Quid pro quo
- Thread starter uncboy10
- Start date
And from the looks of it, so did Hillary's.
The only difference is that you have to go back to 2009 to find a transgression on the Trump side.
Not how it works. Clean up your own mess before you worry about others.
What a spectacularly silly tautology. Your side is imperfect, so criticisms of our side are invalid? HA nice try.
No, its that I just don't give a shit about your complaints when you acknowledge that the people you support engage in the same behavior that you are accusing others of committing.
And I am not admitting that Trump has done anything wrong. On the contrary, I don't think he has nor did he need to.
Who here supports Hillary? Billy was her biggest supporter on this board (as far as I could tell) and he literally just said he's fine with her going to prison. The hypocrisy you're looking for just doesn't exist.
Yeah I remember when you said that very same thing when Obama had his hot mic moment with that Russian.
There are plenty more than just Hillary. How about Bernie's wife? And does she lead to illegal behavior by Bernie? And let's look into Obama's use of the IRS for starters, as well as his complicit behavior in many of the Clintons's schemes.
Get that taken care of and then we can talk Russia.
Not really the same thing. Obama was already elected and there is nothing wrong with what he said in my opinion. What he said is the way the political world works. The Russian's "colluding" with Trump theoretically got him elected and put in power so he could help Russia out.
Explain to me again how the Russians supposedly got Trump elected.
You must have missed where I put colluding in quotes and the word theoretically in front of got him elected. My personal opinion is that they used methods such as online media to try to influence the vote, but I don't think that it actually got him elected. I think the outrage on the left comes from the fact that the Russians actually attempted this in favor of Trump and some are even naïve enough to think this is the first or last time someone will try it.
I seriously doubt that the Russians preferred Trump to Hillary, so none of this makes any sense. They already owned Hillary.
I guess it's possible. Maybe they thought they could do even better with Trump since the GOP controlled congress. Clinton wouldn't have accomplished much in her term outside of executive orders and judicial appointments because of congress.
I still say it's awful hypocritical of people in the US to bitch about Russia interfering in our election when we do it all over the world.
I agree 100%. My guess is many of the people complaining don't know or believe that we do it.
I'll get Robert Mueller right on it . . his schedule is a little full at the moment. More impowtant stuff ya know . .
I have no idea. I think I read somewhere that they bought some Facebook and Twitter ads. I guess they were supposedly behind the email leaks as well.
You would think they blocked the Democratic voters from voting and voted in their place. One of their own, Diane Feinstein said she has seen nothing in the form of collusion.
This is what I'm getting at. People are actually mad - not at the Clintons for their corruption - but at the Russians for supposedly leaking information about the corruption. lol. You can't make this stuff up.
The case has been investigated. It would appear not.
We can talk about Russia without your permission, but thanks. Not that there's any point because you have your head so far up on your ass on this Russia story that you can't see the light of day. Denying that he has any connections to Russia when multiple high ranking members of his campaign and staff have been fired and 3 of whom are now indicted for illegal dealings with Russia and lying about it, just looks stupid. His son publicly stated he took a meeting with a Russian lawyer in attempt to get "dirt" on Hillary and offered a quid pro quo arrangement in exchange for that dirt before realizing she didn't have it.
If you're okay with that then I never want to hear another fukkin word about anthem protests or any other faux patriotic bullshit as if you give a damn about this country or its interests.
Apparently social media and social psychology just goes right over people's heads. The Russians created hundreds of housands of fake social media accounts which infiltrated political groups and discussions on various social media platforms, in order to subvert those groups and hijack the discussion and public narrative. If you change the public perception then you change the way people think. The influence of these tactics is massive.
It's almost pathetic how you all keep coming back to Hillary/Obama to defend trump. Kinda weird how the guy who is supposed to be diametrically opposed to the clintons/Obama keeps acting just like them...
It's almost pathetic how you all keep coming back to Hillary/Obama to defend trump. Kinda weird how the guy who is supposed to be diametrically opposed to the clintons/Obama keeps acting just like them...
Yesterday you said "allegedly" quid pro quo. Which is it, you can't have it both ways?
I'll wait while you get your cussing and name calling just right to post.
Okay he "allegedly" made the offer. Lol I'm sure he would even try to deny that. Ya know kinda like he denied taking the meeting in the first place...
But of course Trump doesn't remember any details surrounding or coming out of these meetings, including the one with papadoupolous despite having "one of the world's great memories."
I'm sorry if a few words offend your delicate sensibilities little snowflake.
What if a politically active American did the same thing as the Russians? Is that bad too? Just trying to get some clarity to all of this.
It's pretty funny that you know everything about this but every time a Democratic member of congress shows up on a show they say they have no evidence of collusion. Where do you get all your inside info?
There's a big difference between allegedly and fact, Websters is your friend. You are a typical liberal. Do you ever have a conversation without getting pissed and name calling? No one here has done that but you. See the pattern?
I'm trying to understand what kind of dirt was needed to be found and exploited about Hillary Clinton. Did they use any of this dirt? From what I recall, she sorta had this in-the-bag until Comey resurfaced with the email thing a week before the election day, and that was the final brick that sunk the dingy. I've always felt like that she had it won until that untimely event.
These Facebook memes seem pretty foolish, but I must consider the test group. You can get average people to go along with literally anything imaginable, if you organize the thing effectively.
I don't necessarily disagree with what you are saying, I just think that the impact of the social media stuff in regards to the election is overblown. Social media is mostly used by younger people who traditionally skew left/liberal/ democratic. I'd be willing to bet that those ads and accounts were seen by more anti Trump people than they were independent and pro Trump people because of that. Plus, how much of that was offset by the "fake news" that was perpetuated, to a smaller degree, by the other side on social media? Saying social media was the cause also ignores the fact that Clinton won the popular vote by a very significant margin.
He has also failed to mention that the Clinton campaign and the DNC paid Fusion GPS who has ties to the Russians. That is totally lost on boy.
Clinton got lazy and lost. She thought she had it in the bag. Trump played the electoral map and she neglected it.
Nothing huge came out of it in my opinion. I would say the biggest two things that hurt her were the "collusion" with the DNC to help her with debate questions and some of the things she said behind closed doors in her speeches. Other than that it wasn't too exciting. I have a hard time thinking she had it in the bag until Comey resurfaced though. But even if that is the case, she has no one to blame but herself. Had she not mishandled the emails the investigation would have never happened.
Don't be an idiot if you can help it. And after that, tell me one illegal thing done by the Trump Campaign. Just one.
Kindly point me to my dissenting comments about anthem protests and other "patriotic bullshit".
And if you can't do either of those things, then sit back down son and let the adults talk.
Do we really need to break down the definition of evidence and the burden of proof in a criminal case? They don't have material evidence of collusion, yet. That doesn't mean that the facts of the case don't clearly point towards collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russian state. Stating that you have evidence before you actually acquire it is how you get hit with a slander charge.
Yes, I'm a liberal. But I'm not pissed off on any level, at least not at the moment.
Liberal:
- open to new behavior or opinions and willing to discard traditional values.
"they have more liberal views toward marriage and divorce than some people - (of education) concerned mainly with broadening a person's general knowledge and experience, rather than with technical or professional training.
