Crazy Chainsaw
Philosopher
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2006
- Messages
- 8,339
Okay. And what evidence does the video offer, in support of this claim? Does it name names? Describe methods? Give dates and times?
It shows that the Administration was totally courpt.
Okay. And what evidence does the video offer, in support of this claim? Does it name names? Describe methods? Give dates and times?
So (rule of, etc) that'd be a "no", then.
It takes a special level of conspirartorial nuttery to get folks to defend those that are generaly accepted to be the bad guys of current US politics.
Well done, I guess?
NB: I just broke my glasses jn a sneezing fit, so i apologise for any typos, but I can't see a y of this.
It shows that the Administration was totally courpt.
It shows that the Administration was totally courpt.
Do you think Moscow wanted their Favorite Russian useful idiot, to print a 500 page book Calling for Rudy Giuliani, and President George Walker Bush,
to be hung from Lady Liberty's Torch, for Blowing Up the Word trade center on 9/11/2001, in a False flag attack, to allow GWB to invade Iraq?
Corsi Claimed he had absolutely nothing to do with Russia.
You know what all the investigations into Trump have in common? Not a single one of them mentions this Corsi person. Why do you keep fixating on this nonentity? Do you think continuing to bring up your connection to this nothing-burger of a person somehow makes you a player?
To be clear: You claim that Corsi received the hacked DNC data from RTV Moscow, and that "the Republicans" helped cover up this fact.
But you don't name any names. You don't describe any of the coverup methods. You don't give any dates or times or locations where this coverup would have occurred.
Who wanted to publish this information, and how were they prevented? When were they prevented?
Why were they prevented?
No, it doesn't. The video shows a Trump lawyer desperately trying to wrangle a screwball legal argument. It has absolutely nothing to do with any of the claims you made.
Eta: Mr Chainsaw sir. You are being asked specific questions about specific claims you make. You then answer with utterly irrelevant gibberish about stuff no one is asking about.
Except the Mueller investigation.
Have you read the Mueller report?You haven't read the Mueller Report?
Everything I have said except my involvement with Corsi in 2008, would have happened in 2016 and much is described in the Mueller Report, Corsi Is connected to Trump though his association with Alex Jones, Corsi perfectly described the green Bay Sweep and the Fake electors Scam.
Obviously Corsi was still getting information from someone close too Trump.
He was a two bit chump there too. They determined he was a nobody, and apparently concluded that Corsi was something of an idiot.
Corse does seem to have been questioned during the mueller Investigation.You know what all the investigations into Trump have in common? Not a single one of them mentions this Corsi person. Why do you keep fixating on this nonentity? Do you think continuing to bring up your connection to this nothing-burger of a person somehow makes you a player?
Why wouldn't Corsi be an Idiot?
He was a paid Advisor to Donald Trump.
Corse does seem to have been questioned during the mueller Investigation.
He seems like a guy that was sorta in Stone's orbit but I don't see evidence that he was paid by Trump or on his staff at anypoint.
Keep in mind, Muellers team is in on the cover up, they think the emails were hacked by Russians who gave them to wikileaks.
Mueller couldn't find out where Corsi Got the Emails, he couldn't prove Corsi was Lying
Why wouldn't Corsi be an Idiot?
He was a paid Advisor to Donald Trump.
Corsi Never does anything without pay, Obviously he was Working fir Stone, and Infowars. Later Corsi and Trump entered into a Joint Legal defense agreement.There's another one: do you have any reason to state this as fact? His bio does not list any paid advisory role to Trump. Near as I can tell, he was an unpaid coat-tailer for Roger Stone, running errands for him. So yet again: do you have any evidence to support this claim of Corsi being a "paid Advisor to Donald Trump", or did you just make it up? And I think it would be fair at this point that if you just made it up, readers should assume pretty much anything you claim is just made up.
Then why are you directing us to the Mueller report?
Where is your evidence that Corsi got the data from RTV Moscow, and not from Wikileaks?
(And why should we think this is important?)
Corsi Never does anything without pay, Obviously he was Working fir Stone, and Infowars. Later Corsi and Trump entered into a Joint Legal defense agreement.
https://www.politico.com/story/2018/10/08/trump-attorneys-talk-mueller-877373
Then why are you directing us to the Mueller report?
Where is your evidence that Corsi got the data from RTV Moscow, and not from Wikileaks?
(And why should we think this is important?)