Clapper Must Be 'Sniffing Glue' to Compare Russia Probe to Watergate

Thing1 said:
Oh, please. You like to think that, but it flies in the face of history & reality.

If Trump's investigation ends up with no real findings or indictments, he'll still be 3 fruitless investigations behind Hillary. And the lack of results of those investigations didn't help Hillary.

And don't try explaining how it's "different," or how Hillary is "really guilty, even though..." That's just partisan noise.
Click to expand...
I count 3 investigations AND a Special Prosecutor right now..all chasing their tails for "Russian collusion"
 
Thing1 said:
Just to add to this: whether Republicans want to admit it or not, it appears that Russia was at least involved in meddling in this past election. It might have been independently, but we do not know that at this point.

Given the circumstances, only partisan righties would oppose investigating any potential ties or involvement with campaign operatives. It should be expected. That is something that should be mandatory to at the very least look into.
Click to expand...
If it was limited to the original "intelligence investigation" the FBI had going -OK

But it's not..and all the leaks damage a presidency. The Deep State and the media are more concerned with that.
 
Right said:
What would be Russia's motive for swaying the election to Trump? Didn't Clinton give them more incentive to swing it to her?
Click to expand...
motive would be the demonization of Hillary about Russia/Putin, while Trump wanted to try a "Russian reset" (sic)
 
Thing1 said:
Why do you keep saying "the Democrats"? The FBI STARTED THIS INVESTIGATION. Prominent Republicans have also asked for it. Democrats were even upset when they found out later on that the investigation started during the campaign, but Comey only talked about Hillary's investigation.

I know your perception is that poor persecuted Trump is being treated unfairly by Democrats, but he has brought this on himself. I can't imagine if Hillary was Prez and tried to stifle the investigation and influence the head of the FBI & others to call it off, as is being widely reported and which we should get some pretty firm confirmation on tomorrow. It would be "Tarmac: the sequel."

The double-standard you guys have is so stark & obvious. There is nothing "different" about it.
Click to expand...
The Democrats use term fast an loose like {Russian collusion/Russian operatives/Russian connections/Russian hacking}.
as Russiaphobic as the IC is,at least they are more careful with their charges -the Dems only want to smear.

ta
 
anatta said:
motive would be the demonization of Hillary about Russia/Putin, while Trump wanted to try a "Russian reset" (sic)
Click to expand...
It was Clinton-Obama that proposed a "reset". Epic FAIL lol

...when Secretary of State Hillary Clinton greeted Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov in Geneva Friday before sitting down to their working dinner, she was all smiles when she presented him a small green box with a ribbon.

Lavrov opened it and, inside, there was a red button with the Russian word “peregruzka” printed on it.

"I would like to present you with a little gift that represents what President Obama and Vice President Biden and I have been saying and that is: 'We want to reset our relationship, and so we will do it together.' ...

"We worked hard to get the right Russian word. Do you think we got it?" she asked Lavrov, laughing.

“You got it wrong," said Lavrov, as both diplomats laughed.

“It should be “perezagruzka” [the Russian word for reset]," said Lavrov."This says ‘peregruzka,’ which means ‘overcharged.’”
Click to expand...

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.co...-gift-to-russian-fm-gets-lost-in-translation/
 
Right said:
It was Clinton-Obama that proposed a "reset". Epic FAIL lol
Click to expand...
understood. and actually Tillerson doesn't use such simplistic terms as "Russian reset".
There is no "reset" there is only going forward from here.

(did you ever tell an ex-g/f "can we do a reset?" that never works - you can't just reset relationships)

But Clinton is so freaking hostile to Putin -calling Wikileaks "Russialeaks" and blaming "da Russians" in her shotgun attempt at pinning blame on everybody else.

Besides she has already demonstrated war hawking
 
anatta said:
The Democrats use term fast an loose like {Russian collusion/Russian operatives/Russian connections/Russian hacking}.
as Russiaphobic as the IC is,at least they are more careful with their charges -the Dems only want to smear.

ta
Click to expand...

I had to check the rules on this, but as a Trump supporter, you're actually not allowed to complain about anyone using terms "fast & loose" or being careful w/ the language...
 
Thing1 said:
Oh, please. You like to think that, but it flies in the face of history & reality.
If Trump's investigation ends up with no real findings or indictments, he'll still be 3 fruitless investigations behind Hilh

.
Click to expand...
Hillary didn't get elected........obviously her investigations were not fruitless.....we'll have to wait until 2020 to see if your investigations bear the fruit you desire.....
 
Thing1 said:
Oh, please. You like to think that, but it flies in the face of history & reality.

If Trump's investigation ends up with no real findings or indictments, he'll still be 3 fruitless investigations behind Hillary. And the lack of results of those investigations didn't help Hillary.

And don't try explaining how it's "different," or how Hillary is "really guilty, even though..." That's just partisan noise.
Click to expand...

Yet you claim Hillary's lies are different from Trump.

Massive hack.
 
anatta said:
If it was limited to the original "intelligence investigation" the FBI had going -OK

But it's not..and all the leaks damage a presidency. The Deep State and the media are more concerned with that.
Click to expand...

Claiming a sitting president colluded with a foreign power to subvert democracy is an historic charge. The second historic element is the concerted effort by a political party *colluding* with the media to subvert the results of an election.

And guess which one has the better evidence.
 
Yaya said:
Yet you claim Hillary's lies are different from Trump.

Massive hack.
Click to expand...

You don't think there is a difference between someone who lies for expedience, and someone who lies pathologically?

Think it through. If you don't see a different there, than you really can't make an argument that you see any difference between anyone who has ever lied, and someone like Hillary, or someone like Trump. Your only differentiator is "lying."
 
Darth Omar said:
Claiming a sitting president colluded with a foreign power to subvert democracy is an historic charge. The second historic element is the concerted effort by a political party *colluding* with the media to subvert the results of an election.

And guess which one has the better evidence.
Click to expand...
the next Democrat president colluded with the Nazis to get elected.......news at 11.......
 
Thing1 said:
You don't think there is a difference between someone who lies for expedience, and someone who lies pathologically?

Think it through. If you don't see a different there, than you really can't make an argument that you see any difference between anyone who has ever lied, and someone like Hillary, or someone like Trump. Your only differentiator is "lying."
Click to expand...

Hilliary lied pathologically for expedience and self aggrandizement.....she has all the bases covered......
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top