hoping to get dirty emails...

And as for Trump's love fest for mother Russia. Occam's Razor.

I want a fair and very, very thorough investigation.

That being said, if Hilary wasn't actually dirty, there would have been no dirt for Wikileaks to reveal. So while part of the story is looking for evidence of collusion, another part of the story (which no one, especially you, ever talks about), is asking Hilary and the Democrats why they acted so "dirty" in the first place? If liberals claim that finding out what she did changed the outcome of the election, then that necessarily means that what she did, was deeply immoral. No one talks about that. Why is that?

If revealing the truth about what Hilary was doing actually changed the outcome of the election...then to me, the bigger story is what she did and why, and it's secondary to find out how we found out the truth.

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

I want a fair and very, very thorough investigation.

That being said, if Hilary wasn't actually dirty, there would have been no dirt for Wikileaks to reveal. So while part of the story is looking for evidence of collusion, another part of the story (which no one, especially you, ever talks about), is asking Hilary and the Democrats why they acted so "dirty" in the first place? If liberals claim that finding out what she did changed the outcome of the election, then that necessarily means that what she did, was deeply immoral. No one talks about that. Why is that?

If revealing the truth about what Hilary was doing actually changed the outcome of the election...then to me, the bigger story is what she did and why, and it's secondary to find out how we found out the truth.

What did Wikileaks reveal about Clinton?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[JohnR]

Originally Posted by wdmso

Republicans wanted and impeached Clinton for lying under oath about a BJ let me say again lying about a BJ ...trump lying no big deal ..

But the current Republicans and Trump supporters proclaim where's the proof ... when its Crystal clear they will only wont accept the Truth rather only the truth they want to see ...

it shows here all the time Benghazi, the uranium deal , the Clinton foundation .. over and over... each one has been de bunked at every turn .. but still breath life on the right .. facts dont matter

now Bannon book is out .. this is what happens when you dont pay your bills

This is why I am no longer a Democrat; "standards are for thee not for me"

Originally Posted by spence

What did Wikileaks reveal about Clinton?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Not much - we already knew she was a horrible candidate, a miserable person, and a not so smart mob boss. But it did put more reference in for the True Believers like you

[spence]

Originally Posted by JohnR

Not much - we already knew she was a horrible candidate, a miserable person, and a not so smart mob boss. But it did put more reference in for the True Believers like you

Not the best candidate I'd agree. I know someone who has worked with her extensively and says she's an amazing leader, more like an elite CEO than a politician. If she's really a mob boss I'd say she must be brilliant to not get pinned down with all the scandals thrown at her.

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by spence

Not the best candidate I'd agree. I know someone who has worked with her extensively and says she's an amazing leader, more like an elite CEO than a politician.

There are those who say the same thing about Trump.

[JohnR]

Originally Posted by detbuch

There are those who say the same thing about Trump.

I am still not convinced who was the worst candidate

[JohnR]

Originally Posted by spence

Not the best candidate I'd agree. I know someone who has worked with her extensively and says she's an amazing leader, more like an elite CEO than a politician. If she's really a mob boss I'd say she must be brilliant to not get pinned down with all the scandals thrown at her.

Hahaha - the Wikileak emails quote her top staff saying she is her own worst enemy and her ideas suck. Terrible Instincts.

'Terrible instincts'

On the same day that news of a private email server broke, John Podesta, who later became her campaign chairman, emailed Neera Tanden, who worked for the Clinton campaign in 2008 and has remained a close adviser, to complain about Mrs Clinton's "instincts".

"We've taken on a lot of water that won't be easy to pump out of the boat", he wrote in September 2015 as Clinton staff feared that Vice President Joe Biden would join the Democratic primary race.

"Most of that has to do with terrible decisions made pre-campaign, but a lot has to do with her instincts," he wrote, to which Mrs Tanden responded: "Almost no one knows better [than] me that her instincts can be terrible."

In the email exchange, Mr Podesta also complained that Clinton's personal lawyer David Kendall, and former State Department staffers Cheryl Mills and Philippe Reines "sure weren't forthcoming here on the facts here". Mrs Tanden responds "Why didn't' they get this stuff out like 18 months ago? So crazy."

She later answered her own question saying, "I guess I know the answer. They wanted to get away with it."

Quote is from BBC, clearly worse than FREEP http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-37639370






AWKWARD

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

What did Wikileaks reveal about Clinton?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

If it didn't reveal much, how could it have changed the course of the election?

Talk about wanting to have it both ways! According to your side, she did nothing wrong, but revealing what she did, helped turn the election to Trump.

It showed that she worked with the DNC to cut Sanders' legs off, and that she got debate questions ahead of time, among other things.

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

If it didn't reveal much, how could it have changed the course of the election?

Talk about wanting to have it both ways! According to your side, she did nothing wrong, but revealing what she did, helped turn the election to Trump.

It showed that she worked with the DNC to cut Sanders' legs off, and that she got debate questions ahead of time, among other things.

isn't that what Donald Jr was trying to do.. but via the Russians

and you support the release of stolen information because you like the content ?

Talk about wanting it both ways