Should Trump step aside?

['Nator]

7 hours ago, Tnasty said:

That was a well informed response I won’t even poke fun at as I usually do.

 

I have issues with the investigation under false pretenses, which were created by democrats to hurt a politics opponent, but I’ll digress and just ask the begging question:

 

what were the very very real things? 

 

 

This all started 30+ years ago when Republicans hired Ken Starr because they were so butthurt that a Dem beat them (and was consequently leading the greatest American Economy of any of our lifetimes,) that they tried to trump up some supposed illegal land deal scheme called Whitewater. 

 

Whitewater turned up far, far less than what the FBI found on Trump but what they did eventually uncover was Clinton's blowjob with a White House fatty intern. 

 

This started decades of pants-pissing and false accusations and hearings by Republicans every time a Dem wins the Office. 

 

See: BENGHAZI. 

 

In fact Obama derangement syndrome put so called Trump Derangement Syndrome to shame.

 

All 8 years Obama was supposedly a Black Panther Marxist Sleeper Cell Terrorist with a transexual wife. Also: BENGHAZI and also he's not a citizen, was born in Africa etc.. 

 

At this point the supposed fact that the Clintons are serial, mob-style MURDERERS is all but enshrined into Republican orthodoxy. That and the new anti-vaccine orthodoxy. 

 

I digress. 

 

Anyway Republicans started all this shit. If anything Dems finally fought back w regards to Trump for the first time in 40 fuckin years. 

[Tnasty]

11 hours ago, nine said:

 

The very real things are fully detailed in a 966-page report.   It’s impossible to describe 966 pages of information in 3-4 sentences…but the table of contents offers an overview of everything the report contains;  I suggest you take 30 seconds to look it over.

 

For example:   the TOC  shows 110 pages  dedicated to former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort, his numerous ties and relationships with Russian government figures and oligarchs, and Manafort’s activities and communications with Russia before, during, and after his role as Trump campaign chairman.

 

An excerpt from the report:

The Committee found that Manafort's presence on the Campaign and proximity to Trump created opportunities for Russian intelligence services to exert influence over, and acquire confidential information on, the Trump Campaign. Taken as a whole, Manafort's high level access and willingness to share information with individuals closely affiliated with the Russian intelligence services, particularly Kilimnik and associates of Oleg Deripaska, represented a grave counterintelligence threat.

 

Does that sound like a nothingburger?  

Sounds like Manofirt got too close to Russia, which is why he’s in jail and Trump isn’t 

 

edit:

 

In a 1000 page report if they found evidence for Trump to be in prison, he’d be in prison. Do you think Biden could withstand the scrutiny that Trump did and come out clean?

Edited July 7, 2024 by Tnasty

[Starkiller]

2 minutes ago, Tnasty said:

Sounds like Manofirt got too close to Russia, which is why he’s in jail and Trump isn’t 

Manafort isn’t in fucking prison. Trump pardoned his corrupt ass. Because he was in on it…

[Tnasty]

1 minute ago, Starkiller said:

Manafort isn’t in fucking prison. Trump pardoned his corrupt ass. Because he was in on it…

Don’t agree with that one bit

[Starkiller]

Just now, Tnasty said:

Don’t agree with that one bit

I’m sure you don’t, but it’s still true

[nine]

2 hours ago, Tnasty said:

Sounds like Manofirt got too close to Russia, which is why he’s in jail and Trump isn’t 

 

edit:

 

In a 1000 page report if they found evidence for Trump to be in prison, he’d be in prison. Do you think Biden could withstand the scrutiny that Trump did and come out clean?

Paul Manafort was perhaps the most glaring example;  his activities accounted for 150 pages in a 966 page report…which leaves 800+ pages of other details and connections that had little or nothing to do with Paul Manafort.  

The report ultimately found that there was definitely a great deal of communication and information changing hands between the Russians and many members of the Trump campaign.
 

 They determined the Russia definitely interfered with and tried to illegally influence the election and that Trump campaign was very much aware of these efforts….but the investigation ultimately found no conclusive evidence showing that the Trump campaign or DJT himself were directly involved with the interference.  
 

Trump supporters obviously interpret this as a major victory.   But as an American citizen, I find it disgusting and reprehensible that a presidential candidate would have knowledge of a foreign superpower  taking steps to interfere and illegally influence a US election…and then keep all that information to himself.  

[Starkiller]

Trump specifically hired Manafort for his Russian ties. He worked for Putin in Ukraine for pro-Russian puppet politicians. Russia literally paid him to work for Trump’s campaign. 

Edited July 7, 2024 by Starkiller

[Tnasty]

26 minutes ago, nine said:

Paul Manafort was perhaps the most glaring example;  his activities accounted for 150 pages in a 966 page report…which leaves 800+ pages of other details and connections that had little or nothing to do with Paul Manafort.  

The report ultimately found that there was definitely a great deal of communication and information changing hands between the Russians and many members of the Trump campaign.
 

 They determined the Russia definitely interfered with and tried to illegally influence the election and that Trump campaign was very much aware of these efforts….but the investigation ultimately found no conclusive evidence showing that the Trump campaign or DJT himself were directly involved with the interference.  
 

Trump supporters obviously interpret this as a major victory.   But as an American citizen, I find it disgusting and reprehensible that a presidential candidate would have knowledge of a foreign superpower  taking steps to interfere and illegally influence a US election…and then keep all that information to himself.  

My understanding is the Trump campaign members who were in talks with Russia were just trying to find dirt on Hillary.

 

Is this incorrect?

 

Isn’t the whole reason this even became a thing is because the DNC hired a former MI6 agent, Steele, to do opposition research. 
 

Are you as upset at the democrats for this? Are you upset at all at this?

[reo]

2 hours ago, Tnasty said:

Sounds like Manofirt got too close to Russia

 

Got too close to Russia? He was a Russian operative from the start. He worked to help the Russia backed president in Ukraine prior to Zelenski. He's worked for Russia for decades.

[Tnasty]

3 minutes ago, reo said:

 

Got too close to Russia? He was a Russian operative from the start. He worked to help the Russia backed president in Ukraine prior to Zelenski. He's worked for Russia for decades.

Do you have an issue with Democrats paying a former MI6 agent to do opposition research? (Steele Dossier) Research they posted without permission because it was completely unverified, which was later proven to be a false report. False research they posted for the sole reason of disrupting their political opponents campaign

 

Is Hillary a British operative? Maybe she was sworn in as a knight under the Queen and now King of England to serve the British crown.

 

Thats how ridiculous Democrats sound when saying Trump is a Russian asset 

[reo]

6 minutes ago, Tnasty said:

Do you have an issue with Democrats paying a former MI6 agent to do opposition research? (Steele Dossier) Research they posted without permission because it was completely unverified, which was later proven to be a false report. False research they posted for the sole reason of disrupting their political opponents campaign

 

Is Hillary a British operative? Maybe she was sworn in as a knight under the Queen and now King of England to serve the British crown.

 

Thats how ridiculous Democrats sound when saying Trump is a Russian asset 

 

If you'd like to talk about Steele (who Trump owes 6 figures in legal fees due to a failed lawsuit), we can but we're talking about Manafort. Good attempt to change the subject though.

[Tnasty]

1 minute ago, reo said:

 

If you'd like to talk about Steele (who Trump owes 6 figures in legal fees due to a failed lawsuit), we can but we're talking about Manafort. Good attempt to change the subject though.

Why are you getting upset when we’re talking about the same topic: political parties paying foreign agents to do research on their political opponents for the sole purpose of dirt?

 

is it because it’s your party with the spotlight on it?

 

why don’t you tell me how you feel about the Steele dossier and DNCs role in it?

 

no? Then you’re not really an honest actor in this, your a partisan shill pushing the party line.

[reo]

3 minutes ago, Tnasty said:

Why are you getting upset when we’re talking about the same topic: political parties paying foreign agents to do research on their political opponents for the sole purpose of dirt?

 

is it because it’s your party with the spotlight on it?

 

why don’t you tell me how you feel about the Steele dossier and DNCs role in it?

 

no? Then you’re not really an honest actor in this, your a partisan shill pushing the party line.

 

Who's getting upset? We're talking about Manafort who was a forgein agent.

 

Why do you want to change the subject to Steele? 

[Tnasty]

4 minutes ago, reo said:

 

Who's getting upset? We're talking about Manafort who was a forgein agent.

 

Why do you want to change the subject to Steele? 

Why do you have such an issue with giving your opinion on the DNCs role in the Steele dossier?

 

This is the third time I’ve asked you, it’s beginning to feel like you’re intentionally not answering the question because it will hurt your political party.

 

Whats more important: your political party, or being truthful to what is right and wrong?

 

If you can’t admit the wrongs of the DNC, don’t expect anyone to take you seriously when you raise republican issues. Either you have a baseline of what’s acceptable, or you’re biased. Just admit your biased and can’t admit DNC did what your crying about republicans doing 

Edited July 7, 2024 by Tnasty

[reo]

9 minutes ago, Tnasty said:

Why do you have such an issue with giving your opinion on the DNCs role in the Steele dossier?

 

Bc we were talking about manafort. Why do you feel the need to change the subject?

 

It's really interesting that you immediately try to pivot away from the topic.