Trump Praises Putin: ‘I Always Knew He Was Very Smart!’

[Desperado]

Question: What line has never been uttered about Obama?
Answer:: ‘I Always Knew He Was Very Smart!’

 

[kaz]

Nice to see at least one liberal outlet has the gumption to question the official story...

The problem with this story is that, like the Iraq-WMD mess [and the Benghazi Youtube video fiasco], it takes place in the middle of a highly politicized environment during which the motives of all the relevant actors are suspect. Nothing quite adds up.

If the American security agencies had smoking-gun evidence that the Russians had an organized campaign to derail the U.S. presidential election and deliver the White House to Trump, then expelling a few dozen diplomats after the election seems like an oddly weak and ill-timed response. Voices in both parties are saying this now.

Taibbi: Something About This Russia Story Stinks
​

An article that every liberal swallowing this story hook, line and sinker should read.​

Also, I think most countries even some of our allies are trying to hack us. I know the Chinese have. Should we expel their diplomats? Yeah I think this move by Obama was all for show. We have our hackers as well and I think there was an election recently that Obama interfered in. So this hacking thing is an unfortunant reality and calls for better internet security and not having computer operators like Clinton and Podesta who are dumb as rocks.

Exactly. Should Obama apologize to Putin for endlessly hacking him?

 

[kaz]

But Obama - has every right to respond to the Russian hacking since he IS the sitting president.

You're under the implication that I said he's not allowed to.

Point taken.

Note - I also never said it was wrong of Trump to try to improve relations

We hack them, we should hack them all the harder. That is how we pay them back. Going to Putin and attacking him publically for what he knows well we do to him all the time is the disingenuous hack Obama and his butt hurt worshippers are. Tell me you think we don't hack Russia. Seriously, tell me you think that

 

[kaz]

The comment comes after the Obama administration announced its response to Russian hacking.

President-elect Donald Trump praised Russian President Vladimir Putin on Friday afternoon, after the Russian leader said he would not expel any U.S. diplomats from his country.

Trump tweeted, “Great move on delay (by V. Putin) - I always knew he was very smart!”

It’s shockingly direct praise from an incoming American president for a Russian leader who’s been accused by U.S. intelligence agencies and President Barack Obama of overseeing hacking efforts aimed at influencing the 2016 election.

More: Trump Praises Putin: ‘I Always Knew He Was Very Smart!’

Is this treason? Is this grounds for impeachment? At the very least - it should be grounds for a thorough investigation into Trump's ties to Putin. This is a Constitutional crisis that Congress must address.

Trump sides with Russia against America, he is a complete idiot.

I am so very disgusted , he is a mentally ill moron.

Lets be clear, Putin is a killer and ex head of KGB not a good person. He locks dissidents up in prison and is a dictator however they are still a world superpower that posseses nukes. However we have come a long way in improving relations with them and achieving peace since the days of Jimmy Carter. We would be wise to continue having peaceful relations with them while western civilization is dealing with other more real problems like the rise of Radical Islam.

Putin has one weakness, he's an ego maniac. So what is your problem with Trump feeding his ego? It's actually a brilliant tactic to do this. Obama's administration on the other hand has been trying to raise the stakes pushing us closer to a conflict. Obama is the idiot, creating more strife even as he leaves office. It's obvious though he's trying to create a mess for Trump to deal with. It's just not good enough for them to glue the white house cabinets shut is it?

Wait --- did you just say "Putin is an egomaniac"???

He's got way more money than Rump or anybody else, but do you see him putting his name in big gold letters on buildings, continually yammering "I'm really rich", staying up all night to send whiny-little-bitch tweets because some reporter dared to pose a pointed question, mocking a reporter's disability because the reporter didn't collude on his lie, or taking a writer to court for estimating his net worth lower than he wanted it estimated?

There is definitely an egomaniac in the equation. Putin is not it. Take one more guess.

You need a good icy enema for that butt hurt

 

[boedicca]

Our Mad Duck President is making a fool of himself with his final Fuck You Agenda as his days as President dwindle down.

And Putin sure sounds a lot smarter, dignified and competent than does Obabble (not that that is very difficult to accomplish).

We regard the recent unfriendly steps taken by the outgoing US administration as provocative and aimed at further weakening the Russia-US relationship. This runs contrary to the fundamental interests of both the Russian and American people. Considering the global security responsibilities of Russia and the United States, this is also damaging to international relations as a whole.

As it proceeds from international practice, Russia has reasons to respond in kind. Although we have the right to retaliate, we will not resort to irresponsible ‘kitchen’ diplomacy but will plan our further steps to restore Russian-US relations based on the policies of the Trump Administration.

The diplomats who are returning to Russia will spend the New Year’s holidays with their families and friends. We will not create any problems for US diplomats. We will not expel anyone. We will not prevent their families and children from using their traditional leisure sites during the New Year’s holidays. Moreover, I invite all children of US diplomats accredited in Russia to the New Year and Christmas children’s parties in the Kremlin.

It is regrettable that the Obama Administration is ending its term in this manner. Nevertheless, I offer my New Year greetings to President Obama and his family.

My season’s greetings also to President-elect Donald Trump and the American people.

I wish all of you happiness and prosperity.

Putin Stunner: "We Will Not Expel Anyone; We Refuse To Sink To 'Kitchen' Diplomacy" | Zero Hedge

 

[Correll]

You've done nothing to support your assumption that PUtin is manipulating Trump.

There's no assumption to it. It may seem like one to you because you don't know what you're talking about.

Former CIA chief says Vladimir Putin is playing Donald Trump as an ‘unwitting agent’

Psychological Manipulation Techniques | Modern Machiavelli

https://www.researchgate.net/profil...Processing/links/56f3c12508ae38d7109bb7e1.pdf

I read the first link. The CIA guy offered NOTHING to support his opinion.


The Cold War is over. NOT screwing with RUssia is not doing something for Putin's benefit.

It is avoiding needless conflict.

Well, read the rest of them and then it'll all come together for you. You didn't expect it all to come neatly wrapped with a bow, did you?

Offering multiple links with no personal summary is generally used as the Logical Fallacy of Proof by Verbosity.


As you are new, I gave you the respect of reading ONE of your links. The CIA guy offered no support of his personal opinion, which was nothing new.


You weren't trying to cite him as an Authority to deferred to, were you?

 

[usmbguest5318]

You've done nothing to support your assumption that PUtin is manipulating Trump.

There's no assumption to it. It may seem like one to you because you don't know what you're talking about.

Former CIA chief says Vladimir Putin is playing Donald Trump as an ‘unwitting agent’

Psychological Manipulation Techniques | Modern Machiavelli

https://www.researchgate.net/profil...Processing/links/56f3c12508ae38d7109bb7e1.pdf

I read the first link. The CIA guy offered NOTHING to support his opinion.


The Cold War is over. NOT screwing with RUssia is not doing something for Putin's benefit.

It is avoiding needless conflict.

Well, read the rest of them and then it'll all come together for you. You didn't expect it all to come neatly wrapped with a bow, did you?

Offering multiple links with no personal summary is generally used as the Logical Fallacy of Proof by Verbosity.


As you are new, I gave you the respect of reading ONE of your links. The CIA guy offered no support of his personal opinion, which was nothing new.


You weren't trying to cite him as an Authority to deferred to, were you?

I presented you with a body of information that you can read in order to understand that what I told you is not an assumption. If you are unwilling to avail yourself of the opportunity to do so, that's on you, but I'm not going to rewrite and aggregate information that is readily available on the Internet simply because it's not before come to your attention nor have you sought it out. All of that is on you; I shall not bear your burden or be your teacher.

 

[Correll]

You've done nothing to support your assumption that PUtin is manipulating Trump.

There's no assumption to it. It may seem like one to you because you don't know what you're talking about.

Former CIA chief says Vladimir Putin is playing Donald Trump as an ‘unwitting agent’

Psychological Manipulation Techniques | Modern Machiavelli

https://www.researchgate.net/profil...Processing/links/56f3c12508ae38d7109bb7e1.pdf

I read the first link. The CIA guy offered NOTHING to support his opinion.


The Cold War is over. NOT screwing with RUssia is not doing something for Putin's benefit.

It is avoiding needless conflict.

Well, read the rest of them and then it'll all come together for you. You didn't expect it all to come neatly wrapped with a bow, did you?

Offering multiple links with no personal summary is generally used as the Logical Fallacy of Proof by Verbosity.


As you are new, I gave you the respect of reading ONE of your links. The CIA guy offered no support of his personal opinion, which was nothing new.


You weren't trying to cite him as an Authority to deferred to, were you?

I presented you with a body of information that you can read in order to understand that what I told you is not an assumption. If you are unwilling to avail yourself of the opportunity to do so, that's on you, but I'm not going to rewrite and aggregate information that is readily available on the Internet simply because it's not before come to your attention nor have you sought it out. All of that is on you; I shall not bear your burden or be your teacher.

This is a discussion forum. If you can't make a point yourself, don't try.

links are for supporting evidence or to source your claims, not to make your argument for you.

 

[usmbguest5318]

There's no assumption to it. It may seem like one to you because you don't know what you're talking about.

Former CIA chief says Vladimir Putin is playing Donald Trump as an ‘unwitting agent’

Psychological Manipulation Techniques | Modern Machiavelli

https://www.researchgate.net/profil...Processing/links/56f3c12508ae38d7109bb7e1.pdf

I read the first link. The CIA guy offered NOTHING to support his opinion.


The Cold War is over. NOT screwing with RUssia is not doing something for Putin's benefit.

It is avoiding needless conflict.

Well, read the rest of them and then it'll all come together for you. You didn't expect it all to come neatly wrapped with a bow, did you?

Offering multiple links with no personal summary is generally used as the Logical Fallacy of Proof by Verbosity.


As you are new, I gave you the respect of reading ONE of your links. The CIA guy offered no support of his personal opinion, which was nothing new.


You weren't trying to cite him as an Authority to deferred to, were you?

I presented you with a body of information that you can read in order to understand that what I told you is not an assumption. If you are unwilling to avail yourself of the opportunity to do so, that's on you, but I'm not going to rewrite and aggregate information that is readily available on the Internet simply because it's not before come to your attention nor have you sought it out. All of that is on you; I shall not bear your burden or be your teacher.

This is a discussion forum. If you can't make a point yourself, don't try.

links are for supporting evidence or to source your claims, not to make your argument for you.

Okay. I'll tell you what. You do you. I'll do me. You keep thinking the silly shit you wrote, and I'll keep on knowing better and that you have no interest in learning something by your own efforts. I think we both will be quite content that way because a discussion topic of which I have information that I've made available for you to know too and that you refuse to get to know by simply declining to read it, is a discussion that need not happen between you and me.

I'm not trying to hide info from from you or make out like I am some genius, but I'm not going to take the time to compile, summarize and then distill everything I've learned over the course of my life every time I want to talk about it. I welcome your engaging me in a discussion, but make no mistake, I'm new to this forum, but I'm not at all new. So if you want to run with me in a discussion, fine, and if you need to do some background research to get up to speed, that's fine too - I can be patient - but if not, I assure you, Sir, neither of us will object to your silence.

 

[Correll]

I read the first link. The CIA guy offered NOTHING to support his opinion.


The Cold War is over. NOT screwing with RUssia is not doing something for Putin's benefit.

It is avoiding needless conflict.

Well, read the rest of them and then it'll all come together for you. You didn't expect it all to come neatly wrapped with a bow, did you?

Offering multiple links with no personal summary is generally used as the Logical Fallacy of Proof by Verbosity.


As you are new, I gave you the respect of reading ONE of your links. The CIA guy offered no support of his personal opinion, which was nothing new.


You weren't trying to cite him as an Authority to deferred to, were you?

I presented you with a body of information that you can read in order to understand that what I told you is not an assumption. If you are unwilling to avail yourself of the opportunity to do so, that's on you, but I'm not going to rewrite and aggregate information that is readily available on the Internet simply because it's not before come to your attention nor have you sought it out. All of that is on you; I shall not bear your burden or be your teacher.

This is a discussion forum. If you can't make a point yourself, don't try.

links are for supporting evidence or to source your claims, not to make your argument for you.

Okay. I'll tell you what. You do you. I'll do me. You keep thinking the silly shit you wrote, and I'll keep on knowing better and that you have no interest in learning something by your own efforts. I think we both will be quite content that way because a discussion topic of which I have information that I've made available for you to know too and that you refuse to get to know by simply declining to read it, is a discussion that need not happen between you and me.

I'm not trying to hide info from from you or make out like I am some genius, but I'm not going to take the time to compile, summarize and then distill everything I've learned over the course of my life every time I want to talk about it. I welcome your engaging me in a discussion, but make no mistake, I'm new to this forum, but I'm not at all new. So if you want to run with me in a discussion, fine, and if you need to do some background research to get up to speed, that's fine too - I can be patient - but if not, I assure you, Sir, neither of us will object to your silence.

Got it, you can't make your argument.


Here's mine.

The Cold War is over. Trump knows that, Putin knows he knows that, and Trump knows that Putin knows that he knows it.


Peace starts jan 20th.

 

[usmbguest5318]

Well, read the rest of them and then it'll all come together for you. You didn't expect it all to come neatly wrapped with a bow, did you?

Offering multiple links with no personal summary is generally used as the Logical Fallacy of Proof by Verbosity.


As you are new, I gave you the respect of reading ONE of your links. The CIA guy offered no support of his personal opinion, which was nothing new.


You weren't trying to cite him as an Authority to deferred to, were you?

I presented you with a body of information that you can read in order to understand that what I told you is not an assumption. If you are unwilling to avail yourself of the opportunity to do so, that's on you, but I'm not going to rewrite and aggregate information that is readily available on the Internet simply because it's not before come to your attention nor have you sought it out. All of that is on you; I shall not bear your burden or be your teacher.

This is a discussion forum. If you can't make a point yourself, don't try.

links are for supporting evidence or to source your claims, not to make your argument for you.

Okay. I'll tell you what. You do you. I'll do me. You keep thinking the silly shit you wrote, and I'll keep on knowing better and that you have no interest in learning something by your own efforts. I think we both will be quite content that way because a discussion topic of which I have information that I've made available for you to know too and that you refuse to get to know by simply declining to read it, is a discussion that need not happen between you and me.

I'm not trying to hide info from from you or make out like I am some genius, but I'm not going to take the time to compile, summarize and then distill everything I've learned over the course of my life every time I want to talk about it. I welcome your engaging me in a discussion, but make no mistake, I'm new to this forum, but I'm not at all new. So if you want to run with me in a discussion, fine, and if you need to do some background research to get up to speed, that's fine too - I can be patient - but if not, I assure you, Sir, neither of us will object to your silence.

Got it, you can't make your argument.


Here's mine.

The Cold War is over. Trump knows that, Putin knows he knows that, and Trump knows that Putin knows that he knows it.


Peace starts jan 20th.

Well, see now, there you go. Nice, but droll try. That post of yours is illustrative of exactly the point I made, and you don't even know it, or know why, because you refused to read what I provided for you. You did not see how easily I manipulated you into foolishly taunting me so that I'd in reply do what it is you want and that I've made clear I will not do. You can call it "taking the bait" seein' as that's what the newsies called it this past election season.

There can be no better illustration of exactly the point I was making about how Putin plays Trump. It's no different than how I just played you into demonstrating that I know what I'm talking about and you don't at all and don't want to, which is fine, but just stop discussing it - at least with me - if you don't want to develop your understanding of the matter. Had you read the materials I shared, you would not have fallen for that and you'd have had something substantive to say based on the content I made available to you.

Now you can keep saying stupid shit to me if you'd like, but at some point you and it will cease to be merely entertaining and become but a bore. You'll know when that happens for I will no longer respond to you.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

The comment comes after the Obama administration announced its response to Russian hacking.

President-elect Donald Trump praised Russian President Vladimir Putin on Friday afternoon, after the Russian leader said he would not expel any U.S. diplomats from his country.

Trump tweeted, “Great move on delay (by V. Putin) - I always knew he was very smart!”

It’s shockingly direct praise from an incoming American president for a Russian leader who’s been accused by U.S. intelligence agencies and President Barack Obama of overseeing hacking efforts aimed at influencing the 2016 election.

More: Trump Praises Putin: ‘I Always Knew He Was Very Smart!’

Is this treason? Is this grounds for impeachment? At the very least - it should be grounds for a thorough investigation into Trump's ties to Putin. This is a Constitutional crisis that Congress must address.

Constitutional Crisis...........OMG......

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Gotta admit, i'd take Putin as our President over Hussein and Hitlery anytime. He's a strong intelligent leader who loves his country. That's much more than i can say about Hussein and Hitlery.

Oh Look, yet another one with raging Vlad mancrush.

