The Great Debate
- Thread starter Big Rig
- Start date
Sounds like you watched a clip edited to make her look bad.
Was it the full answer?
How is Trump going to achieve these goals? Please show me how he's clearly stated he's going to bring down inflation. He's the one crying interest rates were too high and now they dropped by .5 he's crying they should not have done it yet, hmmm, I wonder why.
If there was clear evidence that there was indeed collusion it would have been found. Fact is, there wasn't because it didn't happen. The whole thing was a political tactic to smear an opponent and get people sucked into headlines.
The investigation was a sham from the beginning and anyone who can take a step back and look at it can clearly see it was an example of a weaponized justice system by the Dems.
They had the entire power of the FBI at their disposal and couldn't find any tangible evidence to prove Trump was involved in collusion.
That should concern you.
More doom/gloom prophecy...you need new tactics here. these aren't working for you.
Yes and you interpret that as guilt? I interpret that as protecting the landlord from fraudulent law suits thrown at them in the future.
It was all the indictments and convictions concerned me. Plus look at Muellers quote. He's saying Trump committed crimes. That too concerns me. And it's grand juries, and then juries - in which trumps lawyers chose those jurors - that convicted him and his associates and declared his company and its activities fraudulent.
In contrast, Durham and Jim Jordan spent more money and time pursuing your narrative and found nothing.
I dont expect it to work with people who deny reality and are beyond help. You can lead the horse to the water, you cannot make it drink it.
Seems like you already drank the water...or was it Kool Aid?
Yet Durham's investigation resulted in the FBI committing to making several "adjustments" to their practices including ethics training. Why would that be if their investigation was above board and not politically motivated?
"The report found that the FBI was justified in opening its investigation in the summer of 2016 into whether the Trump campaign was coordinating with Russia to tip the election in the president’s favor. But it also identified “serious performance failures” up the bureau’s chain of command, including 17 “significant inaccuracies or omissions” in applications for a warrant from the secretive Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court to monitor the communications of former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page and subsequent warrant renewals.
The errors, the watchdog said, resulted in “applications that made it appear that the information supporting probable cause was stronger than was actually the case.”
https://apnews.com/general-news-2d46c5046088ed17e57758344c6ce1e1
People who say the Mueller Report found nothing never read the report.
They also tend not to understand it is a report about the decision of the prosecutor to indict or not indict, not an extensive list of everything they found or investigated.
What a ridiculous statement.
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
You do know evidence of collusion was found, right?
What wasn't found was sufficient evidence to charge any member of the campaign with taking part in a criminal conspiracy and likely get a prosecution.
While the whole "It was a political tactic" is a much-needed emotional security blanket for you, I am most intrigued by what appears to be an unconscious admission here.
As you know, Trump has repeatedly promised to weaponize the justice system and government against his enemies again, as he did in his first Adminsitration.
He had only limited success the first go-round, and some of his supporters have claimed this was due to the Deep State being against him and his inexperience in the Presidency.
The implication being that he would be better in round two.
"That should concern you" really does make it sound like you are worried that even with the second time around, he won't be able to do better in persecuting his enemies.
JUST IN: Donald Trump says he will *not* be doing another debate in October on CNN, says Kamala Harris is "losing badly." "The problem with another debate is that it's just too late voting has already started." "She's had her chance to do it with Fox... but now she wants to do a debate right before the election because she's losing badly. "It's like a fighter. She sees the pulse, she sees what's happening. She's losing badly, but it's like a fighter who goes into the ring and gets knocked out. The first thing he says is, 'I wanna rematch.'"
This is an awesome debate watching a lefty dismantle a deplorable rightie, conspiracy theorist, anti-vaxxer.
Last edited:
