Sol Rosenberg

Drip Drip Drip

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

You're right - I shared my interpretation of the comments, and that interpretation was driven by the "I'll have more flexibility then" portion of Pres Obama's comment. 

2 hours ago, learningJ24 said:

It's AN interpretation but, since the actual wording was "after my election I'll have more flexibillity" it leans toward "not right now" rather than "help me out".

And this is the key problem here. There is no two ways to look at the actions of Trump's campaign. What members of that campaign did breached the Logan Act. Which is wrong unless you're Dog and can't admit to anything wrong being done by the GOP presidential candidate for fear of tainting the wider party's rep.

When it comes to Obama, there is a short snippet that, even given the basic benefit of doubt, reads as a simple statement of fact - one has more flexibility to negotiate foreign policy outside an election campaign. Not "If you give me space and then I'll give you better treatment". Merely, "anything negotiated in the spotlight of any presidents campaign will be subject to electoral pressures"

Of course, if you're looking to find flaw in Obama and his statement, then due to it being short and heard without knowing anything else about the negotiations that happen off mike, you can say it could mean he wanted to negotiate space for flexibility later. Maybe. To prove that, you'd need more than what's on the tape and that "little bit extra" comes from assumptions and hypotheticals of people wanting to find flaw with the Democratic President.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Bent Sailor said:

And this is the key problem here. There is no two ways to look at the actions of Trump's campaign. What members of that campaign did breached the Logan Act. Which is wrong unless you're Dog and can't admit to anything wrong being done by the GOP presidential candidate for fear of tainting the wider party's rep.

 

You're so full of shit. Cite for us the violations of the logan act.

Share this post


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

You're so full of shit. Cite for us the violations of the logan act.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/2017/12/04/why_the_trump_team_should_fear_the_logan_act_428161.html

Unlike you, Dog, I check my sources before I make claims. That way I don't have to flail about looking for a distraction when the facts are exposed like you do.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/2017/12/04/why_the_trump_team_should_fear_the_logan_act_428161.html

Unlike you, Dog, I check my sources before I make claims. That way I don't have to flail about looking for a distraction when the facts are exposed like you do.

 

You're intitled to their opinion but that's all it is. The FBI has the transcript of Flynn's discussions should be open and shut right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No need for the FBI transcript but I like the way you’re thinking. Flynn has plea bargained in exchange for testimony. You can infer the Logan Act violations he isn’t getting prosecuted for from his signed statement of offense.

Share this post


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

You're intitled to their opinion but that's all it is.

You asked for a cite, I provided it. It's not their opinion that I was relying on, merely the cited action. You once again leapt before checking if it was safe, so don't blame me for hurting yourself.

If you had the balls, you'd explain where Flynn obtained the necessary authority from the federal government (recalling Obama was still president) to negotiate with the Russian ambassador to delay a UN vote on a resolution or use Russia’s veto to prevent it from passing. Of course, you lack said balls, so you're flailing about looking for a way to make his cited actions "opinion". They're not - you're just wrong.

 

3 minutes ago, Dog said:

The FBI has the transcript of Flynn's discussions should be open and shut right?

Yup, and I expect that open & shut nature is why Flynn was so willing to plead guilty to a lesser crime. Are you trying to imply that not being charged for a crime means it didn't occur?

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, learningJ24 said:

 Unreliable perhaps, hostile maybe, but enemy?

Sounds just like the USA from our viewpoint.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Bent Sailor said:

Yup, and I expect that open & shut nature is why Flynn was so willing to plead guilty to a lesser crime. Are you trying to imply that not being charged for a crime means it didn't occur?

It wasn’t a crime until he was tricked. 

Share this post


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

Breaking

Micheal Cohen to testify publicly in front of the house oversight committee.  Isn’t Democrat oversight fun?

https://www.mediaite.com/trump/breaking-michael-cohen-to-testify-publicly-before-house/

Will he be wearing an orange jumpsuit and flip flops?

Share this post


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

Breaking

Micheal Cohen to testify publicly in front of the house oversight committee.  Isn’t Democrat oversight fun?

https://www.mediaite.com/trump/breaking-michael-cohen-to-testify-publicly-before-house/

I get the feeling it's going to be 3 hours of "I can't comment on an ongoing investigation"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Mike G said:

I get the feeling it's going to be 3 hours of "I can't comment on an ongoing investigation"

I think it will be 3 hours of TRUMP FUCKED YOU ALL IN THE ASS!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Mike G said:

I get the feeling it's going to be 3 hours of "I can't comment on an ongoing investigation"

Let's take this in camera.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Mrleft8 said:

I think it will be 3 hours of TRUMP PUTIN FUCKED YOU ALL IN THE ASS!

FIFY

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Prosecutors Examining Ukrainians Who Flocked to Trump Inaugural

Quote

They attended meetings and orchestrated encounters at Trump International Hotel with influential Republican members of Congress and close allies of President Trump. Representing a range of views, including a contingent seen as sympathetic to Moscow, they positioned themselves as brokers who could help solve one of the thorniest foreign policy problems facing the new administration — the ugly military stalemate between Russia and Ukraine and the tough sanctions imposed on Moscow following its seizure of Crimea.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/10/us/politics/ukraine-donald-trump-inauguration.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cache of drugs and guns shown at Trump's TX photo op were SEIZED AT LEGAL POINTS OF ENTRY.

Trump spent most of the day near the U.S.-Mexico border in Texas, a visit many in Washington see as a precursor to an emergency declaration after talks with congressional leaders imploded the day before. 

“Well, we can declare a national emergency. We shouldn’t have to because this is just common sense,” Trump told reporters on the banks of the Rio Grande River, flanked by border agents and piles of plastic-wrapped drugs seized at the frontier. 

Parts of Trump’s border tour undercut his claim that the wall is essential to stopping drugs and illegal entries at the border. 

A Customs and Border Protections (CBP) agent said a cache of drugs and guns sitting on tables in front of Trump at the station were mostly seized at legal ports of entry, not areas of the border that would be protected by a wall. 

https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/424837-trump-moves-toward-declaring-emergency-to-build-wall

Share this post


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

Cache of drugs and guns shown at Trump's TX photo op were SEIZED AT LEGAL POINTS OF ENTRY.

Trump spent most of the day near the U.S.-Mexico border in Texas, a visit many in Washington see as a precursor to an emergency declaration after talks with congressional leaders imploded the day before. 

“Well, we can declare a national emergency. We shouldn’t have to because this is just common sense,” Trump told reporters on the banks of the Rio Grande River, flanked by border agents and piles of plastic-wrapped drugs seized at the frontier. 

Parts of Trump’s border tour undercut his claim that the wall is essential to stopping drugs and illegal entries at the border. 

A Customs and Border Protections (CBP) agent said a cache of drugs and guns sitting on tables in front of Trump at the station were mostly seized at legal ports of entry, not areas of the border that would be protected by a wall. 

https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/424837-trump-moves-toward-declaring-emergency-to-build-wall

"Guns first, due process second." Trump is a proud gun-grabber. 

 https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2018/02/28/trump_disagrees_with_mike_pence_on_gun_confiscation_guns_first_due_process_second.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Bent Sailor said:

You asked for a cite, I provided it. It's not their opinion that I was relying on, merely the cited action. You once again leapt before checking if it was safe, so don't blame me for hurting yourself.

If you had the balls, you'd explain where Flynn obtained the necessary authority from the federal government (recalling Obama was still president) to negotiate with the Russian ambassador to delay a UN vote on a resolution or use Russia’s veto to prevent it from passing. Of course, you lack said balls, so you're flailing about looking for a way to make his cited actions "opinion". They're not - you're just wrong.

 

Yup, and I expect that open & shut nature is why Flynn was so willing to plead guilty to a lesser crime. Are you trying to imply that not being charged for a crime means it didn't occur?

 

 

Flynn's authority came from the people, he was advisor to the president elect. It is entirely routine for a transition team preparing to take office to have discussions with foreign officials. This is another case of the customary seen as criminal by the TDS afflicted. Candidate Obama didn't even wait until he was elected to do it.

Now it was you who charged a violation of the Logan Act the onus is on you to prove it...Go!

 

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, badlatitude said:
8 hours ago, Mark K said:

You hear that Tom Ray? Thoughts and prayers to you buddy.

This is supposed to be news to me?

On 12/30/2018 at 6:45 PM, dogballs Tom said:

I was only sorta kidding about the bump stocka, by the way.

Obama looked at the issue and decided he could do nothing without unduly usurping power that rightfully belongs to Congress.

Trump looked at the same issue and decided to usurp away and quickly passed more gun control than Obama managed in his two terms.

Obama was clearly preferable on that issue.

On 1/10/2019 at 4:52 AM, dogballs Tom said:

Trump is clearly the more power hungry gun grabber when it suits him, but TeamR doesn't seem to say a thing about it.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, badlatitude said:

HUH?

Image may contain: 1 person

What? Americans are disappearing through the southern border? EGADS! Build a wall to keep them in!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mrleft8 said:

HUH?

I think the context was taken out.

 

I think...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Bent Sailor said:

You asked for a cite, I provided it. It's not their opinion that I was relying on, merely the cited action. You once again leapt before checking if it was safe, so don't blame me for hurting yourself.

If you had the balls, you'd explain where Flynn obtained the necessary authority from the federal government (recalling Obama was still president) to negotiate with the Russian ambassador to delay a UN vote on a resolution or use Russia’s veto to prevent it from passing. Of course, you lack said balls, so you're flailing about looking for a way to make his cited actions "opinion". They're not - you're just wrong.

 

Yup, and I expect that open & shut nature is why Flynn was so willing to plead guilty to a lesser crime. Are you trying to imply that not being charged for a crime means it didn't occur?

 

 

That's Doggy Stylin' for you. No conviction = no crime, guilty pleas don't count, nor does copping a plea to a lesser  crime to avoid prosecution for a greater one.

Oh and whatabout Obama!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Mrleft8 said:

What? Americans are disappearing through the southern border? EGADS! Build a wall to keep them in!

We will have to get to the bottom of the president's confusion first, it may take decades to do that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great idea Rudy -

https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/424871-exclusive-trump-team-should-be-allowed-to-correct-final-mueller

Excerpt -

Rudy Giuliani says President Trump’s legal team should be allowed to “correct” special counsel Robert Mueller’s final report before Congress or the American people get the chance to read it.

The claim, made in a telephone interview with The Hill on Thursday evening, goes further than the president’s legal advisers have ever gone before in arguing they have a right to review the conclusions of Mueller’s probe, which is now in its 20th month

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Remodel said:

That's Doggy Stylin' for you. No conviction = no crime, guilty pleas don't count, nor does copping a plea to a lesser  crime to avoid prosecution for a greater one.

Oh and whatabout Obama!

Good lemming.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Dog said:

Good lemming.

Drizzle drazzle droozle dred. Time for doggy to go to bed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Dog said:

Flynn's authority came from the people, he was advisor to the president elect.

I'm sure you think that's a great moral argument, but that's not how the law works. He required authorisation from the federal government, not the people. He broke the law. No matter how unfair, immoral, or broken you might think it is. 

Cite provided, facts sworn in court, Flynn broke the law as written. Stop digging Dog. 

 

14 hours ago, Dog said:

Now it was you who charged a violation of the Logan Act the onus is on you to prove it. 

Done and done. The law says what it says, not what you want it to say. His sworn statement shows he broke the law as written. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Dog said:

Good lemming.

Never mind, that. You need to pile some Dog shit on this:

In the days after President Trump fired then FBI director James B. Comey, the FBI became so concerned by his behavior that they opened a counter intelligence investigation into whether he was working for Russia, the New York Times reports. Counterintelligence investigators for the FBI were considering whether the president’s own actions constituted a possible threat to national security. Two instances in which Trump publicly tied the Comey firing to the Russia investigation reportedly helped prompt the counterintelligence aspect of the inquiry, which was taken over by Special counsel Robert Mueller when he was appointed days after Comey was fired. It is unknown if Mueller is still pursuing the counterintelligence angle.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/fbi-opened-probe-into-trump-whether-trump-was-secretly-working-for-russia?ref=home

Share this post


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

Never mind, that. You need to pile some Dog shit on this:

In the days after President Trump fired then FBI director James B. Comey, the FBI became so concerned by his behavior that they opened a counter intelligence investigation into whether he was working for Russia, the New York Times reports. Counterintelligence investigators for the FBI were considering whether the president’s own actions constituted a possible threat to national security. Two instances in which Trump publicly tied the Comey firing to the Russia investigation reportedly helped prompt the counterintelligence aspect of the inquiry, which was taken over by Special counsel Robert Mueller when he was appointed days after Comey was fired. It is unknown if Mueller is still pursuing the counterintelligence angle.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/fbi-opened-probe-into-trump-whether-trump-was-secretly-working-for-russia?ref=home

That happens with every president.  It's not like he produced a thought provoking Birth Certificate!  

Share this post


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

I'm sure you think that's a great moral argument, but that's not how the law works. He required authorisation from the federal government, not the people. He broke the law. No matter how unfair, immoral, or broken you might think it is. 

Cite provided, facts sworn in court, Flynn broke the law as written. Stop digging Dog. 

 

Done and done. The law says what it says, not what you want it to say. His sworn statement shows he broke the law as written. 

It's not a moral arguement, it's reality.

And BTW....Flynn did not sware in court that he violated the Logan Act.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Clove Hitch said:

Never mind, that. You need to pile some Dog shit on this:

In the days after President Trump fired then FBI director James B. Comey, the FBI became so concerned by his behavior that they opened a counter intelligence investigation into whether he was working for Russia, the New York Times reports. Counterintelligence investigators for the FBI were considering whether the president’s own actions constituted a possible threat to national security. Two instances in which Trump publicly tied the Comey firing to the Russia investigation reportedly helped prompt the counterintelligence aspect of the inquiry, which was taken over by Special counsel Robert Mueller when he was appointed days after Comey was fired. It is unknown if Mueller is still pursuing the counterintelligence angle.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/fbi-opened-probe-into-trump-whether-trump-was-secretly-working-for-russia?ref=home

The FBI investigated Trump....shocking!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Olsonist said:
1 hour ago, Dog said:

It's not a moral arguement, it's reality.

And BTW....Flynn did not sware in court that he violated the Logan Act.

STATEMENT OF THE OFFENSE

https://www.justice.gov/file/1015126/download

image.png.667f5d682bb442211a3f93a5db66435f.png

Did the Dog relate an Alternative Fact? I'm shocked, shocked, I tell you..... I thought he was such an honest fellow.....

-DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Olsonist said:
1 hour ago, Dog said:

It's not a moral arguement, it's reality.

And BTW....Flynn did not sware in court that he violated the Logan Act.

STATEMENT OF THE OFFENSE

https://www.justice.gov/file/1015126/download

image.png.667f5d682bb442211a3f93a5db66435f.png

Dog's correct.  Flynn didn't "sware" in court.  Whatever the fuck that is....

Share this post


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

Did the Dog relate an Alternative Fact? I'm shocked, shocked, I tell you..... I thought he was such an honest fellow.....

-DSK

 

Dog, the Painfully Pedantic Pet!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fun facts -

The Logan Act was passed in 1799. Since then, there have been two indictments (the last occurred in 1853)  and zero convictions. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Dog said:

It's not a moral arguement, it's reality.

It's not an "arguement" at all. It's also not correct that Trump being the president elect gave Flynn the required federal government authority to negotiate as required by the Logan Act.

 

11 hours ago, Dog said:

And BTW....Flynn did not sware in court that he violated the Logan Act.

Didn't say he did. I said he swore that he took actions which violate the Logan Act.

He has sworn that he negotiated with Russian diplomats on foreign policy before Trump was president. He was not authorised by the current president at the time to negotiate with them. He has therefore sworn to actions which breach the act.

If I testify to killing someone in cold blood, I don't need to have said the words "which means I committed homicide which is against the law" for me to be guilty of breaching the law. Your flailing is getting desperate Dog. This is about the time you start blurting out "bullshit" like a cow rustler with Tourette's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Bent Sailor said:

This is about the time you start blurting out "bullshit" like a cow rustler with Tourette's.

Dont' forget "Bla bla bla"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No big deal. A nothingburger. Every president does this.

President Trump has gone to extraordinary lengths to conceal details of his conversations with Russian President Vladi­mir Putin, including on at least one occasion taking possession of the notes of his own interpreter and instructing the linguist not to discuss what had transpired with other administration officials, current and former U.S. officials said.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/trump-has-concealed-details-of-his-face-to-face-encounters-with-putin-from-senior-officials-in-administration/2019/01/12/65f6686c-1434-11e9-b6ad-9cfd62dbb0a8_story.html?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-main_trumpputin-635pm%3Ahomepage%2Fstory-ans&utm_term=.f59a6cf54754

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Nice! said:

No big deal. A nothingburger. Every president does this.