Not all male Trump-fans are gay. Just most of them.

But you are not a fan of Trump.

What's your excuse ?

 

[Correll]

Offering multiple links with no personal summary is generally used as the Logical Fallacy of Proof by Verbosity.


As you are new, I gave you the respect of reading ONE of your links. The CIA guy offered no support of his personal opinion, which was nothing new.


You weren't trying to cite him as an Authority to deferred to, were you?

I presented you with a body of information that you can read in order to understand that what I told you is not an assumption. If you are unwilling to avail yourself of the opportunity to do so, that's on you, but I'm not going to rewrite and aggregate information that is readily available on the Internet simply because it's not before come to your attention nor have you sought it out. All of that is on you; I shall not bear your burden or be your teacher.

This is a discussion forum. If you can't make a point yourself, don't try.

links are for supporting evidence or to source your claims, not to make your argument for you.

Okay. I'll tell you what. You do you. I'll do me. You keep thinking the silly shit you wrote, and I'll keep on knowing better and that you have no interest in learning something by your own efforts. I think we both will be quite content that way because a discussion topic of which I have information that I've made available for you to know too and that you refuse to get to know by simply declining to read it, is a discussion that need not happen between you and me.

I'm not trying to hide info from from you or make out like I am some genius, but I'm not going to take the time to compile, summarize and then distill everything I've learned over the course of my life every time I want to talk about it. I welcome your engaging me in a discussion, but make no mistake, I'm new to this forum, but I'm not at all new. So if you want to run with me in a discussion, fine, and if you need to do some background research to get up to speed, that's fine too - I can be patient - but if not, I assure you, Sir, neither of us will object to your silence.

Got it, you can't make your argument.


Here's mine.

The Cold War is over. Trump knows that, Putin knows he knows that, and Trump knows that Putin knows that he knows it.


Peace starts jan 20th.

Well, see now, there you go. Nice, but droll try. That post of yours is illustrative of exactly the point I made, and you don't even know it, or know why, because you refused to read what I provided for you. You did not see how easily I manipulated you into foolishly taunting me so that I'd in reply do what it is you want and that I've made clear I will not do. You can call it "taking the bait" seein' as that's what the newsies called it this past election season.

There can be no better illustration of exactly the point I was making about how Putin plays Trump. It's no different than how I just played you into demonstrating that I know what I'm talking about and you don't at all and don't want to, which is fine, but just stop discussing it - at least with me - if you don't want to develop your understanding of the matter. Had you read the materials I shared, you would not have fallen for that and you'd have had something substantive to say based on the content I made available to you.

Now you can keep saying stupid shit to me if you'd like, but at some point you and it will cease to be merely entertaining and become but a bore. You'll know when that happens for I will no longer respond to you.

Wow. You've declared yourself the winner. That never happens here.


Sooo, new.

The odds you have something new to say to me that I haven't heard a dozen lefties say before, is about zero.

Thus, your links get no love until you earn credibility.

I gave you ONE generous read, because you're new. It was exactly what I expected.


btw, the same goes for video links. Don't even try.

USE YOUR WORDS.

 

[usmbguest5318]

I presented you with a body of information that you can read in order to understand that what I told you is not an assumption. If you are unwilling to avail yourself of the opportunity to do so, that's on you, but I'm not going to rewrite and aggregate information that is readily available on the Internet simply because it's not before come to your attention nor have you sought it out. All of that is on you; I shall not bear your burden or be your teacher.

This is a discussion forum. If you can't make a point yourself, don't try.

links are for supporting evidence or to source your claims, not to make your argument for you.

Okay. I'll tell you what. You do you. I'll do me. You keep thinking the silly shit you wrote, and I'll keep on knowing better and that you have no interest in learning something by your own efforts. I think we both will be quite content that way because a discussion topic of which I have information that I've made available for you to know too and that you refuse to get to know by simply declining to read it, is a discussion that need not happen between you and me.

I'm not trying to hide info from from you or make out like I am some genius, but I'm not going to take the time to compile, summarize and then distill everything I've learned over the course of my life every time I want to talk about it. I welcome your engaging me in a discussion, but make no mistake, I'm new to this forum, but I'm not at all new. So if you want to run with me in a discussion, fine, and if you need to do some background research to get up to speed, that's fine too - I can be patient - but if not, I assure you, Sir, neither of us will object to your silence.

Got it, you can't make your argument.


Here's mine.

The Cold War is over. Trump knows that, Putin knows he knows that, and Trump knows that Putin knows that he knows it.


Peace starts jan 20th.

Well, see now, there you go. Nice, but droll try. That post of yours is illustrative of exactly the point I made, and you don't even know it, or know why, because you refused to read what I provided for you. You did not see how easily I manipulated you into foolishly taunting me so that I'd in reply do what it is you want and that I've made clear I will not do. You can call it "taking the bait" seein' as that's what the newsies called it this past election season.

There can be no better illustration of exactly the point I was making about how Putin plays Trump. It's no different than how I just played you into demonstrating that I know what I'm talking about and you don't at all and don't want to, which is fine, but just stop discussing it - at least with me - if you don't want to develop your understanding of the matter. Had you read the materials I shared, you would not have fallen for that and you'd have had something substantive to say based on the content I made available to you.

Now you can keep saying stupid shit to me if you'd like, but at some point you and it will cease to be merely entertaining and become but a bore. You'll know when that happens for I will no longer respond to you.

Wow. You've declared yourself the winner. That never happens here.


Sooo, new.

The odds you have something new to say to me that I haven't heard a dozen lefties say before, is about zero.

Thus, your links get no love until you earn credibility.

I gave you ONE generous read, because you're new. It was exactly what I expected.


btw, the same goes for video links. Don't even try.

USE YOUR WORDS.

By your own assertion, "never" has just come to an end. It's a new day.

You read one thing, so now you know everything. ROTFL

I am no more going to deign to prove to you what I stated and provided content that supports my assertions than I am going to prove the Pythagorean Theorem, which too has been proven. The fact that you don't know of material does not in any way demonstrate that it's unproven.

 

[Correll]

This is a discussion forum. If you can't make a point yourself, don't try.

links are for supporting evidence or to source your claims, not to make your argument for you.

Okay. I'll tell you what. You do you. I'll do me. You keep thinking the silly shit you wrote, and I'll keep on knowing better and that you have no interest in learning something by your own efforts. I think we both will be quite content that way because a discussion topic of which I have information that I've made available for you to know too and that you refuse to get to know by simply declining to read it, is a discussion that need not happen between you and me.

I'm not trying to hide info from from you or make out like I am some genius, but I'm not going to take the time to compile, summarize and then distill everything I've learned over the course of my life every time I want to talk about it. I welcome your engaging me in a discussion, but make no mistake, I'm new to this forum, but I'm not at all new. So if you want to run with me in a discussion, fine, and if you need to do some background research to get up to speed, that's fine too - I can be patient - but if not, I assure you, Sir, neither of us will object to your silence.

Got it, you can't make your argument.


Here's mine.

The Cold War is over. Trump knows that, Putin knows he knows that, and Trump knows that Putin knows that he knows it.


Peace starts jan 20th.

Well, see now, there you go. Nice, but droll try. That post of yours is illustrative of exactly the point I made, and you don't even know it, or know why, because you refused to read what I provided for you. You did not see how easily I manipulated you into foolishly taunting me so that I'd in reply do what it is you want and that I've made clear I will not do. You can call it "taking the bait" seein' as that's what the newsies called it this past election season.

There can be no better illustration of exactly the point I was making about how Putin plays Trump. It's no different than how I just played you into demonstrating that I know what I'm talking about and you don't at all and don't want to, which is fine, but just stop discussing it - at least with me - if you don't want to develop your understanding of the matter. Had you read the materials I shared, you would not have fallen for that and you'd have had something substantive to say based on the content I made available to you.

Now you can keep saying stupid shit to me if you'd like, but at some point you and it will cease to be merely entertaining and become but a bore. You'll know when that happens for I will no longer respond to you.

Wow. You've declared yourself the winner. That never happens here.


Sooo, new.

The odds you have something new to say to me that I haven't heard a dozen lefties say before, is about zero.

Thus, your links get no love until you earn credibility.

I gave you ONE generous read, because you're new. It was exactly what I expected.


btw, the same goes for video links. Don't even try.

USE YOUR WORDS.

By your own assertion, "never" has just come to an end. It's a new day.

You read one thing, so now you know everything. ROTFL

I am no more going to deign to prove to you what I stated and provided content that supports my assertions than I am going to prove the Pythagorean Theorem, which too has been proven. The fact that you don't know of material does not in any way demonstrate that it's unproven.

Got it. You expect to be able to assert your opinion and have it accepted as proven.

You will fit right in with the lefties already here.

 

[usmbguest5318]

Okay. I'll tell you what. You do you. I'll do me. You keep thinking the silly shit you wrote, and I'll keep on knowing better and that you have no interest in learning something by your own efforts. I think we both will be quite content that way because a discussion topic of which I have information that I've made available for you to know too and that you refuse to get to know by simply declining to read it, is a discussion that need not happen between you and me.

I'm not trying to hide info from from you or make out like I am some genius, but I'm not going to take the time to compile, summarize and then distill everything I've learned over the course of my life every time I want to talk about it. I welcome your engaging me in a discussion, but make no mistake, I'm new to this forum, but I'm not at all new. So if you want to run with me in a discussion, fine, and if you need to do some background research to get up to speed, that's fine too - I can be patient - but if not, I assure you, Sir, neither of us will object to your silence.

Got it, you can't make your argument.


Here's mine.

The Cold War is over. Trump knows that, Putin knows he knows that, and Trump knows that Putin knows that he knows it.


Peace starts jan 20th.

Well, see now, there you go. Nice, but droll try. That post of yours is illustrative of exactly the point I made, and you don't even know it, or know why, because you refused to read what I provided for you. You did not see how easily I manipulated you into foolishly taunting me so that I'd in reply do what it is you want and that I've made clear I will not do. You can call it "taking the bait" seein' as that's what the newsies called it this past election season.

There can be no better illustration of exactly the point I was making about how Putin plays Trump. It's no different than how I just played you into demonstrating that I know what I'm talking about and you don't at all and don't want to, which is fine, but just stop discussing it - at least with me - if you don't want to develop your understanding of the matter. Had you read the materials I shared, you would not have fallen for that and you'd have had something substantive to say based on the content I made available to you.

Now you can keep saying stupid shit to me if you'd like, but at some point you and it will cease to be merely entertaining and become but a bore. You'll know when that happens for I will no longer respond to you.

Wow. You've declared yourself the winner. That never happens here.


Sooo, new.

The odds you have something new to say to me that I haven't heard a dozen lefties say before, is about zero.

Thus, your links get no love until you earn credibility.

I gave you ONE generous read, because you're new. It was exactly what I expected.


btw, the same goes for video links. Don't even try.

USE YOUR WORDS.

By your own assertion, "never" has just come to an end. It's a new day.

You read one thing, so now you know everything. ROTFL

I am no more going to deign to prove to you what I stated and provided content that supports my assertions than I am going to prove the Pythagorean Theorem, which too has been proven. The fact that you don't know of material does not in any way demonstrate that it's unproven.

Got it. You expect to be able to assert your opinion and have it accepted as proven.

You will fit right in with the lefties already here.

Actually, what I expect is to be engaged by people who are well informed enough to know what is someone's opinion and what is not. On this matter, you are not such a person, but you do make me chuckle.

 

[Correll]

Got it, you can't make your argument.


Here's mine.

The Cold War is over. Trump knows that, Putin knows he knows that, and Trump knows that Putin knows that he knows it.


Peace starts jan 20th.

Well, see now, there you go. Nice, but droll try. That post of yours is illustrative of exactly the point I made, and you don't even know it, or know why, because you refused to read what I provided for you. You did not see how easily I manipulated you into foolishly taunting me so that I'd in reply do what it is you want and that I've made clear I will not do. You can call it "taking the bait" seein' as that's what the newsies called it this past election season.

There can be no better illustration of exactly the point I was making about how Putin plays Trump. It's no different than how I just played you into demonstrating that I know what I'm talking about and you don't at all and don't want to, which is fine, but just stop discussing it - at least with me - if you don't want to develop your understanding of the matter. Had you read the materials I shared, you would not have fallen for that and you'd have had something substantive to say based on the content I made available to you.

Now you can keep saying stupid shit to me if you'd like, but at some point you and it will cease to be merely entertaining and become but a bore. You'll know when that happens for I will no longer respond to you.

Wow. You've declared yourself the winner. That never happens here.


Sooo, new.

The odds you have something new to say to me that I haven't heard a dozen lefties say before, is about zero.

Thus, your links get no love until you earn credibility.

I gave you ONE generous read, because you're new. It was exactly what I expected.


btw, the same goes for video links. Don't even try.

USE YOUR WORDS.

By your own assertion, "never" has just come to an end. It's a new day.

You read one thing, so now you know everything. ROTFL

I am no more going to deign to prove to you what I stated and provided content that supports my assertions than I am going to prove the Pythagorean Theorem, which too has been proven. The fact that you don't know of material does not in any way demonstrate that it's unproven.

Got it. You expect to be able to assert your opinion and have it accepted as proven.

You will fit right in with the lefties already here.

Actually, what I expect is to be engaged by people who are well informed enough to know what is someone's opinion and what is not. On this matter, you are not such a person, but you do make me chuckle.

And you repeat your claim that your opinion is not opinion.


You are a standard lefty.

 

[usmbguest5318]

Well, see now, there you go. Nice, but droll try. That post of yours is illustrative of exactly the point I made, and you don't even know it, or know why, because you refused to read what I provided for you. You did not see how easily I manipulated you into foolishly taunting me so that I'd in reply do what it is you want and that I've made clear I will not do. You can call it "taking the bait" seein' as that's what the newsies called it this past election season.

There can be no better illustration of exactly the point I was making about how Putin plays Trump. It's no different than how I just played you into demonstrating that I know what I'm talking about and you don't at all and don't want to, which is fine, but just stop discussing it - at least with me - if you don't want to develop your understanding of the matter. Had you read the materials I shared, you would not have fallen for that and you'd have had something substantive to say based on the content I made available to you.

Now you can keep saying stupid shit to me if you'd like, but at some point you and it will cease to be merely entertaining and become but a bore. You'll know when that happens for I will no longer respond to you.

Wow. You've declared yourself the winner. That never happens here.


Sooo, new.

The odds you have something new to say to me that I haven't heard a dozen lefties say before, is about zero.

Thus, your links get no love until you earn credibility.

I gave you ONE generous read, because you're new. It was exactly what I expected.


btw, the same goes for video links. Don't even try.

USE YOUR WORDS.

By your own assertion, "never" has just come to an end. It's a new day.

You read one thing, so now you know everything. ROTFL

I am no more going to deign to prove to you what I stated and provided content that supports my assertions than I am going to prove the Pythagorean Theorem, which too has been proven. The fact that you don't know of material does not in any way demonstrate that it's unproven.

Got it. You expect to be able to assert your opinion and have it accepted as proven.

You will fit right in with the lefties already here.

Actually, what I expect is to be engaged by people who are well informed enough to know what is someone's opinion and what is not. On this matter, you are not such a person, but you do make me chuckle.

And you repeat your claim that your opinion is not opinion.


You are a standard lefty.

If you read the content I linked to for you, you would know that it's not an opinion. But you won't read it, and I'm not going to summarize it for you. So why do you keep talking about it? Can you not tell that we are at an impasse and there's nothing more for us to say?

 

[Correll]

Wow. You've declared yourself the winner. That never happens here.


Sooo, new.

The odds you have something new to say to me that I haven't heard a dozen lefties say before, is about zero.

Thus, your links get no love until you earn credibility.

I gave you ONE generous read, because you're new. It was exactly what I expected.


btw, the same goes for video links. Don't even try.

USE YOUR WORDS.

By your own assertion, "never" has just come to an end. It's a new day.

You read one thing, so now you know everything. ROTFL

I am no more going to deign to prove to you what I stated and provided content that supports my assertions than I am going to prove the Pythagorean Theorem, which too has been proven. The fact that you don't know of material does not in any way demonstrate that it's unproven.

Got it. You expect to be able to assert your opinion and have it accepted as proven.

You will fit right in with the lefties already here.

Actually, what I expect is to be engaged by people who are well informed enough to know what is someone's opinion and what is not. On this matter, you are not such a person, but you do make me chuckle.

And you repeat your claim that your opinion is not opinion.


You are a standard lefty.

If you read the content I linked to for you, you would know that it's not an opinion. But you won't read it, and I'm not going to summarize it for you. So why do you keep talking about it? Can you not tell that we are at an impasse and there's nothing more for us to say?

Sure, it's not.

LOL!