Why Is Trump At War With Everyone...Except Russia?

[EvilCat Breath]

All the Russia love in this thread is AMAZING. When has Russia EVER done anything to benefit the U.S.? They just hacked the DNC and undertook an operation to undermine our Presidential elections... and you want to give Putin a reach around. WTF is wrong with you people?

Russia warned us that the Tsaranev brothers, refugees were terrorists that had gone to a Chechnyn training camp for bomb making.

Our intelligence disagreed. These were nice quiet refugees.

So far Russia has tried to help us and out intelligence agencies got the Boston Marathon bombed.

Did you really not know or are you pretending to be ignorant.

Russia’s Warning on Bombings Suspect Sets Off a Debate

 

[Harry Dresden]

Harry Dresden

Do you believe that Trump is filling his cabinet with individuals similar to that of the Bush II Administration, yes or no?

some of them yes....now your turn.....

 

[Contumacious]

So called liberals are all suddenly in love with the intelligence apparatus. Ain't love grand.

I'm not a liberal... but I do trust our intelligence agencies over Putin, Russia, and WikiLeaks. Putin and Russia categorically denied they hacked the DNC... now Trump admits he has seen the intelligence report and that they did it. So again, why should we trust Russia and Putin over our own intelligence agencies??

Not a liberal? Not very smart either.

Not very smart is a person that hasn't seen the evidence and wants to use sources of people that haven't seen the evidence either as their source of proof. Again, not a single person that has seen the evidence still questions whether it was the Russians. So... hello, who is not very smart?

Correction

No a single NEUTRAL Person has seen the "evidence" (wink, wink)


.

A neutral person? TRUMP WHO DOESN'T WANT IT TO BE THE RUSSIANS AND WHOM HAD PUBLICLY QUESTIONED THE FINDINGS BEFORE SEEING THE EVIDENCE, NOW SAYS IT WAS THE RUSSIANS.

What is so hard for you guys to understand? Literally, the candidate that you support tells you that the Russians did it... and you don't believe him. He told you he was going to lock Hillary up and you believed that...

Excuse me , my confused opponent.

He had to PRETEND to believe that the report was genuine lest his cabinet nominees would have been held hostage.

That's live in the swamp.

.

 

[Lewdog]

All the Russia love in this thread is AMAZING. When has Russia EVER done anything to benefit the U.S.? They just hacked the DNC and undertook an operation to undermine our Presidential elections... and you want to give Putin a reach around. WTF is wrong with you people?

Russia warned us that the Tsaranev brothers, refugees were terrorists that had gone to a Chechnyn training camp for bomb making.

Our intelligence disagreed. These were nice quiet refugees.

So far Russia has tried to help us and out intelligence agencies got the Boston Marathon bombed.

Did you really not know or are you pretending to be ignorant.

Russia’s Warning on Bombings Suspect Sets Off a Debate

Those kids where Chechnya refugees, of whom Russia has been bombing and killing civilians of. I can rightfully understand the fact that the U.S intelligence agencies might have some apprehension about how truthful they were, but in this case if the Russians did provide the info to the U.S., they made a bad move.

 

[Lewdog]

I'm not a liberal... but I do trust our intelligence agencies over Putin, Russia, and WikiLeaks. Putin and Russia categorically denied they hacked the DNC... now Trump admits he has seen the intelligence report and that they did it. So again, why should we trust Russia and Putin over our own intelligence agencies??

Not a liberal? Not very smart either.

Not very smart is a person that hasn't seen the evidence and wants to use sources of people that haven't seen the evidence either as their source of proof. Again, not a single person that has seen the evidence still questions whether it was the Russians. So... hello, who is not very smart?

Correction

No a single NEUTRAL Person has seen the "evidence" (wink, wink)


.

A neutral person? TRUMP WHO DOESN'T WANT IT TO BE THE RUSSIANS AND WHOM HAD PUBLICLY QUESTIONED THE FINDINGS BEFORE SEEING THE EVIDENCE, NOW SAYS IT WAS THE RUSSIANS.

What is so hard for you guys to understand? Literally, the candidate that you support tells you that the Russians did it... and you don't believe him. He told you he was going to lock Hillary up and you believed that...

Excuse me , my confused opponent.

He had to PRETEND to believe that the report was genuine lest his cabinet nominees would have been held hostage.

That's live in the swamp.

.

So you are making up excuses... I love it. You have nothing other than that. So far Sessions and Tillerson have both said it was the Russians as well. So Trump, Tillerson, Preibus, Sessions... have you heard anyone with any type of connections to the federal government and the actually evidence say it wasn't the Russians? Anyone? Nope... try again.

 

[MarcATL]

some of them yes....now your turn.....

It's like pulling teeth with you. I see you are trying your damnedest to avoid the simple truth that ALL, not SOME, of Trump's Cabinet is a revision of Bush II, cept these guys are bigger, badder, know what they're doing and are more ruthless.

If you see that formula as one for success then I'd like to interest you in a bridge I have for sale in Brooklyn.

 

[Contumacious]

Not a liberal? Not very smart either.

Not very smart is a person that hasn't seen the evidence and wants to use sources of people that haven't seen the evidence either as their source of proof. Again, not a single person that has seen the evidence still questions whether it was the Russians. So... hello, who is not very smart?

Correction

No a single NEUTRAL Person has seen the "evidence" (wink, wink)


.

A neutral person? TRUMP WHO DOESN'T WANT IT TO BE THE RUSSIANS AND WHOM HAD PUBLICLY QUESTIONED THE FINDINGS BEFORE SEEING THE EVIDENCE, NOW SAYS IT WAS THE RUSSIANS.

What is so hard for you guys to understand? Literally, the candidate that you support tells you that the Russians did it... and you don't believe him. He told you he was going to lock Hillary up and you believed that...

Excuse me , my confused opponent.

He had to PRETEND to believe that the report was genuine lest his cabinet nominees would have been held hostage.

That's live in the swamp.

.

So you are making up excuses... I love it. You have nothing other than that. So far Sessions and Tillerson have both said it was the Russians as well. So Trump, Tillerson, Preibus, Sessions... have you heard anyone with any type of connections to the federal government and the actually evidence say it wasn't the Russians? Anyone? Nope... try again.

Again, when I read the opinion of a NEUTRAL THIRD PARTY who is no in a position to COERCE nor in one where he can be COERCED

.

 

[Lewdog]

Not very smart is a person that hasn't seen the evidence and wants to use sources of people that haven't seen the evidence either as their source of proof. Again, not a single person that has seen the evidence still questions whether it was the Russians. So... hello, who is not very smart?

Correction

No a single NEUTRAL Person has seen the "evidence" (wink, wink)


.

A neutral person? TRUMP WHO DOESN'T WANT IT TO BE THE RUSSIANS AND WHOM HAD PUBLICLY QUESTIONED THE FINDINGS BEFORE SEEING THE EVIDENCE, NOW SAYS IT WAS THE RUSSIANS.

What is so hard for you guys to understand? Literally, the candidate that you support tells you that the Russians did it... and you don't believe him. He told you he was going to lock Hillary up and you believed that...

Excuse me , my confused opponent.

He had to PRETEND to believe that the report was genuine lest his cabinet nominees would have been held hostage.

That's live in the swamp.

.

So you are making up excuses... I love it. You have nothing other than that. So far Sessions and Tillerson have both said it was the Russians as well. So Trump, Tillerson, Preibus, Sessions... have you heard anyone with any type of connections to the federal government and the actually evidence say it wasn't the Russians? Anyone? Nope... try again.

Again, when I read the opinion on a NEUTRAL THIRD PARTY who is no in a position to COERCE nor in one where he can be COERCED

.

You mean like the Republican Senators in Congress who are on the intelligence committee?

 

[Contumacious]

Correction

No a single NEUTRAL Person has seen the "evidence" (wink, wink)


.

A neutral person? TRUMP WHO DOESN'T WANT IT TO BE THE RUSSIANS AND WHOM HAD PUBLICLY QUESTIONED THE FINDINGS BEFORE SEEING THE EVIDENCE, NOW SAYS IT WAS THE RUSSIANS.

What is so hard for you guys to understand? Literally, the candidate that you support tells you that the Russians did it... and you don't believe him. He told you he was going to lock Hillary up and you believed that...

Excuse me , my confused opponent.

He had to PRETEND to believe that the report was genuine lest his cabinet nominees would have been held hostage.

That's live in the swamp.

.

So you are making up excuses... I love it. You have nothing other than that. So far Sessions and Tillerson have both said it was the Russians as well. So Trump, Tillerson, Preibus, Sessions... have you heard anyone with any type of connections to the federal government and the actually evidence say it wasn't the Russians? Anyone? Nope... try again.

Again, when I read the opinion on a NEUTRAL THIRD PARTY who is no in a position to COERCE nor in one where he can be COERCED

.

You mean like the Republican Senators in Congress who are on the intelligence committee?

Some of those Senators are beholden to special interest groups like war profiteers, American Likudnicks, bankers, etc.

.

 

[Harry Dresden]

some of them yes....now your turn.....

It's like pulling teeth with you. I see you are trying your damnedest to avoid the simple truth that ALL, not SOME, of Trump's Cabinet is a revision of Bush II, cept these guys are bigger, badder, know what they're doing and are more ruthless.

If you see that formula as one for success then I'd like to interest you in a bridge I have for sale in Brooklyn.

i gave you an answer marc,you just cant accept it because it doesnt match up with yours.....now answer my question....

 

[Lewdog]

A neutral person? TRUMP WHO DOESN'T WANT IT TO BE THE RUSSIANS AND WHOM HAD PUBLICLY QUESTIONED THE FINDINGS BEFORE SEEING THE EVIDENCE, NOW SAYS IT WAS THE RUSSIANS.

What is so hard for you guys to understand? Literally, the candidate that you support tells you that the Russians did it... and you don't believe him. He told you he was going to lock Hillary up and you believed that...

Excuse me , my confused opponent.

He had to PRETEND to believe that the report was genuine lest his cabinet nominees would have been held hostage.

That's live in the swamp.

.

So you are making up excuses... I love it. You have nothing other than that. So far Sessions and Tillerson have both said it was the Russians as well. So Trump, Tillerson, Preibus, Sessions... have you heard anyone with any type of connections to the federal government and the actually evidence say it wasn't the Russians? Anyone? Nope... try again.

Again, when I read the opinion on a NEUTRAL THIRD PARTY who is no in a position to COERCE nor in one where he can be COERCED

.

You mean like the Republican Senators in Congress who are on the intelligence committee?

Some of those Senators are beholden to special interest groups like war profiteers, American Likudnicks, bankers, etc.

.

"Some." Thank you for validating my point.

 

[MarcATL]

i gave you an answer marc,you just cant accept it because it doesnt match up with yours.....now answer my question....

I did answer you. It's a resounding no. I don't see how doing the same thing a 3rd and 4th time in 50 years will yield different results.

Now, can I interest you in a bridge I have for sale in Brooklyn? I'll give you a really good deal.

 

[Constructive Anarchy]

Not a liberal? Not very smart either.

Not very smart is a person that hasn't seen the evidence and wants to use sources of people that haven't seen the evidence either as their source of proof. Again, not a single person that has seen the evidence still questions whether it was the Russians. So... hello, who is not very smart?

Correction

No a single NEUTRAL Person has seen the "evidence" (wink, wink)


.

A neutral person? TRUMP WHO DOESN'T WANT IT TO BE THE RUSSIANS AND WHOM HAD PUBLICLY QUESTIONED THE FINDINGS BEFORE SEEING THE EVIDENCE, NOW SAYS IT WAS THE RUSSIANS.

What is so hard for you guys to understand? Literally, the candidate that you support tells you that the Russians did it... and you don't believe him. He told you he was going to lock Hillary up and you believed that...

Excuse me , my confused opponent.

He had to PRETEND to believe that the report was genuine lest his cabinet nominees would have been held hostage.

That's live in the swamp.

.

So you are making up excuses... I love it. You have nothing other than that. So far Sessions and Tillerson have both said it was the Russians as well. So Trump, Tillerson, Preibus, Sessions... have you heard anyone with any type of connections to the federal government and the actually evidence say it wasn't the Russians? Anyone? Nope... try again.

Waiting for the Obama Administration to release some kind of evidence of actual evidence...........

 

[Constructive Anarchy]

Excuse me , my confused opponent.

He had to PRETEND to believe that the report was genuine lest his cabinet nominees would have been held hostage.

That's live in the swamp.

.

So you are making up excuses... I love it. You have nothing other than that. So far Sessions and Tillerson have both said it was the Russians as well. So Trump, Tillerson, Preibus, Sessions... have you heard anyone with any type of connections to the federal government and the actually evidence say it wasn't the Russians? Anyone? Nope... try again.

Again, when I read the opinion on a NEUTRAL THIRD PARTY who is no in a position to COERCE nor in one where he can be COERCED

.

You mean like the Republican Senators in Congress who are on the intelligence committee?

Some of those Senators are beholden to special interest groups like war profiteers, American Likudnicks, bankers, etc.

.

"Some." Thank you for validating my point.

You have yet to make one.

 

[Lewdog]

Not very smart is a person that hasn't seen the evidence and wants to use sources of people that haven't seen the evidence either as their source of proof. Again, not a single person that has seen the evidence still questions whether it was the Russians. So... hello, who is not very smart?

Correction

No a single NEUTRAL Person has seen the "evidence" (wink, wink)


.

A neutral person? TRUMP WHO DOESN'T WANT IT TO BE THE RUSSIANS AND WHOM HAD PUBLICLY QUESTIONED THE FINDINGS BEFORE SEEING THE EVIDENCE, NOW SAYS IT WAS THE RUSSIANS.

What is so hard for you guys to understand? Literally, the candidate that you support tells you that the Russians did it... and you don't believe him. He told you he was going to lock Hillary up and you believed that...

Excuse me , my confused opponent.

He had to PRETEND to believe that the report was genuine lest his cabinet nominees would have been held hostage.

That's live in the swamp.

.

So you are making up excuses... I love it. You have nothing other than that. So far Sessions and Tillerson have both said it was the Russians as well. So Trump, Tillerson, Preibus, Sessions... have you heard anyone with any type of connections to the federal government and the actually evidence say it wasn't the Russians? Anyone? Nope... try again.

Waiting for the Obama Administration to release some kind of evidence of actual evidence...........

Are you going to apply for a job in an intelligence agency, get a top secret clearance, and then see the evidence? Let me know when you do.

 

[Constructive Anarchy]

Correction

No a single NEUTRAL Person has seen the "evidence" (wink, wink)


.

A neutral person? TRUMP WHO DOESN'T WANT IT TO BE THE RUSSIANS AND WHOM HAD PUBLICLY QUESTIONED THE FINDINGS BEFORE SEEING THE EVIDENCE, NOW SAYS IT WAS THE RUSSIANS.

What is so hard for you guys to understand? Literally, the candidate that you support tells you that the Russians did it... and you don't believe him. He told you he was going to lock Hillary up and you believed that...

Excuse me , my confused opponent.

He had to PRETEND to believe that the report was genuine lest his cabinet nominees would have been held hostage.

That's live in the swamp.

.

So you are making up excuses... I love it. You have nothing other than that. So far Sessions and Tillerson have both said it was the Russians as well. So Trump, Tillerson, Preibus, Sessions... have you heard anyone with any type of connections to the federal government and the actually evidence say it wasn't the Russians? Anyone? Nope... try again.

Waiting for the Obama Administration to release some kind of evidence of actual evidence...........

Are you going to apply for a job in an intelligence agency, get a top secret clearance, and then see the evidence? Let me know when you do.

Have you found the weapons of mass destruction in Iraq yet?

 

[Lewdog]

A neutral person? TRUMP WHO DOESN'T WANT IT TO BE THE RUSSIANS AND WHOM HAD PUBLICLY QUESTIONED THE FINDINGS BEFORE SEEING THE EVIDENCE, NOW SAYS IT WAS THE RUSSIANS.

What is so hard for you guys to understand? Literally, the candidate that you support tells you that the Russians did it... and you don't believe him. He told you he was going to lock Hillary up and you believed that...

Excuse me , my confused opponent.

He had to PRETEND to believe that the report was genuine lest his cabinet nominees would have been held hostage.

That's live in the swamp.

.

So you are making up excuses... I love it. You have nothing other than that. So far Sessions and Tillerson have both said it was the Russians as well. So Trump, Tillerson, Preibus, Sessions... have you heard anyone with any type of connections to the federal government and the actually evidence say it wasn't the Russians? Anyone? Nope... try again.

Waiting for the Obama Administration to release some kind of evidence of actual evidence...........

Are you going to apply for a job in an intelligence agency, get a top secret clearance, and then see the evidence? Let me know when you do.

Have you found the weapons of mass destruction in Iraq yet?

When was that? I have a bad memory... can you tell me how many years ago that was?

 

[yiostheoy]

I mean, he's (Donald Trump) at war with the intelligence committee, he's at war with the press, he's at war with Republicans & Democrats that are critical of him, and the only people he isn't at war with - are the Russians. He LIKES the Russians.

Something is very wrong here. Why is that?

It's payback time.

And Trump is right about CNN and BBC -- they are both a pile of crap.

 

[Constructive Anarchy]

Excuse me , my confused opponent.

He had to PRETEND to believe that the report was genuine lest his cabinet nominees would have been held hostage.

That's live in the swamp.

.

So you are making up excuses... I love it. You have nothing other than that. So far Sessions and Tillerson have both said it was the Russians as well. So Trump, Tillerson, Preibus, Sessions... have you heard anyone with any type of connections to the federal government and the actually evidence say it wasn't the Russians? Anyone? Nope... try again.

Waiting for the Obama Administration to release some kind of evidence of actual evidence...........

Are you going to apply for a job in an intelligence agency, get a top secret clearance, and then see the evidence? Let me know when you do.

Have you found the weapons of mass destruction in Iraq yet?

When was that? I have a bad memory... can you tell me how many years ago that was?

Ancient history. That's all changed now. They never lie. And of course a last minute cobbled together generic report based on unsubstantiated anecdotes couldn't possibly appear to be politically motivated. Now could it.

 

[Lewdog]

So you are making up excuses... I love it. You have nothing other than that. So far Sessions and Tillerson have both said it was the Russians as well. So Trump, Tillerson, Preibus, Sessions... have you heard anyone with any type of connections to the federal government and the actually evidence say it wasn't the Russians? Anyone? Nope... try again.

Waiting for the Obama Administration to release some kind of evidence of actual evidence...........

Are you going to apply for a job in an intelligence agency, get a top secret clearance, and then see the evidence? Let me know when you do.

Have you found the weapons of mass destruction in Iraq yet?

When was that? I have a bad memory... can you tell me how many years ago that was?

Ancient history. That's all changed now. They never lie. And of course a last minute cobbled together generic report based on unsubstantiated anecdotes couldn't possibly appear to be politically motivated. Now could it.

How long ago was it? How many leaders of the Federal intelligence agencies were heads of their agencies at that time?