Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
IGotWorms

Trump went through Stone to obtain emails stolen by Russians

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, IGotWorms said:

You gotta do the investigations so that there’s at least some appearance of restraining his rampant abuses of power. But I agree that they’re ultimately unlikely to achieve many tangible results.

Yeah you’re right and I agree. I just think some Dems are under this delusion that Trump’s action are unique or he gets removed from office over this. He’s a scumbag no doubt and “They’re all as corrupt as me!” is a lame defense. But the DNC isn’t going to win over voters on a platform of Russia. 

Share this post


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

You gotta do the investigations so that there’s at least some appearance of restraining his rampant abuses of power. But I agree that they’re ultimately unlikely to achieve many tangible results.

It's also great cover for the lack of tangible ideas. 

Share this post


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

:wacko:

Benghazi? Hillary’s emails? 

Share this post


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

Don't agree with the libs.

After 4 years of investigations if Trump did anything, they'd have rolled that out and NOT have to resort to staged whistleblowers, 'presumed' allegations, etc.

If you have the goods you don't have to llant evidence.

I believe all politicians have dome some sketchy things to get into the position they're in.  We can argue about the definition of sketchy and how far things have been taken, but at the end of the day, I'd have a hard time trusting any of them.  I'll continue to support those who most closely align with my views.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, MDC said:

Benghazi?

A US base getting overrun and the ambassador killed on September 11 wasn't worth a look?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, MDC said:

Benghazi? Hillary’s emails? 

I didn't/don't support continuous investigations.  I'm sure others did.  It's a massive waste of time/resources IMO.  I'm good with an investigation though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, TimmySmith said:

A US base getting overrun and the ambassador killed on September 11 wasn't worth a look?  

It was a video 

Share this post


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

A US base getting overrun and the ambassador killed on September 11 wasn't worth a look?  

Worth a look sure. 10 investigations over 4-5 years? GTFO. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, IGotWorms said:

You gotta do the investigations so that there’s at least some appearance of restraining his rampant abuses of power. But I agree that they’re ultimately unlikely to achieve many tangible results.

So you agree, Biden should be investigated?

Share this post


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

Worth a look sure. 10 investigations over 4-5 years? GTFO. 

Obama admin shouldn't have lied about it at the start.  It led to a what are they hiding situation.  Made it easy for the Republicans.  :dunno:

Share this post


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

Obama admin shouldn't have lied about it at the start.  It led to a what are they hiding situation.  Made it easy for the Republicans.  :dunno:

Sure. And Trump’s lying made it it easy for the Dems to investigate this Ukraine stuff. And if that takes 5 years and 10 investigations so be it. See how that works?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, MDC said:

Sure. And Trump’s lying made it it easy for the Dems to investigate this Ukraine stuff. And if that takes 5 years and 10 investigations so be it. See how that works?

So far we have no evidence of lying.  Only accusations. 

Share this post


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

Sure. And Trump’s lying made it it easy for the Dems to investigate this Ukraine stuff. 

But not ALL the Ukraine stuff, right? :lol:

So far all lying on the Ukraine stuff has been Dem operatives planting evidence. 

Share this post


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

But not ALL the Ukraine stuff, right? :lol:

So far all lying on the Ukraine stuff has been Dem operatives planting evidence. 

:pointstosky:

Share this post


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

But not ALL the Ukraine stuff, right? :lol:

So far all lying on the Ukraine stuff has been Dem operatives planting evidence. 

Investigate it all. Plenty of corruption, lies and nepotism to go around on both sides. :thumbsup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Mike Honcho said:

Everything lines up to reach the logical conclusion of Trump much more involved than report indicates, but Mueller did what he could given "did not know what Mr. Stone and Mr. Trump had discussed".   Without that exact evidence/confession from Stone he would not(and IMO shouldn't) state a conclusion.  Put the evidence out there and let the pieces fall where they may.  Unfortunately the country has moved to a place where the individual teams matter more than the game.   :(

 

3 hours ago, Mike Honcho said:

Good decision, because it only gets worse from there for President Trump and Stone when you read the rest of the NYTimes article.  

 

2 hours ago, Filthy Fernadez said:

 

JFC.....you bozos aren't 24 hours removed from the last "AHA!!!!" garbage that blew up in your face.

'Presumed'   and  'don't know what Stone and Trump discussed' are NOT smoking guns. They're laser pointers used by the MSM and you keep chasing it off the cliff.

How many times did you send $5,000 to the African Prince who will wire you a million dollars once he's out of exile?

:doh:

I gave an opinion that the evidence paints an unflattering picture and made a statement saying people need to weigh the evidence.  In my next post I made a statement/implied that the rest of the NYTimes article offered more negative information/facts/conclusions about the story worms quoted.   NO where did I claim there were smoking guns---pretty much the exact opposite:

Quote

Mueller did what he could given "did not know what Mr. Stone and Mr. Trump had discussed".   Without that exact evidence/confession from Stone he would not(and IMO shouldn't) state a conclusion. 

You might want to consider a reading comprehension class.

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While I am glad he tried to get after this it sucks that they could not get the emails, I hope he keeps after this....

Share this post


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

 

 

I gave an opinion that the evidence paints an unflattering picture and made a statement saying people need to weigh the evidence.  In my next post I made a statement/implied that the rest of the NYTimes article offered more negative information/facts/conclusions about the story worms quoted.   NO where did I claim there were smoking guns---pretty much the exact opposite:

You might want to consider a reading comprehension class.

 

 

You might want to consider throwing out your Jump to Conclusions mat.

Falling for every bit of garbage that Schiff puts out is putting you on a SloTard level.

Share this post


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

It's also great cover for the lack of tangible ideas. 

Yeah I don’t think so Timmy. Warren has put out lots of very tangible policy proposals. Bernie has too. There’s the Green New Deal and all that as well.

You can’t have it both ways: are they terrible horrible communist plans that will rob the people, or do they not exist? Pick a lane.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Warren's ideas and the Green New Deal are tangible? Doesn't it have to be possible for it to be tangible?

Those are focking crack pipe dreams.

Share this post


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

Yeah I don’t think so Timmy. Warren has put out lots of very tangible policy proposals. Bernie has too. There’s the Green New Deal and all that as well.

You can’t have it both ways: are they terrible horrible communist plans that will rob the people, or do they not exist? Pick a lane.

Look up tangible and get back to me.

Share this post


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

Yeah I don’t think so Timmy. Warren has put out lots of very tangible policy proposals. Bernie has too. There’s the Green New Deal and all that as well.

You can’t have it both ways: are they terrible horrible communist plans that will rob the people, or do they not exist? Pick a lane.

What ones do you like? Not the polices you want them to be, but the actual policies.  

Share this post


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

Look up tangible and get back to me.

Nice try Timmy. They’re pretty damn detailed. Perhaps too much so from a political standpoint since they open people up to a fair amount of criticism, but you certainly can’t say they aren’t tangible.

Share this post


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

Nice try Timmy. They’re pretty damn detailed. Perhaps too much so from a political standpoint since they open people up to a fair amount of criticism, but you certainly can’t say they aren’t tangible.

https://www.businessinsider.com/hillary-clinton-slams-elizabeth-warren-bernie-sanders-wealth-tax-2019-11

From your own peeps. :dunno:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Filthy Fernadez said:

Warren's ideas and the Green New Deal are tangible? Doesn't it have to be possible for it to be tangible?

Those are focking crack pipe dreams.

Didn’t your Messiah say Mexico would buy us a border wall and he’d pay off the federal debt in 8 years? :wacko: 

Share this post


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

Now you’re trying to move the goalposts to whether they’re good plans. Different question.

 And Hillary ain’t no peep of mine. Fock off already lady :wave:

Get off the pipe.  They aren't tangible just because they exist.  Nice try though.  ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, TimmySmith said:

Get off the pipe.  They aren't tangible just because they exist.  Nice try though.  ;)

Tangible (adjective): clear and definite; real.

Did you maybe mean to use some other word?

Share this post


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

Tangible (adjective): clear and definite; real.

Did you maybe mean to use some other word?

An idea can exist, but it ain't tangible.  Sorry.  And you almost had a win to talk about at the water cooler.  

Share this post


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

While I am glad he tried to get after this it sucks that they could not get the emails, I hope he keeps after this....

This, America deserves and is owed the emails. They are our property. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, IGotWorms said:

Tangible (adjective): clear and definite; real.

Did you maybe mean to use some other word?

Last time I checked, the word real was in realistic.

Tangible = realistic which neither Warren's and New Green Deal are

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good: paying a British agent to gather dirt from Russia on their political opponent

Bad: attempting to get dirt on a political opponent from a whistleblower

Beyond retarded

Share this post


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

WASHINGTON — President Trump was more personally involved in his campaign’s effort to obtain Democratic emails stolen by Russian operatives in 2016 than was previously known, phone records introduced in federal court on Wednesday suggested.

Federal prosecutors disclosed the calls at the start of the criminal trial of Roger J. Stone Jr., Mr. Trump’s longtime friend, who faces charges of lying to federal investigators about his efforts to contact WikiLeaks during the 2016 campaign. Russian intelligence officers had funneled tens of thousands of emails they stole from Democratic computers to WikiLeaks, which released them at critical points during the presidential race. 

The records suggest that Mr. Trump spoke to Mr. Stone repeatedly during the summer of 2016, at a time when Mr. Stone was aggressively seeking to obtain the stolen emails from Julian Assange, the founder of WikiLeaks. The prosecutors noted that they did not know what Mr. Stone and Mr. Trump had discussed. But they stressed that the timing of their calls dovetailed with other key developments related to the theft and release of the Democratic emails. 

The phone records are the first concrete suggestion that Mr. Trump may have had a direct role in his campaign’s effort to benefit from Russia’s hidden hand in the election. At the very least, the calls and other evidence underscored the eagerness of senior campaign officials and other Trump associates to reap the rewards of what the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, later called a sophisticated and alarming covert Russian influence operation.

How come you never provide links with your copy/paste routines?  Where did you get this? The DNC website?

Do you every have a cogent or logical thought of your own?  Or are you happy with just repeating what your liberal masters tell you to?

Share this post


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

How come you never provide links with your copy/paste routines?  Where did you get this? The DNC website?

Do you every have a cogent or logical thought of your own?  Or are you happy with just repeating what your liberal masters tell you to?

I always used to but it’s become a real pain in the ass with the quote function since the bored update. Or I’m probably just too dumb to adjust.

 That story was from the Failing New York Times (tm) which is my usual go-to source.

I have plenty of my own thoughts but when passing along facts of events that I wasn’t present for I find newspapers can be a good source. Maybe not as good as some anonymous twitter account that probably traces back to a Russian saboteur but sometimes we have to make do.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Good: paying a British agent to gather dirt from Russia on their political opponent

Bad: attempting to get dirt on a political opponent from a whistleblower

Beyond retarded

 

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  

×