Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
ms maggie

Collusion?

293 posts in this topic

All Republicans appear to be gravitating toward the alternative reality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Phineas Finn said:

This member is a master of tap dancing along to line of support for whomever the favorite du jour of the right happens in be a any given thread. She won't take an actual stand or commit but she will take pot shots at anti-Trump posters or attempt to deflect whenever possible. Wade through her old posts -- it's obvious.

Oh gee, it's been way too long, PF.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Secret Service: Trump Jr. not under protection during meeting with Russian lawyer

On Sunday morning, Jay Sekulow, a member of Trump's legal team, questioned on ABC News' "This Week" why the Secret Service allowed Trump Jr. to meet Kremlin-linked Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya.

"Well, I wonder why the Secret Service, if this was nefarious, why the Secret Service allowed these people in. The president had Secret Service protection at that point, and that raised a question with me," he said.

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/07/16/donald-trump-jr-russia-lawyer-secret-service-responds-240612


Why is the President's lawyer talking about the Secret Service vetting that meeting?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Cameron said:

Why is the President's lawyer talking about the Secret Service vetting that meeting?

 

 

Because his base believes anything they say?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Norman said:

Because his base believes anything they say?

The only person who had Secret Service protection was the Republican nominee, Trump.

If, as the lawyer says, the Secret Service vetted that meeting, it sounds like Trump was there or was supposed to be there.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Cameron said:

The only person who had Secret Service protection was the Republican nominee, Trump.

If, as the lawyer says, the Secret Service vetted that meeting, it sounds like Trump was there or was supposed to be there.

 

My point is that they just make crap up and if when proven incorrect they adjust and the base doesn't care that it was a lie....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, JoyinMudville said:

... maybe if Trump hadn't repeatedly offended the intelligence community...

Predisent bonzo has also offended the community's intelligence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, jdsample said:

So far, nothing IS happening. 

I see this as a one-way street.  The left (after loving him in the primaries) hates that Trump defeated Hillary.  Most of the people who are permanent government employees are Trump haters.  So they leak stuf that may be true, or may be a lie.  No one knows.  But no one is leaking dirt on Hillary or Obama.  They are loyal soldiers in that cause.  What sane individual would believe Trump's people were the only ones to talk to a Russian during the campaign?  No one. 

Everything you say may or may not be true....for both sides.

However there are two very important points. First an foremost Hillary nor Obama are sending the US down crap river as Trump is. Secondly, yes embedded lefties in the gooberment maybe leaking info as well as people close to Trump that realize he is nuts....since they are leaks we don't know for the most part. BUT and this is important....be it what it may....the GREATEST percentage of leaks....seem to bear out as to 'yes there is/was/and continues to be 'something fishy' with the Trump Administration.

And if you deny that.....well what can I say.

And one can say. well nothing has been proven. But what is the definition of proven? If the definition of proven is that it hasn't been run through the Congressional meat grinder with results ..... yup....but neither has the meat grinder declared that there is no 'here ...here'. And if the definition is that it has NOT been proven in a court of law.....yup....but I am sure that is coming. Mueller ... I am sure ....that he is making sure that if and when he presents this stuff to the courts....that every T will be crossed and every I dotted.

Or....he may say there is no 'here ...here'.

But from my viewpoint... Trump better start getting measured for an orange prison suit......or at the very least MANY of his minions. Which knowing Trump .... will throw under the bus in a heartbeat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, jdsample said:

The media loved him as a candidate because they were sure he was the only one Hillary was guaranteed to beat.  That was very decent of Gore, an honest if dim-witted boob of a candidate.  Meanwhile Hillary cheated in the presidential debates.  Trump did not cheat, and your "ethical challenge" stands withh no evidence to back it up. 

The media loved him as a candidate because he stirred controversy on an almost daily basis with his outrageous antics and comments and this was good for ratings. We're all paying for that cynicism now.

If by cheated you mean, 'did her homework', yes Hillary prepared, Trump did not, and he got his arse handed to him. The Trump chumps just don't care about competence, preparation, intelligence, or moral and ethical standards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JoyinMudville said:

The media loved him as a candidate because he stirred controversy on an almost daily basis with his outrageous antics and comments and this was good for ratings. We're all paying for that cynicism now.

If by cheated you mean, 'did her homework', yes Hillary prepared, Trump did not, and he got his arse handed to him. The Trump chumps just don't care about competence, preparation, intelligence, or moral and ethical standards.

No she cheated by receiving debate questions ahead of time and not owning up to it before the debate.  She used the questions to prepare.  If someone stole a copy of the final exam and gave it to you do you use it to prepare or do you let the professor know his exam has been compromised?  It is clear that the left chooses the former rather than the latter. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, jdsample said:

 It is clear that the left chooses the former rather than the latter. 

 

 

yes, the entire 'left' was in on it.

Oh... and the debate in question was a primary debate between Hillary and Bernie so it doesn't excuse Trump for being totally unprepared for his debate with Hillary.

did anyone ever authenticate the emails?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, JoyinMudville said:

yes, the entire 'left' was in on it.

Oh... and the debate in question was a primary debate between Hillary and Bernie so it doesn't excuse Trump for being totally unprepared for his debate with Hillary.

did anyone ever authenticate the emails?

If you say so.  I thought it was just Hillary and Donna who were cheating, and everyone on the left defending the cheaters.  Which strongly suggests they approve of cheating ad would do the same thing. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, jdsample said:

If you say so.  I thought it was just Hillary and Donna who were cheating, and everyone on the left defending the cheaters.  Which strongly suggests they approve of cheating ad would do the same thing. 

In other words, you were wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, JoyinMudville said:

In other words, you were wrong.

So fill us in on what others were involved.  Please, more dirt! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, jdsample said:

If you say so.  I thought it was just Hillary and Donna who were cheating, and everyone on the left defending the cheaters.  Which strongly suggests they approve of cheating ad would do the same thing. 

Yikes!

For someone so eager to defend Trump, your post is not believable.

There is not a shred of evidence that Hillary cheated.

One was a question about Flint. The other about the death penalty.

It is mundane.

Not sure what Brazile thought she was doing, maybe trying to ingratiate herself.

You have zero evidence  that Hillary Clinton ever saw any of it.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it just gets better... the 8th man in the ring was representing the Agalarovs...one of Trump's Russian business partners...oh my...

Trump's lawyer says " then the Russian lawyer discussed the information she allegedly had about Russia donating to the Democratic National Committee and Hillary Clinton before moving on to the topic of adoptions.".  So the lawyer had information-- possibly on the two pages not accounted for.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/07/17/politics/donald-trump-jr-agalarov/index.html

so the story that nothing about Clinton was mentioned is another lie in the on-going cover up.....I guess those who said it couldn't be collusion because nothing was given to jr. are now going to perform more mental gymnastics to avoid the truth.....

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0