Trump Changes Subject After Meeting With Vladmir Putin

Page 3 of 5 [ 65 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 41,322
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

16 Nov 2017, 6:41 pm

EzraS wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
EzraS wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
EzraS wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
It aint over till the fat lady sings... or till the Mueller investigation finishes up.


I won't be over then if the investigation doesn't produce what you and others are hoping for. Or even if Trump got booted then all the negativity would just shift over to Pence who's also viewed as a villain. All the fussing won't be over with until a democrat is president again.


Sort of like how the Republicans were with Obama?


The republicans have been way out done when it comes to mass hysteria and outright temper tantrums. Really a dem president will probably be voted in just to shut them the f**k up.


Mass hysteria implies something isn't true. Like the right's birther idiocy.


Mass hysteria refers to real or imagined. Or a combination of the two. Over exaggeration. Mass hysteria like in the movie Chicken Little involves large crowds going berserk. Running around screaming smahing things and setting things on fire etc.


If the sitting President of the United States has possibly compromised himself after receiving help from an adversary to get to the White House, then I'd say that's more than enough justification to get hysterical.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


EzraS
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Sep 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 27,108
Location: Twin Peaks

16 Nov 2017, 8:20 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
EzraS wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
EzraS wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
EzraS wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
It aint over till the fat lady sings... or till the Mueller investigation finishes up.


I won't be over then if the investigation doesn't produce what you and others are hoping for. Or even if Trump got booted then all the negativity would just shift over to Pence who's also viewed as a villain. All the fussing won't be over with until a democrat is president again.


Sort of like how the Republicans were with Obama?


The republicans have been way out done when it comes to mass hysteria and outright temper tantrums. Really a dem president will probably be voted in just to shut them the f**k up.


Mass hysteria implies something isn't true. Like the right's birther idiocy.


Mass hysteria refers to real or imagined. Or a combination of the two. Over exaggeration. Mass hysteria like in the movie Chicken Little involves large crowds going berserk. Running around screaming smahing things and setting things on fire etc.


If the sitting President of the United States has possibly compromised himself after receiving help from an adversary to get to the White House, then I'd say that's more than enough justification to get hysterical.


Justifying is never a problem :wink:



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 41,322
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

16 Nov 2017, 10:00 pm

EzraS wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
EzraS wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
EzraS wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
EzraS wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
It aint over till the fat lady sings... or till the Mueller investigation finishes up.


I won't be over then if the investigation doesn't produce what you and others are hoping for. Or even if Trump got booted then all the negativity would just shift over to Pence who's also viewed as a villain. All the fussing won't be over with until a democrat is president again.


Sort of like how the Republicans were with Obama?


The republicans have been way out done when it comes to mass hysteria and outright temper tantrums. Really a dem president will probably be voted in just to shut them the f**k up.


Mass hysteria implies something isn't true. Like the right's birther idiocy.


Mass hysteria refers to real or imagined. Or a combination of the two. Over exaggeration. Mass hysteria like in the movie Chicken Little involves large crowds going berserk. Running around screaming smahing things and setting things on fire etc.


If the sitting President of the United States has possibly compromised himself after receiving help from an adversary to get to the White House, then I'd say that's more than enough justification to get hysterical.


Justifying is never a problem :wink:


If it turns out to be true, would you not be outraged?


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


EzraS
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Sep 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 27,108
Location: Twin Peaks

16 Nov 2017, 10:48 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
EzraS wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
EzraS wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
EzraS wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
EzraS wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
It aint over till the fat lady sings... or till the Mueller investigation finishes up.


I won't be over then if the investigation doesn't produce what you and others are hoping for. Or even if Trump got booted then all the negativity would just shift over to Pence who's also viewed as a villain. All the fussing won't be over with until a democrat is president again.


Sort of like how the Republicans were with Obama?


The republicans have been way out done when it comes to mass hysteria and outright temper tantrums. Really a dem president will probably be voted in just to shut them the f**k up.


Mass hysteria implies something isn't true. Like the right's birther idiocy.


Mass hysteria refers to real or imagined. Or a combination of the two. Over exaggeration. Mass hysteria like in the movie Chicken Little involves large crowds going berserk. Running around screaming smahing things and setting things on fire etc.


If the sitting President of the United States has possibly compromised himself after receiving help from an adversary to get to the White House, then I'd say that's more than enough justification to get hysterical.


Justifying is never a problem :wink:


If it turns out to be true, would you not be outraged?


No I would be dispassionate like I am about most events. Especially remote events that I have no control over and don't affect me directly.



auntblabby
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 94,369
Location: the island of defective toy santas

16 Nov 2017, 11:00 pm

Image



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 41,322
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

16 Nov 2017, 11:54 pm

auntblabby wrote:
Image


I concur. :lol:


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


JohnPowell
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2016
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,806
Location: Palestine

17 Nov 2017, 7:14 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
JohnPowell wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
EzraS wrote:
There's actually considerably more empirical evidence regarding Clinton than Trump. One can conclude that it didn't amount to anything or that she got away with whatever. It's obvious from her emails that she is no saint. Not that Trump is either. But again when it comes to Clinton there's reams of tangible hard evidence that anyone can examine. When it comes to Trump there's mainly alleged evidence, circumstantial evidence and consensus rather than hard evidence. That's why so many people think it's bogus. Also it doesn't look like Clinton is entirely off the hook yet either.


If Clinton is so guilty of anything, why hasn't been brought up on charges? She had been cleared every time she had been investigated, but you wouldn't know that from how the right wing media reports on it, or how right wing Americans just don't want to know the truth about the findings of those investigations.


Is that a serious question? I worry very much if you believe there are people in the positions who could do such a thing, would do such a thing because they just care about justice. A lot of Clinton's crimes were carried out while her husband was President, and lots of people connected to the Clintons were given a pardon in the last hours of his Presidency. She's been sued all over the place. She's literally gotten away with murder, mass murder. While children were starving to death in Iraq, she stopped US charities from giving them aid. I guess that along with the millions of people she's helped kill is what you'd call "unethical". To think it's just the "right wing" that are against Clinton, is ludicrous.


I don't defend her helping to starve Iraqi children, but I hardly think anyone in power, regardless of who they are, would be prosecuted for that, considering how Saddam Hussein has been turned into such a monster in the public eye.
As for all those alleged crimes she committed during her husband's administration - - everything I know about that is pretty much bullshit, particularly about assassinations, prostitution rings, and drug dealing on her orders, created by right wing political hacks.
As far as her getting sued countless times - -well, so did Trump.


So it's OK to kill half a million children because the country has a bad leader? What the f**k? Given what a monster you think Trump is, would that justify killing half a million children in the US? You don't know anything. Nope, they were all true pretty much and the people connected were given pardons on Bill's last day in office, and that isn't a secret. It doesn't matter if right wing hacks wrote about it, it still happened. Oh so that's OK.


_________________
"No one believes more firmly than Comrade Napoleon that all animals are equal. He would be only too happy to let you make your decisions for yourselves. But sometimes you might make the wrong decisions, comrades, and then where should we be?"


JohnPowell
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2016
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,806
Location: Palestine

17 Nov 2017, 7:16 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
JohnPowell wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
EzraS wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
EzraS wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
EzraS wrote:
There's actually considerably more empirical evidence regarding Clinton than Trump. One can conclude that it didn't amount to anything or that she got away with whatever. It's obvious from her emails that she is no saint. Not that Trump is either. But again when it comes to Clinton there's reams of tangible hard evidence that anyone can examine. When it comes to Trump there's mainly alleged evidence, circumstantial evidence and consensus rather than hard evidence. That's why so many people think it's bogus. Also it doesn't look like Clinton is entirely off the hook yet either.


If Clinton is so guilty of anything, why hasn't been brought up on charges? She had been cleared every time she had been investigated, but you wouldn't know that from how the right wing media reports on it, or how right wing Americans just don't want to know the truth about the findings of those investigations.


Just because Hillary hasn't been charged with anything, doesn't eliminate the mountain of hard evidence that's she has been guilty of a lot of wrong doing. That's what the findings are; a lot of wrong doing but nothing she can be prosecuted for, so far. And let's not forget all the stuff Donna Brazile recently laid out regarding Hillary.

Whereas when it comes to Trump being in treasonous collusion with Putin, there's no hard evidence, as so many keep pointing out. There just isn't and that's a fact so far, regardless of being pro or anti Trump. People can keep saying there's no evidence, because there is none and Putin can keep saying he didn't do it and Trump can keep saying the whole thing is false, because there's nothing solid to prove otherwise. At least not yet.


From what Brazile wrote, Clinton is guilty of some pretty underhanded and unethical stuff, but nothing really illegal.
We know Donny Jr had met with the Russians to get the dirt on Clinton, which is in itself proof. There is more than enough proof that Russian trolls in Putin's pay have been manipulating American public opinion. We know that various Trumpites had made visits to Russia at this time, meeting with Russian intelligence leaders. I could go on and on. Ignoring this only shows that one is wearing political blinders.


I agree that Trump jr's meeting with those Russians is very factual. There's very solid evidence of it having occurred. But that's about the only thing there's who what where when why and how evedence of. Virtually nothing else comes close to that. The rest is based on conclusion, conjecture, do the math, connect the dots. But none of it amounts to solid evidence of much or anything at all. I mean if there was any actual proof to back up the accusations I would acknowledge it. The way my mind works I wouldn't have any other choice. But likewise I can't accept accusations as fact without proper evidence.


