LV426 (08-16-2019)
Truth Detector (08-16-2019)
Truth Detector (08-16-2019)
1. You said for two years straight that Russia didn't hack anything. You're only now saying Russia did hack because the evidence laid out in the Mueller report is indisputable.
2. You say there's no collusion, yet you cannot offer a credible explanation for why Manafort shared polling data from the same states Trump narrowly won, and which were targeted by the IRA and Russian propagandists, with Kilimnik for months when he was campaign manager.
3. You say there's no collusion, yet you cannot offer a credible explanation for why the Republican Party changed its platform at the 2016 RNC to be more pro-Russia.
4. You say there's no collusion, yet you cannot offer a credible explanation for why Trump ordered his son to lie about the reason for the June 2016 Trump Tower meeting with known Russian spies.
When I die, turn me into a brick and use me to cave in the skull of a fascist
Truth Detector (08-16-2019)
No, from day one you said Russia didn't hack anything.
Then you changed that once the evidence of their hack became indisputable.
Now you're saying that they did hack, but didn't conspire with Trump or the GOP to do so, but you can't really say that because you can't explain:
a) The inconvenient event of the GOP changing their platform to be pro-Russia at the 2016 RNC
b) Why Trump ordered his son to lie about the reasons for the 2016 June Trump Tower meeting
c) Why Manafort was sharing polling data with Kilimnik for months when he was campaign manager.
So you keep changing what it is you say is true, and you do it because you're a pathetic troll on the internet who realized you have to carry Trump's baggage now and forever. That's why you keep creating new IDs...you hate being held to account for all the dumb, stupid things you say here that end up being wrong.
When I die, turn me into a brick and use me to cave in the skull of a fascist
it's disputable -it's wrong. both the charges against Kilimnik and the redactions of the Dowd phone call to imply obstruction a incorrect
I need not provide an alternate explanation. I only have to show Mueller was skipping the fact Kilimnik was a known US State Dept asset. Mueller had the source doc to know he was a US asset as well
they did NOT change their platform - you are so freaking brain dead i'v e given you links and you conveniently forget them the next day
What really happened with the GOP platform and Russia
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/b...orm-and-russia
Mueller said that was not collusion, that's all that matters4. You say there's no collusion, yet you cannot offer a credible explanation for why Trump ordered his son to lie about the reason for the June 2016 Trump Tower meeting with known Russian spies.
Truth Detector (08-16-2019)
Truth Detector (08-16-2019)
Yes you do. You're here saying you can't explain these things, therefore they didn't happen. But they did happen, and you know the reason why they happened. You just don't want to say because of what it means for your credibility on these boards.
But that's why you create new IDs, isn't it? Because you burn through your credibility.
When I die, turn me into a brick and use me to cave in the skull of a fascist
Bookmarks