Cont: All things Trump + Russia Part 2

Status
Not open for further replies.
WilliamSeger said:
Lol

Nope, what has been shown it that the Trump administration would like to "hopelessly politicize" anyone and anything that threatens to expose whatever it is that they are trying so hard to cover up. And it's been shown that 32% of likely voters are incredibly gullible.
Click to expand...

Lol

No yours really isn’t reality.

Eric Holder, Obama and Clinton have done their level best to fill these agencies with libs, it’s quite clear.
 
The 2016 election was a total sham! Think about it! Everyone knows that Donald Trump is a shyster conman. And have you noticed that the Trump administration has started to act very strangely? They obviously don’t want this story getting out. I mean, what would happen if people began asking if Putin controlled The Oval Office? Well, they may be able to fool the sheeple, but the members of mainstream media aren’t swallowing their story. Look, don’t take it from me; Rachel Maddow is convinced as well. But we have to act fast, because our very democracy is at risk.

(CT boilerplate taken from https://www.wired.com/2010/02/pl_print_conspiracy/)

I must admit that this whole thing rings eerily similar to a conspiracy theory to me.

Here's a few CT bullet points to consider:

1) Wanting to make sense out of something that wasn't thought possible. (The election of Trump.)

2) Those who support it claim to be truth-seekers and decry those who don't as stupid sheeple. (Many posts in this thread.)

3) Unfalsifiability. (How the Steele dossier is considered. This is one of Maddow's points.)

4) It also sounds a lot like 9/11 truthers who on the one hand claim GWB was a blithering idiot while simultaneously giving him credit for being behind some grand conspiracy.

5) Then there's the mentality that all one has to do (if you're bright enough and truth-seeking enough) is "connect the dots" to know that this is what happened.

I urge everyone who buys into this Trump-Russia collusion stuff to take a step back and try to objectively examine their behavior.

Do conspiracies actually occur? Yes, of course they do.

However, there's been nothing to date that proves that such a conspiracy took place between Trump and Russia. And this whole thing pretty much started with one of Hillary's many excuses for why she lost.

You may think that Mueller's team has all sorts of evidence and that some grand finale of indictments is in the pipeline but all of that is mere speculation.

My personal opinion is that Trump and crew would would not have the wherewithal to pull it off and have kept it secret for so long but, then again, I didn't think he'd be able to beat Hillary so I could be wrong.
 
Last edited:
Iamafalser said:
You mean like the pee tape stuff? How is that at all relevant to Trump illegally colluding with Russia to subvert the will of the American people?
Click to expand...


Because it's one of several tapes alleged to be held by Russia and being used to blackmail Trump.
 
Last edited:
Iamafalser said:
The 2016 election was a total sham! Think about it! Everyone knows that Donald Trump is a shyster conman. And have you noticed that the Trump administration has started to act very strangely? They obviously don’t want this story getting out. I mean, what would happen if people began asking if Putin controlled The Oval Office? Well, they may be able to fool the sheeple, but the members of mainstream media aren’t swallowing their story. Look, don’t take it from me; Rachel Maddow is convinced as well. But we have to act fast, because our very democracy is at risk.

(CT boilerplate taken from https://www.wired.com/2010/02/pl_print_conspiracy/)

I must admit that this whole thing rings eerily similar to a conspiracy theory to me.

Here's a few CT bullet points to consider:

1) Wanting to make sense out of something that wasn't thought possible. (The election of Trump.)

2) Those who support it claim to be truth-seekers and decry those who don't as stupid sheeple. (Many posts in this thread.)

3) Unfalsifiability. (How the Steele dossier is considered. This is one of Maddow's points.)

4) It also sounds a lot like 9/11 truthers who on the one hand claim GWB was a blithering idiot while simultaneously giving him credit for being behind some grand conspiracy.

5) Then there's the mentality that all one has to do (if you're bright enough and truth-seeking enough) is "connect the dots" to know that this is what happened.

I urge everyone who buys into this Trump-Russia collusion stuff to take a step back and try to objectively examine their behavior.

Do conspiracies actually occur? Yes, of course they do.

However, there's been nothing to date that proves that such a conspiracy took place between Trump and Russia. And this whole thing pretty much started with one of Hillary's many excuses for why she lost.

You may think that Mueller's team has all sorts of evidence and that some grand finale of indictments is in the pipeline but all of that is mere speculation.

My personal opinion is that Trump and crew would would not have the wherewithal to pull it off and have kept it secret for so long but, then again, I didn't think he'd be able to beat Hillary so I could be wrong.
Click to expand...



It doesn't have to be a Macchiavellian scheme by the Trump camp. Based on the current known evidence the Trump camp had communications with the Russian government and lied about it. I think there are other questions about Trump financial ties to Russian oligarchs that may compromise him. Presumably Mueller has been tracking down these questions. Trump doesn't have to be some mastermind to have engaged in this behavior. Frankly, the administration having these problems is more indicative of a blundering idiot than a mastermind. My guess is if someone like McConnell were president and had these connections, there would be nothing traceable.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Iamafalser said:
The 2016 election was a total sham! Think about it! Everyone knows that Donald Trump is a shyster conman. And have you noticed that the Trump administration has started to act very strangely? They obviously don’t want this story getting out. I mean, what would happen if people began asking if Putin controlled The Oval Office? Well, they may be able to fool the sheeple, but the members of mainstream media aren’t swallowing their story. Look, don’t take it from me; Rachel Maddow is convinced as well. But we have to act fast, because our very democracy is at risk.

(CT boilerplate taken from https://www.wired.com/2010/02/pl_print_conspiracy/)

I must admit that this whole thing rings eerily similar to a conspiracy theory to me.

Here's a few CT bullet points to consider:

1) Wanting to make sense out of something that wasn't thought possible. (The election of Trump.)

2) Those who support it claim to be truth-seekers and decry those who don't as stupid sheeple. (Many posts in this thread.)

3) Unfalsifiability. (How the Steele dossier is considered. This is one of Maddow's points.)

4) It also sounds a lot like 9/11 truthers who on the one hand claim GWB was a blithering idiot while simultaneously giving him credit for being behind some grand conspiracy.

5) Then there's the mentality that all one has to do (if you're bright enough and truth-seeking enough) is "connect the dots" to know that this is what happened.

I urge everyone who buys into this Trump-Russia collusion stuff to take a step back and try to objectively examine their behavior.

Do conspiracies actually occur? Yes, of course they do.

However, there's been nothing to date that proves that such a conspiracy took place between Trump and Russia. And this whole thing pretty much started with one of Hillary's many excuses for why she lost.

You may think that Mueller's team has all sorts of evidence and that some grand finale of indictments is in the pipeline but all of that is mere speculation.

My personal opinion is that Trump and crew would would not have the wherewithal to pull it off and have kept it secret for so long but, then again, I didn't think he'd be able to beat Hillary so I could be wrong.
Click to expand...

I take issue with your point 1). Not all on the anti-Trump side believe that the atypical interaction between the Trump campaign and Russian officials (and yes it has been established that there was an unusual amount of interaction) was the cause of Trump's victory. MHO is that Comey's announcement was a larger factor.

I also take issue with your point 3). In fact, it makes little sense. Many criminal defendants are found not guilty without being able to prove that they actually are not guilty. Are we to think that criminal charges are often invalid because they are not "falsifiable"?

4) is just plain wrong. A conspiracy such has been alleged does not take a whole lot of intelligence to pull off.

I don't understand 5). Many criminal cases and scientific theories don't have one single "smoking gun" piece of evidence that provides definitive proof. It actually is often necessary to consider multiple pieces of evidence, i.e., it requires "connecting the dots". The problem with the 9/11 Truthers is that many of their dots either have alternative explanations, are speculative, or require working backwards from an assumed conclusion.

The reason why there is an investigation into Trump campaign-Russia coordination is because not everything remained secret, e.g., Sessions' meetings with the Russian ambassador, so I disagree with your conclusion.
 
logger said:
Eric Holder, Obama and Clinton have done their level best to fill these agencies with libs, it’s quite clear.
Click to expand...

And yet even before the election - before the firing of Comey - the FBI was described by FBI agents as "Trumpland" because of the massive support for Trump and antipathy for Clinton.

The sense of persecution the right-wing has just astounds me. They can have agencies that are actually filled with people on the same side as them, and which are actively working for their side, and they can still whine about how they're victims and their spaces aren't safe enough.

Boo hoo.
 
Squeegee Beckenheim said:
And yet even before the election - before the firing of Comey - the FBI was described by FBI agents as "Trumpland" because of the massive support for Trump and antipathy for Clinton.
Click to expand...

Prove it!
The sense of persecution the right-wing has just astounds me. They can have agencies that are actually filled with people on the same side as them, and which are actively working for their side, and they can still whine about how they're victims and their spaces aren't safe enough.

Boo hoo.
Click to expand...

The IRS scandal would be a clue?
 
Squeegee Beckenheim said:
And yet even before the election - before the firing of Comey - the FBI was described by FBI agents as "Trumpland" because of the massive support for Trump and antipathy for Clinton.

The sense of persecution the right-wing has just astounds me. They can have agencies that are actually filled with people on the same side as them, and which are actively working for their side, and they can still whine about how they're victims and their spaces aren't safe enough.

Boo hoo.
Click to expand...


I highly suspect the persecution complex is carried over from Christianity. They view sticking to their guns in the face of such insurmountable odds as a virtue, and any victory as a validation of the righteousness of their cause.
 
Cl1mh4224rd said:
I highly suspect the persecution complex is carried over from Christianity. They view sticking to their guns in the face of such insurmountable odds as a virtue, and any victory as a validation of the righteousness of their cause.
Click to expand...

Lol

That is impressive, except we don’t have just any victory, we have the vast majority of victories and now we’re just cleaning up the left overs.
 
logger said:
Prove it!
Click to expand...

I mean, I know you won't actually read it and will dismiss it out of hand, but: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/nov/03/fbi-leaks-hillary-clinton-james-comey-donald-trump

The IRS scandal would be a clue?
Click to expand...

You mean the "scandal" that didn't involve any partisanship from the IRS and which even Trump's administration isn't interested in trying to prosecute? The one where the investigation itself was Republican dominated and a review of which found that it had deliberately ignored evidence against partisanship?

Boo hoo. Poor babies.
 
logger said:
Lol

That is impressive, except we don’t have just any victory, we have the vast majority of victories and now we’re just cleaning up the left overs.
Click to expand...

You have "the vast majority of victories", yet you're still characterising yourself as an oppressed victim. Wah wah wah.
 
Squeegee Beckenheim said:
I mean, I know you won't actually read it and will dismiss it out of hand, but:
Click to expand...

Yes, dismissed!


You mean the "scandal" that didn't involve any partisanship from the IRS and which even Trump's administration isn't interested in trying to prosecute? The one where the investigation itself was Republican dominated and a review of which found that it had deliberately ignored evidence against partisanship?

Boo hoo. Poor babies.
Click to expand...

Didn’t involve partisanship? Lol
 
logger said:
Lol

I suppose you could post the part where I characterize myself that way?Hilarious!
Click to expand...

It is hilarious, yes. Especially coming immediately after some posts in which you dispute your own party in saying that non-partisan wrongdoing was partisan wrongdoing in order to characterise yourself as an oppressed victim, and ignore the evidence that the FBI was anti-Clinton and pro-Trump during the election to pretend that the FBI has a Clinton bias in order to paint yourself as an oppressed victim.

Don't worry. I'm sure mummy will kiss it better for you.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom