The Big Fat Compendium Of Russiagate Debunkery

[aj3647]

After Russia failed to meet May's deadline to explain how a Russian nerve agent was used to poison three people on British soil [[a British police officer is also hospitalized after being exposed), the UK has now expelled 23 Russian diplomats from the country and called for an emergency session of the UN Security Council to discuss the matter:

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/14/w...-measures.html

NATO has called this incident the "first offensive use of a nerve agent” on alliance territory since NATO was founded in 1949 and that this attack was "a clear breach of international norms and agreements.”

May is expected to put forth further "economic and diplomatic" reprisals to the UK Parliament today. She has also received backing from top European allies, including France and Germany, to do more to combat Russian meddling in Western Europe.

Meanwhile, Donald Trump has finally weighed in on the matter saying "it sounds to me" like Russia was behind the chemical attack "based on all the evidence."

[Maof]

Meanwhile, Donald Trump has finally weighed in on the matter saying "it sounds to me" like Russia was behind the chemical attack "based on all the evidence."

LMAO - Smart guy!

[TKshreve]

LMAO - Smart guy!

Well, he's a genius, right? A yuge, fat, orange, stable genius.

And nobody has better words than him. But, we'll have to wait and see if that's true.

[oladub]

aj, you almost completely ducked my questions about why you make more of an issue about what, if any, Americans Russia has killed in the US and why that seems to be a bigger issue to you than the thousands of Americans killed by subsequent by Islamic radicals on and since 9/11, what Libya, Serbia, and Syria ever did to the U.S. to justify Obama, Kerry, and the Clintons trying to unconstitutionally topple them, and why you seem ok with Hillary's campaign paying foreign citizens including a foreign intelligence official to dig up dirt on Trump and have the FBI use it.

Your answer to all those questions was "I don't know" and then to obfuscate. Unlike you ducking questions, I answer your questions. I strongly object to incidents of violence and support for "rebels" trying to overthrow Assad by either Obama or Trump and have mentioned that my biggest fault with Trump is the extent with which he has continued Obama's idiotic and murderous policies in Syria. I have mentioned this several times but am repeating it for you. My primary preference was for Rand Paul, an actual peace candidate, but he was so far behind that I voted for Bernie hoping to keep the Lady Macbeth "and he died, yuck, yuck yuck" out.

Establishment Democrats, deep state apologists, and neocons [[if the shoe fits, wear it) have a problem though with proportionality somehow equating, for instance, thousands of Americans killed by Islamic radicals in the U.S. with a couple of possible/probable Russian assassinations in England or the hundreds of thousands of dead Arabs and millions of refugees caused by your guys with a Syrian plane shot down, a Syrian military base bombed, and other limited incidents under Trump. Also, ISIS was tolerated to some extent under Obama as a tool to undermine Assad according to Kerry. Trump instead rolled ISIS back. Big difference.

[aj3647]

aj, you almost completely ducked my questions about why you make more of an issue about what, if any, Americans Russia has killed in the US and why that seems to be a bigger issue to you than the thousands of Americans killed by subsequent by Islamic radicals on and since 9/11, what Libya, Serbia, and Syria ever did to the U.S. to justify Obama, Kerry, and the Clintons trying to unconstitutionally topple them, and why you seem ok with Hillary's campaign paying foreign citizens including a foreign intelligence official to dig up dirt on Trump and have the FBI use it.

Yes, Islamic terrorists killed 3000 Americans on 9/11. That was 17 years ago. Since then, the United States created a brand new cabinet department [[Homeland Security), the TSA, completely changed how Americans fly commercially, waged two wars, and have spent well in excess of a trillion dollars combating Islamic terrorism around the globe. Soooooo, what exactly is your point here in even bringing that up? That the response was insufficient, or that we should ignore what Russia does in the year of our lord two thousand and eighteen because, and I quote, "9/11."

See, this is all you have: red herrings. Do you know what a red herring is, oladub? A red herring is defined as "something that misleads or distracts from a relevant or important issue." In a thread ostensibly about "Russiagate", whenever I try to actually address current events about what's happening in the world today, right now in the year 2018, YOU seemingly want to go back and rehash shit that happened years or decades ago. Libya, Serbia, 9/11, etc, whatever you can toss out to steer the conversation AWAY from Trump, AWAY from Russia, AWAY from what's actually happening in the world right now.

So no, when you pull that nonsense, I'll just give it the consideration that it's due, which is none. Bill Clinton is not the President of the United States right now. Hillary Clinton is not the President either. Nor is Barack Obama. If you want to rehash history, start a new thread. If not, I'll just continue to ignore your pointless red herring attempts. Take a look at the title of the thread, what does 9/11 have to do with anything?

So nice try, but the fact that Islamic terrorists killed 3000 people 17 years ago does not mean that we shouldn't address Russian aggression in the year 2018. By that stupid logic, neither China nor North Korea have killed anyone on American soil either, so I guess Trump should shut up about them [[using your logic)? I mean, if China or North Korea or Iran hasn't killed anyone on American soil, then they aren't a threat to us and we should pay them no heed. That's what your logic consists of.

[oladub]

My point in bringing proportionality up is that Islam has not changed and still has its discordant elements. For instance, the 8 people an Uzbek nationalist mowed down in NY City in October, the 14 people killed in San Bernadino in 2015, the 49 people killed in a Florida nightclub Jube 2016, or the 13 year old killed by a teen age Islamist in Palm Beach yesterday who didn't get on the news. Trying to sweep the 9/11 3,000 dead mostly Americans under the rug might be convenient for you but I still remember 9/11. The fact is that Islamic religiously inspired killings still occur, ISIS continues to threaten mass atrocities, and you cannot assure anyone that contemporaries of Bin Laden won't use WMD's on the U.S. if they get their hands on them. 9/11 is not ancient history. Today's Bin Ladens have the same objectives. It might be harder for them to get box cutters onto planes but is it really much harder for them to ship in WMD's in any load of cargo or shoot up a school, theater, or shopping center? So you can worry about Russians killing their own in England. I'll prioritize a history of thousands killed in the U.S.. How many Americans did you say Russians killed in the US? Choose your timeframe.

The Islamic NYC killer who killed 8 was brought here on a diversity lottery visa. He, in turn, chose 23 of his 'relatives' to come here as chain immigrants. Get that? Terrorists are allowed to choose immigrants. Trump is trying to get rid of those programs. Putting marshals on planes and making travelers stand in long lines didn't prevent that.

Since our choice was between Trump and Hillary and Hillary had a warmongering past, including Hillary in any discussion of how we got here is hardly a 'red herring'. Bush's wars, supported by Hillary and Obama's wars, to the extent they are protracted by Trump are contiguous. The millions of refugees Obama,Kerry, and Clinton created are still a problem. You can pretend Trump started fresh but like any president, he took over ongoing situations. Hillary is still going around insulting working Americans to the point that even Democrats are saying 'enough is enough'. She remains fair game. You trivialize 9/11 and Islamic threats but sensationalize English crimes. You cheerlead for the attempted coup based on English agents' dossiers bought by the Clinton campaign to produce information for the weaponized FBI to take out Hillary's opponent.

[Richard]

^ you are addressing a group that would welcome a nuclear strike on US soil as long as it took out the currant president,the millions of others that perished in the process would be exceptable losses as long as the objective was met.

Still waiting on proof of Russian collusion.

[bust]

Trying to sweep the 9/11 3,000 dead mostly Americans under the rug might be convenient for you but I still remember 9/11.

I too remember. I probably still carry traces of the dust in my lungs. But that truly is a red herring.

Especially when you complain about the destabilized Middle East and all but ignore how GW Bush's revenge war to finish his daddy's oil war in Iraq did so much to cause the whole mess. You also make no mention of the 4,520 American soldiers killed in Iraq. Nor the deaths of 3,481 US contractors, 318 Allied troops, and approximately 12,000 Iraqi military and police officers. The at least 202,757 documented Iraqi civilian deaths. [[One 2013 study convincingly estimates 500,000 Iraqis deaths is closer to the truth.) The countless injuries. The millions displaced. The vast civil and economic destruction. The families torn apart. So much death and devastation it's impossible to keep track.

The end result was a terribly destabilized Middle East with Iran the clear winner. If Foreign Policy isn't conservative enough a source for that opinion, here's The American Conservative. "Mission accomplished"? Nope.

How does it make sense to discuss stupid US foreign policy with tragic consequences in the Middle East, and focus so much blame on Obama, Kerry, and Clinton? Especially as you cite ISIS and [radical] Islamic threats? [[I helped you on that). They inherited most of that giant mess.

The Financial Times says the war in Iraq led to the Syrian civil war, and yes, ISIS. So does Time. And Vanity Fair. And The New Yorker. And The Intercept. And Tony Blair. And The Guardian. And the CBC and the UK's 12-volume official post mortem on British involvement in the war. Heck, so does even disgraced Michael Flynn! [[I could go on.) And they don't blame decisions made during Obama's tenure. By far the biggest mistakes were made early on, not the least of which was waging war there in the first place.

But that's irrelevant to the topic of this thread.

The Islamic NYC killer who killed 8 was brought here on a diversity lottery visa. He, in turn, chose 23 of his 'relatives' to come here as chain immigrants.

Also not relevant.

Moreover: Not true. At all.

That's a blatant lie quoted directly from our pathological-liar-in-chief [[who later inexplicably reduced the supposed number of relatives selected by the terrorist to 22).

From Politifact:

"Applicants for the diversity program are able to include in their application their spouse and unmarried children under 21 years old.

That is not what happened with Saipov, who arrived in 2010. Multiple news outlets reported that Saipov got married in the United States in 2013 to a woman who already lived here, also an Uzbek national. Their three children were all born in the United States. The family lived in Paterson, N.J..

“Unless Saipov had 22 unmarried, under-age-21 children at the time he came here, President Trump's statement that Saipov brought 22 people with him is clearly false,” said Stephen H. Legomsky, an emeritus professor at the Washington University School of Law in St. Louis who served as chief counsel of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services from 2011 to 2013."

Saipov immigrated to the US just after his 22nd birthday.

Trump made more than 2000 false or misleading claims during his first year in office. There are no good excuses for anyone who still believes that man.

Let's finish on a light note.

Have you seen Jimmy Kimmel's 5-minute documentary of Trump's best lies in office?

At least that's a diverting diversion.

Now can we please get back to the matter at hand?

Sources:

The Iraq Takeaway: American Ground Invasions Destabilize the Middle East
https://www.theatlantic.com/internat...e-east/274190/

American Soldiers Killed in Iraq
https://www.statista.com/statistics/263798/american-soldiers-killed-in-iraq/

Allied Combatants Killed in Iraq March 2003-April 2015
http://watson.brown.edu/costsofwar/costs/human/military

Number of documented civilian deaths in the Iraq war from 2003 to February 2018
https://www.statista.com/statistics/...ar-since-2003/

Half-Million Iraqis Died in the War, New Study Says
https://news.nationalgeographic.com/...s-survey-2013/

Who won the war in Iraq? [[Here’s a big hint: It wasn’t the United States)
http://foreignpolicy.com/2011/09/29/...united-states/

2017: The Year the Iraq War Truly Ended
So why does it feel like Iran is the only winner?
http://www.theamericanconservative.c...kurds-isis-is/

Three truths about the Iraq war and its consequences
https://www.ft.com/content/1353c1d8-...f-79eb4891c97d

How Disbanding the Iraqi Army Fueled ISIS
http://time.com/3900753/isis-iraq-sy...ates-military/

How the Bush Wars Opened the Door for ISIS
https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2015...-war-bush-isis

Did George W. Bush Create ISIS?
https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-...sh-create-isis

Blowback: How ISIS Was Created by the U.S. Invasion of Iraq
https://theintercept.com/2018/01/29/...tate-blowback/

Tony Blair Says Iraq War Helped Give Rise to ISIS
https://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/26/w...e-to-isis.html

Tony Blair is right: without the Iraq war there would be no Islamic State
https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...uld-be-no-isis

The U.K. had a preview of slaughter, ISIS — and a veto, but didn't use it
http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/chilcot-report-1.3666502

Ex-US Intelligence Chief on Islamic State's Rise: 'We Were Too Dumb'
http://www.spiegel.de/international/...a-1065131.html

Donald Trump’s unsubstantiated claims about chain migration, NYC terror suspect
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...about-chain-m/

Finding a Rootless Life in U.S., Sayfullo Saipov Turned to Radicalism
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/01/n...manhattan.html

President Trump has made more than 2,000 false or misleading claims over 355 days
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...over-355-days/

Kimmel Made a Short Documentary About All of Trump’s Best Lies
https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood...el-documentary

[bust]

Still waiting on proof of Russian collusion.

I'm patiently waiting for the results of the Mueller investigation, and don't expect them until it's complete. Nor do I expect a careful criminal investigation of such import to wrap up quickly. Such things take time.

[oladub]

Bust I'll concede the point that Mr. Saipov was still ineligible to initiate to bring in 23 chain migrants because the consensus was that he was still here on a diversity lottery visa and probably not yet a citizen. Diversity lottery winners may invite their married and unmarried children, spouses, and siblings once they become citizens. Upon becoming citizens, those invitees can do the same. Just the same, Mr. Siapov mowed down and killed 8 people in NY City. Choosing future citizens by lottery is insane. In this case from a country that had already provided another terrorist through the diversity lottery and provided ISIS with 1,500 troops. Mr. Saipov or any Uzbek terrorist has a 1 in 188 chance of winning the lottery. All former ISIS members should apply. This is why its called chain immigration. Except for future Democratic Party votes and cheap labor, it makes almost no sense.

You are just however wrong about Bush. I do not ignore Bush lying about WMD's as a basis for his war in Iraq. I voted for Ralph Nader in 2004 and avidly supporting Ron Paul, a peace candidate, and voted third party again in 2008. Find a post in which I supported Bush or the Iraq war to validate your false claim. Nor do I excuse Senators Clinton and Kerry for voting in support of Bush's Iraq war. Those two expanded the mid east mess and then made it worse as Secretaries of State by creating policies that left hundreds of thousands of dead Arabs and millions of refugees. That vote alone should have disqualified both Kerry and Hillary as presidential candidates. As long as the threat of Islamic inspired incidents exists, 9/11 and subsequent Islamic radical attacks are not a red herring. They are a warning.

Given that Islamists have killed something like 3,200+ on American soil going back to 9/11, how many have Russians killed on American soil in the same time period? If you want to talk about Russia, here is your opportunity. To make it easy so you can forget about 9/11, choose your own time frame.

[TKshreve]

Still waiting on proof of Russian collusion.

I've lost count of how many times I've personally had to address people online about this naive notion that proof has yet to be revealed/displayed by the investigation regarding any direct lines of collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russians.

At this point, you display one of two things, in certainty, when you trot out this flimsy strawman [over and over]:

1> You are simply obtuse to the idea of how an FBI investigation is conducted, outside of Hollywood interpretations. In what fantasy land do you reside, where investigators divulge to the public the findings of their ONGOING investigation? You can't possible think that this would be status quo for the FBI. On a case under such scrutiny and spotlight? Sadly, if this is your stance, it is by far the better of the two.

2> You are being willfully ignorant towards the facts surrounding the investigation. By disregarding the countless upward targeted indictments, and subsequent charges levied by Special Counsel Mueller against continued individuals who worked within the Trump campaign, you're desperately trying to muddy the waters and sow uncertainty. Anyone who cannot remotely sense the trajectory and targeting of this investigation thus far cannot be relied upon to have an open discussion surrounding this case.
It's this one for sure!!!
Can't wait for the next, next, next time you request proof of collusion from an ongoing investigation. The only person who has said there was no collusion is Trump himslef, and Huckabee Sanders - the mouthpiece for his lackluster ass.

