|
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. |
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On March 03 2017 02:54 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On March 03 2017 02:50 LegalLord wrote: The entire post-election period was a gigantic Russia hunt on the part of Democrats. Every relevant nominee was grilled hard on relations with Russia, and they were looking for any reason whatsoever to try to tie Trump and his staff to Russia. Flynn was an easy target - he wasn't vetted by Congress, he was clearly incompetent, and he did do something obviously not proper for his position. Getting rid of him was doable. But now I see that the Democrats want to go after the next most disliked person that they can get their hands on: Sessions. Someone they very clearly disliked. Maybe they would go after DeVos but it's not easy to do that on Russia matters.
Looking at the WaPo above, the case against Sessions looks quite mediocre. It's looking like a political game of "blame the Russia" which is not far from McCarthying. Or maybe it's Ben Ghazi'ing. Or does that strike too close to home? I know you're trolling given that you've been trolling for a while now, but yes, you could call it another Benghazi-like probe, yes.
|
On March 03 2017 02:58 farvacola wrote: It's nice to see someone who admittedly voted for Trump indicate that they too recognize LL's shilling, as some here are all too willing to let him add his RT 2-cents to their crusade against "the regressive left." Did you read the shit he posted on 688/689 of euro thread?
EDIT: have a link: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/general/471672-european-politico-economics-qa-mega-thread?page=688
not giving a tldr because that discussion deserves to be read in its entirety
|
On March 03 2017 02:58 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On March 03 2017 02:54 Acrofales wrote:On March 03 2017 02:50 LegalLord wrote: The entire post-election period was a gigantic Russia hunt on the part of Democrats. Every relevant nominee was grilled hard on relations with Russia, and they were looking for any reason whatsoever to try to tie Trump and his staff to Russia. Flynn was an easy target - he wasn't vetted by Congress, he was clearly incompetent, and he did do something obviously not proper for his position. Getting rid of him was doable. But now I see that the Democrats want to go after the next most disliked person that they can get their hands on: Sessions. Someone they very clearly disliked. Maybe they would go after DeVos but it's not easy to do that on Russia matters.
Looking at the WaPo above, the case against Sessions looks quite mediocre. It's looking like a political game of "blame the Russia" which is not far from McCarthying. Or maybe it's Ben Ghazi'ing. Or does that strike too close to home? I know you're trolling given that you've been trolling for a while now, but yes, you could call it another Benghazi-like probe, yes. Man, wouldn't that be terrible. Subjecting the Republicans to the same level of bullshit that they pulled on the Democrats. Darn. What a terrible thing. We should all play nice and get along. That worked so well from 2000-2008. Great stuff happened back then.
|
On March 03 2017 03:01 TheLordofAwesome wrote:Show nested quote +On March 03 2017 02:58 farvacola wrote: It's nice to see someone who admittedly voted for Trump indicate that they too recognize LL's shilling, as some here are all too willing to let him add his RT 2-cents to their crusade against "the regressive left." Did you read the shit he posted on 688/689 of euro thread? Several of us have been calling out Aarron Burr on this RT fan-boyness for a while now. Though I might have to amend my claims that LL is the threads Arron Burr. He is more of a Benedict Arnold.
|
On March 03 2017 02:33 Danglars wrote:
Skepticism at WaPo. No fucking shit they are overplaying their hand. This is #fakenews in action for all of the reasons that I detailed last night. And the insidious effect of it is obvious for all to see. People are reading the first 2-3 paragraphs of that shitty WashPo article and presuming that there's a huge problem without really digging into the rest of the article where the shortcomings of the narrative become brutally apparent. And don't for a moment think that the timing of this article wasn't deliberate. This #fakenews narrative was launched precisely to derail Trump's momentum from his speech on Tuesday.
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On March 03 2017 03:01 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On March 03 2017 02:58 LegalLord wrote:On March 03 2017 02:54 Acrofales wrote:On March 03 2017 02:50 LegalLord wrote: The entire post-election period was a gigantic Russia hunt on the part of Democrats. Every relevant nominee was grilled hard on relations with Russia, and they were looking for any reason whatsoever to try to tie Trump and his staff to Russia. Flynn was an easy target - he wasn't vetted by Congress, he was clearly incompetent, and he did do something obviously not proper for his position. Getting rid of him was doable. But now I see that the Democrats want to go after the next most disliked person that they can get their hands on: Sessions. Someone they very clearly disliked. Maybe they would go after DeVos but it's not easy to do that on Russia matters.
Looking at the WaPo above, the case against Sessions looks quite mediocre. It's looking like a political game of "blame the Russia" which is not far from McCarthying. Or maybe it's Ben Ghazi'ing. Or does that strike too close to home? I know you're trolling given that you've been trolling for a while now, but yes, you could call it another Benghazi-like probe, yes. Man, wouldn't that be terrible. Subjecting the Republicans to the same level of bullshit that they pulled on the Democrats. Darn. What a terrible thing. We should all play nice and get along. That worked so well from 2000-2008. Great stuff happened back then. I'm ok with seeing this as a "what goes around comes around" especially considering that I don't particularly care for Sessions or Republicans in general. Sure, I would have wanted Democrats to show a moral high ground on any such issues of partisanship but that's not the world we live in - so "karma, bitch" is a close second.
|
It's one thing to regurgitate talking points from RT. It's quite another to essentially claim that Soviet occupation of Eastern Europe was justifiable and to say that the people living in Eastern Europe today who are still upset about it and afraid of Russian tyranny are "whiners"
|
On March 03 2017 03:04 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On March 03 2017 03:01 Plansix wrote:On March 03 2017 02:58 LegalLord wrote:On March 03 2017 02:54 Acrofales wrote:On March 03 2017 02:50 LegalLord wrote: The entire post-election period was a gigantic Russia hunt on the part of Democrats. Every relevant nominee was grilled hard on relations with Russia, and they were looking for any reason whatsoever to try to tie Trump and his staff to Russia. Flynn was an easy target - he wasn't vetted by Congress, he was clearly incompetent, and he did do something obviously not proper for his position. Getting rid of him was doable. But now I see that the Democrats want to go after the next most disliked person that they can get their hands on: Sessions. Someone they very clearly disliked. Maybe they would go after DeVos but it's not easy to do that on Russia matters.
Looking at the WaPo above, the case against Sessions looks quite mediocre. It's looking like a political game of "blame the Russia" which is not far from McCarthying. Or maybe it's Ben Ghazi'ing. Or does that strike too close to home? I know you're trolling given that you've been trolling for a while now, but yes, you could call it another Benghazi-like probe, yes. Man, wouldn't that be terrible. Subjecting the Republicans to the same level of bullshit that they pulled on the Democrats. Darn. What a terrible thing. We should all play nice and get along. That worked so well from 2000-2008. Great stuff happened back then. I'm ok with seeing this as a "what goes around comes around" especially considering that I don't particularly care for Sessions or Republicans in general. Sure, I would have wanted Democrats to show a moral high ground on any such issues of partisanship but that's not the world we live in - so "karma, bitch" is a close second. Moral high ground. LOL. You know what the high ground gets you? A good view of how badly you are getting screwed over by people that are down in the dirt.
|
On March 03 2017 03:03 xDaunt wrote:No fucking shit they are overplaying their hand. This is #fakenews in action for all of the reasons that I detailed last night. And the insidious effect of it is obvious for all to see. People are reading the first 2-3 paragraphs of that shitty WashPo article and presuming that there's a huge problem without really digging into the rest of the article where the shortcomings of the narrative become brutally apparent. And don't for a moment think that the timing of this article wasn't deliberate. This #fakenews narrative was launched precisely to derail Trump's momentum from his speech on Tuesday. Ofcourse its timed. But the Democrats didn't make Sessions have a 1 on 1 with the Russian ambassador, nor did they make him withhold it during his hearing.
keep on hashtagging mate. I'm sure it will convince exactly 0 people.
|
The Trump campaign had an unusually high level of contacts and connections with Russians, and Russia hacked the US election to benefit Trump. That is the accurate narrative as of now, and an independent investigation should follow.
|
On March 03 2017 03:03 xDaunt wrote:No fucking shit they are overplaying their hand. This is #fakenews in action for all of the reasons that I detailed last night. And the insidious effect of it is obvious for all to see. People are reading the first 2-3 paragraphs of that shitty WashPo article and presuming that there's a huge problem without really digging into the rest of the article where the shortcomings of the narrative become brutally apparent. And don't for a moment think that the timing of this article wasn't deliberate. This #fakenews narrative was launched precisely to derail Trump's momentum from his speech on Tuesday. As I have tried to make clear, possibly unsuccessfully, I liked Trump, particularly on immigration. I voted for Trump. I am disgusted by lawmakers on both sides trying to score political points now when our country is facing one of the most severe crises in its history.
Trump's Russia ties are of serious concern. Carter Page. Paul Manafort. Gen Flynn. Jeff Sessions. When the hell does this end? How deep does it go? Why is Trump so friendly towards Putin? What kind of kompromat does Putin have on Trump? Why is Trump, someone who doesn't shy from confrontation, unwilling to confront a Kremlin that refers to USA as its "Main Adversary" once again?
(for you lefties, Putin would have had all illegal business conducted via Clinton's email server to blackmail her with, at minimum. Clinton sucks just as hard here.)
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On March 03 2017 03:07 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On March 03 2017 03:04 LegalLord wrote:On March 03 2017 03:01 Plansix wrote:On March 03 2017 02:58 LegalLord wrote:On March 03 2017 02:54 Acrofales wrote:On March 03 2017 02:50 LegalLord wrote: The entire post-election period was a gigantic Russia hunt on the part of Democrats. Every relevant nominee was grilled hard on relations with Russia, and they were looking for any reason whatsoever to try to tie Trump and his staff to Russia. Flynn was an easy target - he wasn't vetted by Congress, he was clearly incompetent, and he did do something obviously not proper for his position. Getting rid of him was doable. But now I see that the Democrats want to go after the next most disliked person that they can get their hands on: Sessions. Someone they very clearly disliked. Maybe they would go after DeVos but it's not easy to do that on Russia matters.
Looking at the WaPo above, the case against Sessions looks quite mediocre. It's looking like a political game of "blame the Russia" which is not far from McCarthying. Or maybe it's Ben Ghazi'ing. Or does that strike too close to home? I know you're trolling given that you've been trolling for a while now, but yes, you could call it another Benghazi-like probe, yes. Man, wouldn't that be terrible. Subjecting the Republicans to the same level of bullshit that they pulled on the Democrats. Darn. What a terrible thing. We should all play nice and get along. That worked so well from 2000-2008. Great stuff happened back then. I'm ok with seeing this as a "what goes around comes around" especially considering that I don't particularly care for Sessions or Republicans in general. Sure, I would have wanted Democrats to show a moral high ground on any such issues of partisanship but that's not the world we live in - so "karma, bitch" is a close second. Moral high ground. LOL. You know what the high ground gets you? A good view of how badly you are getting screwed over by people that are down in the dirt. Fair enough. In that case keep 'em coming. Play the Republicans' game and see how far it gets you.
I'll grab the popcorn, we finally brought fun to politics.
|
On March 03 2017 03:07 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On March 03 2017 03:03 xDaunt wrote:No fucking shit they are overplaying their hand. This is #fakenews in action for all of the reasons that I detailed last night. And the insidious effect of it is obvious for all to see. People are reading the first 2-3 paragraphs of that shitty WashPo article and presuming that there's a huge problem without really digging into the rest of the article where the shortcomings of the narrative become brutally apparent. And don't for a moment think that the timing of this article wasn't deliberate. This #fakenews narrative was launched precisely to derail Trump's momentum from his speech on Tuesday. Ofcourse its timed. But the Democrats didn't make Sessions have a 1 on 1 with the Russian ambassador, nor did they make him withhold it during his hearing. keep on hashtagging mate. I'm sure it will convince exactly 0 people. I don’t know why Xdaunt is shocked that the press isn’t pulling any punches when it comes to Trump. He has been openly advocating to limit their ability to do their job from day one. Want to 100% make sure you will get ravaged by the press? Attack them.