Even if Donny Jr's Russian misadventures were the only solid piece of evidence, it alone still gives credibility to the rest of the accusations.


No it does not. You can't just make up your own rules. If Russia hacked the election for Trump, he'd have been impeached already. The establishment is against Trump, because he beat their girl.


No, Trump wouldn't be impeached already. That'll happen when the Mueller investigation is complete.


If there was any evidence, Trump would be gone already.


_________________
"No one believes more firmly than Comrade Napoleon that all animals are equal. He would be only too happy to let you make your decisions for yourselves. But sometimes you might make the wrong decisions, comrades, and then where should we be?"


EzraS
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Sep 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 27,108
Location: Twin Peaks

17 Nov 2017, 7:50 pm

JohnPowell wrote:
If there was any evidence, Trump would be gone already.


No no this stuff takes years to compile and then they have to wait for just the right time to strike. Any minute now... any minute... wait for it...



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 41,322
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

17 Nov 2017, 8:58 pm

JohnPowell wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
JohnPowell wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
EzraS wrote:
There's actually considerably more empirical evidence regarding Clinton than Trump. One can conclude that it didn't amount to anything or that she got away with whatever. It's obvious from her emails that she is no saint. Not that Trump is either. But again when it comes to Clinton there's reams of tangible hard evidence that anyone can examine. When it comes to Trump there's mainly alleged evidence, circumstantial evidence and consensus rather than hard evidence. That's why so many people think it's bogus. Also it doesn't look like Clinton is entirely off the hook yet either.


If Clinton is so guilty of anything, why hasn't been brought up on charges? She had been cleared every time she had been investigated, but you wouldn't know that from how the right wing media reports on it, or how right wing Americans just don't want to know the truth about the findings of those investigations.


Is that a serious question? I worry very much if you believe there are people in the positions who could do such a thing, would do such a thing because they just care about justice. A lot of Clinton's crimes were carried out while her husband was President, and lots of people connected to the Clintons were given a pardon in the last hours of his Presidency. She's been sued all over the place. She's literally gotten away with murder, mass murder. While children were starving to death in Iraq, she stopped US charities from giving them aid. I guess that along with the millions of people she's helped kill is what you'd call "unethical". To think it's just the "right wing" that are against Clinton, is ludicrous.


I don't defend her helping to starve Iraqi children, but I hardly think anyone in power, regardless of who they are, would be prosecuted for that, considering how Saddam Hussein has been turned into such a monster in the public eye.
As for all those alleged crimes she committed during her husband's administration - - everything I know about that is pretty much bullshit, particularly about assassinations, prostitution rings, and drug dealing on her orders, created by right wing political hacks.
As far as her getting sued countless times - -well, so did Trump.


So it's OK to kill half a million children because the country has a bad leader? What the f**k? Given what a monster you think Trump is, would that justify killing half a million children in the US? You don't know anything. Nope, they were all true pretty much and the people connected were given pardons on Bill's last day in office, and that isn't a secret. It doesn't matter if right wing hacks wrote about it, it still happened. Oh so that's OK.


Again, starving children is indefensible. I never said otherwise.
As far as Trump being gone by now if he was really guilty, I'll answer that with a question: was Nixon booted out immediately, or did he have to live through an investigation?


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


JohnPowell
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2016
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,806
Location: Palestine

22 Nov 2017, 12:34 pm

EzraS wrote:
JohnPowell wrote:
If there was any evidence, Trump would be gone already.


No no this stuff takes years to compile and then they have to wait for just the right time to strike. Any minute now... any minute... wait for it...


:coffee: Still waiting...


_________________
"No one believes more firmly than Comrade Napoleon that all animals are equal. He would be only too happy to let you make your decisions for yourselves. But sometimes you might make the wrong decisions, comrades, and then where should we be?"


JohnPowell
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2016
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,806
Location: Palestine

22 Nov 2017, 12:36 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
JohnPowell wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
JohnPowell wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
EzraS wrote:
There's actually considerably more empirical evidence regarding Clinton than Trump. One can conclude that it didn't amount to anything or that she got away with whatever. It's obvious from her emails that she is no saint. Not that Trump is either. But again when it comes to Clinton there's reams of tangible hard evidence that anyone can examine. When it comes to Trump there's mainly alleged evidence, circumstantial evidence and consensus rather than hard evidence. That's why so many people think it's bogus. Also it doesn't look like Clinton is entirely off the hook yet either.


If Clinton is so guilty of anything, why hasn't been brought up on charges? She had been cleared every time she had been investigated, but you wouldn't know that from how the right wing media reports on it, or how right wing Americans just don't want to know the truth about the findings of those investigations.


Is that a serious question? I worry very much if you believe there are people in the positions who could do such a thing, would do such a thing because they just care about justice. A lot of Clinton's crimes were carried out while her husband was President, and lots of people connected to the Clintons were given a pardon in the last hours of his Presidency. She's been sued all over the place. She's literally gotten away with murder, mass murder. While children were starving to death in Iraq, she stopped US charities from giving them aid. I guess that along with the millions of people she's helped kill is what you'd call "unethical". To think it's just the "right wing" that are against Clinton, is ludicrous.


I don't defend her helping to starve Iraqi children, but I hardly think anyone in power, regardless of who they are, would be prosecuted for that, considering how Saddam Hussein has been turned into such a monster in the public eye.
As for all those alleged crimes she committed during her husband's administration - - everything I know about that is pretty much bullshit, particularly about assassinations, prostitution rings, and drug dealing on her orders, created by right wing political hacks.
As far as her getting sued countless times - -well, so did Trump.


So it's OK to kill half a million children because the country has a bad leader? What the f**k? Given what a monster you think Trump is, would that justify killing half a million children in the US? You don't know anything. Nope, they were all true pretty much and the people connected were given pardons on Bill's last day in office, and that isn't a secret. It doesn't matter if right wing hacks wrote about it, it still happened. Oh so that's OK.


Again, starving children is indefensible. I never said otherwise.
As far as Trump being gone by now if he was really guilty, I'll answer that with a question: was Nixon booted out immediately, or did he have to live through an investigation?


Yet you think it took Russia hacking the election to "ruin" her.
Well that's odd, because people like you and Clinton already have decided that Russia hacked the election.


_________________
"No one believes more firmly than Comrade Napoleon that all animals are equal. He would be only too happy to let you make your decisions for yourselves. But sometimes you might make the wrong decisions, comrades, and then where should we be?"


Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 41,322
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

22 Nov 2017, 2:16 pm

JohnPowell wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
JohnPowell wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
JohnPowell wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
EzraS wrote:
There's actually considerably more empirical evidence regarding Clinton than Trump. One can conclude that it didn't amount to anything or that she got away with whatever. It's obvious from her emails that she is no saint. Not that Trump is either. But again when it comes to Clinton there's reams of tangible hard evidence that anyone can examine. When it comes to Trump there's mainly alleged evidence, circumstantial evidence and consensus rather than hard evidence. That's why so many people think it's bogus. Also it doesn't look like Clinton is entirely off the hook yet either.


If Clinton is so guilty of anything, why hasn't been brought up on charges? She had been cleared every time she had been investigated, but you wouldn't know that from how the right wing media reports on it, or how right wing Americans just don't want to know the truth about the findings of those investigations.


Is that a serious question? I worry very much if you believe there are people in the positions who could do such a thing, would do such a thing because they just care about justice. A lot of Clinton's crimes were carried out while her husband was President, and lots of people connected to the Clintons were given a pardon in the last hours of his Presidency. She's been sued all over the place. She's literally gotten away with murder, mass murder. While children were starving to death in Iraq, she stopped US charities from giving them aid. I guess that along with the millions of people she's helped kill is what you'd call "unethical". To think it's just the "right wing" that are against Clinton, is ludicrous.


I don't defend her helping to starve Iraqi children, but I hardly think anyone in power, regardless of who they are, would be prosecuted for that, considering how Saddam Hussein has been turned into such a monster in the public eye.
As for all those alleged crimes she committed during her husband's administration - - everything I know about that is pretty much bullshit, particularly about assassinations, prostitution rings, and drug dealing on her orders, created by right wing political hacks.
As far as her getting sued countless times - -well, so did Trump.


So it's OK to kill half a million children because the country has a bad leader? What the f**k? Given what a monster you think Trump is, would that justify killing half a million children in the US? You don't know anything. Nope, they were all true pretty much and the people connected were given pardons on Bill's last day in office, and that isn't a secret. It doesn't matter if right wing hacks wrote about it, it still happened. Oh so that's OK.


Again, starving children is indefensible. I never said otherwise.
As far as Trump being gone by now if he was really guilty, I'll answer that with a question: was Nixon booted out immediately, or did he have to live through an investigation?


Yet you think it took Russia hacking the election to "ruin" her.
Well that's odd, because people like you and Clinton already have decided that Russia hacked the election.


Say for the sake of argument that Russian interference didn't sway the election, if Trump had colluded with them to win, then his act is still treasonous.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


JohnPowell
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2016
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,806
Location: Palestine

22 Nov 2017, 2:56 pm

If I had a million pounds I'd be a millionaire.


_________________
"No one believes more firmly than Comrade Napoleon that all animals are equal. He would be only too happy to let you make your decisions for yourselves. But sometimes you might make the wrong decisions, comrades, and then where should we be?"


Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 41,322
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

22 Nov 2017, 5:43 pm

JohnPowell wrote:
If I had a million pounds I'd be a millionaire.


That if is more likely in some circumstances than others. Like with Trump colluding with the puppet master, Putin.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer