Russiagate

[normiss 620]

Yahtzee.

[JoeWeber 2,294]

wolfriverjoe

***Marc I honestly don’t get it. You realise that the article and even the extract you posted go against your viewpoint and don’t back it up?

I honestly don't get it.

Why does no one seem to understand that he doesn't care?

He won't answer your questions.
He won't provide proof for his ludicrous assertions (which doesn't exist in the first place).
He won't post in a rational manner, or even in decent English (unless it serves his needs).
He posts links where the headline sort of matches the point he wants to push, but doesn't care if the actual text in the article agrees or disagrees.

As was noted by Billvon somewhere recently, he's in favor of anything that opposes the Democrats. It doesn't have to be true. If someone says it and it makes the Ds look bad, he repeats it.
Provide proof that he's wrong and he ignores it.
Ask for proof and he ignores it.

He refuses to acknowledge anything that makes Trump or the Rs look bad. He simply ignores it.

The repeated demands by many for him to back up his claims are foolish. He ignores them and keeps posting his garbage.

WHY does anyone treat him as if he is going to do anything different?

Because the powers that be, and some posters, seem to enjoy arguing with walls.

[LeeroyJenkins 2]

wolfriverjoe

***Hey Rush,

Can we have a civil debate about something closely related to Trump-Russia? You can pick the subject.

LJ

Can you find one instance where he did that?

One.

Anytime in the past, say 3 years.

Where he actually answered questions and responded in a rational manner, where he provided at least some sort of backup for his assertions?

Betcha can't.

See my post above yours.


So he is either trolling or he is incapable. I’m giving him a chance to prove he is neither.

Edit: Billvon, I didn't mean for that to be too far. I'm genuinely concerned about it.

[wmw999 2,116]

Don't be. Just discuss with other people.

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[Phil1111 908]

kallend

A new CNN poll finds:

Only 34 percent of Americans approve of Trump’s handling of the Russia investigation, vs. 55 percent who disapprove.
58 percent say this is a serious matter that should be investigated, vs. only 37 percent who think it’s mainly an effort to discredit Trump.
56 percent say Trump has interfered with the investigation, vs. only 38 percent who say he has not.
Only 37 percent say the things Trump has said publicly about the investigation are true, vs. 56 percent who say they are false.
70 percent say Trump should testify to Mueller, vs. only 25 percent who say he should not.
57 percent say Trump knew about contacts between his campaign operatives and Russians, vs. only 36 percent who say he did not.

Trump is losing every single public argument about the Mueller probe. His latest, in a tweet citing Judicial Watch, is that the firing of former FBI agent Peter Strzok, who authored texts critical of Trump, shows that the “fundamental underpinnings of the investigation were corrupt.” This is a lie: The inspector general’s report into all this actually found that the FBI decision not to prosecute Hillary Clinton was untainted by bias or politics, completely laying waste to Trump’s narrative.

The poll actually still speaks to the substantial base of the trump cult. Of supporters like Marc.

Mueller will likely get north of $20 million in tax penalties and interest from the Manafort trial. Which will likely pay for his investigation to date.

As long as the effects of a $1.5 trillion theft from the children of America. Slushes through the economy like so much crack in the veins of an addict. As long as trump supporters ignore the damage of the international train wreck. NK nuclear, Turkey, Iran nuclear, trade wars, his base will remain.

Marc isn't the brick wall, ignorance is. With 37 percent thinking its an effort to discredit trump. Thats the number who don't follow the disclosures from the trump clan of misfits itself.

Their dialogue went from "there is no Russia". To its not a crime.

trump dosn't need to address the NK nuclear issue. Because his base dosn't care. Most Americans don't follow any foreign policy issues. Kim will keep expanding his nuclear delivery program. The republican guard of the Iranian government will begin to formulate responses. In Yemen, in Iraq, in Afghanistan. To teach America a lesson for trump's actions.

Turkey will have additional responses besides banning Apple phones. The next time trump wants Turkish support for a Syrian issue or Iraq issue. Its leader like trump relishes payback. The US will become a new punching bag for all of Turkey's problems. Sound familiar? Every dictator needs enemies to blame its failures on.

[rushmc 18]

billvon

>His latest, in a tweet citing Judicial Watch, is that the firing of former FBI agent Peter Strzok . . .

So much for supporting the "rank and file" FBI.

A Deputy Director is rank and file?

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 18]

Both got info from Russians.

That is a fact.

Spinning how is was gotten means exactly nothing.

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 18]

LeeroyJenkins

***Oh

About collusion not being a crime.

https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/collusion-crime-it-may-not-matter-why-manafort-s-trial-ncna896511

Quote

Most legal experts would probably agree with Giuliani on this point — collusion, in the legal sense, is generally only applicable in antitrust cases. Meanwhile, the prosecutors in the Manafort case have told the judge that they may not even utter the word Russia in what is expected to be a three-week trial. Instead, they are focusing on Manafort’s financial crimes, including bank fraud and tax evasion.

I think I just heard a thousand bubbles pop.....

Do you really need me to post the USC code defining conspiracy again?


Rush, how about you lay out your point right here. you keep flip flopping. I have a couple questions for you.

1. Did Hilary Clinton collude with the Russians.

2. Is collusion a crime?

Post the code again if you want as it means nothing.

And I will believe what lawyers like Dershowitz has to say about compared to what you bring up.

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[jcd11235 0]

rushmc

Nothing about Trump collusion during the Manafort trial.

You get that trial judges tend to try to keep trial on topic, right? They probably won't spend much time discussing baseball, either.

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[LeeroyJenkins 2]

rushmc

Both got info from Russians.

That is a fact.

Spinning how is was gotten means exactly nothing.

“Spinning” explaining* how it was gotten is the difference between illegal and legal. It means everything in this argument.

[DJL 232]

rushmc

Both got info from Russians.

That is a fact.

Spinning how is was gotten means exactly nothing.

Is there something about being a Russian that makes it inherently illegal to get information from them. If someone was looking up financial dealing that Hillary Clinton had with a Canadian national do you think they would not get that information from a Canadian bank or deal with Canadian people?

"I encourage all awesome dangerous behavior." - Jeffro Fincher

[LeeroyJenkins 2]

DJL

***Both got info from Russians.

That is a fact.

Spinning how is was gotten means exactly nothing.

Is there something about being a Russian that makes it inherently illegal to get information from them. If someone was looking up financial dealing that Hillary Clinton had with a Canadian national do you think they would not get that information from a Canadian bank or deal with Canadian people?

Rush just isn't capable of understanding the differences between information received directly from a Russian tied to the Kremlin and receiving information from an American law firm.

There is a reason rush voted for Trump and it isn't because he understands his policies.

[LeeroyJenkins 2]

Rush,

I have a question for you. Nothing inferred, nothing implied, just a simple question.

Did Donald Trump Jr., Paul Montfort, and Jared Kushner meet with a Russian lawyer in Trump tower?

LJ

[kallend 1,621]

rushmc

Both got info from Russians.

.

"Whatabout Hillary..." will not be a legal defense that will hold up during Trump's trials.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[jclalor 12]

wolfriverjoe

***Marc I honestly don’t get it. You realise that the article and even the extract you posted go against your viewpoint and don’t back it up?

I honestly don't get it.

Why does no one seem to understand that he doesn't care?

He won't answer your questions.
He won't provide proof for his ludicrous assertions (which doesn't exist in the first place).
He won't post in a rational manner, or even in decent English (unless it serves his needs).
He posts links where the headline sort of matches the point he wants to push, but doesn't care if the actual text in the article agrees or disagrees.

As was noted by Billvon somewhere recently, he's in favor of anything that opposes the Democrats. It doesn't have to be true. If someone says it and it makes the Ds look bad, he repeats it.
Provide proof that he's wrong and he ignores it.
Ask for proof and he ignores it.

He refuses to acknowledge anything that makes Trump or the Rs look bad. He simply ignores it.

The repeated demands by many for him to back up his claims are foolish. He ignores them and keeps posting his garbage.

WHY does anyone treat him as if he is going to do anything different?

You just described not only Marc, but 37% of the country.

[billvon 2,380]

>"Whatabout Hillary..." will not be a legal defense that will hold up during Trump's trials.

But her emails . . . .

No one could have foreseen that secretly meeting with a Russian agent to get dirt on Clinton was illegal! No one knew the law could be so complicated.

[LeeroyJenkins 2]

Rush,

I actually have one very important question I want your personal opinion on. What would trump have to do for you to support his impeachment?

LJ

[SkyDekker 1,121]

LeeroyJenkins

Rush,

I actually have one very important question I want your personal opinion on. What would trump have to do for you to support his impeachment?

LJ

Hillary should be impeached. She sent emails and Benghazi. Trump can't be impeached until after Hillary. Deep State.

[rushmc 18]

LeeroyJenkins

Rush,

I have a question for you. Nothing inferred, nothing implied, just a simple question.

Did Donald Trump Jr., Paul Montfort, and Jared Kushner meet with a Russian lawyer in Trump tower?

LJ

Yep

And it means exactly nothing.

the topic discussed in the short-term meeting was that one law that dealt with Russian u. S. Adoptions and nothing about Hillary was passed.

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 18]

SkyDekker

***Rush,

I actually have one very important question I want your personal opinion on. What would trump have to do for you to support his impeachment?

LJ

Hillary should be impeached. She sent emails and Benghazi. Trump can't be impeached until after Hillary. Deep State.


Yo dude you need to stop drinking

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 18]

Okay now I have a question for you.

Strozk and Ohr emailed back and forth just before the Congressional testimony of Strozk I believe.

In that email Strozk asked Ohr if he had any new information. And was hoping that the firewalls would hold. What does that mean to you?

0hr emailed back and said he had no new information at this time. If anything came up he would let him know.

in the context of all the other emails that have just been released this looks pretty bad don't you think?

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[lummy 4]

Strozk did not email Ohr asking if the firewalls will hold, nor did Ohr email Strozk back

I promise not to TP Davis under canopy.. I promise not to TP Davis under canopy.. eat sushi, get smoochieTTK#1

[LeeroyJenkins 2]

rushmc

Okay now I have a question for you.

Strozk and Ohr emailed back and forth just before the Congressional testimony of Strozk I believe.

In that email Strozk asked Ohr if he had any new information. And was hoping that the firewalls would hold. What does that mean to you?

0hr emailed back and said he had no new information at this time. If anything came up he would let him know.

in the context of all the other emails that have just been released this looks pretty bad don't you think?

It looks like a bunch of stuff that doesn’t have relation to trump-Russia. It looks like you’re trying to distract from trump Russia and dodge my question about what it would take for you to support impeachment. I will answer your question though. No it doesn’t look bad. It looks like a DOJ officials was getting intel from a source. That’s pretty normal.

So again, what would it take for you to support the impeachment of trump?

[rushmc 18]

lummy

Strozk did not email Ohr asking if the firewalls will hold, nor did Ohr email Strozk back

Yes

Texts

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 18]

LeeroyJenkins

***

Okay now I have a question for you.

Strozk and Ohr emailed back and forth just before the Congressional testimony of Strozk I believe.

In that email Strozk asked Ohr if he had any new information. And was hoping that the firewalls would hold. What does that mean to you?

0hr emailed back and said he had no new information at this time. If anything came up he would let him know.

in the context of all the other emails that have just been released this looks pretty bad don't you think?

It looks like a bunch of stuff that doesn’t have relation to trump-Russia. It looks like you’re trying to distract from trump Russia and dodge my question about what it would take for you to support impeachment.

So again, what would it take for you to support the impeachment of trump?

it is totally related. And that's why it's a damn hard to talk to you. Because your mind is so closed you have no understanding of what's really going on. More is coming. And it's going to be really hard on the left I think when the sing all falls out..

To even talk about impeachment of trump at this point is delusional at best

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln