James Comey Indirectly Responds To Trump’s Morning Twitter Rant With Single Quote

[Checkerboard Strangler]

I read two of those links--which you clearly didnt read--and they dont back up your poiint. What a surprise. The charge that Trump supporters love Putin is a lie and the links you posted and didnt read, dont support that they do. Now that you have exposed yourself, see if you can cobble together a reply that isnt a fraud and actually contains an honest, mature argument. And no, I dont expect you to pull that off.

If that were the case, you would have quoted something that sticks it directly in my craw, but you didn't.

 

[Fletch]

If that were the case, you would have quoted something that sticks it directly in my craw, but you didn't.

You didnt read the links You just grabbed some random articles and threw them up there and pretended you made a case. You didnt. What would you like me to quote from your links :roll: This conversation began with me challenging another posters claim that Trump supporters love Putin and hate Comey. My question was: who on the right loves Putin. To his credit, he ran off and didnt try to defend his bull****. There are plenty of people on the right who dont see Putin as the worlds great bogey man that is pulling Trumps strings, but that doesnt mean they love the guy. They dont. The accusation was hackish nonsense and I called it out. Thats all.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

You didnt read the links You just grabbed some random articles and threw them up there and pretended you made a case. You didnt. What would you like me to quote from your links :roll: This conversation began with me challenging another posters claim that Trump supporters love Putin and hate Comey. My question was: who on the right loves Putin. To his credit, he ran off and didnt try to defend his bull****. There are plenty of people on the right who dont see Putin as the worlds great bogey man that is pulling Trumps strings, but that doesnt mean they love the guy. They dont. The accusation was hackish nonsense and I called it out. Thats all.

Remember when Bill Clinton got into the "it all depends on what your definition of 'is' is"?
That's what you're doing right now.

The Republican Party has diversity just like the Democrats do however a majority of them are doing Trump's bidding without hesitation, and central to Trump's bidding is protecting Vladimir Putin and staying at arm's length from Russia.

And that's because Trump is most likely a Russian asset. You may very well disagree but a lot of us here on DP don't agree with you on that issue, because a lot of us see the patterns and recognize them for what they are.
So whether you wish to try to narrow down "Putin love" as genuine affection or simply carrying water for Putin's likely asset in the White House, it doesn't matter in the end because the result is the same, where our own national security is concerned.

It doesn't matter because, in the end, extending diplomatic courtesy to another world leader does not include stepping in to defend their invasion of Afghanistan with perhaps the stupidest and most historically ignorant foreign policy comment in recent history, just as one recent example.

It doesn't matter because, in the end, casting our own law enforcement, military and justice as villains, in public where Vladimir Putin can read it, is tantamount to carrying Putin's agenda, which is the destabilization of the United States.

You don't agree? I don't give two ****s if you don't agree, but you can't say that I didn't respond with valid material.
Ummm, of course, you can, but you look foolish in doing so, only you don't realize it.

It's a question of Trump love among the Republicans translating into "love" of Putin, and there is ample evidence that a large number of Republicans, yourself included, will follow Trump right off a cliff in defending Putin and Russia.

And that's it, we're done...you will be talking to yourself from now on...and looking even more foolish than even I thought was possible.

 

[Mach]

Don't worry. The other shoe will drop when the time is right.

I accept that you can't defend your silly posts. Maybe that shoe will drop like pizzagate..maybe like Obama's birth certificate.
Will I need to have my tinfoil hat on to detect it?

Get a new hobby.

 

[Fletch]

Remember when Bill Clinton got into the "it all depends on what your definition of 'is' is"?
That's what you're doing right now.

The Republican Party has diversity just like the Democrats do however a majority of them are doing Trump's bidding without hesitation, and central to Trump's bidding is protecting Vladimir Putin and staying at arm's length from Russia.

And that's because Trump is most likely a Russian asset. You may very well disagree but a lot of us here on DP don't agree with you on that issue, because a lot of us see the patterns and recognize them for what they are.
So whether you wish to try to narrow down "Putin love" as genuine affection or simply carrying water for Putin's likely asset in the White House, it doesn't matter in the end because the result is the same, where our own national security is concerned.

It doesn't matter because, in the end, extending diplomatic courtesy to another world leader does not include stepping in to defend their invasion of Afghanistan with perhaps the stupidest and most historically ignorant foreign policy comment in recent history, just as one recent example.

It doesn't matter because, in the end, casting our own law enforcement, military and justice as villains, in public where Vladimir Putin can read it, is tantamount to carrying Putin's agenda, which is the destabilization of the United States.

You don't agree? I don't give two ****s if you don't agree, but you can't say that I didn't respond with valid material.
Ummm, of course, you can, but you look foolish in doing so, only you don't realize it.

It's a question of Trump love among the Republicans translating into "love" of Putin, and there is ample evidence that a large number of Republicans, yourself included, will follow Trump right off a cliff in defending Putin and Russia.

And that's it, we're done...you will be talking to yourself from now on...and looking even more foolish than even I thought was possible.

So you put together a thoughtful, intelligent post then decide to stop talking?? So be it.

 

[Mycroft]

"Spoken about by a lot of people" means absolutely nothing. What means something are charges, indictments and guilty verdicts.

Those "lot of people" include the President and members of Congress.

The rest? Give it time.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

So you put together a thoughtful, intelligent post then decide to stop talking?? So be it.

Look, I realize that you think you're some kind of Ben Shapiro.
I get that you want to be him badly, because you're attempting to use stuff you saw in the "7 Reasons Ben Shapiro is So Dominant in Debates" clip on YouTube, particularly #3..."pushing for specifics".
It's a cute parlor trick, if your opponent, or ... just the person you are talking to (how's that for a concept?) is stupid.

However, it's not working, and you're not Ben Shapiro, and you never will be.
And I'm not stupid.

On the main issue at hand, the Democrats, specifically people on the LEFT fringe of the Democratic Party, historically had a mild fascination with the old USSR, (Soviet Union) which was communist.
And because the Soviet Union was communist, the left fringe felt that there might be some awkward kinship with the socialist aspects of the old Soviet leaders.
This of course, was a path to sure failure because even if the United States was indeed experimenting with a couple of mild socialist tweaks to the economy, (The New Deal) pretending that The New Deal meant we had any kinship with our adversaries the Soviets was both dangerous and foolhardy.
And mainstream Democrats understood this just as surely as Republicans did.

But as the leftward push in American society grew, more liberals attempted to engender a more open relationship with the Soviets. Ever the pragmatists, conservatives decided that despite "trust but verify", that they might give the new Soviet "perestroika" a try, and they gained the support of liberals by doing so.

I might remind everyone that I said that the conservatives were pragmatists back then, at least with regard to the Soviet question.
Where the Soviets were concerned, the left fringe in the Democratic Party WERE NOT. They honestly believed that the Soviets were our friends if we'd just give them a chance. The conservatives simply used perestroika as one more bargaining tactic in their overall quest to destroy the Soviet Union, which they accomplished.
Vladimir Putin's Russia is not the old communist Soviet Union, be this known if nothing else is.

"People in Russia say that those who do not regret the collapse of the Soviet Union have no heart, and those that do regret it have no brain." (PUTIN)

Today, we observe the far Right fringes of the Republican Party gaining a lot of strength.
And hand in hand, we observe a desire for kinship with Vladimir Putin's Russia in a pattern eerily similar to the fringe lunatic left fascination with the old Soviet Union. It is not however based on any perceived common goals with Russia, but rather this time it is based solely on loyalty to Donald Trump, who is a client of Putin.

And it is foolish.

(My father, Peter H. Haas, 2nd from Left, SALT NEGOTIATOR in Moscow)

 

[HumblePi]

Those "lot of people" include the President and members of Congress.

The rest? Give it time.

Speaking about something is meaningless. "Give it time" ? Yet you are the ones pushing for Mueller to finish up all the time.

 

[Mycroft]

Speaking about something is meaningless. "Give it time" ? Yet you are the ones pushing for Mueller to finish up all the time.

"Whatabout!!!"

Hey...I have a whatabout for you, Sen. Warner talked to Tapper yesterday. Did you see that? Here...watch this.



Can you find the most glaring misstatement that Warner spouted in that interview? Hint: Think "gang of eight"

How can Warner be briefed, as member of the Gang of Eight, when he WASN'T a member of the gang of eight? He talks about knowing what the gang of eight was briefed on regarding Trump investigations. The problem...the gang of eight was briefed on Trump investigations by Brennan in Aug. 2016. Warner wasn't in the gang of eight until Jan. 2017.

So...tell me...did Warner just now lie to Tapper and the American people about being briefed as a member of the gang of eight? Or...was he actually illegally briefed on classified information when he was not allowed to have that information?

Oh...and did you know that Warner was also trying to set up meetings and collaborations with both Steele and Deripaska in Mar. 2017? Talk about "Russian collusion"!! Democratic Senator Mark Warner. Not Trump.




You see...while you, led by the Trump-hating multimedia echo chamber and the likes of Comey, focus on "Trump/Russia"...a whole lot of people are part of corrupt activities that range from unethical to outright illegal. Warner is just one of them. Comey is another one.

 

[Fletch]

Look, I realize that you think you're some kind of Ben Shapiro.
I get that you want to be him badly, because you're attempting to use stuff you saw in the "7 Reasons Ben Shapiro is So Dominant in Debates" clip on YouTube, particularly #3..."pushing for specifics".
It's a cute parlor trick, if your opponent, or ... just the person you are talking to (how's that for a concept?) is stupid.

However, it's not working, and you're not Ben Shapiro, and you never will be.
And I'm not stupid.

I see. Ive never watched any videos by Ben Shapiro, never read anything by him or heard any speeches. Ive seen him interviewed on TV a couple of times, but thats it. So much for your theory. As for the rest of your post, it makes a great deal of sense until you blow it with this:

And hand in hand, we observe a desire for kinship with Vladimir Putin's Russia in a pattern eerily similar to the fringe lunatic left fascination with the old Soviet Union. It is not however based on any perceived common goals with Russia, but rather this time it is based solely on loyalty to Donald Trump, who is a client of Putin.

Trump is not a 'client of Putin.' Thats just dumb. Trump has zero foreign policy experience and more than likely is just of the belief that he, through the power of his personality, can swing Putin away from the Dark Side. He seems to have that same position when it comes to Kim an XI as well. Thats just his self confidence or arrogance overpowering his ignorance. That some diabolical ends are constantly attributed to everything Trump says and does is silliness. Modern Russia is NOT the Soviet Union and Putin really isnt much of a threat to us The entire collusion and Russian election interference is political theater not not 70's style cloak and dagger stuff. Trump is aloof and uninterested in detail, not some criminal mastermind trying to sell America out to the Russians. He won because for all his flaws, he was a better choice than Hillary, not because the Russians helped him. In my opinion, Mueller is doing this country a great disservice by not wrapping this investigation up.

(My father, Peter H. Haas, 2nd from Left, SALT NEGOTIATOR in Moscow)

Thats pretty cool.

 

[American]

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entr...with-single-quote_us_5c3a50ace4b0922a21d55da6

In usual fashion, the former FBI director responded to a barrage of insults from the president with a subtle subtweet.


James Comey is no stranger to the subtweet. The former FBI director has been known to fire off historical quotes seemingly directed at President Donald Trump, and Saturday was no exception.

“I ask you to judge me by the enemies I have made,” Comey tweeted, quoting former President Franklin D. Roosevelt.
=============================
His response speaks for itself.

Comey, the lapdog of the Democratic Corruption Machine.

 

[HumblePi]

"Whatabout!!!"

Hey...I have a whatabout for you, Sen. Warner talked to Tapper yesterday. Did you see that? Here...watch this.



Can you find the most glaring misstatement that Warner spouted in that interview? Hint: Think "gang of eight"

How can Warner be briefed, as member of the Gang of Eight, when he WASN'T a member of the gang of eight? He talks about knowing what the gang of eight was briefed on regarding Trump investigations. The problem...the gang of eight was briefed on Trump investigations by Brennan in Aug. 2016. Warner wasn't in the gang of eight until Jan. 2017.

So...tell me...did Warner just now lie to Tapper and the American people about being briefed as a member of the gang of eight? Or...was he actually illegally briefed on classified information when he was not allowed to have that information?

Oh...and did you know that Warner was also trying to set up meetings and collaborations with both Steele and Deripaska in Mar. 2017? Talk about "Russian collusion"!! Democratic Senator Mark Warner. Not Trump.

View attachment 67247948


You see...while you, led by the Trump-hating multimedia echo chamber and the likes of Comey, focus on "Trump/Russia"...a whole lot of people are part of corrupt activities that range from unethical to outright illegal. Warner is just one of them. Comey is another one.

What a bunch of bull. You got that information from far-right conservative websites. You WANT to believe lies, so you do. You're reaching far and wide for some sort of safety net for Trump but even his conspiracy theory rightists aren't going to be able to shield him for much longer. The noose is tightening. In March, 2017, Adam Schiff, co-chair of the House Permanent Select Committee, stated that the select group of House and Senate members on intelligence matters was not adequately briefed on Russian issues ahead of the 2016 presidential election. In a roughly-three hour House Intelligence hearing with FBI Director James B. Comey, Senator Schiff stated that he had “absolutely” learned new information that the so-called gang of eight had not previously been looped in on.

The chairmen and ranking members of the House and Senate intelligence committees, along with the top party leaders in each chamber, receive additional secret national security information that other members do not receive.

“These are issues that should have been brought to the gang of eight, at a minimum. If we’re to get quarterly counterintelligence briefings, then we need the confidence of knowing that they’re briefing us on the most significant issues.”

“At this point, I think that’s very much in question, I don’t think at all we’ve gotten the kind of quarterly briefings that we should have been getting. Not now, not in the summer, not in the fall and not even to this day.”

Do you understand NOW why they only heard pertinent information about Russia and the role they played in our 2016 election? It's quite simply because the controlling Republican House and Congress would not ALLOW them to. They stifled and hid information which was significant and pertinent to the Russia investigation because it implicated Trump!

 

[Xelor]

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entr...with-single-quote_us_5c3a50ace4b0922a21d55da6

In usual fashion, the former FBI director responded to a barrage of insults from the president with a subtle subtweet.


James Comey is no stranger to the subtweet. The former FBI director has been known to fire off historical quotes seemingly directed at President Donald Trump, and Saturday was no exception.

“I ask you to judge me by the enemies I have made,” Comey tweeted, quoting former President Franklin D. Roosevelt.
=============================
His response speaks for itself.

Red:
It does; however, frankly, I don't know why Mr. Comey has succumbed to the prole's practice of deigning to dignify brigands and boneheads' bêtise with a response.

 

[notquiteright]

You tell me.

Weak tea, even for you....

I guess you don't watch mainstream media.... :roll:

Let's try Manafort, Cohen, 'lock her up' Disgraced Former General Flynn...

I'm sure the list will grow.... :2wave:

 

[Mycroft]

What a bunch of bull. You got that information from far-right conservative websites. You WANT to believe lies, so you do. You're reaching far and wide for some sort of safety net for Trump but even his conspiracy theory rightists aren't going to be able to shield him for much longer. The noose is tightening. In March, 2017, Adam Schiff, co-chair of the House Permanent Select Committee, stated that the select group of House and Senate members on intelligence matters was not adequately briefed on Russian issues ahead of the 2016 presidential election. In a roughly-three hour House Intelligence hearing with FBI Director James B. Comey, Senator Schiff stated that he had “absolutely” learned new information that the so-called gang of eight had not previously been looped in on.

The chairmen and ranking members of the House and Senate intelligence committees, along with the top party leaders in each chamber, receive additional secret national security information that other members do not receive.

“These are issues that should have been brought to the gang of eight, at a minimum. If we’re to get quarterly counterintelligence briefings, then we need the confidence of knowing that they’re briefing us on the most significant issues.”

“At this point, I think that’s very much in question, I don’t think at all we’ve gotten the kind of quarterly briefings that we should have been getting. Not now, not in the summer, not in the fall and not even to this day.”

Do you understand NOW why they only heard pertinent information about Russia and the role they played in our 2016 election? It's quite simply because the controlling Republican House and Congress would not ALLOW them to. They stifled and hid information which was significant and pertinent to the Russia investigation because it implicated Trump!

You are right that the DOJ and FBI...under Obama and held over by Trump (temporarily, some of them)...hid stuff from Congress. Specifically, that they had been investigating since mid-2016. (Of course, THAT was a lie, as well. The Obama administration had targeted Trump long before Jul. 2016.)

Here's Comey saying that he did exactly that..."because of the sensitivity of the matter". LOL!!



So...we have Comey NOT giving Congress information when he should have...and we have Brennan, apparently, giving information to Congressmen that he SHOULDN'T have...or, we have Warner lying to Tapper about getting information.

Anyway you look at it, it's all a bunch of Obama pukes and/or Democrat Congressmen doing bad stuff. And what do they all have in common? The desire to stop Trump.

 

[Mycroft]

Weak tea, even for you....

I guess you don't watch mainstream media.... :roll:

Let's try Manafort, Cohen, 'lock her up' Disgraced Former General Flynn...

I'm sure the list will grow.... :2wave:

shrug...

You may think it's weak, but that's the proper response to rhetorical whataboutism.

 

[Mycroft]

Red:
It does; however, frankly, I don't know why Mr. Comey has succumbed to the prole's practice of deigning to dignify brigands and boneheads' bêtise with a response.

He's feeling cocky.

 

[Mach]

You see...while you, led by the Trump-hating multimedia echo chamber and the likes of Comey, focus on "Trump/Russia"...a whole lot of people are part of corrupt activities that range from unethical to outright illegal. Warner is just one of them. Comey is another one.

We're being led by Trump's own actions in public, and on the record.

FBI investigated Trump largely on the basis of things he's said and done that we all know about. That you refuse to accept its evidence worthy of investigation to me means you don't have American interests at heart.

But here we have a mountain of evidence of unethical and likely illegal behavior from POTUS and his cronies...in our hands, on record, from POTUS's own mouth.... and you're accusing us of not paying attention to the people investigating him, who YOU claim are unethical/illegal. With no credible evidence.

You don't find that absurd?

 

[Mycroft]

We're being led by Trump's own actions in public, and on the record.

FBI investigated Trump largely on the basis of things he's said and done that we all know about. That you refuse to accept its evidence worthy of investigation to me means you don't have American interests at heart.

But here we have a mountain of evidence of unethical and likely illegal behavior from POTUS and his cronies...in our hands, on record, from POTUS's own mouth.... and you're accusing us of not paying attention to the people investigating him, who YOU claim are unethical/illegal. With no credible evidence.

You don't find that absurd?

That you would deny evidence presented to you...their own words and texts, among other evidence...of actions ranging from unethical to politically corrupt to outright illegal by various people inside and outside of the Obama administration simply because you have a hard on for Trump IS absurd.

Look. Trump is being investigated. He has been investigated...since, at least, mid 2016. Nobody is ignoring that. What people are ignoring are the actions of the investigators. I predict that soon y'all won't be able to ignore those actions. You will only be able to respond with spin and whataboutism.

 

[notquiteright]

shrug... You may think it's weak, but that's the proper response to rhetorical whataboutism.

I think it's extremely weak.... :roll:

Comey hasn't been charged with anything but tRump's crew seems to be falling like autumn leaves... :doh

From where I sit I like the idea of letting the law be used as the yardstick... Team tRump is in the lead in this disgraceful scorecard.... eace

 

[HumblePi]

You are right that the DOJ and FBI...under Obama and held over by Trump (temporarily, some of them)...hid stuff from Congress. Specifically, that they had been investigating since mid-2016. (Of course, THAT was a lie, as well. The Obama administration had targeted Trump long before Jul. 2016.)

Here's Comey saying that he did exactly that..."because of the sensitivity of the matter". LOL!!



So...we have Comey NOT giving Congress information when he should have...and we have Brennan, apparently, giving information to Congressmen that he SHOULDN'T have...or, we have Warner lying to Tapper about getting information.

Anyway you look at it, it's all a bunch of Obama pukes and/or Democrat Congressmen doing bad stuff. And what do they all have in common? The desire to stop Trump.

Let's give Trump the benefit of the doubt. Even if Trump did all of this unwittingly, think of all the actions Trump has taken after these revelations in his constant attempts to shut down this investigation or to discredit it. Trump isn't shy about playing with our national security as though it was a toy. This is a man who has shut down our government over a fake, bizarre claim about the wall and the hypothetical view that maybe some of these immigrants would come and hurt Americans. Here we have the most concrete thing imaginable that our adversary, Putin is engaged in an attempt to try and undermine the democratic system. And what is Trump's answer? It's to discredit Mueller and point his finger the other way. There's something very wrong with all of this.

Going back to 2016 when Manafort took the job gratis as campaign manager, suddenly the Republican National Committee platform changed to take a very pro-Russian stance. The FBI intelligence was looking into Paul Manafort's connection with a Russian oligarch, Oleg Deripaska. Before the inauguration, FBI Director James Comey had repeatedly warned Trump that there was hard evidence that the Russians interfered in the election and that several members of his campaign were implicated in Russian interference and that he may be compromised by Russia. This was well into into the FBI investigation. They essential said they're trying to help him and inoculate him against this influence of Russia. He repeatedly brought up Russia in every one-on-one with Comey in every discussion then fires him and drafts a memo, retracts it, then goes on TV with Lester Holt and says he fired Comey because of this 'Russia thing'.

After the inauguration, just out of nowhere, Trump started to cite propaganda from Russia about Poland being aggressive and because of this Russian propaganda coming from the president of the United States and the increased aggression by Russia, Poland is even more susceptible to an invasion by Russia. For a man like Trump -- who is not specific about anything he clearly knows nothing about -- to be speaking about things that are complete falsehoods is another reason to suspect Trump has been compromised by Russia.

Israel and the US have a close intelligence-sharing relationship but spies from the Middle Eastern nation had previously been warned not to share sensitive details with the Trump White House. When Trump hosted the Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and the Russian Ambassador Sergei Kislyak, he got in trouble because he shared sensitive details of a the covert Israeli operation that exposed Isis’ plans to create new laptop bombs and smuggle them aboard commercial airliners. US reporters were barred from the meeting and the only images that documented it were taken by Russia’s TASS news agency.

There's a mountain of reasons to suspect that Trump has been an agent working on behalf of Russia. The evidence will come out and it will be damaging and irrefutable.

 

[Mycroft]

Let's give Trump the benefit of the doubt. Even if Trump did all of this unwittingly, think of all the actions Trump has taken after these revelations in his constant attempts to shut down this investigation or to discredit it. Trump isn't shy about playing with our national security as though it was a toy. This is a man who has shut down our government over a fake, bizarre claim about the wall and the hypothetical view that maybe some of these immigrants would come and hurt Americans. Here we have the most concrete thing imaginable that our adversary, Putin is engaged in an attempt to try and undermine the democratic system. And what is Trump's answer? It's to discredit Mueller and point his finger the other way. There's something very wrong with all of this.

Going back to 2016 when Manafort took the job gratis as campaign manager, suddenly the Republican National Committee platform changed to take a very pro-Russian stance. The FBI intelligence was looking into Paul Manafort's connection with a Russian oligarch, Oleg Deripaska. Before the inauguration, FBI Director James Comey had repeatedly warned Trump that there was hard evidence that the Russians interfered in the election and that several members of his campaign were implicated in Russian interference and that he may be compromised by Russia. This was well into into the FBI investigation. They essential said they're trying to help him and inoculate him against this influence of Russia. He repeatedly brought up Russia in every one-on-one with Comey in every discussion then fires him and drafts a memo, retracts it, then goes on TV with Lester Holt and says he fired Comey because of this 'Russia thing'.

After the inauguration, just out of nowhere, Trump started to cite propaganda from Russia about Poland being aggressive and because of this Russian propaganda coming from the president of the United States and the increased aggression by Russia, Poland is even more susceptible to an invasion by Russia. For a man like Trump -- who is not specific about anything he clearly knows nothing about -- to be speaking about things that are complete falsehoods is another reason to suspect Trump has been compromised by Russia.

Israel and the US have a close intelligence-sharing relationship but spies from the Middle Eastern nation had previously been warned not to share sensitive details with the Trump White House. When Trump hosted the Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and the Russian Ambassador Sergei Kislyak, he got in trouble because he shared sensitive details of a the covert Israeli operation that exposed Isis’ plans to create new laptop bombs and smuggle them aboard commercial airliners. US reporters were barred from the meeting and the only images that documented it were taken by Russia’s TASS news agency.

There's a mountain of reasons to suspect that Trump has been an agent working on behalf of Russia. The evidence will come out and it will be damaging and irrefutable.

None of that is evidence of anything. It's nothing more that speculation, spin, innuendo and hyperbole.

btw, regarding Poland...here is the reality:

https://www.newsweek.com/trump-poland-warsaw-us-arms-russia-missiles-border-632766

https://news.yahoo.com/trump-studying-possibility-permanent-us-poland-182952834.html

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/worl...liquefied-natural-gas-deal-with-us/ar-BBRbYKY

I don't know where this "Poland is even more susceptible to an invasion by Russia" stuff comes from, but I'm thinking Russia will think twice about attacking a country that we are doing such deals with.

 

[Mach]

politically corrupt to outright illegal by various people inside and outside of the Obama administration

IGs have found nothing illegal.
No criminal investigations.
No felons.
Obama is not the ****ing president, it's over, get over it. They were pristine compared to Trump.

In contrast, Trump's up to what, 5 felons plus a host of others that helped him win the election? Keep dreaming.

What people are ignoring are the actions of the investigators. I predict that soon y'all won't be able to ignore those actions. You will only be able to respond with spin and whataboutism.

You predict later we'll only respond with spin and whataboutism, as you engage in spin and whataboutism in your own post?

Good gods, is there no depth to the **** you'll post?

 

[Mycroft]

IGs have found nothing illegal.
No criminal investigations.
No felons.
Obama is not the ****ing president, it's over, get over it. They were pristine compared to Trump.

In contrast, Trump's up to what, 5 felons plus a host of others that helped him win the election? Keep dreaming.


You predict later we'll only respond with spin and whataboutism, as you engage in spin and whataboutism in your own post?

Good gods, is there no depth to the **** you'll post?

Do you think it is legal for Warner to collude with a Russian oligarch?

Do you think it is legal for the Obama FBI to allow non-government subcontractors unsupervised access to the NSA database?

Those are just two of the many questions about the Obama administration and about Congressional figures.

Or do you only care about "Trump/Russia"?

 

[Mach]

Do you think it is legal for Warner to collude with a Russian oligarch?
Do you think it is legal for the Obama FBI to allow non-government subcontractors unsupervised access to the NSA database?
Those are just two of the many questions about the Obama administration and about Congressional figures.
Or do you only care about "Trump/Russia"?

You need to start threads in the conspiracy theory forum and stop cluttering these threads up with your off-topic tin-foil hat B.S.