Now that we know what the Democrats did....they have a huge problem.

Posted by toddcommish on 3/23/2017 12:42:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 3/23/2017 12:32:00 PM (view original):

Posted by toddcommish on 3/23/2017 12:20:00 PM (view original):
Can I ask a naive question? Are we supposed to hate Russia again?

I mean, some of the liberals sound positively McCarthyistic in their "Red Menace" rhetoric. I honestly see ISIS as a greater threat to the US than Russia. I would rather have the media grill the president (and Congress) about how we're gonna deal with TERRORISM rather than Putin's personal habits.

p.s. Korea is 2nd, China is 3rd on my "threat to US" meter.

If the Trump campaign colluded with Russia to win an election, that's a huge problem. Agree?

If Trump said, "I want you to hack Hillary's servers and release her emails so I can win", yes, that's a huge problem.

If Russia said "Hey, Trump, we hacked DNC/Hillary's servers and found some bad **** that she's done." and Trump says, "I'll give you a release plan, so it will coincide with some speeches I have planned", yes, it's a huge problem.

If Russia said "We hacked DNC/Hillary's servers and found some bad **** that she's done. We hate Hillary, so we'll release it so it she won't be President, and it helps that rich ******* on american TV.", yes, it's a problem, but it isn't Trump's fault.

If Russia said "Hey, Trump, we hacked DNC/Hillary's servers and found some bad **** that she's done." and Trump says "GTFO my office, and stop calling my people", and the Russians release it anyway, yes, it's a problem, but isn't Trump's fault.

Remember, all of these start with DNC/Hillary doing some bad ****. It just so happens that the Russians found it, and released it during the election cycle. Everything after that is guesswork.

What? The DNC didn't do anything wrong.

I asked about colluding. Only your first scenario is actual collusion, so I'll take your answer to be yes.

Quit trying to confuse haters with logic and facts.

Posted by bad_luck on 3/23/2017 12:46:00 PM (view original):

Posted by toddcommish on 3/23/2017 12:42:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 3/23/2017 12:32:00 PM (view original):

Posted by toddcommish on 3/23/2017 12:20:00 PM (view original):
Can I ask a naive question? Are we supposed to hate Russia again?

I mean, some of the liberals sound positively McCarthyistic in their "Red Menace" rhetoric. I honestly see ISIS as a greater threat to the US than Russia. I would rather have the media grill the president (and Congress) about how we're gonna deal with TERRORISM rather than Putin's personal habits.

p.s. Korea is 2nd, China is 3rd on my "threat to US" meter.

If the Trump campaign colluded with Russia to win an election, that's a huge problem. Agree?

If Trump said, "I want you to hack Hillary's servers and release her emails so I can win", yes, that's a huge problem.

If Russia said "Hey, Trump, we hacked DNC/Hillary's servers and found some bad **** that she's done." and Trump says, "I'll give you a release plan, so it will coincide with some speeches I have planned", yes, it's a huge problem.

If Russia said "We hacked DNC/Hillary's servers and found some bad **** that she's done. We hate Hillary, so we'll release it so it she won't be President, and it helps that rich ******* on american TV.", yes, it's a problem, but it isn't Trump's fault.

If Russia said "Hey, Trump, we hacked DNC/Hillary's servers and found some bad **** that she's done." and Trump says "GTFO my office, and stop calling my people", and the Russians release it anyway, yes, it's a problem, but isn't Trump's fault.

Remember, all of these start with DNC/Hillary doing some bad ****. It just so happens that the Russians found it, and released it during the election cycle. Everything after that is guesswork.

What? The DNC didn't do anything wrong.

I asked about colluding. Only your first scenario is actual collusion, so I'll take your answer to be yes.

"IF" being the key word. You're acting like it's been metaphysically proven, which it hasn't. Realistically, the 3rd "IF" is the most likely scenario in my book, while you and media are acting like the 1st one (your example) is the absolute truth.

Recognize your own confirmation bias.

Now we know what Obama did after the election. Changing the security parameters. Leaks galore. Muddy the waters and start false rumors and have fake investigations for as long as possible to hurt the Republicans at election time and to hide all the illegal stuff that was never supposed to come out because Trump wasn't supposed to win. Community organizer offices all over. Paid for by the democrats. Fake protests. Fake news.

Fake News didn't even report about the illegal immigrant rapes in Maryland and they'll run away from the British terrorism incident as quickly as possible so they can take you away from what is really happening.

And what did Trump do with the Russians? NOTHING. And a year from now, nothing will have changed on that front.

I don't know who's more harmful to democracy and the world. Isis or the democrats who pretended they didn't exist and gave us this mess.

I'm not acting like anything. The FBI is investigating the collusion. The reports coming out are indicating that there's evidence of collusion. I'll believe it when I see it, but it certainly is interesting and, as you agree, a huge problem for Trump if it's true.

Posted by bad_luck on 3/23/2017 12:46:00 PM (view original):

Posted by toddcommish on 3/23/2017 12:42:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 3/23/2017 12:32:00 PM (view original):

Posted by toddcommish on 3/23/2017 12:20:00 PM (view original):
Can I ask a naive question? Are we supposed to hate Russia again?

I mean, some of the liberals sound positively McCarthyistic in their "Red Menace" rhetoric. I honestly see ISIS as a greater threat to the US than Russia. I would rather have the media grill the president (and Congress) about how we're gonna deal with TERRORISM rather than Putin's personal habits.

p.s. Korea is 2nd, China is 3rd on my "threat to US" meter.

If the Trump campaign colluded with Russia to win an election, that's a huge problem. Agree?

If Trump said, "I want you to hack Hillary's servers and release her emails so I can win", yes, that's a huge problem.

If Russia said "Hey, Trump, we hacked DNC/Hillary's servers and found some bad **** that she's done." and Trump says, "I'll give you a release plan, so it will coincide with some speeches I have planned", yes, it's a huge problem.

If Russia said "We hacked DNC/Hillary's servers and found some bad **** that she's done. We hate Hillary, so we'll release it so it she won't be President, and it helps that rich ******* on american TV.", yes, it's a problem, but it isn't Trump's fault.

If Russia said "Hey, Trump, we hacked DNC/Hillary's servers and found some bad **** that she's done." and Trump says "GTFO my office, and stop calling my people", and the Russians release it anyway, yes, it's a problem, but isn't Trump's fault.

Remember, all of these start with DNC/Hillary doing some bad ****. It just so happens that the Russians found it, and released it during the election cycle. Everything after that is guesswork.

What? The DNC didn't do anything wrong.

I asked about colluding. Only your first scenario is actual collusion, so I'll take your answer to be yes.

BERNIE BERNIE BERNIE!!!!


NO COLLISION THERE, RIGHT?

Posted by moy23 on 3/23/2017 1:19:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 3/23/2017 12:46:00 PM (view original):

Posted by toddcommish on 3/23/2017 12:42:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 3/23/2017 12:32:00 PM (view original):

Posted by toddcommish on 3/23/2017 12:20:00 PM (view original):
Can I ask a naive question? Are we supposed to hate Russia again?

I mean, some of the liberals sound positively McCarthyistic in their "Red Menace" rhetoric. I honestly see ISIS as a greater threat to the US than Russia. I would rather have the media grill the president (and Congress) about how we're gonna deal with TERRORISM rather than Putin's personal habits.

p.s. Korea is 2nd, China is 3rd on my "threat to US" meter.

If the Trump campaign colluded with Russia to win an election, that's a huge problem. Agree?

If Trump said, "I want you to hack Hillary's servers and release her emails so I can win", yes, that's a huge problem.

If Russia said "Hey, Trump, we hacked DNC/Hillary's servers and found some bad **** that she's done." and Trump says, "I'll give you a release plan, so it will coincide with some speeches I have planned", yes, it's a huge problem.

If Russia said "We hacked DNC/Hillary's servers and found some bad **** that she's done. We hate Hillary, so we'll release it so it she won't be President, and it helps that rich ******* on american TV.", yes, it's a problem, but it isn't Trump's fault.

If Russia said "Hey, Trump, we hacked DNC/Hillary's servers and found some bad **** that she's done." and Trump says "GTFO my office, and stop calling my people", and the Russians release it anyway, yes, it's a problem, but isn't Trump's fault.

Remember, all of these start with DNC/Hillary doing some bad ****. It just so happens that the Russians found it, and released it during the election cycle. Everything after that is guesswork.

What? The DNC didn't do anything wrong.

I asked about colluding. Only your first scenario is actual collusion, so I'll take your answer to be yes.

BERNIE BERNIE BERNIE!!!!


NO COLLISION THERE, RIGHT?

Political parties are allowed to control their nominee process. That "collision" is perfectly legal.

Colluding with a foreign government to win an election, is not.

Posted by moy23 on 3/23/2017 1:18:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 3/23/2017 12:16:00 PM (view original):

Posted by moy23 on 3/23/2017 12:12:00 PM (view original):

Posted by evil_twin on 3/23/2017 11:09:00 AM (view original):
You guys are something else. You voted to put a Russian intelligence asset in the White House, and still fight to defend that decision.

I like Russia. I have no qualms with them.

You like them because Trump likes them.

I like them because I have some 1st generation Russian employees and they speak highly of their home country (as well as this one). I'm not sure why I should hate them since we do all the same stuff they do. We hack other countries, we influence foreign elections (see Israel), we invade other countries (like Iraq and Afghanistan). How are we different?

Right. We do those things to advance American interests. Russia does those things to advance Russian interests. Trump colluding with Russia advances Russian interests. See the problem?

Posted by bad_luck on 3/22/2017 5:11:00 PM (view original):

Posted by moy23 on 3/22/2017 5:09:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 3/22/2017 4:54:00 PM (view original):

Posted by moy23 on 3/22/2017 4:46:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 3/22/2017 2:58:00 PM (view original):
"This is a normal, incidental collection, based on what I could collect," Nunes said. "This appears to be all legally collected foreign intelligence under" the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.

So Trump potentially WAS under surveillance, no? I thought Trump was lying about that.

He wasn't under surveillance. Transition team communications were picked up in incidental intercepts legal under a FISA warrant. You know, like Flynn talking to Russia.

That certainly isn't an Obama wire "tapp" on Trump Tower.

Which is exactly where Liberals will lose. Everyone and their mother (except libs) understand Trump was not being literal in his 140 max character tweet. Everyone and their mother (except libs) don't like when people are spied on by the government. There's only one way all the LEAKS you are referring to came out and that's because Trump and his people were spied on by the Obama administration.

Let it play out. You'll see. This is another example of Trump giving the media enough rope to hang themselves.... And they are getting really good at doing just that. #fakenews

Yes, the intelligence leaks of the Trump campaign colluding with Russia are the REAL problem here. Pay no attention to Putin's puppet.

It's interesting. In the example above BL only cares that the information that was illegally obtained. When it comes to the wikileaks data and Hillary he only cares that it was obtained illegally but doesn't care that Hillary was colluding with the DNC and CNN to oust Bernie.

Very interesting.

Posted by moy23 on 3/23/2017 1:30:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 3/22/2017 5:11:00 PM (view original):

Posted by moy23 on 3/22/2017 5:09:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 3/22/2017 4:54:00 PM (view original):

Posted by moy23 on 3/22/2017 4:46:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 3/22/2017 2:58:00 PM (view original):
"This is a normal, incidental collection, based on what I could collect," Nunes said. "This appears to be all legally collected foreign intelligence under" the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.

So Trump potentially WAS under surveillance, no? I thought Trump was lying about that.

He wasn't under surveillance. Transition team communications were picked up in incidental intercepts legal under a FISA warrant. You know, like Flynn talking to Russia.

That certainly isn't an Obama wire "tapp" on Trump Tower.

Which is exactly where Liberals will lose. Everyone and their mother (except libs) understand Trump was not being literal in his 140 max character tweet. Everyone and their mother (except libs) don't like when people are spied on by the government. There's only one way all the LEAKS you are referring to came out and that's because Trump and his people were spied on by the Obama administration.

Let it play out. You'll see. This is another example of Trump giving the media enough rope to hang themselves.... And they are getting really good at doing just that. #fakenews

Yes, the intelligence leaks of the Trump campaign colluding with Russia are the REAL problem here. Pay no attention to Putin's puppet.

It's interesting. In the example above BL only cares that the information that was illegally obtained. When it comes to the wikileaks data and Hillary he only cares that it was obtained illegally but doesn't care that Hillary was colluding with the DNC and CNN to oust Bernie.

Very interesting.

Jesus Christ, are you stupid?

The DNC "colluding" with Clinton is perfectly legal. Political parties get to control their nomination process.

Posted by bad_luck on 3/23/2017 1:24:00 PM (view original):

Posted by moy23 on 3/23/2017 1:19:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 3/23/2017 12:46:00 PM (view original):

Posted by toddcommish on 3/23/2017 12:42:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 3/23/2017 12:32:00 PM (view original):

Posted by toddcommish on 3/23/2017 12:20:00 PM (view original):
Can I ask a naive question? Are we supposed to hate Russia again?

I mean, some of the liberals sound positively McCarthyistic in their "Red Menace" rhetoric. I honestly see ISIS as a greater threat to the US than Russia. I would rather have the media grill the president (and Congress) about how we're gonna deal with TERRORISM rather than Putin's personal habits.

p.s. Korea is 2nd, China is 3rd on my "threat to US" meter.

If the Trump campaign colluded with Russia to win an election, that's a huge problem. Agree?

If Trump said, "I want you to hack Hillary's servers and release her emails so I can win", yes, that's a huge problem.

If Russia said "Hey, Trump, we hacked DNC/Hillary's servers and found some bad **** that she's done." and Trump says, "I'll give you a release plan, so it will coincide with some speeches I have planned", yes, it's a huge problem.

If Russia said "We hacked DNC/Hillary's servers and found some bad **** that she's done. We hate Hillary, so we'll release it so it she won't be President, and it helps that rich ******* on american TV.", yes, it's a problem, but it isn't Trump's fault.

If Russia said "Hey, Trump, we hacked DNC/Hillary's servers and found some bad **** that she's done." and Trump says "GTFO my office, and stop calling my people", and the Russians release it anyway, yes, it's a problem, but isn't Trump's fault.

Remember, all of these start with DNC/Hillary doing some bad ****. It just so happens that the Russians found it, and released it during the election cycle. Everything after that is guesswork.

What? The DNC didn't do anything wrong.

I asked about colluding. Only your first scenario is actual collusion, so I'll take your answer to be yes.

BERNIE BERNIE BERNIE!!!!


NO COLLISION THERE, RIGHT?

Political parties are allowed to control their nominee process. That "collision" is perfectly legal.

Colluding with a foreign government to win an election, is not.

If what the DNC did was "legal", then why did they go through the farce of a Hillary vs Bernie campaign? Why didn't they just announce at the beginning of primary season last year "We're with her" and tell Bernie and all of his supporters to stand down, STFU and support the party?

Does that sound like the party of transparency?

But seriously BL.... If the ends justify the means, as you've argued for riots in major cities using this logic, then who cares how Trump got in office since that was the desired end result of your alleged collusion?