Trump Is Unhinged

apoptygma · Jul 17, 2018

LOL!!!!

Now Small Hands clarified one of his statements from his press conference in Helsinki.
He didn't say "I don't see why it WOULD be Russia".
He said "I don't see why it WOULDN'T be Russia".

LOL... And you Trumptards are just guzzling his jizz, aren't you???

Too. Freakin'. Funny!
LOL!!!

shack · Jul 17, 2018

apoptygma said:
LOL!!!!

Now Small Hands clarified one of his statements from his press conference in Helsinki.
He didn't say "I don't see why it WOULD be Russia".
He said "I don't see why it WOULDN'T be Russia".

LOL... And you Trumptards are just guzzling his jizz, aren't you???

Too. Freakin'. Funny!
LOL!!!

And as ridiculous as that already sounds, when you take it in context it is even stupider.

He talks about how Putin so strongly and emphatically said it wasn't Russia and then we are supposed to believe that he said "I don't see why it wouldn't be Russia". That would make no sense. Saying Putin denied it and then saying "I don't see why it would be Russia" is a logical thing to say, not "wouldn't".

Somebody should ask him if he is now saying that Putin lied to him. He strongly denied it, I don't see why it wouldn't be Russia. It means he is saying that Putin lied to him.

As far as his supporters, trump could give Putin the keys to Fort Knox, the nuclear codes and shoot Melania in the head in front of cameras and they would still find a way to justify it.

latinboy · Jul 18, 2018

shack said:
As far as his supporters, trump could give Putin the keys to Fort Knox, the nuclear codes and shoot Melania in the head in front of cameras and they would still find a way to justify it.

Talking about FLOTUS BEING SHOT IN THE HEAD.

What an insane nutbar. :crazy:

Let's hope your moronic statement doesn't get flagged. But I bet it does. SMFH

apoptygma · Jul 18, 2018

latinboy said:
Talking about FLOTUS BEING SHOT IN THE HEAD.

What an insane nutbar. :crazy:

Let's hope your moronic statement doesn't get flagged. But I bet it does. SMFH

Talk about completely missing the point.
Not a surprise. At all.

Frankfooter · Jul 18, 2018

shack said:
And as ridiculous as that already sounds, when you take it in context it is even stupider.

He talks about how Putin so strongly and emphatically said it wasn't Russia and then we are supposed to believe that he said "I don't see why it wouldn't be Russia". That would make no sense. Saying Putin denied it and then saying "I don't see why it would be Russia" is a logical thing to say, not "wouldn't".

Somebody should ask him if he is now saying that Putin lied to him. He strongly denied it, I don't see why it wouldn't be Russia. It means he is saying that Putin lied to him.

As far as his supporters, trump could give Putin the keys to Fort Knox, the nuclear codes and shoot Melania in the head in front of cameras and they would still find a way to justify it.

The Trump denial failed like his Charlottesville denial. He just couldn't help himself and went off script and blew it.

Bud Plug · Jul 18, 2018

shack said:
And as ridiculous as that already sounds, when you take it in context it is even stupider.

He talks about how Putin so strongly and emphatically said it wasn't Russia and then we are supposed to believe that he said "I don't see why it wouldn't be Russia". That would make no sense. Saying Putin denied it and then saying "I don't see why it would be Russia" is a logical thing to say, not "wouldn't".

Somebody should ask him if he is now saying that Putin lied to him. He strongly denied it, I don't see why it wouldn't be Russia. It means he is saying that Putin lied to him.

As far as his supporters, trump could give Putin the keys to Fort Knox, the nuclear codes and shoot Melania in the head in front of cameras and they would still find a way to justify it.

I agree with you to this extent, BOTH the uncorrected and corrected statements express a measure of doubt about which position is correct (the US intelligence position, or Putin's denials).

However, NEITHER statement amounts to AGREEING with Putin. The media are attempting to transmute "not fully convinced of either side" into "agreeing with the other side".

Debating diplomacy with the press right in front of the foreign leader in question is a bad idea. Trump should have blown the question off. He let his annoyance with the press goad him into making a statement he didn't need to make. The press include quite a few idiots who certainly don't give a whit about diplomacy. They need to be completely dismissed at times.

toguy5252 · Jul 18, 2018

Bud Plug said:
I agree with you to this extent, BOTH the uncorrected and corrected statements express a measure of doubt about which position is correct (the US intelligence position, or Putin's denials).

However, NEITHER statement amounts to AGREEING with Putin. The media are attempting to transmute "not fully convinced of either side" into "agreeing with the other side".

Debating diplomacy with the press right in front of the foreign leader in question is a bad idea. Trump should have blown the question off. He let his annoyance with the press goad him into making a statement he didn't need to make. The press include quite a few idiots who certainly don't give a whit about diplomacy. They need to be completely dismissed at times.

How could the statement "why would they'" be construed as anything but agreeing with Putin and disagreeing with his own intelligence assessments and conclusions. Putting aside the ididotic attempt at "clarification".

Bud Plug · Jul 18, 2018

toguy5252 said:
How could the statement "why would they'" be construed as anything but agreeing with Putin and disagreeing with his own intelligence assessments and conclusions. Putting aside the ididotic attempt at "clarification".

Are you referring to the passage when he questioned why the FBI never took the server, etc? If you are, I think it would be fair to say that he is expressing some doubt about the reliability of the conclusions reached by the FBI under the Obama administration. I can't agree, logically, that doubt means by implication that he fully believes or accepts Putin's denials. What he does appear to say is that he wants the servers to be examined before he is going to be convinced one way or the other.

Don't you find it problematic that the FBI never took possession of the DNC servers to verify the investigation report of the DNC IT contractor? You should.

Here's a link to the entire press conference, if you haven't already watched it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cwxqOoIyWm0

toguy5252 · Jul 18, 2018

Bud Plug said:
Are you referring to the passage when he questioned why the FBI never took the server, etc? If you are, I think it would be fair to say that he is expressing some doubt about the reliability of the conclusions reached by the FBI under the Obama administration. I can't agree, logically, that doubt means by implication that he fully believes or accepts Putin's denials. What he does appear to say is that he wants the servers to be examined before he is going to be convinced one way or the other.

Don't you find it problematic that the FBI never took possession of the DNC servers to verify the investigation report of the DNC IT contractor? You should.

Here's a link to the entire press conference, if you haven't already watched it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cwxqOoIyWm0

LOL. I can see you have received the talking points and you have no interest in dealing with what was really said. Read the transcript of the presser. It is as plane as day.

Bud Plug · Jul 18, 2018

toguy5252 said:
LOL. I can see you have received the talking points and you have no interest in dealing with what was really said. Read the transcript of the presser. It is as plane as day.

Wasn't it obvious that I had watched the entire press conference? Almost as obvious as the fact you couldn't back up your half-hearted argument.

toguy5252 · Jul 18, 2018

Bud Plug said:
Wasn't it obvious that I had watched the entire press conference? Almost as obvious as the fact you couldn't back up your half-hearted argument.

It was obvious from your comment that you either did not watch it or did not understand it. Either way your mindless attempt to explain away Trumps idiotic answer was apparent.

And of course when you are desperate to defend the indefensible default to Hillary. Predictable. LOL

Bud Plug · Jul 18, 2018

toguy5252 said:
It was obvious from your comment that you either did not watch it or did not understand it. Either way your mindless attempt to explain away Trumps idiotic answer was apparent.

And of course when you are desperate to defend the indefensible default to Hillary. Predictable. LOL

Hillary? Wasn't Trump's point not so much about "lock her up' as it was about the fact that the absence of the server impaired the ability of the US to nail the hackers? He's right. Those indictments are a joke (whether or not the Russians actually did the hacking). That's why Putin was so cocky as to invite Mueller's team to come to Russia and investigate if they wanted.

I watch these press conferences pretty closely, live in this case. I'm 100% sure that you haven't watched this one, at least not in full. It's a lot easier to incorrectly parse a speaker's words from a transcript, without the considerations of timing, body language, tone of voice, pace, etc.

toguy5252 · Jul 18, 2018

Bud Plug said:
Hillary? Wasn't Trump's point not so much about "lock her up' as it was about the fact that the absence of the server impaired the ability of the US to nail the hackers? He's right. Those indictments are a joke (whether or not the Russians actually did the hacking). That's why Putin was so cocky as to invite Mueller's team to come to Russia and investigate if they wanted.

I watch these press conferences pretty closely, live in this case. I'm 100% sure that you haven't watched this one, at least not in full. It's a lot easier to incorrectly parse a speaker's words from a transcript, without the considerations of timing, body language, tone of voice, pace, etc.

LOL. Were we talking about the presser in Helsinki or his speech at the RNC convention. You may wish to have your meds adjusted.

apoptygma · Jul 18, 2018

Bud Plug said:
Hillary? Wasn't Trump's point not so much about "lock her up' as it was about the fact that the absence of the server impaired the ability of the US to nail the hackers? He's right. Those indictments are a joke (whether or not the Russians actually did the hacking). That's why Putin was so cocky as to invite Mueller's team to come to Russia and investigate if they wanted.

I watch these press conferences pretty closely, live in this case. I'm 100% sure that you haven't watched this one, at least not in full. It's a lot easier to incorrectly parse a speaker's words from a transcript, without the considerations of timing, body language, tone of voice, pace, etc.

If I were you, I would get a mental health check up... or wouldn't... same thing, right?

Frankfooter · Jul 18, 2018

Bud Plug said:
Hillary? Wasn't Trump's point not so much about "lock her up' as it was about the fact that the absence of the server impaired the ability of the US to nail the hackers? He's right.

You should reread the indictments, they make it pretty clear that Mueller has all the info he needs from the dem servers.
Which of the 140 servers did you think they should have taken, by the way?
What info do you think they wouldn't have gotten from the copies of the drives?

Butler1000 · Jul 18, 2018

Frankfooter said:
You should reread the indictments, they make it pretty clear that Mueller has all the info he needs from the dem servers.
Which of the 140 servers did you think they should have taken, by the way?
What info do you think they wouldn't have gotten from the copies of the drives?

The fact that the chain of evidence is broken by DNC refusal to allow direct access means they won't last in court.

Frankfooter · Jul 18, 2018

Butler1000 said:
The fact that the chain of evidence is broken by DNC refusal to allow direct access means they won't last in court.

You really don't have a clue, do you?
Mueller has those copies of the drives and he's already used them to indict 12 Russians, amongst others.
He'll be using them in court.

Butler1000 · Jul 18, 2018

Frankfooter said:
You really don't have a clue, do you?
Mueller has those copies of the drives and he's already used them to indict 12 Russians, amongst others.
He'll be using them in court.

Charges against people who will never see a USA court. So testing the evidence is moot.

Frankfooter · Jul 18, 2018

Butler1000 said:
Charges against people who will never see a USA court. So testing the evidence is moot.

You think Mueller would put out phony charges?

Butler1000 · Jul 18, 2018

Frankfooter said:
You think Mueller would put out phony charges?

I think the timing of the announcement was political yes. I'm betting these agents of the GRU did do it.

And I'm betting most of it is " high confidence Intel"

And there is a difference between that and beyond reasonable doubt.

Trump Is Unhinged

Well-known member

Nitpicker Extraordinaire

Active member

Well-known member

dangling member

Sexual Appliance

Well-known member

Sexual Appliance

Well-known member

Sexual Appliance

Well-known member

Sexual Appliance

Well-known member

Well-known member

dangling member

Well-known member

dangling member

Well-known member

dangling member

Well-known member