It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: theantediluvian
I have said I believe manafort is probably guilty.
I have said I want Mueller to finish his investigation.
So don't lump me in with what you are saying here.
My only point now is we have at least as much evidence for Russian collusion by the democrats.
Now these same democrats and the media went nuts about collusion allegations with trump, with near 24 7 coverage, and we have a huge investigation.
Now that the dems are implicated, suddenly it's not that big of a deal, and any investigation is a distraction.
And as I have been say in for two days bow, if this dossier was paid for by Hillary's team to foreign agents, and it was used by Obama for fisa warrants, then this is far more damming than anything russia has been accused of.
I am sure you agree.
originally posted by: Garmanarnar
originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: theantediluvian
I have said I believe manafort is probably guilty.
I have said I want Mueller to finish his investigation.
So don't lump me in with what you are saying here.
My only point now is we have at least as much evidence for Russian collusion by the democrats.
Now these same democrats and the media went nuts about collusion allegations with trump, with near 24 7 coverage, and we have a huge investigation.
Now that the dems are implicated, suddenly it's not that big of a deal, and any investigation is a distraction.
And as I have been say in for two days bow, if this dossier was paid for by Hillary's team to foreign agents, and it was used by Obama for fisa warrants, then this is far more damming than anything russia has been accused of.
I am sure you agree.
The Democrats uncovering trumps collusion does not make him innocent, you do understand that?
originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: Grambler
It's strange how Trump supporters still refuse to acknowledge significant instances of Trump and team's malfeasance.
Did the DNC make Flynn lie about contacts with Kislyak? Did the media make Trump go along with the lie until it was exposed? Did "the Left" make Donald Trump Jr take that meeting? Make him lie about it? Were we all bull#ting about Manafort?
Trump and his supporters have been dismissing Russian meddling in the election for over a year and now that they think they've got a few lines in the water and they might catch a ClintonFish they're *instantly* — I mean *instantly* — prepared to believe absolutely any claim made about Russian influence... on Hillary.
If Manafort is accused of being a conduit for Kremlin influence on Clinton? The whole gang is ready to believe. If it's alleged that Manafort was acting in a similar fashion in the Trump campaign? Fake News! Manafort is being smeared to attack Trump.
Wasn't the Washington Post fake news just the day before yesterday? Washington Post is run by Bezos, Bezos founded Amazon, Amazon is a front for the CIA, the Washington Post is the CIA — a mouthpiece for the "deep state." That's the talking point right?
Even now the first thing you think to say is "it has exposed the media."
What is "it" exactly? Something reported by the Washington Post? What happened to disregarding "it" because the Washington Post is essentially the CIA?
And what about "anonymous sources?" Tens of thousands of lines of angst over anonymous sources were posted by Trump supporters in the last year. Now all of a sudden, anonymous sources are A-Okay?
Then there is this purely emotional reaction (in fact it's what this thread is about) to these Clinton. This mass hysteria whereby Trump and his supporters have somehow convinced themselves that allegations against Clinton are somehow exculpatory of Team Trump.
If you accept that Manafort is a Kremlin operative in the one instance, that still means that from March to August, one of Trump's most important advisors, and from May through August, the person running his campaign, was a Kremlin operative.
Does that make the idea of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia seem more plausible or less?
originally posted by: Grambler
originally posted by: kosmicjack
It doesn't make it untrue. Simply remains unverified.
What's madness and cherry picking is that, when it suited him, it was "fake news" but now that we know more facts about who paid for it, that part is true. Just not tbe rest of it.
I fail to understand what you are trying to say.
Are you claiming by Trump pointing out that that hillarys team lied,
originally posted by: network dude
originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: Grambler
It's strange how Trump supporters still refuse to acknowledge significant instances of Trump and team's malfeasance.
Did the DNC make Flynn lie about contacts with Kislyak? Did the media make Trump go along with the lie until it was exposed? Did "the Left" make Donald Trump Jr take that meeting? Make him lie about it? Were we all bull#ting about Manafort?
Trump and his supporters have been dismissing Russian meddling in the election for over a year and now that they think they've got a few lines in the water and they might catch a ClintonFish they're *instantly* — I mean *instantly* — prepared to believe absolutely any claim made about Russian influence... on Hillary.
If Manafort is accused of being a conduit for Kremlin influence on Clinton? The whole gang is ready to believe. If it's alleged that Manafort was acting in a similar fashion in the Trump campaign? Fake News! Manafort is being smeared to attack Trump.
Wasn't the Washington Post fake news just the day before yesterday? Washington Post is run by Bezos, Bezos founded Amazon, Amazon is a front for the CIA, the Washington Post is the CIA — a mouthpiece for the "deep state." That's the talking point right?
Even now the first thing you think to say is "it has exposed the media."
What is "it" exactly? Something reported by the Washington Post? What happened to disregarding "it" because the Washington Post is essentially the CIA?
And what about "anonymous sources?" Tens of thousands of lines of angst over anonymous sources were posted by Trump supporters in the last year. Now all of a sudden, anonymous sources are A-Okay?
Then there is this purely emotional reaction (in fact it's what this thread is about) to these Clinton. This mass hysteria whereby Trump and his supporters have somehow convinced themselves that allegations against Clinton are somehow exculpatory of Team Trump.
If you accept that Manafort is a Kremlin operative in the one instance, that still means that from March to August, one of Trump's most important advisors, and from May through August, the person running his campaign, was a Kremlin operative.
Does that make the idea of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia seem more plausible or less?
It's almost like you haven't been paying any attention to what others have been saying at all. Don Jr. came out and said exactly what he did. "the left" cried on and on that he was colluding with Russia and said words like "treason". The right just didn't agree that anything wrong was done. Political opponents do things like this. But it was HAMMERED on and on since it was "Russia", and they are coming for our democracy.
Now that the tables are turned, and the left are the ones "colluding" and doing the same things (well, different in that they actually did get something from their deal) the same pea brains who were calling for Trump Jr. to be hanged, and trying to offer a free pass to the teflon bitch. Pointing out that glaring hippocricy is enjoyable. Watching the left try to explain why they have no moral compass is even more fun. Spin away Anti. It's your lie, tell it however you like.
yet the stock market is improving, unemployment is dropping, Isis is almost eradicated, and fat boy in N. Korea is facing off against a president who WILL vaporize him if he attacks us.