President Trump has gone to extraordinary lengths to conceal details of his conversations with Russian President Vladi­mir Putin, including on at least one occasion taking possession of the notes of his own interpreter and instructing the linguist not to discuss what had transpired with other administration officials, current and former U.S. officials said.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/trump-has-concealed-details-of-his-face-to-face-encounters-with-putin-from-senior-officials-in-administration/2019/01/12/65f6686c-1434-11e9-b6ad-9cfd62dbb0a8_story.html?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-main_trumpputin-635pm%3Ahomepage%2Fstory-ans&utm_term=.f59a6cf54754

Wonder if Mr Mueller has had a nice chat with the cunning linguist?

Or if there was a counter intel op running as we are now learning,  were other means used  to gain an understanding of just what was said in those many meetings?

Do they have a tape of Donnie swallowing?

Gonna be Horrible,  everyone is saying it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

So between NYT and WaPo, we have learned, in the past 24 hours, that Trump was the subject of an FBI counterintelligence investigation for working on behalf of Russia and that he attempted to stop U.S. officials from having a record of his conversations with Russia's president.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Que a twitter eruption the size of Vesuvius in 5,4,3,2,1

Gonna be  yuge, bigly and horrible,  everyone is saying so.

Just how does one arrest a sitting pres for treason with a secret service charged with protecting the  motherfucker?

Think Muellers report might be the least of Donnies problems this week.....just saying:rolleyes:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Navig8tor said:

Que a twitter eruption the size of Vesuvius in 5,4,3,2,1

Gonna be  yuge, bigly and horrible,  everyone is saying so.

Just how does one arrest a sitting pres for treason with a secret service charged with protecting the  motherfucker?

Think Muellers report might be the least of Donnies problems this week.....just saying:rolleyes:

 

The only new item in this news is the FBI investigation of him as a potential Russian agent. All the rest of it has been well known, and dismissed by the Trumpublicans..... maybe we should rename the GOP the Russiablicans?

-DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For those capable of considering an alternate view....

“The (New York) Times story is an unwitting disclosure and verification of the utter corruption of their oaths by (fired FBI Director James) Comey and his colleagues to undermine the free election of the President of the United States. It was apparently done under the supervision of the Deputy Attorney General, who was reportedly ready to wear a wire to ensnare President Trump. This is the stuff of banana republic's and dictatorships. This despicable, unlawful, official conduct undermines our entire federal criminal justice system which protects our liberty as a free people.” John Dowd

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Dog said:

For those capable of considering an alternate view....

“The (New York) Times story is an unwitting disclosure and verification of the utter corruption of their oaths by (fired FBI Director James) Comey and his colleagues to undermine the free election of the President of the United States. It was apparently done under the supervision of the Deputy Attorney General, who was reportedly ready to wear a wire to ensnare President Trump. This is the stuff of banana republic's and dictatorships. This despicable, unlawful, official conduct undermines our entire federal criminal justice system which protects our liberty as a free people.” John Dowd

 

 

it's not hard to see the fbi's slant on the trump campaign - he was basically an unknown commodity and was surrounded by some shaky (now criminal) characters.  they had to assume the worst, and that's what we expect them to do

most candidates for president are long term politicians that are well known to the fbi - and are truly vetted by the election process.  no one really expected trump to win, even with the russian meddling, and when he did - the fbi was way behind the curve.  add up candidate trump's views on russia, the meddling, and the dossier and the fbi freaked.

did they do the right thing? I'd say yes.  did they go too far?  the ig findings and mueller's report will tell us that

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, hermetic said:

did they do the right thing? I'd say yes.  did they go too far?  the ig findings and mueller's report will tell us that

+1

Right on! Unfortunately in the bizarro world of Doggy Styling, they are doing everything possible to quash or discredit the investigations to protect a criminal that they "don't support."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, hermetic said:

it's not hard to see the fbi's slant on the trump campaign - he was basically an unknown commodity and was surrounded by some shaky (now criminal) characters.  they had to assume the worst, and that's what we expect them to do

most candidates for president are long term politicians that are well known to the fbi - and are truly vetted by the election process.  no one really expected trump to win, even with the russian meddling, and when he did - the fbi was way behind the curve.  add up candidate trump's views on russia, the meddling, and the dossier and the fbi freaked.

did they do the right thing? I'd say yes.  did they go too far?  the ig findings and mueller's report will tell us that

Saying the FBI freaked is generous. There's lots of evidence their actions were calculated and politically motivated. References to "insurance policies"  and "we won't let that happen" wrt Trump's election. Bruce Ohr functioning as a conduit between Steele and the FBI. The use Hillary's opposition research dirt that they held to be "salacious and unverified" to get a warrant to spy on Carter Page who today is walking around a free man.

Consider the stark difference between how the Hillary investigation matter was conducted with it premature exoneration memo and immunity deals and how Trump and associates are being investigated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Dog said:

Saying the FBI freaked is generous. There's lots of evidence their actions were calculated and politically motivated. ....     ...

OTOH there is even more evidence that Team Trump was working hand-in-glove with the Russians. Hell they hired one guy based on his claims of being close to Putin and another based on his claims that he was himself a Russian spy and could bring KGB assistance. One of their main figures was making a lot of money consulting with the Russians on stuff that was described as treasonous by a Republican-appointed judge who saw unredacted evidence.

So, we have Team Trump's yelling about Deep State Conspiracy, and then we have the facts. Hmm, tough call

-DSK

Share this post


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

OTOH there is even more evidence that Team Trump was working hand-in-glove with the Russians. Hell they hired one guy based on his claims of being close to Putin and another based on his claims that he was himself a Russian spy and could bring KGB assistance. One of their main figures was making a lot of money consulting with the Russians on stuff that was described as treasonous by a Republican-appointed judge who saw unredacted evidence.

So, we have Team Trump's yelling about Deep State Conspiracy, and then we have the facts. Hmm, tough call

-DSK

If Trump is working for the Russians why did he resume the sale of arms to Russia's neighbors?

Why is he insisting that NATO nations up their defense spending?

Why is he working to undermine Russia's strangle hold on European energy? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Dog said:
1 hour ago, hermetic said:

it's not hard to see the fbi's slant on the trump campaign - he was basically an unknown commodity and was surrounded by some shaky (now criminal) characters.  they had to assume the worst, and that's what we expect them to do

most candidates for president are long term politicians that are well known to the fbi - and are truly vetted by the election process.  no one really expected trump to win, even with the russian meddling, and when he did - the fbi was way behind the curve.  add up candidate trump's views on russia, the meddling, and the dossier and the fbi freaked.

did they do the right thing? I'd say yes.  did they go too far?  the ig findings and mueller's report will tell us that

Saying the FBI freaked is generous. There's lots of evidence their actions were calculated and politically motivated. References to "insurance policies"  and "we won't let that happen" wrt Trump's election. Bruce Ohr functioning as a conduit between Steele and the FBI. The use Hillary's opposition research dirt that they held to be "salacious and unverified" to get a warrant to spy on Carter Page who today is walking around a free man.

Consider the stark difference between how the Hillary investigation matter was conducted with it premature exoneration memo and immunity deals and how Trump and associates are being investigated.

as I said, the ig report will tell us about any fbi overreach that may have occured

as to the difference in the way the two investigations were / are conducted, I'd love to have a time machine and see where the trump investigation would have gone if flynn hadn't lied about those phone calls.  he certainly gave the fbi all the evidence they needed to suspect something was being hidden - if you're going to lie about something silly, what else is there?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Dog said:

If Trump is working for the Russians why did he resume the sale of arms to Russia's neighbors?

 

He didn't. The sale of arms was negotiated before he took office.

Aside from that, we've seen how Trump loves to claim he's good at business, so he thinks "selling stuff" is a way of WINNING!!

 

1 minute ago, Dog said:

 

Why is he insisting that NATO nations up their defense spending?

 

He's not. He tried to beat them up to pay the US protection money. Trying to get NATO to up it's defense spending is the State Dept's spin on this, as a matter of semi-adult policy.

 

3 minutes ago, Dog said:

Why is he working to undermine Russia's strangle hold on European energy? 

I'm not at all convinced that he is. What factual evidence can you offer? I hope you've got something better than ending the "War On (Beautiful Clean) Coal"

-DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Dog said:

Saying the FBI freaked is generous. There's lots of evidence their actions were calculated and politically motivated. References to "insurance policies"  and "we won't let that happen" wrt Trump's election. Bruce Ohr functioning as a conduit between Steele and the FBI. The use Hillary's opposition research dirt that they held to be "salacious and unverified" to get a warrant to spy on Carter Page who today is walking around a free man.

Consider the stark difference between how the Hillary investigation matter was conducted with it premature exoneration memo and immunity deals and how Trump and associates are being investigated.

You’re one traitorous bitch. But you knew that

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Dog said:

If Trump is working for the Russians why did he resume the sale of arms to Russia's neighbors?

Why is he insisting that NATO nations up their defense spending?

Why is he working to undermine Russia's strangle hold on European energy? 

Lie, lie, lie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Dog said:

blah blah blah

If Trump is working for the russians he'd be:

-giving them classified information

-actively undermining the EU

-actively undermining NATO

-reducing sanctions on their criminals

-turning a blind eye to murder

-acting like Putin's bitch in public

-hiding all information about meetings with Putin

 

Russian State TV loves Trumps dumbfuckery. They laugh every day at people like you dog.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/7/2019 at 8:28 PM, Mrleft8 said:

Rotting potatoes are about  the only thing that smells worse than rotting onions, and that's tertiary to rotting chicken....

 You get a pot or rotting raw onions, potatoes, and chicken backs...... ! You got yourself, YEEEEEEWWWWWIE , some gator bait!

Spend some time working in a grocery store, and learn... rotting potatoes, or onions, or even chicken, are nothing, compared to rotten watermelon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, frenchie said:

Spend some time working in a grocery store, and learn... rotting potatoes, or onions, or even chicken, are nothing, compared to rotten watermelon.

Hence the look on this poor kid's face.

l-40048-when-my-name-is-in-a-math-proble

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Raz'r said:

Lie, lie, lie

They’re not lies if one is a True Believer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

If Trump is working for the russians he'd be:

-giving them classified information

-actively undermining the EU

-actively undermining NATO

-reducing sanctions on their criminals

-turning a blind eye to murder

-acting like Putin's bitch in public

-hiding all information about meetings with Putin

 

Russian State TV loves Trumps dumbfuckery. They laugh every day at people like you dog.

Wait a second! Trump did all that! This devastating reveal of Trump will surely cause Dog to change his mind about the Traitor in Chief.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Fakenews said:

Wait a second! Trump did all that! This devastating reveal of Trump will surely cause Dog to change his mind about the Traitor in Chief.

Only if the GOP's Greatest Patriot switches his party affiliation (back to democRAT). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Dog said:

Saying the FBI freaked is generous. There's lots of evidence their actions were calculated and politically motivated. References to "insurance policies"  and "we won't let that happen" wrt Trump's election. Bruce Ohr functioning as a conduit between Steele and the FBI. The use Hillary's opposition research dirt that they held to be "salacious and unverified" to get a warrant to spy on Carter Page who today is walking around a free man.

Consider the stark difference between how the Hillary investigation matter was conducted with it premature exoneration memo and immunity deals and how Trump and associates are being investigated.

 All you need to do to grasp this (assuming for the moment that you do want to understand this) is imagine that Hillary and many on her team had been lying to the FBI about their contacts with Russians...and the FBI launched a counter intelligence investigation because of those lies.  

Share this post


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

 All you need to do to grasp this (assuming for the moment that you do want to understand this) is imagine that Hillary and many on her team had been lying to the FBI about their contacts with Russians...and the FBI launched a counter intelligence investigation because of those lies.  

All you need to grasp this is to compare what happened to those who lied to investigators in the Hillary email matter and what happened to those who lied to investigators in the Russia investigation.

Same offense, completely different outcomes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Dog said:

All you need to grasp this is compare what happened to those who lied to investigators in the Hillary email matter and what happened to those who lied to investigators in the Russia investigation.

Same offense completely different outcomes.

I see the goal posts have moved from the FBI having grounds to conduct and investigation. I could mention Hillary having to endure testifying before Congress under oath for 8 hours on that matter...and the contents thereof, but what would be the point? 

 

 

Share this post


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

I see the goal posts have moved from the FBI having grounds to conduct and investigation. I could mention Hillary having to endure testifying before Congress under oath for 8 hours on that matter...and the contents thereof, but what would be the point? 

Looking forward to watching Trump endure testifying before Congress under oath for 8 hours on each of many matters.... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, d'ranger said:

Dog has OD'ed on the koolaid.

Do you think the FBI investigated Hillary and Co. as aggressively as it did Trump and Co?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, kent_island_sailor said:

Because Hillary did (or at least Fox says she did) X, then a Russian stooge as president is fine with the canine.

 

Not only that, "if you like your doctor you can keep your doctor" which is a total fucking lie. I even built a cage to keep mine in, then found out I couldn't after all

-DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Sidecar said:

Looking forward to watching Trump endure testifying before Congress under oath for 8 hours on each of many matters.... 

Probably quicker to throw the fucker in jail for lying under oath first,  because you know he just can't help himself,  then ask the him questions, you might get a slightly more honest version of his "truth"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Navig8tor said:

Probably quicker to throw the fucker in jail for lying under oath first because you know he just can't help himself, and then ask the him questions, you might get a slightly more honest version of his "truth"

Do you think all politicians who lie under oath should be thrown in jail?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Dog said:

All you need to grasp this is to compare what happened to those who lied to investigators in the Hillary email matter and what happened to those who lied to investigators in the Russia investigation.

Same offense, completely different outcomes.

Was anyone in Hillary's campaign convicted of crimes? Did any of her campaign staff plead guilty to any crimes?

 No conviction, no crime.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Navig8tor said:

Probably quicker to throw the fucker in jail for lying under oath first because you know he just can't help himself, and then ask the him questions, you might get a slightly more honest version of his "truth"

We should start a pool to see how long it takes for Trump to shoot himself in the foot in front of Congress.. I reckon 8 minutes.

7 minutes ago, Dog said:

Do you think all politicians who lie under oath should be thrown in jail?

In a courtroom yes.....

I recall one particular Congress trying to impeach a certain President for a lie? How many do you think Trump will tell in 8 hours?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Dog said:

Do you think the FBI investigated Hillary and Co. as aggressively as it did Trump and Co?

they didn't find as much shit to wallow in, now did they?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Mrleft8 said:

Was anyone in Hillary's campaign convicted of crimes? Did any of her campaign staff plead guilty to any crimes?

 No conviction, no crime.

Convicted, are you kidding? Hillary associates who lied to investigators didn't even get charged, they got immunity deals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Dog said:

Do you think all politicians who lie under oath should be thrown in jail?

Not necessarily, but I think there should be dramatic consequences.

However when the POTUS has told 6200 verifiable lies as of Nov 2018 credited to him and a record 83 lies told in one friggin day with NO consequences, it is easy to conclude he is a lying sack of shit.

His average for 2018 was 15 a day!.

The lies per day....... (Do you not find that an ironic KPI for a sitting President?) has increased since November because he's all nervous because he lost the house, do you actually trust a man that tells an average of 15 porkies per day or do you move on with someone you can trust?

WaPo and several other sources.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Dog said:

Convicted, are you kidding? Hillary associates who lied to investigators didn't even get charged, they got immunity deals.

Maybe they didn't commit any crimes that inspired a judge to call them traitors?

-DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Dog said:

Convicted, are you kidding? Hillary associates who lied to investigators didn't even get charged, they got immunity deals.

So, one’s associates getting immunity is a bad thing, right?

https://www.google.com/search?q=trump+associates+immunity&rlz=1CDGOYI_enUS695US695&oq=trump+associates+immunity&aqs=chrome..69i57.12046j1j9&hl=en-US&sourceid=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8

Share this post


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

Do you think the FBI investigated Hillary and Co. as aggressively as it did Trump and Co?

Does it matter, to you, that what Hillary did wasn't what Trump did??    

Share this post


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

Do you think the FBI investigated Hillary and Co. as aggressively as it did Trump and Co?

Discussing the ongoing investigation of one candidate but not the other kinda belies your assumption that they did not. The FBI got the Pride of the GOP elected. You should be nuzzling Comey’s balls, not kicking them. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites