Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 100
  1. #16
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    18,121

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by justthefacts View Post
    What do you think this revelation means?


  2. #17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Costa Rican Gopher View Post
    What do you think this revelation means?
    You are asking him to think? Can't he just retweet what someone else said and leave it at that? He has no clue.

  3. #18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sportsfan24 View Post
    This is just more fake news and TDS. Itís not a big deal that someone in Trumps campaign met with the Russians and furnished them confidential polling info.

    Itís not like Manafort was a high ranking official in the campaign.......what? He was the head of the campaign? Oh sh**t! Well they werenít sneaking around and meeting in secret......what? They secretly met in another country!?

    Well at least Manafort is the only person associated with Trump to lie about meeting with Russians...... huh? 15 other people associated with Trump also lies about Russian meetings and contact.

    How is this mofo still in office?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    So there are two options here:

    1. Manafort had an 11 million dollar debt to Derapaska and was trying to make nice with them to help his own situation. (highly probable) It's a fact that Manafort, who had been in on several national campaigns never should have been brought on by Trump (even though he ran Trump's campaign for free).

    2. Trump told Manafort to get the information to the Russians. (highly doubtful- I think even you would agree with this)

    So what? Let's say a Russian connected to the Russian government wanted to know how the Trump campaign thinks they are doing in the internal polls so they can assess whether Trump has a chance to win and prepare for that. Would it have been illegal for the Trump campaign to offer it? I think it would have only been illegal to do so if it were to be in return for help to win the election or if it were done in return for financial reward. As we have seen, the entire Trump campaign was being spied on for nearly a year. All of their communications were captured. So if the goal was to do this to collude and conspire with the Russians- this would have been known. As of 2017,Brennan, Clapper, Comey, Strzok, all of the people that spied on the Trump campaign stated that they had no evidence of Trump Russian collusion. Nothing has changed since then.

  4. #19
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    18,121

    Default

    Who is Oleg Deripaska?

  5. #20
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    18,121

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bga1 View Post
    So there are two options here:

    1. Manafort had an 11 million dollar debt to Derapaska and was trying to make nice with them to help his own situation. (highly probable) It's a fact that Manafort, who had been in on several national campaigns never should have been brought on by Trump (even though he ran Trump's campaign for free).

    2. Trump told Manafort to get the information to the Russians. (highly doubtful- I think even you would agree with this)

    So what? Let's say a Russian connected to the Russian government wanted to know how the Trump campaign thinks they are doing in the internal polls so they can assess whether Trump has a chance to win and prepare for that. Would it have been illegal for the Trump campaign to offer it? I think it would have only been illegal to do so if it were to be in return for help to win the election or if it were done in return for financial reward. As we have seen, the entire Trump campaign was being spied on for nearly a year. All of their communications were captured. So if the goal was to do this to collude and conspire with the Russians- this would have been known. As of 2017,Brennan, Clapper, Comey, Strzok, all of the people that spied on the Trump campaign stated that they had no evidence of Trump Russian collusion. Nothing has changed since then.
    Was Manafort the FBI plant in the Trump campaign?

  6. #21

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Costa Rican Gopher View Post
    Was Manafort the FBI plant in the Trump campaign?
    I have wondered that many times although I believe it was Papadop who says he knows the name and it is not a household name. With Manafort- I think he quickly became a person of opportunity for the Dems to frame a narrative on him. Hillary's hirling, Glen Simpson, had done a lot of past background work on Manafort and knew about his Russian business dealings so they definitely used that as an avenue to attempt to frame him into the picture and subsequently tease the FBI into running people at him (lures). Manafort, despite his sketchy past, had been cleared in the past by the FBI so he appeared to the Trump campaign (desperate for help) to be clean.

    If Kilminik wanted asked for info from Manafort, I have little doubt that the FBI was involved in setting that one up.

  7. #22
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    18,121

    Default

    Was Christopher Steele working for Deripaska when he crafted the Russian dossier?

  8. #23

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Costa Rican Gopher View Post
    Was Christopher Steele working for Deripaska when he crafted the Russian dossier?
    https://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-new...oleg-deripaska

  9. #24

    Default

    NYT was fake news again it seems....



  10. #25
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    18,121

    Default

    Are you kidding me? That's a pretty big detail to get wrong, lol. The NYT has turned into such a clown show.

  11. #26

    Default

    Reading the 2nd page of this thread is like opening the door to a bathroom and seeing a dude in trump socks and trump tattoos beating off a dude in a tinfoil hat...

  12. #27

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bottlebass View Post
    Reading the 2nd page of this thread is like opening the door to a bathroom and seeing a dude in trump socks and trump tattoos beating off a dude in a tinfoil hat...



    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  13. #28

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Costa Rican Gopher View Post
    Are you kidding me? That's a pretty big detail to get wrong, lol. The NYT has turned into such a clown show.
    They are so eager to hear things that fall into the narrative- they fall for it every time. CNN, NYT, WaPo, McClatchy, Mother Jones, Micael Isikoff and many more have all been persistent culprits.

  14. #29
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    18,121

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bga1 View Post
    They are so eager to hear things that fall into the narrative- they fall for it every time. CNN, NYT, WaPo, McClatchy, Mother Jones, Micael Isikoff and many more have all been persistent culprits.
    Either that, or they do it on purpose? They know most of their readers will take it as truth, mindlessly retweet & by then, the damage is done. All you have to do is look at the posters here on GH. No matter how many times these same media outlets do this to them, they still cite them as their sources and defend them as legitimate. Mean old Trump is calling them 'fake news', boohoo, a fascist assault of freedom of the press, blah, blah, blah.

  15. #30
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    31,905
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bottlebass View Post
    Reading the 2nd page of this thread is like opening the door to a bathroom and seeing a dude in trump socks and trump tattoos beating off a dude in a tinfoil hat...
    When you see a thread that is only CRG/Beeg/DH close your eyes and hit back immediately. Don't disturb the echo chamber.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •