Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Hillary Clinton Appears to Claim Russians ‘Grooming’ Tulsi Gabbard

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by annabenedetti View Post
    I get the impression you're team Tulsi
    She's polling at 1.5%, so she doesn't have a snowball's chance of being elected. I'd much prefer Bernie over her anyway. Too bad his age and health are such a concern now. But aside from him, I really don't have a preferred candidate yet.

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by User Name View Post
      She's polling at 1.5%, so she doesn't have a snowball's chance of being elected. I'd much prefer Bernie over her anyway. Too bad his age and health are such a concern now. But aside from him, I really don't have a preferred candidate yet.
      I voted for him in the 2016 primary, but I won't be voting for him this time.

      Tried and waited then got tired, that's about it

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by annabenedetti View Post
        At about the 34/35 minute mark, Plouffe and Hillary are talking about how Trump won because a third party candidate split the vote
        She really does have endless reasons for why she lost, and none of them are her fault. Amazing.

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by User Name View Post
          She really does have endless reasons for why she lost, and none of them are her fault. Amazing.
          From the specifics of my Hillary post you only come away with this? Amazing that you have so little response to either of my posts and I wonder why I bothered, really, and probably won't make that same mistake again. You said "But give me the worst criticism you can find about Gabbard and I'll let you know what I think of it." I'm not holding my breath waiting for your reply. I think I'm finished here.

          Anyway, if you were a Bernie supporter, surely you know that 12% of Bernie voters ending up voting for Trump. Stein voters voted for Trump. Stein voters voted for Stein. You may also know the margin of difference between Clinton and Trump in PA, WI and MI was less than the total votes for Jill Stein in those states.

          Tried and waited then got tired, that's about it

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by annabenedetti View Post
            You said "But give me the worst criticism you can find about Gabbard and I'll let you know what I think of it."
            Honestly I thought you'd pick something else because we touched on that already. The worst anyone can say about it is that it looks "questionable," which doesn't really say anything. The House Ethics Committee certainly hasn't had anything to say about it--which says a lot.

            She was planning to run for president, she was in Syria, she got the chance to communicate with the ruler of Syria, she took it. I can't think of a reason to fault her for that.

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by User Name View Post
              Honestly I thought you'd pick something else because we touched on that already. The worst anyone can say about it is that it looks "questionable," which doesn't really say anything. The House Ethics Committee certainly hasn't had anything to say about it--which says a lot.

              She was planning to run for president, she was in Syria, she got the chance to communicate with the ruler of Syria, she took it. I can't think of a reason to fault her for that.
              Actually, we don't know if the ethics committee had anything to say, we just couldn't source it one way or the other. Oh well... I took a closer look at her and pretty much came away with the same opinion so I don't regret the time spent.

              Tried and waited then got tired, that's about it

              Comment


              • #52
                Bill Browder
                @Billbrowder
                Tulsi Gabbard say that she doesn’t control the Russian bots that support her, but she did control the hiring of Chris Cooper, the smear campaigner who was paid by Natalia Veselnitskaya and her Russian backed sponsors to smear me and try to repeal the Magnitsky Act in DC https://twitter.com/maurabarrettnbc/status/1185656969392218113 …

                Maura Barrett
                @MauraBarrettNBC
                I asked @TulsiGabbard - twice - if she disavows Russian state media support of her campaign.

                Gabbard: "This is not about Russia. This is about a smear campaign that has been waged against me.." & "Again, I don't control them. I don't control what anyone else says or does."




                Tried and waited then got tired, that's about it

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by The Barbarian View Post
                  Not only did the Mueller report document several attempts by Trump to obstruct the investigation (which will have to wait until he leaves office), he is also an unindicted co-conspirator.
                  Here is what your own site said:

                  First, Mueller's report says that if his team "had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state."

                  However, "Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment. Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him."
                  The Mueller report did "not conclude that the President committed a crime."

                  What do you not understand about those words? Despite the fact that the Mueller report did not conclude that the President committed a crime you say that he is an "unindicted co-conspirator":

                  Originally posted by The Barbarian View Post
                  No only did the Mueller report document several attempts by Trump to obstruct the investigation (which will have to wait until he leaves office), he is also an unindicted co-conspirator.
                  Tell me how Trump was an unindicted co-conspirator since your own source said that the Mueller investigation did not conclude that the President committed a crime?

                  You are delusional, proving once again that the Trump Collusion Delusion remains in the minds of those who refuse to use their brains.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Mueller was, according to Justice Department rules, unable to indict Donald Trump. That being so, he was not allowed to accuse him of the crimes he dccumented in his report. Since he showed that Trump, on several occasions, ordered his people to obstruct the investigation, we know he committed that crime. The fact that his people ignored his orders and did not commit obstruction does not mean the attempt is not criminal. It is a crime to merely attempt to obstruct an investigation.

                    Mueller did as much as he could under those limits, pointing out that while he could not indict Trump, he did not clear him of criminal activity.

                    And as you learned, in another criminal case, Trump is and remains an unindicted co-conspirator. Would you like me to show you again?

                    You are delusional, proving once again that the Trump Collusion Delusion remains in the minds of those who refuse to use their brains.
                    This message is hidden because ...

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by The Barbarian View Post
                      Mueller was, according to Justice Department rules, unable to indict Donald Trump.
                      So now that your delusions have been exposed you change your story because earlier you said that Trump was an unindicted co-conspirator:

                      Originally posted by The Barbarian View Post
                      No only did the Mueller report document several attempts by Trump to obstruct the investigation (which will have to wait until he leaves office), he is also an unindicted co-conspirator.
                      Now you say that Mueller was unable to indict Trump.

                      Somehow you can trick your mind into believing that even though Trump was not indicted he actually was.

                      Typical of the fuzzy minded progressives.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by Jerry Shugart View Post
                        So now that your delusions have been exposed you change your story because earlier you said that Trump was an unindicted co-conspirator:
                        It's true. He would you like me to show you again?

                        Plea Deal Makes Trump 'Unindicted Co-Conspirator,' Watergate Prosecutor Says
                        https://www.wbur.org/hereandnow/2018...ate-prosecutor

                        Donald Trump, unindicted co-conspirator
                        One Fox News contributor thinks the President may already have been indicted

                        Judge Andrew Napolitano, a regular Fox contributor, told Shepard Smith, the mid-afternoon anchor, that there was ‘ample evidence’ to indict Trump. Perhaps, he implied, this had already happened, in secret.

                        He began by saying: ‘Last week in a federal direct court here in New York City, a federal judge at the end of Michael Cohen‘s sentencing said the president orchestrated and paid for this crime.’ The crime in question was a felonious campaign finance violation, Cohen paying two women for their silence about Trump days before the election.

                        Smith asked: ‘So you’re saying he’s an unindicted co-conspirator?

                        ‘Yes,’ Napolitano answered.

                        https://spectator.us/donald-trump-un...o-conspirator/

                        Now you say that Mueller was unable to indict Trump.
                        Yes, I showed you that. Hence "unindicted co-conspirator" Somehow you can trick your mind into believing that even though I showed you that Trump was not indicted, I actually said he was.

                        Typical of the fuzzy minded Trump supporters.
                        This message is hidden because ...

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by The Barbarian View Post
                          It's true. He would you like me to show you again?

                          Plea Deal Makes Trump 'Unindicted Co-Conspirator,' Watergate Prosecutor Says
                          https://www.wbur.org/hereandnow/2018...ate-prosecutor

                          Donald Trump, unindicted co-conspirator
                          One Fox News contributor thinks the President may already have been indicted

                          Judge Andrew Napolitano, a regular Fox contributor, told Shepard Smith, the mid-afternoon anchor, that there was ‘ample evidence’ to indict Trump. Perhaps, he implied, this had already happened, in secret.

                          He began by saying: ‘Last week in a federal direct court here in New York City, a federal judge at the end of Michael Cohen‘s sentencing said the president orchestrated and paid for this crime.’ The crime in question was a felonious campaign finance violation, Cohen paying two women for their silence about Trump days before the election.

                          Smith asked: ‘So you’re saying he’s an unindicted co-conspirator?

                          ‘Yes,’ Napolitano answered.

                          https://spectator.us/donald-trump-un...o-conspirator/



                          Yes, I showed you that. Hence "unindicted co-conspirator" Somehow you can trick your mind into believing that even though I showed you that Trump was not indicted, I actually said he was.

                          Typical of the fuzzy minded Trump supporters.
                          Not sure there's such a thing as a 'clear minded' Trump supporter anyway but hey...

                          Well this is fun isn't it?

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by The Barbarian View Post
                            It's true. He would you like me to show you again?

                            Plea Deal Makes Trump 'Unindicted Co-Conspirator,' Watergate Prosecutor Says
                            https://www.wbur.org/hereandnow/2018...ate-prosecutor

                            [COLOR="#800000"]Donald Trump, unindicted co-conspirator
                            One Fox News contributor thinks the President may already have been indicted

                            Judge Andrew Napolitano, a regular Fox contributor, told Shepard Smith, the mid-afternoon anchor, that there was ‘ample evidence’ to indict Trump. Perhaps, he implied, this had already happened, in secret.

                            He began by saying: ‘Last week in a federal direct court here in New York City, a federal judge at the end of Michael Cohen‘s sentencing said the president orchestrated and paid for this crime.’ The crime in question was a felonious campaign finance violation, Cohen paying two women for their silence about Trump days before the election.
                            You prove once again that you are delusional!

                            The subject was the Mueller investigation and not anything to do with campaign violations. You said:

                            Originally posted by The Barbarian View Post
                            Not only did the Mueller report document several attempts by Trump to obstruct the investigation (which will have to wait until he leaves office), he is also an unindicted co-conspirator.
                            I hope they treat you well in your padded cell.
                            Last edited by Jerry Shugart; October 21st, 2019, 02:30 PM.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by Arthur Brain View Post
                              Not sure there's such a thing as a 'clear minded' Trump supporter anyway but hey...

                              Yes, thumbs up for the Trump Collusion Delusion!

                              Birds of a feather flock together. I hope they treat you will in your padded cell too!

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by Jerry Shugart View Post
                                Yes, thumbs up for the Trump Collusion Delusion!

                                Birds of a feather flock together. I hope they treat you will in your padded cell too!
                                Oh, you hope "they'll" treat me "will" do you? That's nice...

                                I suppose you think that Trump has your very wellbeing at heart and cares about all Americans ahead of his own oh so obvious ego as well do you?



                                Heck, it's not like most politicians give a whit about constituents in general but your beloved president would likely want to carve Mount Rushmore into one face only - and guess who's depiction that would be?

                                Well this is fun isn't it?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X