1 minute ago, Redline said:

Along with Russian interference 

Proof, my man, proof.  Biased opinions based on what someone desperately wants to believe amounts to . . . zero.  Give us proof!

Trump defends right to interfere in criminal cases

Come on Donald, how much longer do we have to wait for you to rewrite the Holy Bible!

6 hours ago, rooster59 said:

Trump defends right to interfere in criminal cases

Just like Putin. 

26 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

Comment please.

 

Obama’s Comments About Clinton’s Emails Rankle Some in the F.B.I.

 

“I don’t think it posed a national security problem,” Mr. Obama said Sunday on CBS’s “60 Minutes.” He said it had been a mistake for Mrs. Clinton to use a private email account when she was secretary of state, but his conclusion was unmistakable: “This is not a situation in which America’s national security was endangered.”

 

What selective memories libs/Dems have.  Simply amazing, too, that when "interference" is done by a Democratic president the libs/Dems don't say boo but if it's a Republican, well, that's grounds for impeachment.  Twisted logic and perverse reasoning.  LOL

Just make you vote count! Clowns occupy both sides of the fence!

A nasty bit of work and a dangerous man, he wants to be a dictator... hope Americans see the light before it's too late.

5 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Bernie isn’t going to be a candidate 

Same thing they said about Trump. But does not matter Trump will win all about the money US markets at all time highs.

Yeeehaaaa!

Edited February 15, 20206 yr by bkk6060

as I said before....nothing more than an orchestrated stunt by Barr & Trump with ABC complicity trying to boost DOJ self confidence, it's all too obvious, thanks to the bad actors/acting easy to detect

1 hour ago, Tippaporn said:

Proof, my man, proof.  Biased opinions based on what someone desperately wants to believe amounts to . . . zero.  Give us proof!

why do you keep wasting time asking for things that have already been provided to you. Surely your memory isnt that bad.

 

https://www.vox.com/2019/7/25/8930616/senate-intelligence-report-russia-50-states

 

Even putin admitted it.

5 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

Comment please.  Explain how this is different.

 

Obama’s Comments About Clinton’s Emails Rankle Some in the F.B.I.

 

“I don’t think it posed a national security problem,” Mr. Obama said Sunday on CBS’s “60 Minutes.” He said it had been a mistake for Mrs. Clinton to use a private email account when she was secretary of state, but his conclusion was unmistakable: “This is not a situation in which America’s national security was endangered.”

 

What selective memories libs/Dems have.  Simply amazing, too, that when "interference" is done by a Democratic president the libs/Dems don't say boo but if it's a Republican, well, that's grounds for impeachment.  Twisted logic and perverse reasoning.  LOL

no need to comment, not mixing apples and oranges.... you guys are specialists at that, not me, Trump telling DOJ to go easy on his friends has absolute;y nothing to do with Hilary's e-mails even if I agree that was wrong but it would be a complete different post

58 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

Comment please.

Putin’ attack on justice by pushing a narrative weakening faith in the rule of law as administered by the justice system in Russia and its being copied by Trump. 
 

Your example is illogical and has false equivalency. 

1 hour ago, Baerboxer said:

 

So did McCabe lie or not?

Yes, but not a sufficient cause to progress to criminal charges. Whereas trump lies and misinforms every day he is in power. Begs the question why DoJ is not laying charges for falsifying evidence. I understand a President cannot be charged by DoJ for criminality whilst in power which to my mind is ridiculous, a ruling that must be challenged by way of a change to the Constitution.

9 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

Comment please.  Explain how this is different.

 

Obama’s Comments About Clinton’s Emails Rankle Some in the F.B.I.

 

“I don’t think it posed a national security problem,” Mr. Obama said Sunday on CBS’s “60 Minutes.” He said it had been a mistake for Mrs. Clinton to use a private email account when she was secretary of state, but his conclusion was unmistakable: “This is not a situation in which America’s national security was endangered.”

 

What selective memories libs/Dems have.  Simply amazing, too, that when "interference" is done by a Democratic president the libs/Dems don't say boo but if it's a Republican, well, that's grounds for impeachment.  Twisted logic and perverse reasoning.  LOL

aren't you tired of all that conspiracy theory.....Republican senator found plenty of evidence, what else do you guys need....

New Senate Intelligence report shows “extensive” Russia 2016 election interference

It also notes that Russia targeted voting systems in all 50 states.

For the past two and a half years, the panel led by Chair Sen. Richard Burr (R-NC)

 

 

2 minutes ago, Mavideol said:

no need to comment, not mixing apples and oranges.... you guys are specialists at that, not me, Trump telling DOJ to go easy on his friends has absolute;y nothing to do with Hilary's e-mails even if I agree that was wrong but it would be a complete different post

Agree. Also it was found that she had nothing that was classified on the emails.

 

Ivanka uses a private email. Trump uses an unsecure phone. Putin is doing handstands.

 

5 hours ago, worgeordie said:

The Dick-tator can do anything now...God help America.

regards Worgeordie

 

wasn't sure who to vote for til i heard about "grabbing pussy" then it was a no brainer

I'll ask the same of each poster here who continues with the false claims that Trump's tweet interfered, or attempted to interfere, with the DOJ on Roger Stone's behalf and how this constitutes, at worst, another impeachable offense.

 

What is the difference between what the libs/Dems are claiming as egregious behaviour on Trump's part and what Obama said on 60 Minutes to deflect calls for the criminal prosecution of Hillary?

 

I'll help by pointing out one difference:  Obama attempted to deflect calls for the criminal prosecution of Hillary while Trump's tweet was merely complaining about an obviously unjust sentence proposal of 7~9 years.  He did not attempt to get Stone's verdict overruled, just the severity of the sentence.

 

There simply is no way to justify the accusations against Trump when Obama went to even greater lengths to protect one of his own Democrats.

11 minutes ago, Mavideol said:

no need to comment, not mixing apples and oranges.... you guys are specialists at that, not me, Trump telling DOJ to go easy on his friends has absolute;y nothing to do with Hilary's e-mails even if I agree that was wrong but it would be a complete different post

LOL.  Okay.

11 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

Putin’ attack on justice by pushing a narrative weakening faith in the rule of law as administered by the justice system in Russia and its being copied by Trump. 
 

Your example is illogical and has false equivalency. 

Illogical and false equivalency how?  Do try and explain rather than brushing it off without explanation.

1 hour ago, Tippaporn said:

Proof, my man, proof.  Biased opinions based on what someone desperately wants to believe amounts to . . . zero.  Give us proof!

Every intelligence agency in the US government has put out reports, the special counsel gave very specific proof, charges were brought agains Russians, the House and Senate both wrote reports ???? where have you been boy?

 

https://apps.washingtonpost.com/g/documents/national/read-the-declassified-report-on-russian-interference-in-the-us-election/2433/

 

https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/sites/default/files/documents/Report_Volume1.pdf
 

if you need help reading, ask your phone.

 

this is two out of dozens ????

6 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

I'll ask the same of each poster here who continues with the false claims that Trump's tweet interfered, or attempted to interfere, with the DOJ on Roger Stone's behalf and how this constitutes, at worst, another impeachable offense.

 

What is the difference between what the libs/Dems are claiming as egregious behaviour on Trump's part and what Obama said on 60 Minutes to deflect calls for the criminal prosecution of Hillary?

 

I'll help by pointing out one difference:  Obama attempted to deflect calls for the criminal prosecution of Hillary while Trump's tweet was merely complaining about an obviously unjust sentence proposal of 7~9 years.  He did not attempt to get Stone's verdict overruled, just the severity of the sentence.

 

There simply is no way to justify the accusations against Trump when Obama went to even greater lengths to protect one of his own Democrats.

So you don't think Obama interefered. Do I understand well?

7 minutes ago, atyclb said:

 

wasn't sure who to vote for til i heard about "grabbing pussy" then it was a no brainer

It would certainly seem logical that those voting for trump had no brains.

A number of posts have been removed where a poster has quoted himself with the same post multiple times.

Replies have generally been allowed to stand.

Continuing to post the same thing over and over is trolling, so kindly desist.

During the first few years of Putin's reign of terror, he used a vast amount of power and influence to weaken the justice system, break down traditional law and order, weaken the media, grab additional reins of power, and consolidate his virtual dictatorship. We see some of these same things happening now. And it is amazing how many millions of Americans either do not see it, or choose to look the other way.

13 minutes ago, Mavideol said:

aren't you tired of all that conspiracy theory.....Republican senator found plenty of evidence, what else do you guys need....

New Senate Intelligence report shows “extensive” Russia 2016 election interference

It also notes that Russia targeted voting systems in all 50 states.

For the past two and a half years, the panel led by Chair Sen. Richard Burr (R-NC)

 

 

What does your above comment have to do with my post?  Remember what this topic is about?

 

Emboldened, Trump defends right to interfere in criminal cases

 

My post has nothing to do with proof of Russian interference and everything to do with this topic . . . the hypocrisy of the left to denounce Trump's tweet and accuse him of attempting to interfere with justice when Obama did no less and no one on the left seems to remember.

13 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

I'll ask the same of each poster here who continues with the false claims that Trump's tweet interfered, or attempted to interfere, with the DOJ on Roger Stone's behalf and how this constitutes, at worst, another impeachable offense.

 

What is the difference between what the libs/Dems are claiming as egregious behaviour on Trump's part and what Obama said on 60 Minutes to deflect calls for the criminal prosecution of Hillary?

 

I'll help by pointing out one difference:  Obama attempted to deflect calls for the criminal prosecution of Hillary while Trump's tweet was merely complaining about an obviously unjust sentence proposal of 7~9 years.  He did not attempt to get Stone's verdict overruled, just the severity of the sentence.

 

There simply is no way to justify the accusations against Trump when Obama went to even greater lengths to protect one of his own Democrats.

Then blame the spineless jelkyfish in the gop for doing nothing.

 

In the meantime stop deflecting with nonsense.

1 minute ago, Tippaporn said:

What does your above comment have to do with my post?  Remember what this topic is about?

 

Emboldened, Trump defends right to interfere in criminal cases

 

My post has nothing to do with proof of Russian interference and everything to do with this topic . . . the hypocrisy of the left to denounce Trump's tweet and accuse him of attempting to interfere with justice when Obama did no less and no one on the left seems to remember.

You posted asking for proof of russian interference.

Jeez now we have to tell trump supporters what they asked.

7 minutes ago, Redline said:

Every intelligence agency in the US government has put out reports, the special counsel gave very specific proof, charges were brought agains Russians, the House and Senate both wrote reports ???? where have you been boy?

 

https://apps.washingtonpost.com/g/documents/national/read-the-declassified-report-on-russian-interference-in-the-us-election/2433/

 

https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/sites/default/files/documents/Report_Volume1.pdf
 

if you need help reading, ask your phone.

 

this is two out of dozens ????

No proof has ever been provided by anyone.  They have only made claims.  "Trust us."  Blind faith.

 

How that Intelligence assessment was concluded is just another aspect of the entire sordid affair that is supposedly being looked into.

6 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

No proof has ever been provided by anyone.  They have only made claims.  "Trust us."  Blind faith.

 

How that Intelligence assessment was concluded is just another aspect of the entire sordid affair that is supposedly being looked into.

Show us proof the assessment was just another aspect of the entire sordid affair.

 

Show us proof it is a sordid affair.

 

If you dont believe the conclusion of every agency with letters and a republican controlled inquiry then there is not much more to say.

 

Congratulations on being first on my ignore list.  Btw, the earth isnt flat.

10 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

No proof has ever been provided by anyone.  They have only made claims.  "Trust us."  Blind faith.

 

How that Intelligence assessment was concluded is just another aspect of the entire sordid affair that is supposedly being looked into.

You and your deep state ???????? Don’t waste your time with me, focus on the idiots

1 hour ago, Tippaporn said:

Illogical and false equivalency how?  Do try and explain rather than brushing it off without explanation.

Thought it was self explanatory and not hard to distinguish if you just try. Hillary was not under indictment or sentencing like Stone nor did she confessed her guilt like Flynn. Most importantly, Obama didn’t had a pattern of obstructing justice like Trump.