EPTOn September 27 2016 11:13 CorsairHero wrote:
they have 0 proof it was russia right?
they have 0 proof it was russia right?
"Circumstantial evidence"
Though it's certainly plausible.
US Politics Mega-thread - Page 5196
| Forum Index > Closed |
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please. In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. | ||
|
LegalLord
United States13779 Posts
"Circumstantial evidence" Though it's certainly plausible. | ||
|
Netscape9
United States139 Posts
| ||
|
Blisse
Canada3710 Posts
Everyone here is retired? Does that mean anything? "ill-considered and debilitating budget cuts" | ||
|
acker
United States2958 Posts
On September 27 2016 11:17 TheTenthDoc wrote: I'm a little skeptical that NATO is the longest military alliance in the history of the world. Maybe not even recorded history Almost certainly not, I think UK had a military pact with Portugal for like 200 years or something. Edit: 500+ years https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-Portuguese_Alliance | ||
|
Kenpark
Germany2350 Posts
| ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States46386 Posts
On September 27 2016 11:14 Rebs wrote: http://www.npr.org/2016/09/26/495115346/fact-check-first-presidential-debate He's lying through his teeth and he's winning. And Lester Holt is letting him say what he wants regardless of the topic. But that should be expected. He's lying but definitely not winning. His idiocy is transparent. | ||
|
Netscape9
United States139 Posts
| ||
|
TheTenthDoc
United States9561 Posts
| ||
|
Lord Tolkien
United States12084 Posts
What. NATO doesn't work with countries paying us. Does he even. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
LegalLord
United States13779 Posts
On September 27 2016 11:17 Netscape9 wrote: Is Hillary really attacking Trump on Libya? Libya was one of her pet projects and that's not even getting into Benghazi... Eh, if she tries to defend it she will fail. In this case deflection is her best option. | ||
|
On_Slaught
United States12190 Posts
| ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On September 27 2016 11:19 Lord Tolkien wrote: "they should be paying us" What. NATO doesn't work with countries paying us. Does he even. He doesn't understand now other nations work. | ||
|
Nevuk
United States16280 Posts
On September 27 2016 11:19 On_Slaught wrote: This is Trump's most rambling debate to yet. It's the only one where the focus has been on him consistently | ||
|
PhoenixVoid
Canada32755 Posts
| ||
|
acker
United States2958 Posts
| ||
|
zlefin
United States7689 Posts
On September 27 2016 11:18 Blisse wrote: Everyone here is retired? Does that mean anything? "ill-considered and debilitating budget cuts" they're necessarily retired; US law and military standards prohibit active servicemen from campaigning/endorsing candidates. | ||
|
Slaughter
United States20255 Posts
| ||
|
OuchyDathurts
United States4588 Posts
Yeah ok sure buddy | ||
|
Netscape9
United States139 Posts
On September 27 2016 11:20 Slaughter wrote: Did he just take credit for NATO's terror division? He did. I can't believe it... And NATO's been focusing on terrorism for a long time now... | ||
| ||
