All of this was known and readily acknowledged from the beginning...and has zero impact on the point being made here. For instance, no one is
ARGUING that tolls having zero impact diminishes the legitimacy of being concerned about ongoing attempts to impose foreign influence on our elections (and being that all the actual, documented cases of this are from
Democrats doing it, I am
particularly still concerned about it). And no one is
ARGUING that them proving in 2017 that Russian trolls have zero impact must mean that there was also exactly zero impact in 2016...just that it shows how unlikely it is that Russians ended up changing results for Bernie or Trump in any meaningful ways. And no one is
ARGUING that Russia couldn't have gotten better than this total failure to impact anything at all over time.
You are responding to points no one has made and idiotically beating your chest in celebration, like you've accomplished something other than demonstrating your literacy issues once more.
Your post also fails to relate in any way to your diversionary "counterpoint" about ambiguity (the thing we were talking about?) where the study was actually unmistakably clear and specific..the opposite of ambiguous...speaking of working on vocabularies and struggling with reading comprehension.
Attachment 13367
Nice English. Have you graduated grade school? Speaking of reading comprehension.
This incoherent drivel refutes no part of what anyone has said.
For example:
-Foreign policy is set by who? The president. The president changing foreign policy isn't the president usurping
those sworn to serve under him...who instead decide to resist him. That's THEM usurping foreign policy, dumb-ass.
-Obama gave them blankets. Trump gave them lethal weapons. Trump briefly delaying aid to vet a new Ukrainian president as required by law isn't Trump denying anyone lethal weapons, genius. That's Trump following the law while UPGRADING their aid.
-Asking for something in exchange for foreign aid (which it isn't even clear is what happened here) is the PURPOSE of foreign aid, you freaking moron. All foreign policy IS Quid Pro Quo. And there's nothing even remotely controversial about asking for an investigation into already proven Democrat corruption in exchange for foreign aid (how about Democrats just stop breaking the law?). If there were, Biden would have been removed for threatening to pull aid to protect his bribery arrangement with Burisma. That's an entirely new standard invented out of thin air by Democrats for purely partisan purposes.
Try again, dishonest (and semi-literate) demagogue.
Obama destroying people's lives and careers is nothing like Trump having a basic universal right to confront his accuser (and all the other basic universal due process rights being violated by this debunked hoax)...an accuser with zero protection under the Whistleblower Protection Act. And you arbitrarily assigning nefarious motives to Trump in no way makes those his actual motives.
Next lie, please.
His lawyer WAS there, endlessly misinformed dumb-ass. He was the guy handing Democrats their asses at every turn. What's it like being wrong with literally every assertion you make?
Translation: Trump makes factual statements about, for instance (from point #1 in said list), Biden doing corrupt things, and if anyone else states those same facts to correct my lies, then that person must be "regurgitating Trump's talking points."
Nice logic.
How about don't lie if you don't want the same facts to keep being brought up to set the record straight?
Here is this outspoken anti-Trump partisan (see also her partisan column smearing Trump over the Crimea) clearly and emphatically advocating AGAINST helping Ukraine before vilifying and scandal-mongering against Trump as posing some kind of unforgivable existential threat to Ukraine for rightly delaying aid:
"Increasing the Ukrainian army’s fighting capacity, the thinking goes, would allow it to kill more rebels and Russian soldiers, generating a backlash in Russia and ultimately forcing the Russian president to the negotiating table. We strongly disagree. The evidence points in a different direction. If we follow the recommendations of this report, the Ukrainians won’t be the only ones caught in an escalating military conflict with Russia."
This is in addition to her blatantly false depiction of the well-documented and proven Democrat collusion with Ukraine (see the next post for proof), which she even later admitted did in fact happen (saying Ukrainian officials 'bet on the wrong horse thinking Hillary 'was going to win,' and 'said some pretty disparaging and pretty hurtful things' to trash his candidacy while 'trying to curry favor' with Hillary by colluding to implicate Paul Manafort), as a "fiction" and a conspiracy theory.
"Chumps," say the same people who just got humiliated for the umpteenth time on YEARS of bullshit talking points, this time by the IG report.
Wrong. Every time you LIE about Trump doing what only Democrats do...we point out that Democrats ACTUALLY did it, and that you defended the ACTUAL instance it being done. Trump going to court to fight back isn't obstruction. Democrats just not complying with subpoenas...THAT'S
ACTUAL obstruction. Freaking moron. Again, the only people who actually use the "whataboutism" fallacy are the people constantly falsely accusing others of it...YOU.
Try again, dishonest demagogue.
9 Times The Obama Administration Fought Subpoenas or Blocked Officials from Testifying Before Congress
Attachment 13364
Eric Holder was even held in contempt of Congress for his relentless defiance of subpoenas. THAT'S
ACTUAL obstruction, misinformation-peddling halfwit. Again, you being unable to comprehend what actual obstruction is isn't other people using the Democrats' beloved "whataboutism" fallacy for correcting your uninformed stupidity.
Because no one who's Hillary's bitch would falsely exonerate Hillary while framing her opponent.
Attachment 13365
And this undoes all the proof of his corruption, law-breaking, abuses of power, and bias how?
Their reporting has been overwhelmingly vindicated by the IG report. Your sources have been exposed as biased trash. Why would I change to LESS credible sources?
Says the guy sputtering semi-literate sentence fragments, incoherent drivel, failing to comprehend plain English at every turn, and having to have everything spelled out with crayons.
Again, this is what only Democrats are actually doing...the entire impeachment show trial was nothing but third and fourth party conjecture and hearsay dressed up as fact.
Attachment 13366
Bookmarks