US Officially Blames Russia

Because he said he would. Once you say that, the other parties don't matter.


Ok, i'll take you by your word for it, but didn't he also say there are more important things to do first? From the article it seems there is a bit of a sense that if anyone sues, it will be him.

Anyway, looking forward to Tuesday or Wednesday. Maybe one of the leakers has turned himself in to the president-elect? That would be fun. Murray thought in the interview that this is a possible development.
 
I wouldn't personally support impeachment for non crimes.

I survived the horrible adminstrations of Reagan, bush, Clinton,bush, Obama. I think we will make it.

On Day 1, Trump's bank account will be growing with pay-to-play money from foreign lobbyists, which is specifically forbidden by the Constitution. This is not a minor technicality, since DJT has never once in his life shown that he puts anything above his own self-interest.
 
On Day 1, Trump's bank account will be growing with pay-to-play money from foreign lobbyists, which is specifically forbidden by the Constitution. This is not a minor technicality, since DJT has never once in his life shown that he puts anything above his own self-interest.

You have no proof.
 
I wouldn't personally support impeachment for non crimes.

I survived the horrible adminstrations of Reagan, bush, Clinton,bush, Obama. I think we will make it.

All former or current governors or members of Congress when they took office.

They had constituents to answer to. Trump has never answered to anyone, and he's not going to start now.

(Well, except Putin)

We can't compare the incoming administration with any other in history. This is new ground. A total buffoon in the white house? An actual moron?
 
All former or current governors or members of Congress when they took office.

They had constituents to answer to. Trump has never answered to anyone, and he's not going to start now.

(Well, except Putin)

We can't compare the incoming administration with any other in history. This is new ground. A total buffoon in the white house? An actual moron?

I don't have much higher opinions of the other 5. It would be a feat to be worse than the others.
 
Tee-hee. The miserable propagandists at the WP have their knickers in a bunch.

It's really bizarre. You accuse the journalists at the Washington post of being "propagandists" yet you cite a news article from RT, a Russian propaganda operation masking as a news agency and whose sole function is to spread pro-Russian propaganda in western countries.

The mere fact that you cite RT first even above the direct Reuters article renders anything and everything you post suspect since they, and by inference you, have no regards for the truth whatsoever. It's not like you did it out of ignorance, unaware that they are a Russian propaganda outlet.
 
You have no proof.

Well, a Congressional committee can just subpoena the records from Trump International Hotel for a start. They don't have to prove that lobbyists actually get special treatment for staying there; the fact that their money is going into DJT's bank account is all that's necessary. Of course, impeachment depends on Republicans deciding they want to toss him out, but I think a lot of Trump supporters are being naive about that possibility. I think there's a possibility that they already have a plan in place, because they'd much rather have Pence in office, and hopefully they realize that DJT could live in indelible stench on the Republican Party.
 
Well, a Congressional committee can just subpoena the records from Trump International Hotel for a start. They don't have to prove that lobbyists actually get special treatment for staying there; the fact that their money is going into DJT's bank account is all that's necessary. Of course, impeachment depends on Republicans deciding they want to toss him out, but I think a lot of Trump supporters are being naive about that possibility. I think there's a possibility that they already have a plan in place, because they'd much rather have Pence in office, and hopefully they realize that DJT could live in indelible stench on the Republican Party.

They don't have to prove anything for an impeachment.

I'm the one demanding evidence of a reciprocal agreement.
 
It's really bizarre. You accuse the journalists at the Washington post of being "propagandists" yet you cite a news article from RT, a Russian propaganda operation masking as a news agency and whose sole function is to spread pro-Russian propaganda in western countries.

The mere fact that you cite RT first even above the direct Reuters article renders anything and everything you post suspect since they, and by inference you, have no regards for the truth whatsoever. It's not like you did it out of ignorance, unaware that they are a Russian propaganda outlet.


You mean because I wrote in my quote that I cited the "Propaganda Bullhorn"? Well spotted, you win five internet points. What I was showing you, and you failed to grasp because you are into deep black and white thinking, is THE FACT that the WP omitted an important information in their article. While RT reported that fact and its source (Reuters) which made it easy to check it. IN THIS CASE, the RT reporting is far better than the WP reporting, and my post outlines that in the strictest way possible (which often includes mocking).

For you, it should be a hint that the prejudices and phobias you sport are way far removed from critical thinking. Take that for 2017, may it improve the lamentable quality of your contributions here.
 
You mean because I wrote in my quote that I cited the "Propaganda Bullhorn"? Well spotted, you win five internet points. What I was showing you, and you failed to grasp because you are into deep black and white thinking, is THE FACT that the WP omitted an important information in their article. While RT reported that fact and its source (Reuters) which made it easy to check it. IN THIS CASE, the RT reporting is far better than the WP reporting, and my post outlines that in the strictest way possible (which often includes mocking).

For you, it should be a hint that the prejudices and phobias you sport are way far removed from critical thinking. Take that for 2017, may it improve the lamentable quality of your contributions here.

The Washington Post article included the actual video, so we can not only hear exactly what he said, but we can also see that once again he's just talking out of his ass, saying something on the spur of the moment that he hopes will sound impressive.
 
Trump is an expert on hacking despite that he rarely uses a computer. He knows more than the investigating agencies know. Just ask him.
 
You mean because I wrote in my quote that I cited the "Propaganda Bullhorn"? Well spotted, you win five internet points. What I was showing you, and you failed to grasp because you are into deep black and white thinking, is THE FACT that the WP omitted an important information in their article. While RT reported that fact and its source (Reuters) which made it easy to check it. IN THIS CASE, the RT reporting is far better than the WP reporting, and my post outlines that in the strictest way possible (which often includes mocking).

For you, it should be a hint that the prejudices and phobias you sport are way far removed from critical thinking. Take that for 2017, may it improve the lamentable quality of your contributions here.

The tuesday Wednesday thing is not significant.
 
We have to give Putin credit for managing to get extreme leftists like communists and anarchist to work together with extreme rightists like nazis and white supremacists to sing his praises and support his puppet on the internet.
 
We have to give Putin credit for managing to get extreme leftists like communists and anarchist to work together with extreme rightists like nazis and white supremacists to sing his praises and support his puppet on the internet.


Not really.

The Republican campaign wasn't about being for anyone in particular. It was about being against Hillary. Trump just became a convenient (perhaps inconvenient) focus. Somewhat to their surprise, I believe.

After that, finding stuff that could be claimed as positive points for Trump was just a routine exercise in misdirection and post hoc justifications. All largely secondary to the main thrust of their campaign.
 

Back
Top Bottom