Chiphigh

2 hours ago, Bluespunk said:

Amazing what can be achieved when you appoint yes men to crucial positions. 

Yes. The Obama administration appointed several hundreds of them, some still have jobs, for now. Some have filed bogus complaints, others are purposely hiding information from foia requests. 

Another term will help to clear up the problem. 

1 minute ago, candide said:

The QPQ occurred between around March and September 2019. People like Biden and Chalupa have nothing to testify about what Trump may have done during this period of time.

 

As for the tactics followed by the Dems, it is obvious that they anticipated that the Republicans would target Biden, as the Republican don't have much else to say. (I doubt they will talk about the "Ukrainian" company Crowdstrike as It's far too ridiculous)

So chulupa solicited Ukraine for interference in the election and this is irrelevant because of the liberal double standards. Or because you don't want to have the dnc tied to the dirty tactics, no matter what it takes. 

OK, great logical choice. 

Fortunately, the facts are being uncovered regardless of the tactics being used to hide them. 

1 hour ago, Chomper Higgot said:

I’m sticking to the FACT that the DoJ investigation found the FBI to have acted legally.

 

As for this nonsense about Carter Page being a CIA asset, he’s nothing but a liability, as the Russians described him

’a useful idiot’.

 

 

I'm sticking to the fact that they used KNOWN bogus information to spy on a KNOWN CIA asset. 

And that they have yet to announce the verdict of the legal predicate of the first two fisa warrants. 

The state dept is still refusing foia requests for information. 

33 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

Sure your critical thinking has nothing to do with Trump calling the Muller probe a witch hunt 84 times. Thinking critically, with so many indicted for connection with the election and 8 pleaded guilty or convicted of felonies which include Trump associates and election campaign officials, 2016 election was compromised. That’s my stance. 

You are entitled to your stance. You are not entitled to state your own opinions and assumptions with unsourced unverifiable assertions as facts. 

It is amazing that the left and the media have stood by the fallacy of a legitimate government investigation for years feeding unsourced innuendo to try and spin the same narrative. 

It is slowly being exposed for the most dangerous attempt to subvert a duly elected president. Unfortunately, the people behind this, are still walking free,for now. 

13 hours ago, Eric Loh said:

Evidences were enough for Mueller and his team to file charges against 37 defendants, secured seven guilty pleas and one conviction at trial. Six former associates and advisors of POTUS were among those charged. The case of Trump’s former deputy campaign chairman Rick Gates was transferred from the special counsel’s office to federal prosecutors in Washington. Perhaps the best part is when Trump leave office and not protected by DOJ policy and indicted as a civilian. That may come this year. 

 
 

Again, I have asked for clear details about the claims you made, and you have not supported them. 

It is astounding to see the lack of actual facts while you constantly post opinions as facts. 

Each week we are learning the real facts behind the attempts to unseat a duly elected president. 

This is going to backfire in spectacular fashion. It will be well deserved. 

3 hours ago, Eric Loh said:

I am sure you treat this as fake news. 

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/dec/10/cia-concludes-russia-interfered-to-help-trump-win-election-report

Where are the names of the people who are making these statements. Who, when and where were they made and more importantly, where in the article does it say specific examples of votes that were affected. 

3 years on, there still is no evidence of their claims. 

2 hours ago, Sujo said:

Even putin admitted russia did it to help trump.

 

im sure they do it because it has no impact. Sarcasm.

Can you please provide factual reference to this and show how anything you are referring to had effect on the election. 

4 minutes ago, simple1 said:

Polls can be incorrect, but showing majority are anti trump, as was the case in 2016. Guess depends if the electoral college again saves him from defeat. Still don't understand why some people support such an endemic liar with a horrible Administration...

The electoral College did not "save" anything. It is the way we elect presidents. I still don't know how the left can sustain the irrational emotional hatred and outrage, while the economy and job market is doing remarkably well. 

11 minutes ago, Redline said:

And what do you stand for?  I would rather have her president of the USA.  At least she can speak above the grade level of trump.  How do you know people tell her what to say?  Do you have proof ???? what about the kids speaking up about gun violence-survivors of mass killings-idiots because they are kids ???? 

Do you think virtue signaling is a valid intellectual argument for your ideas? 

33 minutes ago, Mavideol said:

I make it easy for you but as a Trump supporter I am quite sure you will deny everything and anything, good luck though make sure to read the full report and if you need additional ones they will be in your way

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_Russian_interference_in_the_2016_United_States_elections

 

The Russian government interfered in the 2016 U.S. presidential election with the goal of harming the campaign of Hillary Clinton, boosting the candidacy of Donald Trump, and increasing political and social discord in the United States.

The Internet Research Agency, based in Saint Petersburg and described as a troll farm, created thousands of social media accounts that purported to be Americans supporting radical political groups, and planned or promoted events in support of Trump and against Clinton; they reached millions of social media users between 2013 and 2017. Fabricated articles and disinformation were spread from Russian government-controlled media, and promoted on social media.

 

Russian attempts to interfere in the election were first disclosed publicly by members of the United States Congress on September 22, 2016, confirmed by United States intelligence agencies on October 7, 2016, and further detailed by the Director of National Intelligence office in January 2017.

 

https://www.factcheck.org/2016/12/trump-russia-u-s-election/

 

Joint Statement, Oct. 7: The U.S. Intelligence Community (USIC) is confident that the Russian Government directed the recent compromises of e-mails from US persons and institutions, including from US political organizations. The recent disclosures of alleged hacked e-mails on sites like DCLeaks.com and WikiLeaks and by the Guccifer 2.0 online persona are consistent with the methods and motivations of Russian-directed efforts. These thefts and disclosures are intended to interfere with the US election process. Such activity is not new to Moscow—the Russians have used similar tactics and techniques across Europe and Eurasia, for example, to influence public opinion there. We believe, based on the scope and sensitivity of these efforts, that only Russia’s senior-most officials could have authorized these activities.

 

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/senate-intel-russia-hearing-live-updates/

 

https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/russia-trump-and-2016-us-election

 

 

The Russians have attempted to interfere in many elections for decades.

So has the United States. 

Nowhere does it say that it means that the president wasn't fairly elected, as was your claim. Which is a complete lie. 

This is Just in case you were confused about what you tried to claim in your previous post. Understand? 

19 hours ago, Tug said:

Come on 2020 the vast majority want a real trial looks like that’s not gonna happen it will be reflected in 2020 enough of the fraud

Can you quantify this "vast" majority and how much is in a vast. 

If you are including a poll, include the precise wording of the poll question and the details of the people asked and where the people who were asked were from. 

Thank you

3 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Falling in line with those habitually posting derogatory comments aimed at a teenage girls is not compulsory either.

Here we are again, someone else on the left deciding who can be criticized and who can't with virtue signaling 

1 hour ago, Lacessit said:

Trump is a climate denier. Why wouldn't he be, when he and his cronies will be insulated from the effects?

I don't know which is sadder, the electorates being gulled by populists who don't have a clue themselves, or angry old men attacking a teenage girl for being angry about the mess we are leaving her generation.

There it is again, the ignorance of presuming a binary choice indicates you are either with the "good" or the "bad". 

Get a grip. 

3 hours ago, neeray said:

I make no bones about my citizenship. I am proudly Canadian.

And that qualifies me to hold an unbiased view, a clear view, unlike you who hurts every time somebody expresses an opinion of Dear Leader that opposes yours.

I can see the forest. Can you?

Being Canadian doesn't mean that you are somehow more unbiased or intelligent. Your opinion is merely that. Moral preening is not a virtue. 

2 hours ago, simple1 said:

By trump's behaviour & the GOP they are insulting the Constitution and the American voters. One hopes for the 11/20 election voters actually achieve want the majority desire; removal of trump

That is quite a large generalized assumption with nothing to back it up other than your own opinions. 

7 hours ago, Jingthing said:

Yes and even beyond that if they had agreed to that the senate would still retain the power to overrule any specific decisions they didn't agree with. 

This is the senate, the house investigation is over. The senate will decide whether this ridiculous fantasy will be continued or put into the dust bin where it belongs. 

How many attempts to erase the 2016 election is enough? 

2 minutes ago, candide said:

The usual set of fake arguments directly from Trump's tweets.

What was "fake"? 

9 minutes ago, Mavideol said:

Trump was elected fairly? where and when? and Vlad has nothing to do with that "fair" election 555

Can you please provide factual reference to the claim that you have made? If not, this would be a good time to return to reality. 

8 hours ago, stevenl said:

The opinion of the old geezers here is as usual, denyal of established science. Google is their friend. In the mean time the people who are affected by this seem to care and are willing to change.

This is not "established" science. It is irrational emotional outrage backed by a cabal of people with an agenda who will profit from it financially or politically. 

Anyone who is ignorant enough to think the science is settled is not being honest.