The lights are blinking red

#126
#126
luthervol said:
No, I do not accept that as fact....yet.

I will wait for the conclusion of the Mueller investigation. The harder the right tries to disrupt the investigation, the more probable I find Trump to have colluded.
Click to expand...

Ah, the guilty until proven innocent routine.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#127
#127
Indictments aren't convictions, and we the public have yet to see a shred of this evidence they swear exists. Is it possible Russia interfered? Absolutely. I'll even go so far as to say it's probable they hacked the DNC server even though I don't think that event changed the outcome of the election. But you know what else is possible? That this whole **** show is a manufactured production. Remember, we're talking about what's possible, and just about anything is possible.

Something of this magnitude, if true, we deserve to see the evidence.
 
#128
#128
luthervol said:
You can hang your hat on your position that you do not think that Russia interfered in the election in an attempt to help Trump and hurt Clinton.

Let that be your stated position. It will allow others insight into your mindset.
Click to expand...

Lol...do you want cheese with that melt?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#129
#129
luthervol said:
If you read the latest indictment and still are "in the middle", there is nothing I can provide.

Irrefutable doesn't mean everyone agrees, if so, then there is no irrefutable evidence that the earth is not flat. I will define irrefutable as 98% of rational and reasonable people drawing similar conclusions from the data.

I think we are approaching that number on Russian interference. You never know who the 2 percenters will be. (or maybe you do)
Click to expand...


You haven't even provided evidence, Luther, much less "irrefutable". You have provided hearsay, appeals to authority, and ad hominem attacks.


Again... You really struggle with the concepts of both "rationable" and "reasonable".
 
#131
#131
Weezer said:
Indictments aren't convictions, and we the public have yet to see a shred of this evidence they swear exists. Is it possible Russia interfered? Absolutely. I'll even go so far as to say it's probable they hacked the DNC server even though I don't think that event changed the outcome of the election. But you know what else is possible? That this whole **** show is a manufactured production. Remember, we're talking about what's possible, and just about anything is possible.

Something of this magnitude, if true, we deserve to see the evidence.
Click to expand...


Ding, ding, ding. Luther really is struggling with the concept of "evidence, presented".
 
#133
#133
Orange_Crush said:
You haven't even provided evidence, Luther, much less "irrefutable". You have provided hearsay, appeals to authority, and ad hominem attacks.


Again... You really struggle with the concepts of both "rationable" and "reasonable".
Click to expand...

lol.....Rational and reasonable make up my very foundation. I love the popularity the terms have gained on the PF. Almost equal to x and y.

I'll retract my irrefutable evidence stance. Im not sure if I overestimated or underestimated.
This is the question to which I would find the answers interesting:

From 0% to 100%, how probable to you think it is, based on the information currently available, that Russia interfered in the election with the intent of helping Trump and hurting Clinton?

I'll begin:
My answer is 99.4%
 
#134
#134
luthervol said:
One step at a time.

12 months ago none of you would have agreed that it was an accepted fact that Russia did indeed interfere in an attempt to help Trump and hurt Clinton.

Baby steps. You are being walked to the destination.
Click to expand...

So you’re still going with those Russian meme farms. Your narrative has completely changed. Now you’re saying Russia TRIED to interfere in the election with the intent to HELP trump.

You went from did and collude to try and help.

You sir are humoring us good tonight.
 
Last edited:
#135
#135
#137
#137
tumscalcium said:
Do you’re still going with those Russian meme farms. Your narrative has completely changed. Now you’re saying Russia TRIED to interfere in the election with the intent to HELP trump.

You went from did and collude to try and help.

You sir are humoring us good tonight.
Click to expand...

I said did indeed interfere, not tried. I also said I believe he colluded but will wait on the findings of the Mueller investigation. If you found humor in my changing positions I think it may be more a factor of your miscomprehension. Which humors me good.
 
#138
#138
luthervol said:
lol.....Rational and reasonable make up my very foundation. I love the popularity the terms have gained on the PF. Almost equal to x and y.

I'll retract my irrefutable evidence stance. Im not sure if I overestimated or underestimated.
This is the question to which I would find the answers interesting:

From 0% to 100%, how probable to you think it is, based on the information currently available, that Russia interfered in the election with the intent of helping Trump and hurting Clinton?

I'll begin:
My answer is 99.4%
Click to expand...

This sound fun. I would say 100% that Putin’s wanted to hurt Clinton.

Now 0 to 100% on whether or not Clinton tried to influence their election in 2011.

I’ll begin :
My answer is 99.8% plus or minus .2 %
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#139
#139
AirVol said:
You’re a Bernie guy right? No, wasserface-****z threw a damper on your celebration. She rigged it.
Click to expand...

I was for Bernie a tad over Hillary, largely because of the unwarranted propagandized induced hatred I knew existed toward Hillary.
 
#140
#140
luthervol said:
I said did indeed interfere, not tried. I also said I believe he colluded but will wait on the findings of the Mueller investigation. If you found humor in my changing positions I think it may be more a factor of your miscomprehension. Which humors me good.
Click to expand...

By all means, educate us with your new narrative.
 
#142
#142
Sandman 423 said:
This sound fun. I would say 100% that Putin’s wanted to hurt Clinton.

Now 0 to 100% on whether or not Clinton tried to influence their election in 2011.

I’ll begin :
My answer is 99.8% plus or minus .2 %
Click to expand...

EU Court: Putin's party rigged the 2011 Russian elections - Business Insider

The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) ruled last week that the 2011 Russian parliamentary elections were "unfair" and "compromised," World Affairs Journal reported.

Maybe Hillary was trying to counterbalance Putin's interference to actually make them more fair.
 
#145
#145
luthervol said:
What new narrative are you talking about? Please point it out because I haven't the slightest idea what you're talking about.
Click to expand...

You keep flipping back and forth.

It went from did to tried and now back to did.

Other than the meme farmers what did Russia do to make Trump win?
 
#146
#146
tumscalcium said:
You keep flipping back and forth.

It went from did to tried and now back to did.

Other than the meme farmers what did Russia do to make Trump win?
Click to expand...

If I used the word "tried" at one point (I'm not sure that I did), forgive me. They DID interfere.

Russia seems to have played a significant role in stocking all of the e-mail hysteria on the right. Mueller will provide more answers and better explanations. That's why we have an investigation.
 
#147
#147
Luth, if Russia preferred Trump ask yourself why. Was it because their goal was simply to see how much they could manipulate the election?? Perhaps they didn’t prefer one over the other, but one was so laxed in their security measures the Russians seized an opportunity to see what they could do. Iirc the Dems and Repubs were both warned and the dems chose to do nothing.

Irrefutable? No, but a theory.
 
#148
#148
luthervol said:
If I used the word "tried" at one point (I'm not sure that I did), forgive me. They DID interfere.

Russia seems to have played a significant role in stocking all of the e-mail hysteria on the right. Mueller will provide more answers and better explanations. That's why we have an investigation.
Click to expand...

What did they do that made Trump win?
 
#149
#149
tim said:
Luth, if Russia preferred Trump ask yourself why. Was it because their goal was simply to see how much they could manipulate the election?? Perhaps they didn’t prefer one over the other, but one was so laxed in their security measures the Russians seized an opportunity to see what they could do. Iirc the Dems and Repubs were both warned and the dems chose to do nothing.

Irrefutable? No, but a theory.
Click to expand...

I've asked myself why. There are multiple theories and I have a couple of my own. Let's see what Mueller has to say.
 
#150
#150
luthervol said:
lol.....Rational and reasonable make up my very foundation. I love the popularity the terms have gained on the PF. Almost equal to x and y.

I'll retract my irrefutable evidence stance. Im not sure if I overestimated or underestimated.
This is the question to which I would find the answers interesting:

From 0% to 100%, how probable to you think it is, based on the information currently available, that Russia interfered in the election with the intent of helping Trump and hurting Clinton?

I'll begin:
My answer is 99.4%
Click to expand...

I withhold an opinion due to lack of information.

And again... You have been the antithesis if rational in your posts today. You have been like more than ad hominem attacks and hand waving.
 
Last edited:
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top