TennesseeTuxedo

THE BIG UGLY - DO NOT MERGE (Merged: Mod)

Recommended Posts

43 minutes ago, Soxcat said:

Again, what has Trump done so far that is pro Russia?  What have they gained since he was elected? 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, Soxcat said:

OMG are you people dumb.

He's talked about creating a Anti-hacking coalition with the people who hacked him lol.

The lifting of the sanctions is another and has forced congress to try and get ahead of it and take away the President's power.

Every time sanctions are talked about he's backed off ... because there's too much heat around Russia. Things have to die down first ... which the "Mainstream Media" won't let happen.

All that said ... we're also only a couple of months into his presidency so I doubt he waives the Russian flag early if that's his thinking.

Edited by big2033

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Soxcat said:

I still don't get the connection that is the basis for all this non-sense.  How are the Russians benefitting from a Trump presidency?  Explain libtards. 

All of this is sour grapes because Trump won.  Plain and simple.  I can't beleive the blue ribbon king pins of conspiracy, the Clintons, are the victims.  Hillary would have blown Putin if she thought it would win her an election.  The more layers of the onion that get peeled off will only expose the DNC and the Clintons further. 

Example: Bill Clinton was giving speeches for $500,000 or more while his wife was SOS.  At least 11.  One was 2011 in Russia.  That is literally the same as handing Hillary a $500,000 bribe.  He also gave a speech in China for $550,000.  The Clinton's cashed in orver a million dollars from two countries that are communist and not exactly our best friends.   

Bill Clinton is a Former president, former presidents make speeches all the time around he world and get paid for them. That is not "Literally" the same as handing Hillary a bribe. The only thing that can "literally" be the same as handing Hillary a bribe, is handing Hillary a bribe. Or do you not understand the word literally? 

Also lol @ the people that keep trying to use Clinton as an example of a president that lied. He was IMPEACHED for lying you idiots. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, thor said:

Trump has been harder on Russia than any other President since Regan---I bet Putin wants crooked Hilary now...hell, she'll sell him Uranium...

 

What? Laughing too hard to even type a response.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, heyitsmeallen said:

Bill Clinton is a Former president, former presidents make speeches all the time around he world and get paid for them. That is not "Literally" the same as handing Hillary a bribe. The only thing that can "literally" be the same as handing Hillary a bribe, is handing Hillary a bribe. Or do you not understand the word literally? 

Also lol @ the people that keep trying to use Clinton as an example of a president that lied. He was IMPEACHED for lying you idiots. 

$500,000 for a speech.  You keep proving the moronic double standard.  There is no vagueness here.  He was paid 1/2 a mil to give a damn speech and while his wife was in a position to be influenced (Secretary of State).  Might be different if the speech was given when he and Hillary were both out of office.  Are you really that fing stupid. 

Now, as an example, what if Trump's wife was paid for a speech in Russia and was paid a ridiculous amount of money (even just $50,000 or one tenth).  Libtards would be ejaculating all over themselves.  You do understand who the Secretary of State is don't you?  That foreign countries paying ridiculous amounts of money to the spouse of the Secretary of State is a big deal.  My God how dumb are some of you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You realize that is a normal going rate for a speech from an ex-president.  Gerald Ford was raking in 40,000 per speech even back in the 70's.  Even George W. Bush was making 175,000 per speech and he's one of the worst orraters i've ever heard but he's an ex-president.  Clinton is a gifted orrator and highly sought after.  He earns between 250 and 750k for all of his speeches so 500 is right in line with what everyone else paid.

Obama will likely make even more.  I used to listen to these guys every day just like you do.  Then I realize that they were poison and it was clouding my reason.  Walk away from Rush and Hannity.  Believe me, you will be less angry and better for it in the long run.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Justafan said:

You realize that is a normal going rate for a speech from an ex-president.  Gerald Ford was raking in 40,000 per speech even back in the 70's.  Even George W. Bush was making 175,000 per speech and he's one of the worst orraters i've ever heard but he's an ex-president.  Clinton is a gifted orrator and highly sought after.  He earns between 250 and 750k for all of his speeches so 500 is right in line with what everyone else paid.

Obama will likely make even more.  I used to listen to these guys every day just like you do.  Then I realize that they were poison and it was clouding my reason.  Walk away from Rush and Hannity.  Believe me, you will be less angry and better for it in the long run.

At one point, Sara Palin could show up, take some gratuitous shots at Obama, say same folksy, nonsensical stuff and get paid 100K.

That's the going rate for speeches. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Soxcat said:

I still don't get the connection that is the basis for all this non-sense.  How are the Russians benefitting from a Trump presidency?  Explain libtards. 

Well, now that is the question, isn't it?  We know Putin wanted Trump to win.  Trump was quite soft on Putin during the campaign.  Trump has openly talked about, and pursued, easing sanctions on Russia.  

That's what we know.  So we have a few scenarios.....  

Putin wants a reset with the US and hopes to develop good relations.  That's possible.  Maybe Pootypoot isn't really all that bad.  This belief should be held with extreme skepticism.  

Putin is looking to reduce US influence in the world by having a protectionist US president that wants to shake up the world order.   This, to me, is the Occam's Razor scenario.  I just don't think Putin has our interests at heart.  

Putin is looking to reduce US influence in the world by having a protectionist US president that wants to shake up the world order, and also actively foisting chaos and agenda in the US politic system.  We've already seen a negative stance on Europe from Trump supporters.  We've also seen them in favor of sanction reductions.  We're seen them stand behind Trump on his friendly stance towards Putin.  Concerning.  

Beyond that we get into nefarious agendas and collusion.  

What do you think?  Do you think Putin is an alright leader looking to have a good relationship with the US, or will take advantage of any opportunities in America's changing stance in the world?  

Edited by Rogue

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Justafan said:

You realize that is a normal going rate for a speech from an ex-president.  Gerald Ford was raking in 40,000 per speech even back in the 70's.  Even George W. Bush was making 175,000 per speech and he's one of the worst orraters i've ever heard but he's an ex-president.  Clinton is a gifted orrator and highly sought after.  He earns between 250 and 750k for all of his speeches so 500 is right in line with what everyone else paid.

Obama will likely make even more.  I used to listen to these guys every day just like you do.  Then I realize that they were poison and it was clouding my reason.  Walk away from Rush and Hannity.  Believe me, you will be less angry and better for it in the long run.

Again, missing the point.  If Trump or a family member farts Putin's way they are colluding.  If Billy make s aspeech for 1/2 a mil WHILE Hillary is Sec. of State it is just the going rate for an ex president.  And this is Russia we are talking about.  Why the fuck does Russia or China care if Bill Clinton is a good oratator? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Soxcat said:

Again, missing the point.  If Trump or a family member farts Putin's way they are colluding.  If Billy make s aspeech for 1/2 a mil WHILE Hillary is Sec. of State it is just the going rate for an ex president.  And this is Russia we are talking about.  Why the fuck does Russia or China care if Bill Clinton is a good oratator? 

This is false equivilence and a straw man argument here.  

Ex-Presidents make speeches, including in foreign countries routinely.  There is nothing illegal about it and there is nothing extrordinary about it.  The Russians do not gain influence with the Clintons because he made a speech.  He's in demand so if not there, he would have made a speech somewhere else.

What Trump has done with the Russians is not normal.  He didn't just fart Putin's way.  At least there is the very strong potential that he did something very bad here and regardless of what some people are saying, it IS very much illegal.  The argument you are making is akin to Melania made a model appearance in a foreign country and got paid for it so maybe that government has access to her husband.  No.  It's just not the same as a campaign colluding with a hostile foreign power to overturn an election and soften our stance on the middle east, Ukraine, NATO, and Russian sanctions.  These are American interests that are being undermined for the gain of Donald Trump and the Russians.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Rogue said:

Well, now that is the question, isn't it?  We know Putin wanted Trump to win.  Trump was quite soft on Putin during the campaign.  Trump has openly talked about, and pursued, easing sanctions on Russia.  

That's what we know.  So we have a few scenarios.....  

Putin wants a reset with the US and hopes to develop good relations.  That's possible.  Maybe Pootypoot isn't really all that bad.  This belief should be held with extreme skepticism.  

Putin is looking to reduce US influence in the world by having a protectionist US president that wants to shake up the world order.   This, to me, is the Occam's Razor scenario.  

Putin is looking to reduce US influence in the world by having a protectionist US president that wants to shake up the world order, and also actively foisting chaos and agenda in the US politic system.  We've already seen a negative stance on Europe from Trump supporters.  We've also seen them in favor of sanction reductions.  We're seen them stand behind Trump on his friendly stance towards Putin.  Concerning.  

Beyond that we get into nefarious agendas and collusion.  

What do you think?  Do you think Putin is an alright leader looking to have a good relationship with the US, or will take advantage of any opportunities in America's changing stance in the world?  

I'm sure we can point to reasons Putin may have wanted Trump as president but what does that prove?  You guys are grabbing at straws.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Soxcat said:

I'm sure we can point to reasons Putin may have wanted Trump as president but what does that prove?  You guys are grabbing at straws.

There's an argument to be made that the DEMS are trying very hard to connect dots and have a motive to make a connection with Russia and Trump.

Tell me though, honestly.  After watching multiple members of the campaign lie about this, the FBI nominee say he doesn't believe this is a witch hunt, the conclusions of the Intelligence Community, an independent counsel being appointed, and concerns from both sides of congress over the president's loyalties and some of the comments that Comey made (whether you like him or not)..... Do you really not want to get to the bottom of this and find out what happened?  Do you really believe the Trump campaign are just victims here?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Soxcat said:

I'm sure we can point to reasons Putin may have wanted Trump as president but what does that prove?  You guys are grabbing at straws.

How am I grabbing at straws when you asked the question and I answered as honestly and openly as I could?  

To me, why Putin wanted Trump to win (what we know), especially to the point of actively being involved in our process to get him elected (what we believe), is the most fundamental question to it all.  

It's the question Trump doesn't appear to want to know and the intelligence community and lawmakers do.  

Do you think this really isn't anything that needs to be understood to the extent we can understand it?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.