[Honky Tonk]

I've lost count of how many times I've personally had to address people online about this naive notion that proof has yet to be revealed/displayed by the investigation regarding any direct lines of collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russians.

At this point, you display one of two things, in certainty, when you trot out this flimsy strawman [over and over]:

1> You are simply obtuse to the idea of how an FBI investigation is conducted, outside of Hollywood interpretations. In what fantasy land do you reside, where investigators divulge to the public the findings of their ONGOING investigation? You can't possible think that this would be status quo for the FBI. On a case under such scrutiny and spotlight? Sadly, if this is your stance, it is by far the better of the two.

2> You are being willfully ignorant towards the facts surrounding the investigation. By disregarding the countless upward targeted indictments, and subsequent charges levied by Special Counsel Mueller against continued individuals who worked within the Trump campaign, you're desperately trying to muddy the waters and sow uncertainty. Anyone who cannot remotely sense the trajectory and targeting of this investigation thus far cannot be relied upon to have an open discussion surrounding this case.
It's this one for sure!!!
Can't wait for the next, next, next time you request proof of collusion from an ongoing investigation. The only person who has said there was no collusion is Trump himslef, and Huckabee Sanders - the mouthpiece for his lackluster ass.

So then you have no proof?

[TKshreve]

So then you have no proof?

Actually, no; I do have proof. New article came out that exposes DJT's direct connection to Russian collusion.

[bust]

...I do not ignore Bush lying about WMD's as a basis for his war in Iraq. I voted for Ralph Nader in 2004 and avidly supporting Ron Paul, a peace candidate, and voted third party again in 2008. Find a post in which I supported Bush or the Iraq war...

Oladub, I didn't say you supported Bush, his war, nor that you ignored his lies about WMDs in Iraq.

I said it was wrong to lay blame for the giant mess in the Middle East almost entirely at the feet of the Obama administration. The Bush administration got us there. The collapse of several Middle Eastern governments, the civil war in Syria, and the formation of ISIS jihadis even more bloodthirsty than Al Queda — those were the result of disastrous decisions in Iraq. To say nothing of the tremendous loss of life.

And if you want to address proportionality, 9/11 was a gross atrocity, but let's not forget almost three times as many Americans died in Iraq. Plus our allies, hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, millions who became refugees or were displaced… And add Afghanistan to that.

Obama later replaced Bush in the conductor's compartment, but not until long after the train was already hurtling steeply downhill. And only a small fraction of the deaths in Iraq happened under his watch. I didn't get that you understand that from your post.

It reminds me how some blame the Obama administration for the 2008 housing market / financial collapse. That happened during the Bush administration. And for the subsequent bailout. The bailout and the Treasury's Troubled Asset Relief Program were both enacted during the Bush administration. And for the large budget deficit that existed the first years of the Obama administration. That was a direct consequence of Bush's bank bailouts. And so on...

Some cynically re-write history to mislead. Others are far less ill-intentioned when they believe and repeat the cynical untruths because it suits their politics.

I'll gladly give you the benefit of the doubt you don't fall into the first category.

My intention here was merely to set the record straight.

And to agree with the others the “But Obama” and “But Hillary” refrains some reflexively turn to when their viewpoints are challenged are mere diversions.

I'll agree with you on this though: I'm not a big fan of the Clintons either. But Hillary would have been an infinitely better president than the one we have now. It's my opinion Trump's contributions thus far net deep negative.

That said, I accept the result of the election. Trump won. Whether fairly or not, we'll see.

Meanwhile, it's ironic so many of those who like to crow, “Hillary lost. Get over it!” are the same ones who constantly bring her up.

Sources:

Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emerge...on_Act_of_2008

Troubled Asset Relief Program
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troubl...Relief_Program

Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008: Effects on the National Debt
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emerge..._national_debt

[Richard]

Actually, no; I do have proof. New article came out that exposes DJT's direct connection to Russian collusion.

And of course you will post the link,you know how people like their links.

[oladub]

bust, I didn't blame the "giant mess in the Middle East almost entirely at the feet of the Obama administration". I blamed the ongoing mess created by the Obama Administration including bombing seven countries and overthrowing Libya on Obama & Co.. I take an opposite position that too little blame is ascribed to Obama including much of the death and destruction in places including Libya and Syria. I also blamed part of the Iraq mess on Democrats who went along with Bush to start the war and kept it going. Senator Obama never voted against any request Bush made to keep the war going. There were Democrats like Kucinich who didn't. Bush, at least, never had anything to do with bombing Yemen, Libya, or destabilizing Syria although there was a connection between the CIA running illicit weapons from Libya to Syria once Khaddafi was toppled. Under Obama, Syrian rebels supplied by the CIA fought rebels supplied by the Pentagon. Its because of Obama, not Bush, that refugees are flooding into Europe through Libya and from Syria although Bush's war added refugees from Iraq. After helping create millions of refugees in Syria, Obama upped the intake of Syrian refugees from 1,500 to over 10,000 a year. Candidate Hillary spoke of increasing that number. Why exactly did the U.S. need them or Mr. Saipov? It would have been better to not allow ISIS to grow by undermining Assad like Obama did. For the record, Trump continues to undermine Assad. Obama, not Bush, allowed some growth in ISIS to gain leverage in Syria even though he knew of ISIS atrocities. What a cool guy!

I'm straight forward about criticizing Bush for things like lying about WMD's in Iraq, bringing in an additional 15,000 Saudi students right after 9/11, increasing the national debt by $5T [[Obama: $10T), and expanding the police state[[Obama,Trump:ditto). I am also critical of Trump for continuing Obama's policies in Syria. You are instead an apologist for those Democratic, warmongering, proverbial white sepulchers Hillary and Obama.

[Pam]

Clip from Russian TV. [[The program is called 60 minutes!)

https://youtu.be/v3Vn7YVV9ZA

[Richard]

^ there is a lot of truth in what she is saying,I do not trust the UK government,the Russian government or our own government when it comes to that stuff.

The CIA plays games non stop without anybody knowing what is going on.

The first guy is found hanging in his apartment,plausible deniability,you cannot determine 100% that he committed suicide or was hung,only speculation.

This one with the gas leaves a direct finger pointing,or a believable story even though there is no way to prove it,it looks good in the papers.

Russia is doing the exact same thing that Hitler did when he started,taking little countries that nobody else cared about enough to interfere with,between Syria and Iran he could have a heavy influence in the Middle East and in Europe.

That is why the president made a stop in Poland first because of that border,there are some things going on behind the scenes,I think this is posturing with Russia and telling them to back down,but if Miss May does not bolster the support of the U.K. People behind her,it may backfire.

Meanwhile as we are waiting for proof of the whole russian collusion we could be building a big beautiful wall.

[bust]

Clip from Russian TV. [[The program is called 60 minutes!)...

It's one thing to be susceptible to disinformation intended for a western audience, designed for people with the benefit of easy access to wide perspectives of news and information. How incredibly sad when someone is susceptible even when it's intended for local consumption, to an audience saturated in the totalitarian state's perspective.

I'm even starting to doubt it: Are you real?

Why do your posts here so overwhelmingly push the Russian political agenda?

Issue Brief: Distinguishing Disinformation from Propaganda, Misinformation, and “Fake News”
https://www.ned.org/issue-brief-dist...and-fake-news/

[Richard]

^ also interesting how many posts push for a socialist United States but yet disagree with Russia,embracing the exact thing being protested.

[bust]

^ also interesting how many posts push for a socialist United States...

Show us one. With so "many" to pick from it should be easy.

[Richard]

Show us one. With so "many" to pick from it should be easy.

Try reading your own.

Anybody that does not agree with you or others agenda the words come out in order to try and discredit and gain importance.

Saying I get my information from Fox News is a big stretch because I have not even viewed it in over a year.

But that goes back to the words and Hitler's playbook which was also followed by hitlerette when she called half the country deplorables.

Somebody does not agree with one then attack their spelling,choice of news or perceived choice.

You must be a Russian,anti immigrant,racist,and the list goes on if you do not agree with me.

Same thing Hitler did with the Jews,try and convince everybody else that they were inferior in order to justify his agenda,people ate it up out of desperation and then realized to late about blindly following the pack.

People accusing others of blindly following while they are doing the same thing,fake accusations in order to start a investigation based on no evidence,which is illegal.

How about they come in tomorrow and kicked in your door and arrested you because somebody else said something out of spite and you had to deal with the aftermath.

The elimination of due process for others but not for me because I know so it must be true.

Going on two years later and nothing that proves collusion between the president and the Russians,people are posting that they have proof but yet cannot provide it,like a bunch of little mini Egar Hoovers running around.

Millions whining everyday about the White House and who is in it are now experts on how the world should be run but were never aware of the 12th amendment,they are upset about a system that they had no clue about from the start.

[canuck]

Try reading your own.

Anybody that does not agree with you or others agenda the words come out in order to try and discredit and gain importance.

Saying I get my information from Fox News is a big stretch because I have not even viewed it in over a year.

But that goes back to the words and Hitler's playbook which was also followed by hitlerette when she called half the country deplorables.

Somebody does not agree with one then attack their spelling,choice of news or perceived choice.

You must be a Russian,anti immigrant,racist,and the list goes on if you do not agree with me.

Same thing Hitler did with the Jews,try and convince everybody else that they were inferior in order to justify his agenda,people ate it up out of desperation and then realized to late about blindly following the pack.

People accusing others of blindly following while they are doing the same thing,fake accusations in order to start a investigation based on no evidence,which is illegal.

How about they come in tomorrow and kicked in your door and arrested you because somebody else said something out of spite and you had to deal with the aftermath.

The elimination of due process for others but not for me because I know so it must be true.

Going on two years later and nothing that proves collusion between the president and the Russians,people are posting that they have proof but yet cannot provide it,like a bunch of little mini Egar Hoovers running around.

Millions whining everyday about the White House and who is in it are now experts on how the world should be run but were never aware of the 12th amendment,they are upset about a system that they had no clue about from the start.

Richard, we are all a sorry excuse for a thinker. I admire your insight, or incite I should say, and wish you good luck with your Pres-o-dent. You just had a long hard week trying to mop up all the dirt that accumulates around him. No matter what happens, keep rooting for the OnePercenter extraordinaire, he cares a lot for your self made man aura, your backyard immigrant cabana business, etc...

[Richard]

^ I would think that you have enough problems in your own backyard to be obsessed with our currant president,what is your agenda?

Why are you so obsessed with our form of government and jumping on that bandwagon unless you are pushing your Canadian socialist agenda.

I said I could do and not that I did or am doing,there is a distinction between the two and the point was when you dump a lot of immigrants on a community with no place to stay you are condemning them to what they left ,but you already know that and like to twist words to fit what you want to believe .

You can cry about one percenters all you want but it does not take a rocket scientist to see what happens when the money leaves a city,sooner or later you run out of other people's money.

I do not care who is in the White House or allow it to run my life while others seem obsessed with it.

[bust]

Try reading your own.

In other words, you can't find one.

The rest of your post is rubbish without a thread of evidence to connect it to the subject, nor even one to tie it together.

Typical.

And you cry victim.

Moreover, "fake accusations"...

You've several times called me a socialist [[you don't even understand the term), said that I support terrorists, that I've paved the way for terrorists, that I am more of a terrorist threat than the terrorists, and that I'd sooner shoot my fellow American than a terrorist.

LOL! Turn off the Limbaugh.

But Hitler you sure aren't.
He was shrewd, and deft with words.

I think my earlier response can be forgiven. You prove it over and over again.

I'm amused. And pity you.

When you express your opinions in person do people find excuses to leave?

Best for me to step away too.

It's been hard to resist correcting the nonsense you spew.
But no matter. Blather on polluting every thread.
What a rare fool could be persuaded by you.

At their most innocent, your posts are like this guy fishing.
Hey, that looks like Florida!