DC Tom Posted February 16, 2018 Share Posted February 16, 2018 Just now, GG said: Looks like they were also staging fake events I can't read the indictments right now, btw. Some sort of office internet issues... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted February 16, 2018 Author Share Posted February 16, 2018 3 minutes ago, GG said: Looks like they were also staging fake events On both sides of the spectrum too. "No allegation in this indictment that any American was a knowing participant. There is no allegation in this indictment that the charged conduct altered the outcome of 2016." RR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted February 16, 2018 Share Posted February 16, 2018 11 minutes ago, DC Tom said: I can't read the indictments right now, btw. Some sort of office internet issues... More Russian interference... obviously. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted February 16, 2018 Author Share Posted February 16, 2018 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted February 16, 2018 Share Posted February 16, 2018 People have not problem believing the premise of this show. But many people have a problem believing that this has actually happened and is happening now. Corruption on both sides. Sunshine! Let the sun shine in! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snafu Posted February 16, 2018 Share Posted February 16, 2018 31 minutes ago, GG said: And again, everyone is ignoring that these Russians first started working to "help" Bernie's campaign and then moved onto Trump when it became obvious that Bernie wasn't going to win the nomination, and Trump was. Why is nobody questioning how an out of touch socialist senator who started with 3% in the polls suddenly rose to a near upset? The goal clearly was to disrupt the free elections. Nobody has ever denied that. Re: Clinton vs. Sanders in the primary, you mean "when it became obvious that our domestic election meddling was much better than imported election meddling". And aside from Russian meddling, Sanders rose from 3%, in part, because he campaigned on giving things away to everyone and because he was running against the worst candidate in Presidential election history. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted February 16, 2018 Share Posted February 16, 2018 7 minutes ago, snafu said: Re: Clinton vs. Sanders in the primary, you mean "when it became obvious that our domestic election meddling was much better than imported election meddling". And aside from Russian meddling, Sanders rose from 3%, in part, because he campaigned on giving things away to everyone and because he was running against the worst candidate in Presidential election history. Very true. Santa Claus is a tough opponent to run against. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted February 16, 2018 Share Posted February 16, 2018 Just now, Nanker said: Very true. Santa Claus is a tough opponent to run against. Not really. Enslaves the vertically challenged, cruelty to animals, smuggler, millions of confirmed counts of B&E, anti-union (how many Teamsters you think he has loading that sleigh?) He's at the North Pole, so he probably colludes with Russians. And an absolutely insane number of FISA violations, most likely up to and including kiddie porn. He's almost as bad as Hillary. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted February 16, 2018 Author Share Posted February 16, 2018 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted February 16, 2018 Share Posted February 16, 2018 29 minutes ago, snafu said: Re: Clinton vs. Sanders in the primary, you mean "when it became obvious that our domestic election meddling was much better than imported election meddling". And aside from Russian meddling, Sanders rose from 3%, in part, because he campaigned on giving things away to everyone and because he was running against the worst candidate in Presidential election history. How is that different than any other socialist populist over the last 80 years? In retrospect, Bernie clearly benefited from Russian help, who were much better in getting his "message" out to the people. Of course it helped that he was running against the worst candidate in those 80 years Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted February 16, 2018 Share Posted February 16, 2018 1 minute ago, GG said: How is that different than any other socialist populist over the last 80 years? In retrospect, Bernie clearly benefited from Russian help, who were much better in getting his "message" out to the people. Of course it helped that he was running against the worst candidate in those 80 years Hillary was the worst candidate in 80 years? HA HA, really? Don't think so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted February 16, 2018 Share Posted February 16, 2018 1 minute ago, Tiberius said: Hillary was the worst candidate in 80 years? HA HA, really? Don't think so. She lost to Donald !@#$ing Trump. That ALONE makes her the worst candidate in 80 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted February 16, 2018 Share Posted February 16, 2018 Just now, DC Tom said: She lost to Donald !@#$ing Trump. That ALONE makes her the worst candidate in 80 years. Nope, she lost to a demagogue who had the backing of a foreign power and she still won the popular vote. Heck, she might even have won the election but the Russians hacked it. We don't know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted February 16, 2018 Author Share Posted February 16, 2018 1 minute ago, Tiberius said: Nope, she lost to a demagogue who had the backing of a foreign power and she still won the popular vote. Heck, she might even have won the election but the Russians hacked it. We don't know. There was no hack. This is proven. And the very indictment today went out of its way to show that the goal of Russia was not to prop one candidate up over the other, but to sow chaos on all sides. Even holding a pro trump rally on the same day, same location they held an anti-trump rally. But keep clinging to your long disproven narratives. It's working so well for you so far. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted February 16, 2018 Share Posted February 16, 2018 1 minute ago, Deranged Rhino said: There was no hack. This is proven. And the very indictment today went out of its way to show that the goal of Russia was not to prop one candidate up over the other, but to sow chaos on all sides. Even holding a pro trump rally on the same day, same location they held an anti-trump rally. But keep clinging to your long disproven narratives. It's working so well for you so far. Not proven at all. We know they tried to hack in, that IS proven. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted February 16, 2018 Author Share Posted February 16, 2018 1 minute ago, Tiberius said: Not proven at all. We know they tried to hack in, that IS proven. State election boards in multiple states said the hack did not happen. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/russia-hacking-us-election-voting-systems-did-not-happen-california-a7970976.html Forensic evidence shows that the DNC was not hacked as well. https://www.thenation.com/article/a-new-report-raises-big-questions-about-last-years-dnc-hack/ There were no hacks. Those people using the term "hacked" are either 12 months behind the curve or lying to you (cough: Clapper, Brennan). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted February 16, 2018 Share Posted February 16, 2018 Just now, Deranged Rhino said: State election boards in multiple states said the hack did not happen. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/russia-hacking-us-election-voting-systems-did-not-happen-california-a7970976.html Forensic evidence shows that the DNC was not hacked as well. https://www.thenation.com/article/a-new-report-raises-big-questions-about-last-years-dnc-hack/ There were no hacks. Those people using the term "hacked" are either 12 months behind the curve or lying to you (cough: Clapper, Brennan). Ya sure, I believe you... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted February 16, 2018 Author Share Posted February 16, 2018 Just now, Tiberius said: Ya sure, I believe you... I'm not asking you, or anyone, to believe me. I'm providing evidence you can read and verify for yourself. This is how adults communicate. Try it sometime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted February 16, 2018 Share Posted February 16, 2018 13 minutes ago, DC Tom said: She lost to Donald !@#$ing Trump. That ALONE makes her the worst candidate in 80 years. I thought that was obvious. I was going to say Trump, but then he won, so he can't be the worst. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted February 16, 2018 Share Posted February 16, 2018 2 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: I'm not asking you, or anyone, to believe me. I'm providing evidence you can read and verify for yourself. This is how adults communicate. Try it sometime. You are a conspiracy theorists, stop acting like anyone takes you seriously. I mean aside from garbage like joescumbagpack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts