TrumPutinGate

My point had little to do with the weight of your illogic, and much to do with pointing out the inherent problems with your logic.

My logic is actually fairly sound.

But, yes, I am asking you to believe in something of which there is admittedly no current conclusive public proof.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
It's hard to imagine that you're blind to such huge leaps of logic.

"Under Investigation" does not mean "guilty of". The strange thing is that you would not have been on McCarthy's side in his red scare McCarthyism, nor would you have been on the Puritans' side and torching witches.

But on the modern McCarthyism... You're an Olympic Level Logical Long-Jumper.

yep, he has no problems picking and choosing. this is what happens when you base all decisions on emotions and no common sense.
 
Lies will out.

Lies are hard to hide. The truth will come out.

Ill will will out.

Most people have a hard time to always cover up ill will they feel. At some time or other, it shows.

Murder will out.

Murder is hard to hide. The truth of it will be known.

Volprof used the phrase 'murder will out'. That is not threatening anyone with murder. He simply meant that if there were a death involved, and it was murder, the truth would come out in the investigations. He threatened no one.
 
Suspensions of logic aside, I am not a government figure.

I'm an anonymous poster on a sports-linked politics forum.

Your analogy sounds great, but it's not even comparable, unless you think my posts on here hold the same weight as statements made by Senators or congressional witch hunts.

Making the claims I've made - with a name assigned to them (and especially as a politician) - publicly at the moment would be reprehensible.

I'm under no such obligations or duties.

You are not as anonymous as you think you are...
 

Oh, sorry. I thought I had answered that, but I think I confused our conversation with that between my boss and I (he and I constantly have the same conversations).

She is a former conservative British MP, who now lives here. She's a bit controversial, which is why I agree with you on some of the sensationalist claims, but she hangs around Schindler's Twitter circle.

In particular, I found her claims about Rudy and the NYCFBI office interesting. Provocative and interesting. Perhaps sensational, but not implausible, especially given the reality of both Rudy's claim that "something big was coming" and Comey's 11th hour announcement (a hitjob if ever there was one).
 
In particular, I found her claims about Rudy and the NYCFBI office interesting.

I primarily wanted to verify who wrote it, since the website doesn't clearly say.

I've heard others talk about Rudy's influence in the NYFBI.
 
It's starting to leak:

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/3259984-Trump-Intelligence-Allegations.html

If such documents are good enough for Wikileaks, a Russian intel front, then it's good enough for all of us.

No, this is not from Wikileaks, to clarify.

As I've said before, from what I've been reading for a while now, if any of this is true and the GOP knew in advance (which I have been reading it did now for a while), this is potentially the death knell of the GOP.

You can accuse me of being a liberal hack all you want, but none of that changes the potential consequences of this. I'm simply reporting what I know and believe to be fact. If this had happened to a Democrat, it would probably be the same. It just so happened that a Democrat tricked Republicans into thinking he was a Republican, and now the GOP is just going to have to deal with the repercussions.
 
Last edited:
Again, just to re-emphasize, without starting a new thread (which this probably warrants):

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/3259984-Trump-Intelligence-Allegations.html

No, it can't be verified. Nor could the leaks about Hillary.

However, I've said all along that Trump's war on the IC (and believe me, his complete mockery of the CIA which is what his CIA speech last weekend was did nothing to help) would catch up on him.

This may be the beginning. MSM will hold off for a while, waiting to verify. Verification, however, will be largely impossible at the moment.
 
LOL

C3EblksUEAArYTB.jpg:large


Also, when/why was Manning speaking at the CIA?
 
Admittedly, I haven't read it in it's entirety. So what accusations does this one make that the original didn't?

Where did is supposedly come from?

I stand corrected.

You're right; it was the Steele dossier.

Where I received that link through me off.

So, it does not begin...yet.
 
An FSB official was arrested in Russia on treason charges in connection with to the DNC hacks. So this guy first gets the order from Putin then Putin kills him (treason carries death penalty in Russia).

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/25/...-russian-cybercrimes-agent-arrested.html?_r=1

It's being reported that he's being charged with treason for passing info to us about Russia's American election/DNC/Wikileaks intelligence operation.

If there was anyone still doubting our IC for its reports on Russian meddling, if this doesn't finally convince you, then nothing will.
 
It's being reported that he's being charged with treason for passing info to us about Russia's American election/DNC/Wikileaks intelligence operation.

If there was anyone still doubting our IC for its reports on Russian meddling, if this doesn't finally convince you, then nothing will.

I told you that once an official went on record that I would buy the Russians being behind the DNC hack. They did, so I do. I do not buy into at all your theory of Trump or his team being traitors or under the influence of the Kremlin.
 
Advertisement





Back
Top