Russians Compromising Trump

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No, liberals are understanding the disclaimers that came with the publication of the dossier. How about mroe concerning is the timeline and circumstantial evidence against Trump and the Administration to be around the collusion with a foriegn state.

If you re going to say that it was ok for the Russians to hack the DNC and publish emails (as most Trump supporters have lauded) then this is ok too.

Please don't be a hypocrite.

All fake generated by the media. Have you no shame?

Except your fake news put your guy in the white house. If you buy this "fake news" then how do you explain that Trump now says there is no Russian money when his sone said 9 years ago there was disproprotionate Russian money in the TO deals? How do you explain the deference to Putin and the excoriaton of NATO by Trump? There is a lot to suggest these claims have at least some merit.

Don't waste your time. There is one maybe two Trumpkins who seemto have nothing better to do then post this fake news meme all day long.. They are either pad trolls or insane. In any case, best to just ignore.

Reality must be hard for you. Do you need to up your anti-depressants?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The dossier is not the only source. There are multiple sources who say that Russia has kompromat on Trump.

How's the weather in Moscow comrade?. Real Americans don't use Russian terms like that. Only Russians and fake news outlets do. So you're either Russian or a CNN paid shill.

wait so now you alt righters don't like Russians?? confused.

Liberals are simple minded and often are...so I understand.

Most conservatives and those on the right don't trust the Russians any more than we trust the Iranians. However we realize the reality of the situation and don't react to talking points and hysteria.

I personally find it funny the DNC got hacked because it was there own poor practices and idiocy. Whats more, the Russians did the job our journalists here should have. But when it boils down to it, they didn't affect the election results. DHS said no voting machines were compromised and no votes were tampered with. There is no evidence the outcome would have been different had Hillary's staff not been stupid and gave their passwords to hackers. Trump would have won regardless.

Let's also add the following:
I'd rather make peace with the Russians and work with them for our interests than go to war. I guess liberals are warmongers - I'd personally would rather see a realtionship built so we can work together on several things to include the following:
get rid of ISIS
work on the space program. As it is, we were launching astronauts to ISS from Russian rockets since NASA's budget was cut.
http://www.space.com/34433-soyuz-rocket-launches-us-russian-space-crew.html

And we still are. ISS is a good thing and the Russians are in there with us, so lets do it together.

If you guys want to live in the past that's great..but as Obama told Romney in 2012...the 1980's called, they want their foreign policy back.

You're talking about hacking. This most recent intel report is about something else -- damaging personal and financial information for blackmail.

Whether we should be working with Russia or not (they're actually pretty hard to work with), we want an independent president who will act in the best interest of our country.

That are unsubstantiated...basically there's no proof. I guess you've been under a rock all day...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No, liberals are understanding the disclaimers that came with the publication of the dossier. How about mroe concerning is the timeline and circumstantial evidence against Trump and the Administration to be around the collusion with a foriegn state.

If you re going to say that it was ok for the Russians to hack the DNC and publish emails (as most Trump supporters have lauded) then this is ok too.

Please don't be a hypocrite.

All fake generated by the media. Have you no shame?

Except your fake news put your guy in the white house. If you buy this "fake news" then how do you explain that Trump now says there is no Russian money when his sone said 9 years ago there was disproprotionate Russian money in the TO deals? How do you explain the deference to Putin and the excoriaton of NATO by Trump? There is a lot to suggest these claims have at least some merit.

Don't waste your time. There is one maybe two Trumpkins who seemto have nothing better to do then post this fake news meme all day long.. They are either pad trolls or insane. In any case, best to just ignore.

Reality must be hard for you. Do you need to up your anti-depressants?

Oh a cute little concern troll.... anything to distract or deflect from bad news about dear leader.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The dossier is not the only source. There are multiple sources who say that Russia has kompromat on Trump.

How's the weather in Moscow comrade?. Real Americans don't use Russian terms like that. Only Russians and fake news outlets do. So you're either Russian or a CNN paid shill.

wait so now you alt righters don't like Russians?? confused.

Liberals are simple minded and often are...so I understand.

Most conservatives and those on the right don't trust the Russians any more than we trust the Iranians. However we realize the reality of the situation and don't react to talking points and hysteria.

I personally find it funny the DNC got hacked because it was there own poor practices and idiocy. Whats more, the Russians did the job our journalists here should have. But when it boils down to it, they didn't affect the election results. DHS said no voting machines were compromised and no votes were tampered with. There is no evidence the outcome would have been different had Hillary's staff not been stupid and gave their passwords to hackers. Trump would have won regardless.

Let's also add the following:
I'd rather make peace with the Russians and work with them for our interests than go to war. I guess liberals are warmongers - I'd personally would rather see a realtionship built so we can work together on several things to include the following:
get rid of ISIS
work on the space program. As it is, we were launching astronauts to ISS from Russian rockets since NASA's budget was cut.
http://www.space.com/34433-soyuz-rocket-launches-us-russian-space-crew.html

And we still are. ISS is a good thing and the Russians are in there with us, so lets do it together.

If you guys want to live in the past that's great..but as Obama told Romney in 2012...the 1980's called, they want their foreign policy back.

You're talking about hacking. This most recent intel report is about something else -- damaging personal and financial information for blackmail.

Whether we should be working with Russia or not (they're actually pretty hard to work with), we want an independent president who will act in the best interest of our country.

That are unsubstantiated...basically there's no proof. I guess you've been under a rock all day...

Trump never denied that members of his team communicating with Russia.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow what a media cluster f. This will be very bad for the media, Dems and liberal activist. No one will believe anything they say.

Honestly, their credibility is already at zero. People couldn't take them much less seriously than they already do.

Yeah, that's it. Liberal and media credibility is at zero. The King of the Birthers is now upset that he is not being treated fairly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't see how the Trump lawyer can claim he wasn't in Prager based on a passport...once he entered Europe, he could hop around 20 odd countries without showing additional passport stamps. Just as a visitor or returning US resident may ha e a stamp saying landed Baltimore, but then drive to NY and Philadelphia

It must have been a long time since you were last in Europe.

They don't check passports on most cross-border trains in Europe or on intra-Schengen area flights.

+1 It's kind of laughable to hold up a passport as proof that you haven't traveled to a country in Europe.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't see how the Trump lawyer can claim he wasn't in Prager based on a passport...once he entered Europe, he could hop around 20 odd countries without showing additional passport stamps. Just as a visitor or returning US resident may ha e a stamp saying landed Baltimore, but then drive to NY and Philadelphia

It must have been a long time since you were last in Europe.

They don't check passports on most cross-border trains in Europe or on intra-Schengen area flights.

+1 It's kind of laughable to hold up a passport as proof that you haven't traveled to a country in Europe.

+1000. Even if they check your passport to make sure you haven't exceeded a visit of 90 days , they don't stamp it

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No, liberals are understanding the disclaimers that came with the publication of the dossier. How about mroe concerning is the timeline and circumstantial evidence against Trump and the Administration to be around the collusion with a foriegn state.

If you re going to say that it was ok for the Russians to hack the DNC and publish emails (as most Trump supporters have lauded) then this is ok too.

Please don't be a hypocrite.

All fake generated by the media. Have you no shame?

Except your fake news put your guy in the white house. If you buy this "fake news" then how do you explain that Trump now says there is no Russian money when his sone said 9 years ago there was disproprotionate Russian money in the TO deals? How do you explain the deference to Putin and the excoriaton of NATO by Trump? There is a lot to suggest these claims have at least some merit.

In the REAL world you need proof, not assumptions from Mother Jones articles or fake news from CNN/BuzzFeed.

Say the people who pushed birtherism.
Also, CNN did report real news. Nothing they reported was even wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No, liberals are understanding the disclaimers that came with the publication of the dossier. How about mroe concerning is the timeline and circumstantial evidence against Trump and the Administration to be around the collusion with a foriegn state.

If you re going to say that it was ok for the Russians to hack the DNC and publish emails (as most Trump supporters have lauded) then this is ok too.

Please don't be a hypocrite.

All fake generated by the media. Have you no shame?

Except your fake news put your guy in the white house. If you buy this "fake news" then how do you explain that Trump now says there is no Russian money when his sone said 9 years ago there was disproprotionate Russian money in the TO deals? How do you explain the deference to Putin and the excoriaton of NATO by Trump? There is a lot to suggest these claims have at least some merit.

No I do not have a guy. Fake news was release by Hillary through out her campaign. At least Trump did not create and manage the fake news. What ever you think of Trump, he would say it to your face. So 9 years ago the Russia bought Trump and he is the Russia sleeper? Sure. The neocons pushed NATO expansion into the old eastern block counties and Ukraine. It was a very aggressive move and against our interest. Do you really want your son or daughter fighting for the Ukraine or Estonia. NATO is a relic from the Cold War and really needs to be reevaluated. You know both democrats and republicans have been pressuring NATO countries to meet their treat obligations. Guess that is nit important to you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No, liberals are understanding the disclaimers that came with the publication of the dossier. How about mroe concerning is the timeline and circumstantial evidence against Trump and the Administration to be around the collusion with a foriegn state.

If you re going to say that it was ok for the Russians to hack the DNC and publish emails (as most Trump supporters have lauded) then this is ok too.

Please don't be a hypocrite.

All fake generated by the media. Have you no shame?

Except your fake news put your guy in the white house. If you buy this "fake news" then how do you explain that Trump now says there is no Russian money when his sone said 9 years ago there was disproprotionate Russian money in the TO deals? How do you explain the deference to Putin and the excoriaton of NATO by Trump? There is a lot to suggest these claims have at least some merit.

In the REAL world you need proof, not assumptions from Mother Jones articles or fake news from CNN/BuzzFeed.

Like Obama being born in Kenya or Comet Pizza being the epicenter of a Child trafficing ring lead by Clinton?

You are pathetic.

[Anonymous]

The BBC report from Paul Wood was very specific and telling. This story has legs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The BBC report from Paul Wood was very specific and telling. This story has legs.

Which is why Trumpkins are spinning themselves dizzy here trying to deny it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No, liberals are understanding the disclaimers that came with the publication of the dossier. How about mroe concerning is the timeline and circumstantial evidence against Trump and the Administration to be around the collusion with a foriegn state.

If you re going to say that it was ok for the Russians to hack the DNC and publish emails (as most Trump supporters have lauded) then this is ok too.

Please don't be a hypocrite.

All fake generated by the media. Have you no shame?

Except your fake news put your guy in the white house. If you buy this "fake news" then how do you explain that Trump now says there is no Russian money when his sone said 9 years ago there was disproprotionate Russian money in the TO deals? How do you explain the deference to Putin and the excoriaton of NATO by Trump? There is a lot to suggest these claims have at least some merit.

No I do not have a guy. Fake news was release by Hillary through out her campaign. At least Trump did not create and manage the fake news. What ever you think of Trump, he would say it to your face. So 9 years ago the Russia bought Trump and he is the Russia sleeper? Sure. The neocons pushed NATO expansion into the old eastern block counties and Ukraine. It was a very aggressive move and against our interest. Do you really want your son or daughter fighting for the Ukraine or Estonia. NATO is a relic from the Cold War and really needs to be reevaluated. You know both democrats and republicans have been pressuring NATO countries to meet their treat obligations. Guess that is nit important to you.

Except we have a formal arrangement with NATO, like it or not. Don't sell them out when you owe the threatening country hundreds of millions of dollars.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No, liberals are understanding the disclaimers that came with the publication of the dossier. How about mroe concerning is the timeline and circumstantial evidence against Trump and the Administration to be around the collusion with a foriegn state.

If you re going to say that it was ok for the Russians to hack the DNC and publish emails (as most Trump supporters have lauded) then this is ok too.

Please don't be a hypocrite.

All fake generated by the media. Have you no shame?

Except your fake news put your guy in the white house. If you buy this "fake news" then how do you explain that Trump now says there is no Russian money when his sone said 9 years ago there was disproprotionate Russian money in the TO deals? How do you explain the deference to Putin and the excoriaton of NATO by Trump? There is a lot to suggest these claims have at least some merit.

Don't waste your time. There is one maybe two Trumpkins who seemto have nothing better to do then post this fake news meme all day long.. They are either pad trolls or insane. In any case, best to just ignore.

Reality must be hard for you. Do you need to up your anti-depressants?

Oh a cute little concern troll.... anything to distract or deflect from bad news about dear leader.

Just like distracting from the real issue with #pissgate stories. Well done CNN/BuzzFeed...you've made the media almost irrelevant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No, liberals are understanding the disclaimers that came with the publication of the dossier. How about mroe concerning is the timeline and circumstantial evidence against Trump and the Administration to be around the collusion with a foriegn state.

If you re going to say that it was ok for the Russians to hack the DNC and publish emails (as most Trump supporters have lauded) then this is ok too.

Please don't be a hypocrite.

All fake generated by the media. Have you no shame?

Except your fake news put your guy in the white house. If you buy this "fake news" then how do you explain that Trump now says there is no Russian money when his sone said 9 years ago there was disproprotionate Russian money in the TO deals? How do you explain the deference to Putin and the excoriaton of NATO by Trump? There is a lot to suggest these claims have at least some merit.

Don't waste your time. There is one maybe two Trumpkins who seemto have nothing better to do then post this fake news meme all day long.. They are either pad trolls or insane. In any case, best to just ignore.

Reality must be hard for you. Do you need to up your anti-depressants?

Oh a cute little concern troll.... anything to distract or deflect from bad news about dear leader.

Just like distracting from the real issue with #pissgate stories. Well done CNN/BuzzFeed...you've made the media almost irrelevant.

It's hard for you to believe that CNN didn't say anything direct or vulgar in their report, isn't it? You're blaming them anyway.