Birtherism, Hillary's emails, and other alt-right delusions

[Unregistered]

Your response is so cute. It’s filled with so many misguided but convenient liberal talking points. The problem you always struggle with is facts. You know those little things that make you look stupid. So here are the facts. First, the Mueller report states Russian interference started in 2014 under the Obama administration (fact). Trump didn’t declare his bid for POTUS until June 2015 (fact). That’s right, according to the Mueller report, they interfered before Trump was even in the picture (fact). Despite credible intel of Russian interference, the Trump administration gave the order to “stand down” and do nothing against Russian interference (fact). Obama only applied sanctions later after the damage was already done (fact). Oh then there’s the dossier. You’re so precious! None of the dossier has been disproven? Man, you sure can pull stuff out of your ass. Mueller himself dismissed much of the dossier as untrue (fact). Furthermore, despite who may have started research on Trump, the Clinton campaign and the DNC paid a RUSSIAN AGENT money to drum up dirt on Trump (fact). I repeat, they paid a “COMPROMISED RUSSIAN AGENT” American tax payer money to beat Trump. Yet Trump showed a “willingness” to accept Russian information and he’s the bad guy? You’re a complete idiot. You obviously never reached a fifth grade education. Finally, I was careful to cite only reputable liberal news sources so you would know that even the liberal media disagrees and dispute your “opinions”. When you’re done making shît up, I’d be happy to debate you. In the meantime, try posting in the fiction thread!

https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/19/opini...ngs/index.html

https://beta.washingtonpost.com/worl...outputType=amp

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/24/u...ssier.amp.html

https://www.wsj.com/amp/articles/mue...ms-11555710147

I created this thread just for you. Now all your whataboutisms are on-topic.

Just for fun I clicked on one of your so-called "liberal news sources" and found this:
Editor's note: Scott Jennings, a CNN contributor, is a former special assistant to President George W. Bush and former campaign adviser to Sen. Mitch McConnell. He is a partner at RunSwitch Public Relations in Louisville, Kentucky. Follow him on Twitter @ScottJenningsKY. The opinions expressed in this commentary are his own

You said, "here are the facts", and it turns out to be an *opinion* piece. From a former Bush appointee and current McConnell bootlicker. When your first reference exposes flagrant debate malpractice, I'm not inclined to read any further. You're going to have to do better than that if you want to continue this dialogue.

[Unregistered]

I created this thread just for you. Now all your whataboutisms are on-topic.

Just for fun I clicked on one of your so-called "liberal news sources" and found this:
Editor's note: Scott Jennings, a CNN contributor, is a former special assistant to President George W. Bush and former campaign adviser to Sen. Mitch McConnell. He is a partner at RunSwitch Public Relations in Louisville, Kentucky. Follow him on Twitter @ScottJenningsKY. The opinions expressed in this commentary are his own

You said, "here are the facts", and it turns out to be an *opinion* piece. From a former Bush appointee and current McConnell bootlicker. When your first reference exposes flagrant debate malpractice, I'm not inclined to read any further. You're going to have to do better than that if you want to continue this dialogue.

Look who’s cherry picking now. No mention of the WSJ, Washington Post, or the NYT? The CNN story was opinion piece based on the facts of the Mueller report. He laid out the timeline of the investigation that completely contradicted every made up shît that you posted. Not
to mention the other stories that did the same thing too. You can start 100 new threads, you’ll still be wrong 100 times. You’re not inclined to read any further because the truth doesn’t align with your “opinions”. I get it. It can be embarrassing. Keep your head up!

[Unregistered]

Look who’s cherry picking now. No mention of the WSJ, Washington Post, or the NYT? The CNN story was opinion piece based on the facts of the Mueller report. He laid out the timeline of the investigation that completely contradicted every made up shît that you posted. Not
to mention the other stories that did the same thing too. You can start 100 new threads, you’ll still be wrong 100 times. You’re not inclined to read any further because the truth doesn’t align with your “opinions”. I get it. It can be embarrassing. Keep your head up!

Here's a free debate tip for you. Put your strongest argument first. When your first one turns out to be bullsh!t most people will just stop reading.

Someday you will learn that deception and lies are not good debate techniques. They might work on sheep who only read headlines or watch Fox News, but anyone with critical thinking skills will just write you off.

If you believe that article "completely contradicted every made up shît [sic]" that I posted, let's hear a point-by-point refutation, with sources. Simply saying that some poorly-sourced reference contradicts "everything" is lazy and deceptive. Right now you're sitting with a solid F in debate class. If you want to improve that, you have a lot of work to do.

[Unregistered]

Here's a free debate tip for you. Put your strongest argument first. When your first one turns out to be bullsh!t most people will just stop reading.

Someday you will learn that deception and lies are not good debate techniques. They might work on sheep who only read headlines or watch Fox News, but anyone with critical thinking skills will just write you off.

If you believe that article "completely contradicted every made up shît [sic]" that I posted, let's hear a point-by-point refutation, with sources. Simply saying that some poorly-sourced reference contradicts "everything" is lazy and deceptive. Right now you're sitting with a solid F in debate class. If you want to improve that, you have a lot of work to do.

Critical thinking skills? Please tell me that you aren’t referring to yourself. This is coming from the guy who still thinks Trump is a Russian agent, the DNC didn’t pay for the Trump dossiers, the dossier is 100% true, Clinton didn’t obstruct justice by destroying evidence, Obama wasn’t weak on Russia, and Mueller would’ve indicted Trump when Mueller said himself that there was insufficient evidence to prove any crime. Nothing you’ve posted in true! Someday you’ll learn that opinions aren’t facts and your ideology is not reality. Being the master debater that you are, you should know the difference. You asked for facts then you criticize and cherry pick the sources because they don’t support your rhetoric. Thats what children do. The “F” I get in debate is for “F”ücking you up every time you post dumb shît. I get it. When facts can’t support your story, you have no choice but to make it up. The problem for you is the Mueller sank your conspiracy theories. He stated in front of the whole world that Trump wasn’t a Russian agent or operative of a foreign and that there was insufficient evidence any crime was committed. For years that’s all you posted. Yet you’re still vomiting liberal lies and conspiracies. But hey, that’s why we love you. Always good for a laugh.

[Unregistered]

Critical thinking skills? Please tell me that you aren’t referring to yourself. This is coming from the guy who still thinks Trump is a Russian agent, the DNC didn’t pay for the Trump dossiers, the dossier is 100% true, Clinton didn’t obstruct justice by destroying evidence, Obama wasn’t weak on Russia, and Mueller would’ve indicted Trump when Mueller said himself that there was insufficient evidence to prove any crime. Nothing you’ve posted in true! Someday you’ll learn that opinions aren’t facts and your ideology is not reality. Being the master debater that you are, you should know the difference. You asked for facts then you criticize and cherry pick the sources because they don’t support your rhetoric. Thats what children do. The “F” I get in debate is for “F”ücking you up every time you post dumb shît. I get it. When facts can’t support your story, you have no choice but to make it up. The problem for you is the Mueller sank your conspiracy theories. He stated in front of the whole world that Trump wasn’t a Russian agent or operative of a foreign and that there was insufficient evidence any crime was committed. For years that’s all you posted. Yet you’re still vomiting liberal lies and conspiracies. But hey, that’s why we love you. Always good for a laugh.

Strawman arguments are one of the prime techniques of failed debaters. Prove to me you're not one of those by providing links to TS posts where I said any of those things in the way you describe.

BTW, ad hominem attacks are another technique used when there is nothing of substance to debate with. If you want to pull up that F grade you might want to dial it back a bit. Your frustration is showing.

[Unregistered]

Strawman arguments are one of the prime techniques of failed debaters. Prove to me you're not one of those by providing links to TS posts where I said any of those things in the way you describe.

BTW, ad hominem attacks are another technique used when there is nothing of substance to debate with. If you want to pull up that F grade you might want to dial it back a bit. Your frustration is showing.

You got me. You figured me out. I have repeatedly asked u to answer simple questions that u refuse to answer. Rather you just go on one of your typical liberal rants without ever responding to questions posed to you. Yes, that is frustrating. So I’ll make it easy for you:

Do you think Donald Trump is a Russia agent or an operative of of foreign government?

Do u believe that at any time the Clinton campaign and the DNC paid for a dossier produced from a foreign operative to hurt Trump?

Do you believe the dossier is 100% true and parts have never been dismissed or proven to false?

Do you believe that Trumps “willingness” to accept information on an opponent is far more serious and egregious than paying millions of tax payer dollars to a Russian operative for the sole purpose of gaining information that was used in order to destroy a presidency?

Do you believe that accusations of Trump tying to cover up his “willingness to accept” help is far worse than smashing tablets and cellphones, bleaching hard drives, and deleting over 30,000 emails?

I could go on and on but this is good starting point. Just 5 easy questions? I hope you’ll answer them but my guess is you’ll come back with a bunch of liberal talking points and whataboutisms.

[Unregistered]

You got me. You figured me out. I have repeatedly asked u to answer simple questions that u refuse to answer. Rather you just go on one of your typical liberal rants without ever responding to questions posed to you. Yes, that is frustrating. So I’ll make it easy for you:

Do you think Donald Trump is a Russia agent or an operative of a foreign government?

Not an agent or operative. I would use the term puppet or useful idiot. I don’t think Trump is smart enough to qualify for the first two labels. It's highly likely that Trump is compromised, given his behavior towards Russia, the Saudis, and others.

Mueller didn’t find evidence of conspiracy with the Russians. No smoking gun or proof of a quid pro quo. But consider that the Mueller report is silent on the counter-intelligence investigation that we know happened, and Mueller declined to comment during his testimony, probably because that investigation is still an ongoing. I think there are some bombshells still to drop. One has to wonder about all those meetings with Putin where Trump refused to allow any American witnesses or confiscated the transcripts. And there’s his well documented habit of shredding hand-delivered messages or crumpling them up and swallowing them. Trump is no genius, but he knows not to leave damaging evidence around.

Do u believe that at any time the Clinton campaign and the DNC paid for a dossier produced from a foreign operative to hurt Trump?

In October 2015, Fusion GPS was contracted by conservative political website The Washington Free Beacon to provide general opposition research on Trump and other Republican presidential candidates. In April 2016, an attorney for Hillary Clinton's campaign and the DNC separately hired Fusion GPS to investigate Trump, while The Free Beacon stopped its backing in May of 2016.

So the dossier was initially funded by the right, and later picked up by the left. I never claimed it wasn’t partially funded by the Clinton campaign, but you jumped to that conclusion so you could unleash your typical anti-liberal attack.

Do you believe the dossier is 100% true and parts have never been dismissed or proven to false?

My statement was that parts of it have been proven true and nothing has been disproven. I stand by that. If you claim something has been proven false, please provide a link to a reputable source saying so.

Do you believe that Trumps “willingness” to accept information on an opponent is far more serious and egregious than paying millions of tax payer dollars to a Russian operative for the sole purpose of gaining information that was used in order to destroy a presidency?

I will not answer a question based on a false premise. Please provide a link to a reputable source backing up your claim and I’ll respond.

Do you believe that accusations of Trump trying to cover up his “willingness to accept” help is far worse than smashing tablets and cellphones, bleaching hard drives, and deleting over 30,000 emails?

If someone is guilty of mishandling classified documents or destroying evidence, they should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. From what I’ve read, however, this has been thoroughly investigated and no crimes were discovered. If you have this evidence, please provide a link to a reputable source backing up your claim and I’ll respond.

So there you have it. I've answered your questions. No liberal rants, just facts and logic. Now do your part and show me evidence to back up your claims. And please stop misrepresenting my positions to make it easier for you to attack them. Maybe you'll pull yourself up to a D-minus.

[Unregistered]

Not an agent or operative. I would use the term puppet or useful idiot. I don’t think Trump is smart enough to qualify for the first two labels. It's highly likely that Trump is compromised, given his behavior towards Russia, the Saudis, and others.

Mueller didn’t find evidence of conspiracy with the Russians. No smoking gun or proof of a quid pro quo. But consider that the Mueller report is silent on the counter-intelligence investigation that we know happened, and Mueller declined to comment during his testimony, probably because that investigation is still an ongoing. I think there are some bombshells still to drop. One has to wonder about all those meetings with Putin where Trump refused to allow any American witnesses or confiscated the transcripts. And there’s his well documented habit of shredding hand-delivered messages or crumpling them up and swallowing them. Trump is no genius, but he knows not to leave damaging evidence around.


In October 2015, Fusion GPS was contracted by conservative political website The Washington Free Beacon to provide general opposition research on Trump and other Republican presidential candidates. In April 2016, an attorney for Hillary Clinton's campaign and the DNC separately hired Fusion GPS to investigate Trump, while The Free Beacon stopped its backing in May of 2016.

So the dossier was initially funded by the right, and later picked up by the left. I never claimed it wasn’t partially funded by the Clinton campaign, but you jumped to that conclusion so you could unleash your typical anti-liberal attack.


My statement was that parts of it have been proven true and nothing has been disproven. I stand by that. If you claim something has been proven false, please provide a link to a reputable source saying so.


I will not answer a question based on a false premise. Please provide a link to a reputable source backing up your claim and I’ll respond.


If someone is guilty of mishandling classified documents or destroying evidence, they should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. From what I’ve read, however, this has been thoroughly investigated and no crimes were discovered. If you have this evidence, please provide a link to a reputable source backing up your claim and I’ll respond.

So there you have it. I've answered your questions. No liberal rants, just facts and logic. Now do your part and show me evidence to back up your claims. And please stop misrepresenting my positions to make it easier for you to attack them. Maybe you'll pull yourself up to a D-minus.

Not a government agent or operative despite you spewing those lies for years. That means it was indeed just your “opinion” not based on any verifiable facts. Yet for years you peddled that untrue liberal talking point because CNN told sheep like you to follow inline. You finally had to eat crow. The rest of your comments is just whataboutisms and more conjecture.

I love how you brush off the dossier as “picked up by the left”. The fact of the matter it was picked up by the Clinton campaign and the DNC. The fact you refuse to admit the seriousness of the DNC paying a foreign adversary for dirt on an American president is astounding to me and shows you’re nothing more than uneducated lemming for the liberal party. Furthermore, Mueller dismissed the majority of the dossier due to the unfounded salacious garbage. I provided u the link earlier.

You won’t answer the question because there is no way to explain it away. This is the biggest problem for liberals. They simply can explain how they can hang Trump when trying to defend the acts of the DNC. They simply refuse to talk about it. There is no comparison between a “willingness to accept information” and paying a Russian operative for information. They just want that chapter to go away.

There was an investigation that proved obstruction by the destruction of government evidence. That is fact. They never sought to charge anybody because you, me, and the kitchen sink knows the people in charge of that investigation supported Clinton and despised Trump. The one whataboutism that we can agree on is that there are current investigations ongoing and maybe just maybe Barr will truly expose the real cover up. But hey that’s just conjecture.

[Unregistered]

Not a government agent or operative despite you spewing those lies for years. That means it was indeed just your “opinion” not based on any verifiable facts. Yet for years you peddled that untrue liberal talking point because CNN told sheep like you to follow inline. You finally had to eat crow. The rest of your comments is just whataboutisms and more conjecture.

I love how you brush off the dossier as “picked up by the left”. The fact of the matter it was picked up by the Clinton campaign and the DNC. The fact you refuse to admit the seriousness of the DNC paying a foreign adversary for dirt on an American president is astounding to me and shows you’re nothing more than uneducated lemming for the liberal party. Furthermore, Mueller dismissed the majority of the dossier due to the unfounded salacious garbage. I provided u the link earlier.

You won’t answer the question because there is no way to explain it away. This is the biggest problem for liberals. They simply can explain how they can hang Trump when trying to defend the acts of the DNC. They simply refuse to talk about it. There is no comparison between a “willingness to accept information” and paying a Russian operative for information. They just want that chapter to go away.

There was an investigation that proved obstruction by the destruction of government evidence. That is fact. They never sought to charge anybody because you, me, and the kitchen sink knows the people in charge of that investigation supported Clinton and despised Trump. The one whataboutism that we can agree on is that there are current investigations ongoing and maybe just maybe Barr will truly expose the real cover up. But hey that’s just conjecture.

I asked for evidence from reputable sources to back up your claims and you provided nothing. I think that speaks for itself. All you did is prove that your new thread is titled perfectly.

[Unregistered]

I asked for evidence from reputable sources to back up your claims and you provided nothing. I think that speaks for itself. All you did is prove that your new thread is titled perfectly.

Come on man, don’t quit on me. Certainly a master debater can come up with something better than that lame response. I’m rooting for ya.

[Unregistered]

Here's a free debate tip for you. Put your strongest argument first. When your first one turns out to be bullsh!t most people will just stop reading.

Someday you will learn that deception and lies are not good debate techniques. They might work on sheep who only read headlines or watch Fox News, but anyone with critical thinking skills will just write you off.

If you believe that article "completely contradicted every made up shît [sic]" that I posted, let's hear a point-by-point refutation, with sources. Simply saying that some poorly-sourced reference contradicts "everything" is lazy and deceptive. Right now you're sitting with a solid F in debate class. If you want to improve that, you have a lot of work to do.

Most people.. with ADHD

[Unregistered]

Strawman arguments are one of the prime techniques of failed debaters. Prove to me you're not one of those by providing links to TS posts where I said any of those things in the way you describe.

BTW, ad hominem attacks are another technique used when there is nothing of substance to debate with. If you want to pull up that F grade you might want to dial it back a bit. Your frustration is showing.

Aren't you the guy who claimed with certainty 2 thanksgivings ago Trump wouldn't make it past Thanksgiving? Grade:F

[Unregistered]

Not a government agent or operative despite you spewing those lies for years. That means it was indeed just your “opinion” not based on any verifiable facts. Yet for years you peddled that untrue liberal talking point because CNN told sheep like you to follow inline. You finally had to eat crow. The rest of your comments is just whataboutisms and more conjecture.

I love how you brush off the dossier as “picked up by the left”. The fact of the matter it was picked up by the Clinton campaign and the DNC. The fact you refuse to admit the seriousness of the DNC paying a foreign adversary for dirt on an American president is astounding to me and shows you’re nothing more than uneducated lemming for the liberal party. Furthermore, Mueller dismissed the majority of the dossier due to the unfounded salacious garbage. I provided u the link earlier.

You won’t answer the question because there is no way to explain it away. This is the biggest problem for liberals. They simply can explain how they can hang Trump when trying to defend the acts of the DNC. They simply refuse to talk about it. There is no comparison between a “willingness to accept information” and paying a Russian operative for information. They just want that chapter to go away.

There was an investigation that proved obstruction by the destruction of government evidence. That is fact. They never sought to charge anybody because you, me, and the kitchen sink knows the people in charge of that investigation supported Clinton and despised Trump. The one whataboutism that we can agree on is that there are current investigations ongoing and maybe just maybe Barr will truly expose the real cover up. But hey that’s just conjecture.

Well done.

These guys have their own set of alternative truths.
Because never Trumper McCain - who graduated last in his class at Annapolis-started it during the primaries it must be legit. Because artisan Obama hacks declined to prosecute Crooked Hillary she must be innocent. Libs don't have to prove a positive, Trump can't disprove it therefore he must be be assumed guilty. The mind of a liberal.

Here is a challenge for the lib.

Provide one reputable source that proves Trump is a Russian asset as you have been treasonously claiming for the past two years. Just one. Then send it to Nadler/Pelosi cause they desperately need it about now, after the embarrassment of the past two years. And you wonder why you guys are losing national (presidential) and statewide (senate) elections.

I actually feel bad for u guys ... we need a credible counterpoint but your side right now is a national embarrassment.

[Unregistered]

Well done.

These guys have their own set of alternative truths.
Because never Trumper McCain - who graduated last in his class at Annapolis-started it during the primaries it must be legit. Because artisan Obama hacks declined to prosecute Crooked Hillary she must be innocent. Libs don't have to prove a positive, Trump can't disprove it therefore he must be be assumed guilty. The mind of a liberal.

Here is a challenge for the lib.

Provide one reputable source that proves Trump is a Russian asset as you have been treasonously claiming for the past two years. Just one. Then send it to Nadler/Pelosi cause they desperately need it about now, after the embarrassment of the past two years. And you wonder why you guys are losing national (presidential) and statewide (senate) elections.

I actually feel bad for u guys ... we need a credible counterpoint but your side right now is a national embarrassment.

Too bad the libs don't extend this guilty until proven innocent standard to recidivist rapists and murders ... Dems/ACLU/SPLC = nexus of crime, lies, hoaxes and chaos.

[Unregistered]

Too bad the libs don't extend this guilty until proven innocent standard to recidivist rapists and murders ... Dems/ACLU/SPLC = nexus of crime, lies, hoaxes and chaos.

Convicted rapists and murderers released prematurely by liberal parole boards should be allowed to vote (for Democrats)! They make our society more inclusive (of rapists and murderers) ... and therefore stronger!