Alpha....you actually liked this post a few days ago.
Yet you continue to pass judgment on the collusion investigation.
That's kinda odd. Just saying.
Voter fraud v. Russia
- Thread starter Alpha Poke
- Start date
Alpha....you actually liked this post a few days ago.
Yet you continue to pass judgment on the collusion investigation.
That's kinda odd. Just saying.
Damn dude, I never said stop anything.
I said talk about it when it bears fruit but questioioned why the people who saw the evidence all say the same thing to a T, nothing tying Trump to Russia but they all spend 95 percent of the interview talking about the "feelings" they have that link him.
I'm going to copy and paste this shit from here on out.
I said talk about it when it bears fruit but questioioned why the people who saw the evidence all say the same thing to a T, nothing tying Trump to Russia but they all spend 95 percent of the interview talking about the "feelings" they have that link him.
I'm going to copy and paste this shit from here on out.
So you are good with the investigation going forward to its conclusion?
Because your posts really aren't reflecting that....including the comment "this bullshit" in reference to the same and your objections to responding to your and others posts questioning Russian collusion.
You're not being real consistent or clear in your reasoning. If you want to more effectively focus on the real shit that's going on....the as you say "real crimes against the republic", you probably shouldn't start doing so off with a focus on the bullshit distractions.
Post your evidence.....I'll even help you.
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/447556/donald-trump-voter-fraud-commission
Members of the Commission will begin their investigation this summer. They will have until 2018 to “review policies and practices that enhance or undermine the American people’s confidence in the integrity of Federal elections,” a White House official said, “including improper registrations, improper voting, fraudulent registrations, fraudulent voting, and voter suppression.”
I eagerly await whatever proof they come up with....at the end of their investigation...and will not pass judgment one way or the other on what they have found so far or even remotely suggest they shouldn't follow through to completion.
Will you do the same re: Russian/Trump collusion investigation?
"Questioned why".....sure sounds like a suggestion that it's time to wrap it up and stop.
And here we are right back at the people generating the Trump/Russia talk on this board are you, Guns, and Mega.
What interview are you talking about?
We all know why the Trump/Russia talk was reignited recently. Can we at agree that Trump firing Comey reignited it....at least fan the flames?
Can we also agree Trump himself mentioned the collusion investigation in conjunction with the letter firing Comey and subsequent interviews....more than once?
Finally, can we agree that it is at least a little bit odd and weird for El Presidente to mention the Russian collusion investigation in conjunction with the firing of Comey....done so freely and more than once without any question or prodding from the media....if it is completely irrelevant to why he fired him?
I'm going out to fire up the "Mexican microwave" for the second time today to cook Ms. J her requested Mother's Day meal. When that is completed and I return, this pissing contest needs to be over or I will stop the car!
So despite me saying specifically what I meant you're going to tell me what you thought I meant and go with your version.
My wife does that.
My wife does that.
I was asking then, and plan to ask often in the future - if we either have evidence yet that there's anything TO investigate specifically regarding Trump colluding with Russia OR we are ready to hold propagandists accountable for a massive, dangerous political deception.
You like to call out dodging and deflecting... you like to hold people accountable for things they say and do. That's great but how's that different?
You've been intellectually pinned x 3 over in this thread. Maybe you should go back to debating your wife for May. No shame in going back to the minors for a little rehab and fine tuning.
Let me ask you a question.
If you definitely aren't calling for the investigation to be stopped.....
And the investigation is presently going on.....
What's your beef with the media covering the fact the sitting Presidential administration is under investigation? If you don't want it stopped....how is it "bullshit"? If you don't want it stopped, how is it a distraction?
In other words....you're talking out of both sides of your mouth. You are contradicting yourself. One isn't true.
His last post right now says "1 minute ago" fwiw...
No, you have to try and move the conversation and twist what I've plainly stated to make it look like you have a logical argument against what I said. There isn't one. The media poo poos the notion of voter fraud with butt loads of evidence. They keep talking about Trump despite any evidence. Why?Both are facts not theory.
Are you really having trouble seeing my position? You just want to argue if you can't see the logic.
1. That's all well and good but with regards to the FBI investigation, you pretty much must know you're not going to get an answer until the end of the investigation; and
2. At some point, you and Trump and others continually bringing it up again and again and calling for it to end become just as if not more responsible for it continuing to have legs and being reported on; and
3. You've done a bit more than just ask if we either have evidence yet that there is anything to investigate, etc.; you have express evaluations indicating that there isn't anything to investigate; and
4. You've been doing it since the very beginning, and haven't applied the same standard of questioning to other potential "massive, dangerous, political deception (pizzagate, shadowy "deep state operatives").
Ad hominem. You get trapped in a corner of logic and try to make it personal. I'm not moving anything.
I've kicked your ass in the logic department in this thread....you're so wrapped around the axel right now, this is the best you've got. School yard taunts.
If people on this board or anywhere else want to believe the Russia story, then far be it for me to question their fairy tales.
The last one was to sys, but if this is where you want to take it I'm game.
You can't win the argument coming from your side because of facts.
That's not logical.
You can't win the argument coming from your side because of facts.
That's not logical.
I see your position.....despite your near incoherence in expressing it.
You don't want the media talking about possible Trump/Russian collusion when there is a FREAKING FBI INVESTIGATION ongoing. Talking about an ongoing FBI investigation is a distraction...is bullshit. You don't want people here responding with discussion about alleged Russian/Trump collision in a thread where you are the first one to bring it up....unless they agree with you of course.
You want the media talking about voter fraud, because of this supposed butt load of evidence you've read about. I've got news for you....Sessions is the Attorney General. If he's got evidence of violation of federal law, he probably ought to start investigating and prosecuting it....especially if it's butt loads of evidence. I bet it gets reported if he does. More news for you....the VP is heading up a voter's fraud commission.....if there is a buttload of evidence, I'm sure he'll let us know. Until one of those happens, this supposed claim about massive evidence is not a "fact". It's an opinion.
It really boils down to a childish tantrum over people not agreeing with you and the media not reporting what you want them to. Keep reading Breitbart and Newsmax....keep ignoring everything else...you'll be much happier.
Last edited:
You took it there already, sporto....
Facts?
That word clearly doesn't mean what you think it means.
I didn't read the entire thread but...
Why are we talking about Russia and Trump....The answer is that Russia or whoever exposed that Cankles and DWS rigged the Democratic primaries against Bernie and then continued to rig the presidential election with CNN and Hillary by getting her the questions before hand. That's the real story.
It's kinda like the guy who raped and killed the mother of five...then got busted because the cop didn't have a search warrant. I don't give a fvck about the search warrant. Hillary, DWS, and CNN rigged a primary and then tried to rig a presidential election. And they got caught. Why there are not laws that prohibit such activity and consequently throw people in jail for that, I truly don't understand.
But by all means, let's continue to blame the cop for not having a search warrant and then point to the DA, demand he had something to do with it WITHOUT AND PROOF TO DATE, and keep that the front page story.
But continue on @CowboyJD and the rest of your merry little cuck band. It's like watching election night all over again.
Why are we talking about Russia and Trump....The answer is that Russia or whoever exposed that Cankles and DWS rigged the Democratic primaries against Bernie and then continued to rig the presidential election with CNN and Hillary by getting her the questions before hand. That's the real story.
It's kinda like the guy who raped and killed the mother of five...then got busted because the cop didn't have a search warrant. I don't give a fvck about the search warrant. Hillary, DWS, and CNN rigged a primary and then tried to rig a presidential election. And they got caught. Why there are not laws that prohibit such activity and consequently throw people in jail for that, I truly don't understand.
But by all means, let's continue to blame the cop for not having a search warrant and then point to the DA, demand he had something to do with it WITHOUT AND PROOF TO DATE, and keep that the front page story.
But continue on @CowboyJD and the rest of your merry little cuck band. It's like watching election night all over again.
Serious question.
When does the FBI decide the investigation is concluded if they are trying to find evidence that may not exist?
Clapper said there is no evidence of collusion to this point, so do they continue looking til the end of time?
I mean when there is a murder they collect evidence to discover what happened and by who, right?
So what crime are they investigating? They say there's no evidence of vote tampering, ballot stuffing, so what law was broken?
When does the FBI decide the investigation is concluded if they are trying to find evidence that may not exist?
Clapper said there is no evidence of collusion to this point, so do they continue looking til the end of time?
I mean when there is a murder they collect evidence to discover what happened and by who, right?
So what crime are they investigating? They say there's no evidence of vote tampering, ballot stuffing, so what law was broken?
pretty good point
all is fair in love war and elections
but whatever prove russia meddled in the election ok
then what do you do with the DNC cow that gave hildebeast the debate questions?
call it gamesmanship?
Evidence of voter fraud is impossible to ignore yet the press does.
Evidence of "Russia whatever" is very possible to ignore yet the press does not.
Glad I could clear that up.
Evidence of "Russia whatever" is very possible to ignore yet the press does not.
Glad I could clear that up.
I'm going out to fire up the "Mexican microwave" for the second time today to cook Ms. J her requested Mother's Day meal. When that is completed and I return, this pissing contest needs to be over or I will stop the car!
The f*cking car is stopped!
Unless you're a DNC staffer who's going to "out" the cankle mafia, then you're just another Vince Foster suicide.
Good points. However:
1. I have no issue with the FBI's broader investigation. My issue is with the widely discussed, politicized and as yet unsupported claim that PDJT collided with Russia to usurp the office of the president, which would be treason if true.
2. Sorry but that's nowhere near true. The breadth and scope of large audience idealogues claiming the Russia collusion thing is legit absolutely dwarfs the impact I'm making to potentially dozens who might read this board.
3. I've expressed that nothing has been offered up to support the claim. Am I wrong? If there was something tying Trump to collusion with Russia, there's no chance it isn't leaked long before now, so yes. Seeing as how this is a message board and the only consequence to being wrong is being reminded that I was in fact, wrong... I continue to say that I think the collusion investigation is baseless. It's an opinion. If im wrong I'll own up to it, but I'm not.
4. I've felt "Trump colluded with Russia" sounded like excuse making, paranoid fantasy from the beginning? Well yeah. No shit. Just say it out loud. It helps to understand how ridiculous it (probably) is.
Also, I've made it clear in this thread that I changed my opinions on pizzagate. As for the shadowy deep state stuff, whicj specific claim do you mean? There were a lot - some I believe are plausible and some not, but comparing these to the collusion story in terms of scope and frequency of media coverage is not a solid analogy, IMO.
Last edited:
JD I have read through numerous articles but I can't find anything that would constitute evidence that would warrant further investigation. I have found a lot of Dems saying there could be evidence, but they don't have it.
Could you please lay out just a brief "this the evidence that warrants further investigation." I am curious to what that is I just can't find it. Yes I've googled it. Yes I went through the links provided already. Just a quick summary if you please. I would like to research some more on the topic.
Disclosure: my position is even if they did they would not have effected the outcome of the election so it is a mute point either way. If you go after Trump then you go after Hill for the same thing.
Could you please lay out just a brief "this the evidence that warrants further investigation." I am curious to what that is I just can't find it. Yes I've googled it. Yes I went through the links provided already. Just a quick summary if you please. I would like to research some more on the topic.
Disclosure: my position is even if they did they would not have effected the outcome of the election so it is a mute point either way. If you go after Trump then you go after Hill for the same thing.
BS. Trump himself does more to keep the story up front via his twitter feed than any media person.
Mannafort, Flynn, Page, and Stone. The actions of at least one of these four individuals are worthy of further investigation. QED.
Not BS at all, but.. You see me defending Trump on not taking the bait here? It's an effective strategy to distract him - which along with undermining confidence in him, is the point.
I guess you just don't get that the FBI does not announce what evidence it collects or has as it collects it. The idea that you googled it, didn't see it, so it doesn't exist, so no further investigation is warranted is frankly...dumb.
If you don't think Manafort, Page, Flynn, Stone and their dealings with Russia are due and full and complete investigation and following of the leads generated, I don't know what to tell you. We disagree.
You're position is that even if they did collude with the Russians, it didn't affect the election so no harm no foul? In an election as close as it was in key battleground swing states? There is no way you can say it definitelvely would not have done so. Besides, collusion with Russians to attempt to influence the election is a crime whether or not it ultimately works. Your disclaimer sounds a whole lot like Hillary during the Benghazi hearings....."WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE....WHAT DOES IT MATTER NOW."
I guess I really don't get where you are coming from when you say the "Russia thing" then. You have no problem with the broader FBI investigation. I am assuming that means Manafort, Page, Flynn, Stone but...
What is the "Russian collusion thing" you have such a problem with if you don't have a problem with the broader FBI investigation?
Is it just speculation about Trump specifically? Is it reporting about the FBI investigation? Is it speculation about whether Trump is trying to stop the investigation and why? It my opinion, every single time Trump tweets that "Russia is fake news" and given he mentioned the FBI investigation (which you said you have no problem with) in conjunction with firing Comey....speculation on why he might want to stop the broader FBI investigation is completely valid and appropriate. He's fanning the flames trying to kill the fire.
We're now at 77 replies. What's the over/under before JD gives the other side the last word?
Physician, heal thyself.
If people keep calling me out directly and explicitly, I'm probably going to respond.
Last edited:
So many mischaracterizations of my position here it's not even funny.
If you don't give a fvck about the search warrant, you don't give a fvck about constitutional limitations on governmental authority.....no wonder you're a Trumpie. If the cop didn't get a search warrant when required by the law, the evidence he obtained by violating the constitutional requirement to do so will be suppressed and rightfully so.
I'm not demanding anything. I'm pointing out that Hillary maybe breaking laws (and I think she probably did....lots of them) really isn't a logical justification for arguing the FBI should stop the investigation it has going on right now. Neither is the FBI not commenting on or disclosing results to date in an ongoing investigation.
