• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Yes. Really.

At least we heard US journalists being accused of treason for asking questions in the lead-up to the Iraq fiasco, and there's been a great deal of soul-searching since. The Russian situation is simply dire in comparison.

There are indendent journalists in Russia, and short-lived journals that will publish them , but they aren't the ones denying that Putin's Russia didn't interfere in the US election.

ah yes.
The usual US story.
"We didn't mean bad, we are just incompetent."

It's actually one of my favourite sayings: "Never assume malice when incompetence is a sufficient answer." But after decades of "incompetence" that *always* works in the US favor, I have to assume malice. Icompetence has stopped being a sufficient answer 20 years ago.
 
ah yes.
The usual US story.
"We didn't mean bad, we are just incompetent."

It's actually one of my favourite sayings: "Never assume malice when incompetence is a sufficient answer." But after decades of "incompetence" that *always* works in the US favor, I have to assume malice. Icompetence has stopped being a sufficient answer 20 years ago.

I’m glad it gets you through the day, but it does nothing to advance the discussion here.
 
You aren't aware of the specific allegations or the evidence behind them, but you're gonna believe Russian denials anyway? Suit yourself, but so what?

The allegations are money laundering for manafort (The ukrainians cleared him of that a year ago, but if mueller found something else ... awesome? It's always nice to find a fish on a fishing expedition. good for him)
I am not clear on papadosomethinggreek. "lying to the FBI" is that perjury? Was he under oath?
Anyway what was he lying about? Talking about setting up a meeting between trump and putin. Seriously? Talking about talking to putin is a crime now? Is the US justice system planing any action on steinmeier? He actually went to moscow and talked to putin. Sebastian Kurz? He too talked about trump talking to putin, and wanted it to happen in vienna.

Am I the only one that remembers that one of trumps campaign promises was to normalize US-russian relations?
 
The allegations are money laundering for manafort (The ukrainians cleared him of that a year ago, but if mueller found something else ... awesome? It's always nice to find a fish on a fishing expedition. good for him)
I am not clear on papadosomethinggreek. "lying to the FBI" is that perjury? Was he under oath?
Anyway what was he lying about? Talking about setting up a meeting between trump and putin. Seriously? Talking about talking to putin is a crime now? Is the US justice system planing any action on steinmeier? He actually went to moscow and talked to putin. Sebastian Kurz? He too talked about trump talking to putin, and wanted it to happen in vienna.

Am I the only one that remembers that one of trumps campaign promises was to normalize US-russian relations?

The Ukrainians cleared Manafort of money laundering tied to an oligarch with ties to the Ukranian government? :boggled: What?

Yes, lying to the FBI is illegal. I believe the charge is obstruction rather than perjury. Also lying about your foreign bank accounts to the IRS is illegal as was Manafort lying on his security clearance forms (that alone is a felony).

Are you seriously trying to tell us Mueller's charges are bogus?

Your post reflects that you aren't following this closely or you are simply lying.
 
Last edited:
You're acting as if that hasn't been resolved yet. She had pneumonia. She didn't die. The rumours were exaggerated and turned out wrong. The only people who thought she had a foot in the grave were right-wing partisans who'd accept any negative story about her.

You can roll your eyes all you want but the fact remains that you've not presented any evidence of it.
Evidence, schmevidence. It’s the Clintons.

The CLINTONS!!!
 
This is an interesting strategy.

Several lawmakers from both parties described the session as meandering, at-times confusing and contradictory. Page did not have a lawyer present, which is highly unusual, lawmakers said.

Conaway said that Page was "fulsome" in his answers and he answered all of the questions the committee asked.

Moreover, Page reached a rare agreement to allow the committee to release a transcript of his testimony, something that will happen early next week. Some members said his testimony will help move the investigation forward, though Page told the committee that the Trump campaign made him sign a non-disclosure agreement.
 

"It was terrific to have the opportunity to help clear the record as to the falsehoods from the dodgy dossier, which started this whole thing against me in the final two months before the election," Page told reporters after his marathon session, referring to the Trump-Russia dossier produced by former British agent Christopher Steele. "I'm glad the truth is finally becoming known."

What did Page have to do with the Trump Russia dossier?

The truth is finally known? How can he speak to the truth about what was investigated by the Intelligence Community?

The Republican congressman Conaway says "Yeah, if I were Sessions, I wouldn't remember being told about a trip to Russia either, said in passing"*

*Paraphrasing.
 
"It was terrific to have the opportunity to help clear the record as to the falsehoods from the dodgy dossier, which started this whole thing against me in the final two months before the election," Page told reporters after his marathon session, referring to the Trump-Russia dossier produced by former British agent Christopher Steele. "I'm glad the truth is finally becoming known."

What did Page have to do with the Trump Russia dossier?

The truth is finally known? How can he speak to the truth about what was investigated by the Intelligence Community?

The Republican congressman Conaway says "Yeah, if I were Sessions, I wouldn't remember being told about a trip to Russia either, said in passing"*

*Paraphrasing.


Well then.
 
The truth is finally known? How can he speak to the truth about what was investigated by the Intelligence Community?


The ship is slowly turning around from "Trump/Putin conspiracy" to "hoaxing a Trump/Putin conspiracy", in which light one should see rats like Donna Brazile jumping off board today with her DNC/Killary "revelations".
 
The allegations are money laundering for manafort (The ukrainians cleared him of that a year ago, but if mueller found something else ... awesome? It's always nice to find a fish on a fishing expedition. good for him)

Do you think the Unkrainians made a thorough investigation as to whether Manafort violated US laws?

I am not clear on papadosomethinggreek. "lying to the FBI" is that perjury? Was he under oath?

It is in general illegal to make false or misleading statements to police investigators.

Anyway what was he lying about?

He was lying about whether he had contacts with the Russian operative who was also a college lecturer while he was officially a member of the Trump campaign.

Talking about setting up a meeting between trump and putin. Seriously? Talking about talking to putin is a crime now?

Lying to the FBI about talking to foreign intelligence agents is a crime.

What Papadopoulos pleaded guilty to was probably a reduced charge in exchange to a guilty plea and apparently some assistance in gaining information about other people who are under investigation, so he likely was accused of items more serious than lying to the FBI about his meetings with Russian operatives.
 
Nice write-up on today's mentioned "Democrats" revelations and Twitter admitting that they heavily censored tags related to the #DNCleaks, actually about half of them, while only 2-3% were posted by "Russia-linked" accounts by ridiculous criteria. You are paying attention to this stuff, "Skeptics", aren't you? Concluding paragraphs:

Caitlin Johnstone said:
[...] What this all proves, dear reader, is that the mainstream consensus reality is considerably less reliable than your own personal assessment of things. Don’t listen to the confident-sounding assertions of pundits and politicians. Don’t believe what you are told by CNN and the New York Times. Don’t believe me, either. Trust your own inner sense-maker, because the people whose job it is to tell you what’s going on are proven liars and manipulators. You’re more likely to get close to the truth by stabbing for it in the darkness at random than you are by listening to people who have proven time and time again that their only job is to lie to you while selling your attention to advertisers. Your own intuition and information-gathering skills are infinitely more reliable instruments of truth finding, no matter how rusty they are.

Trust in your own sense of what’s happening, and speak your truth unapologetically. Don’t let them shut you down with scoffing and gibberish about conspiracy theory. That is not a legitimate tactic anymore, because the so-called conspiracy theories keep proving true. As far as you’re concerned, your assessment of reality is far more worthy and relevant than anyone else’s.

The people who speak consensus narratives in authoritative voices are not more clued-in than you are. Don’t let them silence you. Don’t let anyone silence you. Your voice is the most essential voice in your world, and your perspective is the most important. Speak your truth wherever you can speak it. Say it loud, say it like you mean it, and say it like you’re right, because you are.

The oppression machine is crumbling, but it’ll fall a whole lot faster if we all plant our feet and scream our truth.


Amen.
 
What about German, UK, Australian, Singaporean media? Why do think the Russian media doesn't lie as much as the USA media?

What's untrue about RT? They report from a Russian perspective. Boris Johnson has just said that there is not a single sausage of evidence of Russian meddling in the American election.
 
What's untrue about RT? They report from a Russian perspective. Boris Johnson has just said that there is not a single sausage of evidence of Russian meddling in the American election.

No, what he said was:

British foreign minister Boris Johnson said on Wednesday he had not seen any evidence that Russia had interfered in British elections.

:rolleyes:

And look here, I can actually provide a link (which seems utterly beyond you).

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...itish-votes-uk-foreign-minister-idUSKBN1D1585
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/topics/0b79dd85-35b5-40cd-b65e-cb152dd89fba/boris-johnson
 
Why do you people insist on lying about things that are so easily disproven?
I said something that was easily disproven, and then admitted I was wrong. Did more research and corrected my own record. I just don't get why people will believe something after it's been proven false, and them continue to, not only believe it, but still use it as evidence of something.

I was informed that I was "spared" being lectured by someone who routinely nut hugs Putin. Sources and truth aren't their goal, defending Pewtin is..

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk
 
I was informed that I was "spared" being lectured by someone who routinely nut hugs Putin. Sources and truth aren't their goal, defending Pewtin is..


Actually you were being lectured by me, I just decided to not humiliate you. You do that quite fine yourself by your expressed knowledge and schoolyard spellings. Interesting how deep the hatred for the man was planted inside you.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom