Jump to content
Check your account email address ×

last question, for awhile


Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Snake said:

Veselnitskaya has said she sought the Trump Tower meeting in order to lobby the candidate’s team against Russian sanctions, but the initial approach included an offer of compromising information on candidate Clinton.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/fusion-gps-official-met-with-russian-operative-before-and-after-trump-jr-sit-down

 

Right from the horse's mouth. She wanted to talk MA, but also SAID she had some oppo research.

I bet no one ever makes shit up to get a meeting........

:lol:

you have got to be shitting me.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Platinum Contributing Member
2 minutes ago, Snake said:

Veselnitskaya has said she sought the Trump Tower meeting in order to lobby the candidate’s team against Russian sanctions, but the initial approach included an offer of compromising information on candidate Clinton.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/fusion-gps-official-met-with-russian-operative-before-and-after-trump-jr-sit-down

 

Right from the horse's mouth. She wanted to talk MA, but also SAID she had some oppo research.

I bet no one ever makes shit up to get a meeting........

Yep.   Plus that's what they testified to congress and guess what.....no charges about lying to them. 

Funny they threw the book at Manafort and Cohen yet nothing they could reveal said any different.   He seems to forget that.  

Edited by Highmark
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Snoslinger said:

ah, so the media made much of the evidence found in this investigation up? maybe trump tower and the memos weren't even real! seems you're getting a little hot under the collar dude? tit fucker? yeah i have done that on occasion. it was fun. was that supposed to be an insult? and you're telling me to grow the fuck up? lmao. you better bring cop killer back, he didn't look quite as dumb, nor as easy to fire up than "snake". 

 

You've been told the truth; you refuse to accept it. That is not the mark of a well person.

Yeah.. grow up. Children of 8-9 make excuses for their actions and try to pass it on to their little brother.

I'll put my bag of posts over the past 2 days against yours.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Snake said:

You've been told the truth; you refuse to accept it. That is not the mark of a well person.

Yeah.. grow up. Children of 8-9 make excuses for their actions and try to pass it on to their little brother.

I'll put my bag of posts over the past 2 days against yours.

will you please quit making shit up? i have been told something that i feel is the truth - that there was not evidence to get a collusion charge. i don't really care wtf you do with your bags of anything. maybe ya stick them back in wolfie's mouth? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Platinum Contributing Member

1 , Because not only is it done all the time, if Hillary thought the Russians had shit on Trump Chelsea would have been meeting with them. 

It was a witch hunt because their was nothing given back. Meeting with someone isn't against the law. 

 

2 What did Trump have to give? Nothing, the Russians didn't care who won as long as it wasn't Hillary. Why, because they know she wouldn't be able to mind her own business and would be in their face about Crimea and Syria.

3 Its the same shit that happens in most elections and no one has been charged before because they didn't do anything illegal. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Snoslinger said:

and this is primarily addressed to skidmark, snake, tom, steve...

1. if we knew members of the trump admin were meeting with russian operatives, with the intent of getting dirt on hillary, why have you been calling this a "witch hunt", "illegal" etc? why is that not important stuff to check out?

2. if you agreed the members were were meeting with russian operatives with the intent of getting dirt on hillary, how were you so convinced "no collusion"? you didn't know all the details of the events. only mueller would have known all those. for all you know, mueller could have had the actual goods that the russians promised in that meeting. you can't say leaks would have been made either. we learned alot of things about the investigation, long after they happened. it was a damn tight investigation

3. why are you thinking anyone questioning and believing something illegal went down here is stupid, or a hack? i watched many of you go ape shit over much less important things, with no freaking evidence whatsoever. 

personally, i think many of you just got damn lucky on this. there wasn't any real rocket science behind your thoughts. just running your trap yelling "no collusion". 

so, how about taking a stab at those questions and i'll stfu for awhile....

 

 

 

I look at it this way....

A rats rat found that the rat didn’t eat the cheese.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, steve from amherst said:

1 , Because not only is it done all the time, if Hillary thought the Russians had shit on Trump Chelsea would have been meeting with them. 

It was a witch hunt because their was nothing given back. Meeting with someone isn't against the law. 

 

2 What did Trump have to give? Nothing, the Russians didn't care who won as long as it wasn't Hillary. Why, because they know she wouldn't be able to mind her own business and would be in their face about Crimea and Syria.

3 Its the same shit that happens in most elections and no one has been charged before because they didn't do anything illegal. 

 

1. wrong, working with people tied to foreign governments does not happen all the time in our elections. how did you know nothing was given back? 

2. maybe, but trump made alot of sense for them. other gop candidates would not be acting like trump has. they'd all be acting like hillary, tbh

3. um no. do you have any links of prior presidents working with gov officials to win an election?

regardless, thanks for answering

Edited by Snoslinger
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Snoslinger said:

1. wrong, working with people tied to foreign governments does not happen all the time in our elections. how did you know nothing was given back? 

2. maybe, but trump made alot of sense for them. other gop candidates would not be acting like trump has. they'd all be acting like hillary, tbh

3. um no. do you have any links of prior presidents working with gov officials to win an election?

regardless, thanks for answering

Like this?

downloadfile.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Platinum Contributing Member
6 minutes ago, Snoslinger said:

1. wrong, working with people tied to foreign governments does not happen all the time in our elections. how did you know nothing was given back? 

2. maybe, but trump made alot of sense for them. other gop candidates would not be acting like trump has. they'd all be acting like hillary, tbh

3. um no. do you have any links of prior presidents working with gov officials to win an election?

regardless, thanks for answering

Alright, what did Trump give putin? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Platinum Contributing Member
24 minutes ago, Snoslinger said:

will you please quit making shit up? i have been told something that i feel is the truth - that there was not evidence to get a collusion charge. i don't really care wtf you do with your bags of anything. maybe ya stick them back in wolfie's mouth? 

:lol:   And who at CNN or MSNBC told you that?    Talk about making shit up.   That's not what the report said.   It said there was NO EVIDENCE of collusion not insufficient evidence.   

Edited by Highmark
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Snoslinger said:

will you please quit making shit up? i have been told something that i feel is the truth - that there was not evidence to get a collusion charge. i don't really care wtf you do with your bags of anything. maybe ya stick them back in wolfie's mouth? 

There’s truly something wrong with you.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Platinum Contributing Member
34 minutes ago, jammin said:

I say we all go to Liquid Larry and have a few drinks, beers and sodas.  :bc: 

I'll buy is a couple of....Root Beers, Coca Cola....Sasparilla? :ylsuper:

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Snoslinger said:

and this is primarily addressed to skidmark, snake, tom, steve...

1. if we knew members of the trump admin were meeting with russian operatives, with the intent of getting dirt on hillary, why have you been calling this a "witch hunt", "illegal" etc? why is that not important stuff to check out?

2. if you agreed the members were were meeting with russian operatives with the intent of getting dirt on hillary, how were you so convinced "no collusion"? you didn't know all the details of the events. only mueller would have known all those. for all you know, mueller could have had the actual goods that the russians promised in that meeting. you can't say leaks would have been made either. we learned alot of things about the investigation, long after they happened. it was a damn tight investigation

3. why are you thinking anyone questioning and believing something illegal went down here is stupid, or a hack? i watched many of you go ape shit over much less important things, with no freaking evidence whatsoever. 

personally, i think many of you just got damn lucky on this. there wasn't any real rocket science behind your thoughts. just running your trap yelling "no collusion". 

so, how about taking a stab at those questions and i'll stfu for awhile....

 

 

 

Ill take a stab. 

1.  I dont know why Jr set up a meeting with a lawyer from Russia

2.  I havent seen Jr testimony to Mueller so I dont know what he said the meeting was for. 

3. A meeting is not collusion. Something of value has to change hands before it can be considered collusion. I dont know if any valuable information changed hands during or after this meeting. 

4.  I assume Mueller has access to all the same intel you have. Why didnt he find the collusion that you seem to think was there the whole time?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, AKIQPilot said:

Ill take a stab. 

1.  I dont know why Jr set up a meeting with a lawyer from Russia

2.  I havent seen Jr testimony to Mueller so I dont know what he said the meeting was for. 

3. A meeting is not collusion. Something of value has to change hands before it can be considered collusion. I dont know if any valuable information changed hands during or after this meeting. 

4.  I assume Mueller has access to all the same intel you have. Why didnt he find the collusion that you seem to think was there the whole time?  

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Cold War said:

If the Russian government can steal an election........can our government steal an election?  

Well, apparently not but, to be fair...nobody on our side ever thought to buy 100G in Facebook click bait ads tho. 

I mean....BRILLIANT!!!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Zambroski said:

Well, apparently not but, to be fair...nobody on our side ever thought to buy 100G in Facebook click bait ads tho. 

I mean....BRILLIANT!!!!!!

And our government has a spotless record of respecting other countries elections. 

👍

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Trying to pay the bills, lol

×
×
  • Create New...