|
On March 03 2017 03:11 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On March 03 2017 03:07 Plansix wrote:On March 03 2017 03:04 LegalLord wrote:On March 03 2017 03:01 Plansix wrote:On March 03 2017 02:58 LegalLord wrote:On March 03 2017 02:54 Acrofales wrote:On March 03 2017 02:50 LegalLord wrote: The entire post-election period was a gigantic Russia hunt on the part of Democrats. Every relevant nominee was grilled hard on relations with Russia, and they were looking for any reason whatsoever to try to tie Trump and his staff to Russia. Flynn was an easy target - he wasn't vetted by Congress, he was clearly incompetent, and he did do something obviously not proper for his position. Getting rid of him was doable. But now I see that the Democrats want to go after the next most disliked person that they can get their hands on: Sessions. Someone they very clearly disliked. Maybe they would go after DeVos but it's not easy to do that on Russia matters.
Looking at the WaPo above, the case against Sessions looks quite mediocre. It's looking like a political game of "blame the Russia" which is not far from McCarthying. Or maybe it's Ben Ghazi'ing. Or does that strike too close to home? I know you're trolling given that you've been trolling for a while now, but yes, you could call it another Benghazi-like probe, yes. Man, wouldn't that be terrible. Subjecting the Republicans to the same level of bullshit that they pulled on the Democrats. Darn. What a terrible thing. We should all play nice and get along. That worked so well from 2000-2008. Great stuff happened back then. I'm ok with seeing this as a "what goes around comes around" especially considering that I don't particularly care for Sessions or Republicans in general. Sure, I would have wanted Democrats to show a moral high ground on any such issues of partisanship but that's not the world we live in - so "karma, bitch" is a close second. Moral high ground. LOL. You know what the high ground gets you? A good view of how badly you are getting screwed over by people that are down in the dirt. Fair enough. In that case keep 'em coming. Play the Republicans' game and see how far it gets you. I'll grab the popcorn, we finally brought fun to politics. It got them control of both houses of congress for at least 8 years. And the white house. Seems like a winning plan to me.
|
United States42716 Posts
On March 03 2017 03:03 xDaunt wrote:No fucking shit they are overplaying their hand. This is #fakenews in action for all of the reasons that I detailed last night. And the insidious effect of it is obvious for all to see. People are reading the first 2-3 paragraphs of that shitty WashPo article and presuming that there's a huge problem without really digging into the rest of the article where the shortcomings of the narrative become brutally apparent. And don't for a moment think that the timing of this article wasn't deliberate. This #fakenews narrative was launched precisely to derail Trump's momentum from his speech on Tuesday. 1) Sessions, part of the Trump election campaign, chose to have a private meeting with Russian intelligence. 2) Russian intelligence chose to actively intervene in the US election to favour the Trump campaign. 3) The Trump administration then sacrificed American geopolitical interests to offer concessions to Russia. 4) Sessions stated "I did not have communications with the Russians", a statement which can be demonstrated not to be true by the fact that he held a private meeting with Russian intelligence.
Those four are established facts. I know you struggle a lot with facts these days but not all of us are suffering from that particular handicap.
|
On March 03 2017 03:11 TheLordofAwesome wrote:Show nested quote +On March 03 2017 03:03 xDaunt wrote:No fucking shit they are overplaying their hand. This is #fakenews in action for all of the reasons that I detailed last night. And the insidious effect of it is obvious for all to see. People are reading the first 2-3 paragraphs of that shitty WashPo article and presuming that there's a huge problem without really digging into the rest of the article where the shortcomings of the narrative become brutally apparent. And don't for a moment think that the timing of this article wasn't deliberate. This #fakenews narrative was launched precisely to derail Trump's momentum from his speech on Tuesday. As I have tried to make clear, possibly unsuccessfully, I liked Trump, particularly on immigration. I voted for Trump. I am disgusted by lawmakers on both sides trying to score political points now when our country is facing one of the most severe crises in its history. Trump's Russia ties are of serious concern. Carter Page. Paul Manafort. Gen Flynn. Jeff Sessions. When the hell does this end? How deep does it go? Why is Trump so friendly towards Putin? What kind of kompromat does Putin have on Trump? Why is Trump, someone who doesn't shy from confrontation, unwilling to confront a Kremlin that refers to USA as its "Main Adversary" once again? (for you lefties, Putin would have had all illegal business conducted via Clinton's email server to blackmail her with, at minimum. Clinton sucks just as hard here.) Here's the only question that should concern you at this time: what has Trump actually done (not said) to change Russian/American relations?
|
On March 03 2017 03:03 xDaunt wrote:No fucking shit they are overplaying their hand. This is #fakenews in action for all of the reasons that I detailed last night. And the insidious effect of it is obvious for all to see. People are reading the first 2-3 paragraphs of that shitty WashPo article and presuming that there's a huge problem without really digging into the rest of the article where the shortcomings of the narrative become brutally apparent. And don't for a moment think that the timing of this article wasn't deliberate. This #fakenews narrative was launched precisely to derail Trump's momentum from his speech on Tuesday.
Idk how much of it is "fakenews" if Fox is starting to report on it as well... (which idk why you hashtagged, trying to let your Russian friends find the thread?)
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/03/02/sessions-russian-ambassador-spoke-twice-during-presidential-campaign.html
I mean, your own party is reporting on Sessions talking to Russians... which we all know that either fellow Trumpians don't mind becoming Russia 2.0 or just don't care at all, but I mean, when Fox calls it out, shouldn't that be a sign? Since they're "real news"
|
On March 03 2017 03:16 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On March 03 2017 03:11 TheLordofAwesome wrote:On March 03 2017 03:03 xDaunt wrote:No fucking shit they are overplaying their hand. This is #fakenews in action for all of the reasons that I detailed last night. And the insidious effect of it is obvious for all to see. People are reading the first 2-3 paragraphs of that shitty WashPo article and presuming that there's a huge problem without really digging into the rest of the article where the shortcomings of the narrative become brutally apparent. And don't for a moment think that the timing of this article wasn't deliberate. This #fakenews narrative was launched precisely to derail Trump's momentum from his speech on Tuesday. As I have tried to make clear, possibly unsuccessfully, I liked Trump, particularly on immigration. I voted for Trump. I am disgusted by lawmakers on both sides trying to score political points now when our country is facing one of the most severe crises in its history. Trump's Russia ties are of serious concern. Carter Page. Paul Manafort. Gen Flynn. Jeff Sessions. When the hell does this end? How deep does it go? Why is Trump so friendly towards Putin? What kind of kompromat does Putin have on Trump? Why is Trump, someone who doesn't shy from confrontation, unwilling to confront a Kremlin that refers to USA as its "Main Adversary" once again? (for you lefties, Putin would have had all illegal business conducted via Clinton's email server to blackmail her with, at minimum. Clinton sucks just as hard here.) Here's the only question that should concern you at this time: what has Trump actually done (not said) to change Russian/American relations? Why would we be stupid enough to wait until after he fucks things up? That is a terrible plan.
|
On March 03 2017 03:14 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On March 03 2017 03:03 xDaunt wrote:No fucking shit they are overplaying their hand. This is #fakenews in action for all of the reasons that I detailed last night. And the insidious effect of it is obvious for all to see. People are reading the first 2-3 paragraphs of that shitty WashPo article and presuming that there's a huge problem without really digging into the rest of the article where the shortcomings of the narrative become brutally apparent. And don't for a moment think that the timing of this article wasn't deliberate. This #fakenews narrative was launched precisely to derail Trump's momentum from his speech on Tuesday. 1) Sessions, part of the Trump election campaign chose to have a private meeting with Russian intelligence. 2) Russian intelligence chose to actively intervene in the US election to favour the Trump campaign. 3) The Trump administration then sacrificed American geopolitical interests to offer concessions to Russia. 4) Sessions stated "I did not have communications with the Russians", a statement which can be demonstrated not to be true by the fact that he held a private meeting with Russian intelligence. Those four are established facts. I know you struggle a lot with facts these days but not all of us are suffering from that particular handicap. I find your snarkiness seriously irritating. If you want to change someone's mind, this is no way to do it.
|
On March 03 2017 03:11 TheLordofAwesome wrote: (for you lefties, Putin would have had all illegal business conducted via Clinton's email server to blackmail her with, at minimum. Clinton sucks just as hard here.) Very few people would deny that, but as I've said before, Clinton is not our president. Trump is our president. And I care very little about holding him to the standard of a disgraced presidential loser.
|
|
|
|