After mueller we know that Russia interfered?
What’s the hoax part?
After mueller we know that Russia interfered?
What’s the hoax part?
That Trump colluded with the Russians…
So trumps meaning of Russia hoax was “I know Russia is interfering but I am ok with it. I will enorucarage it But I am not an active participant in it. And I will do nothing about itâ€
I think this is at odds with his original statements.
So trumps meaning of Russia hoax was “I know Russia is interfering but I am ok with it. I will enorucarage it But I am not an active participant in it. And I will do nothing about itâ€
I think this is at odds with his original statements.
After mueller we know that Russia interfered?
What’s the hoax part?
That Trump colluded with the Russians…
But Trump seems to think that any bad intent by the Russians is a hoax. Most concernedly he seems to take Putin by his word that Russia has no interest in interfering in Venezuela despite Trump’s own appointed intelligence and military leaders reporting that Russian military personnel and equipment are entering Venezuela. Are Trump’s own appointees creating a hoax and treating Putin unfairly? Or is Russia supporting Maduro with the Russian military?
It might be good to get the CiC on the same page as those he appoints before we possibly send any troops into Venezuela (as chickenhawks Pompeo, Bolton are talking about doing).
I’m sorry, you seem to be under the impression that Trumpies need actual facts to retweet?
After mueller we know that Russia interfered?
What’s the hoax part?
That Trump colluded with the Russians…
But Trump seems to think that any bad intent by the Russians is a hoax. Most concernedly he seems to take Putin by his word that Russia has no interest in interfering in Venezuela despite Trump’s own appointed intelligence and military leaders reporting that Russian military personnel and equipment are entering Venezuela. Are Trump’s own appointees creating a hoax and treating Putin unfairly? Or is Russia supporting Maduro with the Russian military?
It might be good to get the CiC on the same page as those he appoints before we possibly send any troops into Venezuela (as chickenhawks Pompeo, Bolton are talking about doing).
I have no idea what Trump thinks. If you enjoy speculating wildly about what he thinks be my guest.
I have no idea what Trump thinks. If you enjoy speculating wildly about what he thinks be my guest.
I’m not trying to decipher what he thinks. I’m reading his words. A President should use words to communicate things. Words have meaning. And when words of the President contradict words of other U.S. leaders about important issues.
I know it’s super hard for you, but it’s OK to sometimes criticize our celebrity leader. You seem to get all huffy when people call you a ballwasher, yet seem to recoil from criticizing him except in the vaguest possible terms.
It’s OK. You can criticize him and no one will think you’ve caved in to the media elite, or whatever.
It’s OK. You can criticize him and no one will think you’ve caved in to the media elite, or whatever.
I have. A lot.
It’s such a strange phenomena that so many can just simply not ever see it.
OP asked a question. I gave one possible answer.
Doesn’t mean that that answer is an expression of my personal opinion.
Is nuance really that difficult for you?
It’s OK. You can criticize him and no one will think you’ve caved in to the media elite, or whatever.
I have. A lot.
It’s such a strange phenomena that so many can just simply not ever see it.
I wouldn’t say a lot. I think you’ve criticized “the wall?” But it seems like you like to fabricate positive interpretations whenever possible. E.g. you decided that Trump’s conversation was based only on the narrow issue of “collusion” and not the broader Russian interference.
I think you just treat it like a zero-sum game, though. You don’t like the “liberal media” so dismissing news reports bolsters your notion of your “independence.” But I don’t think you’re nearly as free-thinking as you think you are. Or maybe I’m not as much as I think I am.
OP asked a question. I gave one possible answer.
I just get tired of memes sometimes. I prefer the Duffy who can sometimes speak across the table human-to-human.
I wouldn’t say a lot.
Well, you’re missing some then.
I think you’ve criticized “the wall?”
Not just the wall, his entire stance on immigration, his bullshit maneuvers on healthcare, his stances on abortion…
But it seems like you like to fabricate positive interpretations whenever possible. E.g. you decided that Trump’s conversation was based only on the narrow issue of “collusion” and not the broader Russian interference.
I don’t know what conversation you are referencing. I answered what I thought to be a somewhat hypothetical question with a somewhat hypothetical answer. You guys are so wound up about Trump that you can’t even see that I’m just playing devil’s advocate.
Sure I could chime in on the thousands of Orange Man Bad threads and say, “yeah! Me too! Trump bad!!!â€, but what would be the point in that? I’ve never been a joiner and I don’t take part in circle jerks. Sorry.
I think you just treat it like a zero-sum game, though. You don’t like the “liberal media” so dismissing news reports bolsters your notion of your “independence.”
I “dismiss†(more accurately I’m skeptical of) “news†reports because the news media has been shown over and over and over to be completely full of shit.
If you can’t see that then there’s no helping you.
This news media being so utterly corrupt, biased, dishonest is what got us Trump. Trump’s election was a backlash against that. And they (the media) have doubled down on their dishonesty and corruption so we’ll get Trump again in 2020.
This is not a defense of Trump or his voters.
This reminds me of the video of a woman with a nail in her head. She complains of headaches, etc. and her man points out that she has a nail in her head and she just doesn’t want to hear it.
Trump is the headache.
The left, media, “deep stateâ€, “establishmentâ€, “globalistsâ€, etc. are the nail.
I just keep telling anyone who will listen that if you Trump again in 2020 just keep doing what you’re doing. I do this because I DON’T WANT TRUMP TO BE PRESIDENT.
I keep pointing out that you have a nail in your head and you keep saying it’s not about the nail.
It’s actually all about the nail…
I just don’t believe you. This thread is a perfect case in point. Trump clearly called Russian interference a hoax. Because Putin said it was. And it wasn’t your corrupt media telling you that our most cherished legal process was attacked. It was all our intelligence agencies. You consistently protect and defend trump when this comes up.
So, yes, you do want him re-elected and no, you don’t really criticize his policies (like on immigration, as you state). The only thing that makes you not the typical always-trumper is that you’re smarter, and perhaps somewhat less fearful.
After mueller we know that Russia interfered?
What’s the hoax part?
I’ll ignore your hoax question and just say that this is why I’ve agreed with Hillary from the outset that Trump is temperamentally unsuited for the office; he can’t separate himself from any issue, much less Russian interference. For 2020 interference I’m just hoping the rest of govt is on with doing their jobs, as this article indicates, the dichotomy is in full view.
I just don’t believe you.
And therein lies the problem. Just because I’m not a participant in the daily contest of who can vociferously signal their Trumphate the most (and I make fun of those who are) then I must be a supporter of Trump, no matter how many times I explain that I’m not.
Stupid.
Trump clearly called Russian interference a hoax.
This is the first I’ve heard that he said that.
This thread was started with what I thought to be a hypothetical question. I was unaware that Trump claimed there was no attempt by russians to influence the election.
Did he? Can you post a link to him saying this?
So, yes, you do want him re-elected
No. I don’t. The fact that you choose not to believe it is your problem.
you don’t really criticize his policies (like on immigration, as you state).
Actually I do. Use your shitty search function and you’ll see. Oh wait, you’ll just not believe it so don’t bother. You just keep walking around with the false ideas in your head and continue to disregard anything that might challenge it. So very open minded of you.
The only thing that makes you not the typical always-trumper is that you’re smarter, and perhaps somewhat less fearful.
That and the fact that I don’t think he’s fit to president.
trump said in the 1st presidential debate trump said he doubted whether anyone knew who hacked the democrats. in the second debate he doubted any hacking took place and, if it did, was very doubtful russia had anything to do with it. he kept up that theme in the 3rd debate, altho it was very clear that all our allies, and all our intelligence agencies, knew our election was attacked and knew who did it.
post-election he rejected intelligence assessments that russia attacked the election. finally, in jan of '17, under pressure from his own incoming administration, he conceded that russia might have attacked the election, but said it could also have been other countries. then, in november of '17, where were you when trump went to helsinki? met with putin? had the one-on-one with putin? emerged saying, putin said he didn’t do it and i believe him?
the search utility works fine. it just can’t generate a link to something that isn’t there. but if you have faith in other search engines, everybody but you knows trump’s history of denying russian attacks on our election and it’s clear he’s up to it again. use those search engines and you’ll find 10,000 articles about it.
I don’t believe you.
I don’t believe you.
you think your cute routine works. and it does work, in the sense that everyone loves a little duffy. me too. everybody loves a dash of neal cassady. but nobody is fooled. donald trump is trashing institutions that we covet, he does it daily, so, comportment, humanity, rule of law, attention to fact and to truth, civility, basic humanity, loyalty to allies, divided government, it’s all out the window. if that’s a problem for you, you’d make this known when you post. if that’s really not a problem for you, then you’ll keep defending him, or deflecting, as you did in this thread.
trump is really not a problem for you. yes, you have certain issues with his style, but, writ large, he’s your guy, he’s always been your guy. if you protest this view, don’t complain to me, or blame my search engine. just stop defending him, or adopting trump’s stupid routine, as you did on this thread.
comportment, humanity, rule of law, attention to fact and to truth, civility, basic humanity, loyalty to allies, divided government, it’s all out the window
It is my contention that that stuff was never in the window, or at least hasn’t been for quite some time.
That’s what gave us Trump.
I think the reason why Trump was elected is a valid one, Trump is just the wrong guy to fulfill the reasoning behind it.
trump is really not a problem for you. yes, you have certain issues with his style, but, writ large, he’s your guy, he’s always been your guy.
