Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

sactowndog

Ok to accept information from Russians

Recommended Posts

15 minutes ago, toonkee said:

Trust me. You and you buddies aren't fooling anybody. It's obvious you have nothing because you never talk about the actual issue.  Just other people. You guys can't defend your rotten president and his rotten behavior so hope to drag everyone down to his and your level so you can feel justified in your rottenness.

  

All we do is talk about the issues.   HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA!

You hate the issues that's why you keep being upset when the issues are being brought forward.  Your partisan hypocrisy is bewilderingly ignorant. 

You are either are a most dishonest person or completely stupid.

 

He isn't my rotten president, I hope you impeach him.  Just about any republican not named Trump would be preferable and a whole bunch of democrats.   That doesn't change the fact you are so partisan you can't see straight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, sactowndog said:

Took you off to respond.  

1) I never visit MSNBC.....  I check CNN, Foxnews, and the BBC because I don’t trust any single source.   

2) I don’t give a shit if it is true or not.  I didn’t vote for Hilary and already think she is corrupt as hell.  

It is a simple question which should be outside of the partisan framework in which you are stupidly and perpetually stuck.....  

Should we be opposed to allowing foreign governments to provide opposition research to political parties?   

Its not a Republican or Democratic thing as either party could be affected.   It should be a simple question between the potentially increased access to data versus the potential conflict of interest.   But you can’t give a simple well thought out, intelligent response.   Instead, everything is a partisan reflexive response without an ounce of common sense.   

I didn’t block you because I’m afraid of another opinion.  I blocked you because you are incapable of rational thought outside of the partisan construct in which you perpetually reside.   Show me you can make one intelligent comment outside of your partisan framework and I will unblock you.   Otherwise reading your posts aren’t worth my time.  

Why would I care if you blocked me? I’m not getting that one.

I believe that everyone here from the middle to the right at least believes that Trump has had questionable character and makes a complete idiot of himself at times. I don’t need to go into why he’s so popular in the GOP, but I can assure you his character and ego are big negatives. I’m not getting why you think we stick up for everything he does. The problem is that there’s a bunch of Dems that are hell bent on making him look pretty damn reasonable in comparison. And that is pretty damn bad, and that’s very concerning to us.

kat.jpg

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Nevada Convert said:

Why would I care if you blocked me? I’m not getting that one.

I believe that everyone here from the middle to the right at least believes that Trump has had questionable character and makes a complete idiot of himself at times. I don’t need to go into why he’s so popular in the GOP, but I can assure you his character and ego are big negatives. I’m not getting why you think we stick up for everything he does. The problem is that there’s a bunch of Dems that are hell bent on making him look pretty damn reasonable in comparison. And that is pretty damn bad, and that’s very concerning to us.

What part of this question isn’t about Trump or Hilary are you incapable of understanding?   

Nevada is a very good school.  Did you completely fail reading comprehension?   

An it has nothing to do with how good or bad Trump is.   I don’t really care for people’s opinion on that point.  I am interested in your opinion of whether allowing any candidate to receive foreign opposition research should be allowed.  For once, try to respond to a question outside of your permanent partisan framework.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, sactowndog said:

Hell no what.  Are you saying I’m lying? 

:lol:

It doesn’t matter if you voted for Johnson or not. What matters is your loony authoritarian ass is about as far from libertarian as one can get. 

bsu_retro_bsu_logo_helmet.b_1.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, NorthWestCowboy said:

No it's not okay.  Political rivals are and should be just that, rivals.  Our countries adversaries and enemies should never be used to spy on or be the source of information on domestic political rivals.  It's shameful that our country has become so divided politically that Russia is viewed as a valid resource by some of our supposed leaders.  I will never vote for anyone that is cozy with the Russian governement in it's current form.

So you are FOR the prosecution of Hillary Clinton  for hiring a foreign spy to generate a dossier of Russian disinformation?

Just so we are all perfectly phvking clear as to what the evil bitch did

 

“Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts.”

-Richard Feynman

"When buying and selling are controlled by legislation, the first things to be bought and sold are legislators."

-P.J. O’Rourke

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, BSUTOP25 said:

:lol:

It doesn’t matter if you voted for Johnson or not. What matters is your loony authoritarian ass is about as far from libertarian as one can get. 

Yeah okay sure..   and you’re consistent in the only thing you contribute to a conversation are insults.    It’s like you are stuck in 5th grade.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Nevada Convert said:

Dude, I don’t think anyone here from the middle to right thinks Trump has great character and isn’t a complete idiot sometimes. We’re just pointing out that as bad as Trump can be, the left has been a lot worse. And that is mind-blowing bad to smoke Trump that way. 

But the left!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, bluerules009 said:

The best president of the 21st century at this point and it isn't even close.

Hard to handle that isn't it and I even thought Obama could do better than him.

I don't agree. Obviously.

However, since Dubya was Cheney's puppet, let's get real. IYO, the best president of the 21st century has been the Dickster.

Boom goes the dynamite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, pokebball said:

Hillary ran in said election, didn't she?

Right except the question wasn’t about the election was it.   It was about whether the right to know versus the potential conflict of interests of having foreign governments to oppo research.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, sactowndog said:

Right except the question wasn’t about the election was it.   It was about whether the right to know versus the potential conflict of interests of having foreign governments to oppo research.  

Well, since we are talking conflict of interest. You mean kind of like foreign governments gaining access to someone in a position of power for supporting and embellishing said parties personal foundation. That kind of conflict of interest. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, sactowndog said:

Right except the question wasn’t about the election was it.   It was about whether the right to know versus the potential conflict of interests of having foreign governments to oppo research.  

I really don't see a problem with foreign sourced opposition research.  

110926run_defense710.jpg
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, sactowndog said:

Yeah okay sure..   and you’re consistent in the only thing you contribute to a conversation are insults.    It’s like you are stuck in 5th grade.  

Oh boo hoo.... why don’t you just put me on ignore like all the other people you want to start a civil war against? 

bsu_retro_bsu_logo_helmet.b_1.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, soupslam1 said:

Well, since we are talking conflict of interest. You mean kind of like foreign governments gaining access to someone in a position of power for supporting and embellishing said parties personal foundation. That kind of conflict of interest. 

Yes.  If your point is Clinton was corrupt you have no argument from me.   She is also out of office now.  A fate that should befall Trump. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, BSUTOP25 said:

Oh boo hoo.... why don’t you just put me on ignore like all the other people you want to start a civil war against? 

Not worried about it all.   More curious why you seem to have never advanced past 5th grade.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, modestobulldog said:

I really don't see a problem with foreign sourced opposition research.  

That’s a valid viewpoint.  I’m not sure I agree but I appreciate your view.   As you said you value the truth at any price.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/21/2019 at 10:53 AM, sactowndog said:

Giuliani says now, okay the campaign accepted help from Russia.  But that’s perfectly ok...

https://www-m.cnn.com/2019/04/21/politics/rudy-giuliani-trump-russia-cnntv/index.html?r=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.cnn.com%2F

 

do you agree with him?  I think it sets a troubling precedent of Americans working with foreign governments to spy on political opponents.  

Awright, well they both did it apparently.  Although to be fair, Hillary did it more than Trump.  The Clinton campaign actually paid for foreign "help".   I didn't vote for either, although I'm not sure what that accomplished.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, SleepingGiantsFan said:

I don't agree. Obviously.

However, since Dubya was Cheney's puppet, let's get real. IYO, the best president of the 21st century has been the Dickster.

If you knew what you were talking about, you’d know that at the end of his first term, Bush realized that Cheney wasn’t being honest and upfront on some important issues and in the second term they didn’t speak to each other and Bush didn’t want anything to do with him. Cheney would speak to someone and person came to the meetings instead of Cheney. So Bush was only influenced in his first term. In his second term he turned to Scientology. No! Just kidding. I can’t remember who he leaned on in the last 4 years.

kat.jpg

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...