Banned So Many Times

Snowman gave you the opportunity to read a few links from some of your own trusted sources of information. I doubt that you clicked and took time to read. And that is your Waterloo.

None of those links come remotely close to backing up Snowman's assertion that Hillary Clinton colluded with the Russian Government. But since you took the time to read them all, by all means, quote the parts where they indicate that.
 
You know...I don't mind your anti-Trump stuff...it's to be expected considering you're a far-left leaning socialist (at least your forum handle certainly implies that).

What's annoying, and always has been...is the hypocrisy with which you give a pass to the lies and corruption coming from the Dems/Libs, and your hilarious attempts to paint them as being so much better than Trump or any conservative thinking.

As 60's guy noted...that's been your approach for as long as you've been here...attack the right and be a hypocrite when talking about the Dems/Libs.
Of course...I don't blame just you...because that has been the way most leftist liberals see things...or I should say, selectively see things...always pointing out what they think is wrong with the Reps and conservative right...while being 100% blind to the lies and corruption on their side of the fence....and the liberal media has been 100% complicit in helping to spread that propaganda until people start to believe it as absolute truth.

The Clintons have been corrupt from their early days in Arkansas...and you portraying them as "clean" in any way, is just the ultimate hypocrisy...and I know that you know that is the case...and that's the thing about far-left liberal thinking...it knowingly operates with hypocrisy...not to mention absolute intolerance for those who don't buy into that hypocrisy as the truth and reality.
 
None of those links come remotely close to backing up Snowman's assertion that Hillary Clinton colluded with the Russian Government. But since you took the time to read them all, by all means, quote the parts where they indicate that.

You don't even have to read between the lines to figure this one out.

A little refresher course, and this is from memory. So, PLEASE CORRECT all my errors. Frankly, you've never even put forth incidents, theories or anything to even make an argument.

When Trump came down that elevator and INSULTED ALL immigrants (this is #1 on the liberal front of Trump hates all immigrants) EVEN though he only used the word SOME. Since most people don't flip channels, he was on O'Reilly close to that night and it was clarified that the Rapists/Murders he was speaking about were the coyotes that rape and murder these immigrants bringing them across the border. **Happy Funny Note for all liberals** Did you know that if a girl is over the age of 11 or 12 and detained at the border, that she needs to be given a pregnancy test? Because it's almost guaranteed that she was raped by the people bringing her. Before you lie and say that's a conservative talking point, that info comes from many Border Patrol agent interviews.

ANYWAY: Trump was considered a JOKE when he entered the race, by both sides. That conservative paper was digging up dirt on ALL Republican candidates. When it became clear Trump might be the candidate. CLINTON and the DEMS starting paying Fusion GPS/STEELE/RUSSIANS for the dirt. That's A FACT that NO ONE but YOU dispute. The Dems don't even argue it.

A huge story and what brought all kinds of legal wrangling was Trump's son meeting with that Russian lawyer who said she had dirt on Clinton. Do you remember that? That was HUGE. That was PROOF Trump was colluding with Russia. His son MET with a Russian lawyer to find out dirt on Clinton. Supposedly nothing came of it.

HOWEVER you won't see this, but it's FACT -

Clinton & the Democratic Party PAID STEELE for DIRT on TRUMP.

STEELE got that DIRT from RUSSIA. Hell, I'll even say Steele INVENTED that dirt and claimed it came from Russia. REGARDLESS, it's RUSSIAN DIRT. No one disputes it's about Russia.

Clinton BOUGHT Russian Dirt against Trump.

You can't remove the RUSSIA from RUSSIAN dirt, even if it's fabricated. The dems didn't think it was.

Clinton caught red handed with Russian dirt and you're the only one denying it. Most liberals just change the subject.

Now, since you won't agree. Instead of just putting up some snarky worthless replies like "you are so confused", why not put up FACTS. Point to legitimate sources that prove your point. You can't, because they don't exist.

DENYING in another post that Clinton didn't keep her server in her house and didn't maintain protocol? Another FACT no one denies anymore. You're literally denying what even Clinton agrees is fact. What she DISAGREES with is that she kept confidential documents on it.

Stick to music. Because you don't know shit about the news. I may not be 100%. I admit I get things wrong. But, I don't even argue what both sides agree are fact.
 
Last edited:
Well...now there's going to be the big brouhaha over selecting a new Supreme Court Justice, since Ginsberg died today.
The Dems of course want to wait until after January, assuming that they will get to pick one if Biden wins...but you know, Ginsberg was basically not doing much as a SC Justice for the last year or more, because of her failing health, and she refused to step down knowing her days were numbered...anything to prevent Trump for making the new pick...so if she and the Dems did that intentionally, then I have no problem with Trump picking one before the election, or before January, even if he should lose to Biden.
You know the Dems would do the exact same thing if they could.

From what I understand, Ginsberg was prepared to retire prior to the 2016 election. However, she wanted to wait until after the 2016 election to retire. Hillary was practically a shoo in to become the first woman president in US history, the election a mere but necessary formality. It was going to be awesome. Immediately upon taking office the first female president in US history would appoint a (likely female) to the supreme court. The ol' saying you snooze you lose comes to mind. Time to get on with it and fill the scotus vacancy.
 
Hillary Clinton got information from a British ex spy about shit Trump did in Russia. You guys think that means Hillary was conspiring with the Russian Government? (that's quite a leap in logic). If that's the case, I don't know what limits there are in terms of what Republicans can make you believe.

Make you believe? Dude, apparently you still believe what Trump did in Russia was pee on prostitutes on a bed specifically because Obama once slept in that same bed, or some such insanity. Who made you believe that shit, and why do you still believe it? The Russians had evidence in the form of "pee tapes", passed the existence of this yet to be produced evidence over to this Steele guy, who in turn would provide information as to the existence of this evidence over to the DNC and the Hillary campaign. All of this somehow served to support the allegation that Trump was colluding with the Russians....rather than the polar opposite that the Dems were seeking to collude with the Russians to influence the 2016 election. Of course at first the allegation was not that Trump was colluding, rather Russians had the dirt on him so he was beholden to them and therefore to keep it quiet would be Putin's bitch. "Beholden to them" didn't quite have the right ring to it, so they went with "collusion". Impeachable, treasonous. But it was all bullshit.

And after all this time, all the investigations, you still believe that shit. :facepalm: Do yourself a favor, why don't you do yourself one of them fact checks with which you're so fond. Who knows, you might sleep better at night without all of these depraved and disgusting images bouncing around in your head.
 
Last edited:
You don't even have to read between the lines to figure this one out.

A little refresher course, and this is from memory. So, PLEASE CORRECT all my errors. Frankly, you've never even put forth incidents, theories or anything to even make an argument.

When Trump came down that elevator and INSULTED ALL immigrants (this is #1 on the liberal front of Trump hates all immigrants) EVEN though he only used the word SOME. Since most people don't flip channels, he was on O'Reilly close to that night and it was clarified that the Rapists/Murders he was speaking about were the coyotes that rape and murder these immigrants bringing them across the border. **Happy Funny Note for all liberals** Did you know that if a girl is over the age of 11 or 12 and detained at the border, that she needs to be given a pregnancy test? Because it's almost guaranteed that she was raped by the people bringing her. Before you lie and say that's a conservative talking point, that info comes from many Border Patrol agent interviews.

ANYWAY: Trump was considered a JOKE when he entered the race, by both sides. That conservative paper was digging up dirt on ALL Republican candidates. When it became clear Trump might be the candidate. CLINTON and the DEMS starting paying Fusion GPS/STEELE/RUSSIANS for the dirt. That's A FACT that NO ONE but YOU dispute. The Dems don't even argue it.

A huge story and what brought all kinds of legal wrangling was Trump's son meeting with that Russian lawyer who said she had dirt on Clinton. Do you remember that? That was HUGE. That was PROOF Trump was colluding with Russia. His son MET with a Russian lawyer to find out dirt on Clinton. Supposedly nothing came of it.

HOWEVER you won't see this, but it's FACT -

Clinton & the Democratic Party PAID STEELE for DIRT on TRUMP.

STEELE got that DIRT from RUSSIA. Hell, I'll even say Steele INVENTED that dirt and claimed it came from Russia. REGARDLESS, it's RUSSIAN DIRT. No one disputes it's about Russia.

Clinton BOUGHT Russian Dirt against Trump.

You can't remove the RUSSIA from RUSSIAN dirt, even if it's fabricated. The dems didn't think it was.

Clinton caught red handed with Russian dirt and you're the only one denying it. Most liberals just change the subject.

Now, since you won't agree. Instead of just putting up some snarky worthless replies like "you are so confused", why not put up FACTS. Point to legitimate sources that prove your point. You can't, because they don't exist.

DENYING in another post that Clinton didn't keep her server in her house and didn't maintain protocol? Another FACT no one denies anymore. You're literally denying what even Clinton agrees is fact. What she DISAGREES with is that she kept confidential documents on it.

Stick to music. Because you don't know shit about the news. I may not be 100%. I admit I get things wrong. But, I don't even argue what both sides agree are fact.

I asked 60s guy to quote the sections of the articles that back up your ridiculous claim that Hillary was colluding with the Russian Government. You respond with lies, poor logic, and zero quotes.

You think obtaining information from a British guy about something that happened in Russia = colluding with Russia. By that standard, the CIA itself cannot do intelligence operations against Russia without colluding with them. I cannot emphasize enough how incredibly stupid your position is.

You made zero coherent points other than to unequivocally demonstrate your confusion.

Hillary stored her email server in her home. I never said otherwise, nor would I. It's a basic fact, and it's totally insignificant in the big scheme of things. Next time you have the urge to claim I said something, do yourself a favor and quote my post directly. You should do this with news articles as well. That way you reduce the risk of botching it (yet again).
 
Last edited:
Make you believe? Dude, apparently you still believe what Trump did in Russia was pee on prostitutes on a bed specifically because Obama once slept in that same bed, or some such insanity. Who made you believe that shit, and why do you still believe it? The Russians had evidence in the form of "pee tapes", passed the existence of this yet to be produced evidence over to this Steele guy, who in turn would provide information as to the existence of this evidence over to the DNC and the Hillary campaign. All of this somehow served to support the allegation that Trump was colluding with the Russians....rather than the polar opposite that the Dems were seeking to collude with the Russians to influence the 2016 election. Of course at first the allegation was not that Trump was colluding, rather Russians had the dirt on him so he was beholden to them and therefore to keep it quiet would be Putin's bitch. "Beholden to them" didn't quite have the right ring to it, so they went with "collusion". Impeachable, treasonous. But it was all bullshit.

And after all this time, all the investigations, you still believe that shit. :facepalm: Do yourself a favor, why don't you do yourself one of them fact checks with which you're so fond. Who knows, you might sleep better at night without all of these depraved and disgusting images bouncing around in your head.

Five (5) Trump campaign advisors and employees were caught lying to the FBI about their contacts with Russia (Manafort, Gates, Papadopoulos, Flynn, Stone). What is it you think they had to hide that was worth committing a felony over?
 
Five (5) Trump campaign advisors and employees were caught lying to the FBI about their contacts with Russia (Manafort, Gates, Papadopoulos, Flynn, Stone). What is it you think they had to hide that was worth committing a felony over?

Manafort was not charged with lying to the FBI...tax evasion and bank fraud
Roger Stone did not lie to the FBI but a special congressional committee ...to which Donald Trump is quoted as saying of the incident, "They caught Roger red-handed, lying. What he did was ridiculous and stupid.

I am surprised you still want to raise that Russian interference flag here in 2020...For certain social media is a dangerously powerful new way to "influence" the masses...and for certain both sides use it to the fullest of their known capabilities...that said...though it is the "new way" to shape and mold opinions and perceptions ...IMO it is no more powerful than newspapers were 150 years ago, Radio was 100 years ago, TV was 70 years ago....Media for the masses..and the masses are asses...just depends on who you want to believe.....surely most politicians probably go in with the best of intentions but quickly are sucked into the harsh reality that to stay in the game you have to play the game...and to stay and play requires surrendering your lofty principals to a much lower standard...some are just worse than others...Politics is an evil corrupt circus de the same..
 
Manafort was not charged with lying to the FBI...tax evasion and bank fraud

Trump's campaign manager was convicted of fraud (and several other felonies) for covering up the fact that he was on Russia's payroll via his work in Ukraine. It's just the paperwork version of lying.

And I'll ask the question again, since you are defending them: What is it they all knew they had to hide that was so important that they would all deliberately and knowingly commit felonies over?
 
Last edited:
Roger Stone did not lie to the FBI but a special congressional committee ..

Yes that's true, Trump's campaign advisor committed lying, obstructing, and witness tampering felonies - all efforts from Trump's campaign advisor to protect Trump from having his Russia connections revealed.

And Trump returned the favor by commuting Roger Stone's sentence, thus preventing another Trump associated from wearing an orange jumpsuit.
 
I asked 60s guy to quote the sections of the articles that back up your ridiculous claim that Hillary was colluding with the Russian Government. You respond with lies, poor logic, and zero quotes.

You think obtaining information from a British guy about something that happened in Russia = colluding with Russia. By that standard, the CIA itself cannot do intelligence operations against Russia without colluding with them. I cannot emphasize enough how incredibly stupid your position is.

You made zero coherent points other than to unequivocally demonstrate your confusion.

Hillary stored her email server in her home. I never said otherwise, nor would I. It's a basic fact, and it's totally insignificant in the big scheme of things. Next time you have the urge to claim I said something, do yourself a favor and quote my post directly. You should do this with news articles as well. That way you reduce the risk of botching it (yet again).

Point out the lies.

Her server being in her house is insignificant. YEAH.
 
Back
Top