Fourth manufactured Democrat hoax unanimousy obliterated by appeals court

[LV426]

and what did Manafort give him? nothing of value because there was NO RUSSIAN COLLUSION.

Wrong, boy-o.

The thing of value were the polling numbers that Kilmnik then conveyed to the Troll Farm that directed its efforts specifically from the same states which Manafort shared with him. States that were key to Trump's electoral strategy. So the value to Russia was the information of which states to target (and who within those states to target).

Otherwise, what is the point of sharing any polling data with Kilmnik?

 

[LV426]

ilimnik said the 448-page report by Robert S. Mueller III paints a false picture of his role, including the assessment by the FBI that he has ties to Russian intelligence.

LOL! So the guy implicated in the conspiracy is going to deny it?

WOW! AMAZING!

By the way, you've never read Mueller's report so you don't know what the fuck it says.

 

[LV426]

RThe report focused on his Kilimnik’s connections to Russian and Ukrainian business tycoons and his relationship with Manafort, who served as Trump’s campaign chairman until August 2016, when he resigned.

So much for the claim "no one in my campaign had any contact with Russia."

That was a lie, right?

So since that was a lie, isn't it possible they're lying about other things too?

 

[LV426]

Mueller’s report paints a portrait of a campaign intrigued by Russian overtures

The two men spoke extensively during the presidential race. Manafort briefed Kilimnik on the campaign during an in-person meeting in spring 2016 in New York, according to prosecutors. That August, during a meeting at a New York City cigar bar, Kilimnik gave Manafort a proposal from former Ukrainian president Viktor Yanukovych that would have guaranteed Russian control over a new autonomous region in eastern Ukraine, according to Mueller. They also discussed Manafort’s strategy for winning Democratic votes in Midwestern states.

Wow...so how does this help you? Because this is definitely a quid-pro-quo, which would absolutely be collusion.

why shouldn't Kilimnik pass on the Yanukovych initiative? Discussing a strategy would be normal for
2 old political consultants,but YOU MAKE IT SEEM SINISTER WITH RUSSIAN COLLUSION nonsense

What does polling information from PA and WI have to do with the Yanukovich Initiative?

You just laid out the case for collusion for me.

Thanks.

 

[dukkha]

Wrong, boy-o.

The thing of value were the polling numbers that Kilmnik then conveyed to the Troll Farm that directed its efforts specifically from the same states which Manafort shared with him. States that were key to Trump's electoral strategy. So the value to Russia was the information of which states to target (and who within those states to target).

Otherwise, what is the point of sharing any polling data with Kilmnik?

the polling data is USELESS BY STATE for social media! And Mueller never alleged he did this -no evidence it ever happened.

'Polling data' is such a loose term, but you want to gin it up. Voter rolls are public data including:
Address. Date of Birth. Party Affiliation.
so what was the gain?

 

[dukkha]

Wow...so how does this help you? Because this is definitely a quid-pro-quo, which would absolutely be collusion.

Kilimnik was not a "Russian agent" he worked for Ukraine oligarchs!

You just laid out the case for collusion for me. Thanks.

you IDIOT:

Kilimnik was State Department intel source!
https://thehill.com/opinion/white-h...eport-linked-to-russia-was-a-state-department

 

[rjhenn]

Democrats were illegally spying on their opponent with illegal wiretaps, illegal spies infiltrating his campaign, doctored evidence, and staged meetings to make it look nefarious. If Democrats have to lie, cheat, and break the law THAT hard to still get nothing scandalous, then guess what...nothing scandalous happened.

Just another paranoid conspiracy theory without even a trace of reality.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

 

[rjhenn]

Yes, you pretending away the facts presented is someone else being delusional. [emoji23]

You don't deal with facts. All you've got is GOP disinformation which you are desperate to believe is factual.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

 

[rjhenn]

If you want different counterpoints, try telling different lies.

All you do is lie.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

 

[rjhenn]

This makes absolutely no sense because pre-election polls have nothing to do with a transition that happens after an election.

Why do I get the sense you're just typing random thoughts in mass volume in the hopes you frustrate the conversation?

Nothing that Arminimium says makes sense. He either spouts right-wing lies or he just posts stream of consciousness from his fantasies about how things work.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

 

[artichoke]

So, like most who suffer from TDS, you are also deep in ODS, and promoting the usual lies about him. What money did he spend to keep his college records from getting released?

It's right there in the link, genius. He spent almost $40 million to fight Freedom of Information Act requests and keep his college records from being released. That's a ridiculous shit ton of money to spend for someone who has nothing to hide.

It's against federal law to release transcripts without the approval of the individual involved.

Someone needs to brush up on how Freedom of Information Act requests work.

Where are Trump's college transcripts? What is he hiding?

Did he spend almost $40 million to keep them from being released?

The same question applies to his tax returns.

After Democrats railroading every Trump associate they could manufacture BS "process crimes" against, any reasonable person would lock away his tax returns inside Fort Knox and throw away the key. To do anything else would give them a target-rich environment for another round of lawless smear campaigns and McCarthyite witch hunts.

As far as misinformation is concerned, you appear to be drowning in it.

Says the person who just watched every single bullshit talking point of theirs collapse and get laughed off this thread.

And need we review the gigantic list of hoaxes you fell for again? Or would you like to go ahead and retract your hilariously pot-kettle projection now?

The House did not conduct a trial, just an investigation.

Because the House didn't conduct an investigation. They cherry-picked and coached a bunch of Hillary donor "witnesses" who didn't even witness the non-crime. That's not an investigation. It's a hoax.

You don't legitimize obvious hoaxes. You end them with extreme prejudice and hope the scam-artist demagogues who launched them learn from their humiliation.

The Senate was supposed to conduct a trial

Which they did. Even your own partisan "fact-checkers" say you are lying by repeating this debunked misinformation like an embarrassingly gullible lemming. WHO was "swimming in" misinformation?

So it's the GOP that denied Trump due process.

Exonerating him is denying him due process?

Nice logic there, Socrates.

Your ignorance about everything undermines your position. You have contributed nothing but garbage. Right-wing propaganda and GDP talking points. Nothing to do with reality at all.

Says the guy being contradicted by his own "fact-checkers."

The GOP has been rigging elections through gerrymandering for decades.

Gerrymandering is done by both sides and is nothing like Democrats weaponizing law enforcement to rig elections, welcoming illegal immigrants with voter registration forms, and openly committing mass voter fraud.

They've also been making it more difficult for legitimate, but likely Democrat, voters to register to vote.

By preventing rampant Democrat voter fraud with requirements for free government IDs to vote, like virtually every country with any kind of democratic function on the planet. How exactly does it discriminate against minorities to require a free or $5 ID to vote again? Are you saying they are too stupid to fill out the forms or that they cannot come up with $0-5? Because even the poorest countries manage to pull that off.

View attachment 14393

If not for that, it's likely that Trump would have lost the election, just as he lost the popular vote.

Yes, the .0000001% of Americans who can't afford a free ID being allowed to vote at the expense of the entire rest of the voting system Democrats pretend to be so concerned about would have totally made up for millions of illegal immigrants Democrats help to illegally vote and all the votes they cost Trump by orchestrating open voter fraud and colluding with Russia to manufacture fake evidence, lie to federal judges, illegally spy on and frame him throughout Election 2016.

Try again, impotent wannabe demagogue.

 

[artichoke]

Mueller Report; Page 173 V I: Ultimately, the investigation did not establish that the Campaign coordinated or conspired with the Russian government in its election-interference activities.

How can this co-exist with the left's conspiracy theory?

 

[artichoke]

If they went red, then that makes them red states, you fucking clod.

Repeating the stupid claim won't make it less stupid. Deep blue states taking a momentary break from voting for the left doesn't magically transform them into red states. They will still vote with Democrats in almost every situation, even if you don't want that to be true for your current false narrative.

Few things:

1) Why would that be the case if Trump is as wonderful and terrific as you claim and has done such a "marvelous" job with the economy (that hasn't passed 3% annually despite promises of the tax cut it would)?

The economic records he has broken are many, and a matter of fact at this point. And virtually every midterm election goes this way despite how well or poorly the party in power is doing because the minority party is more motivated to show up at local races to resist the agenda of the party in power, while the party in power LOSES voter turnout because the person they really care about being in office isn't up for election.

Did someone miss school during 8th Grade civics?

2) It's conventional for the President's party to lose by 10,000,000 votes in the aggregate? That's the largest aggregate vote margin since Watergate.

So A LOT of blue state Democrats showed up to vote against Trump. And?

We talk about triggered, TDS-suffering Democrat snowflakes screaming at the sky in their little vagina hats all the time on here. This is not news. Virtually every election that went the left's way was ALREADY SUPPOSED to go their way, by virtue of being a blue state AND being a mid-term election. You easily-manipulated pawns parroting desperate spoon-fed propaganda about a "blue wave" is straight-up comical.

3) Democrats should have done better, historically speaking?

Of course. Using your own logic, if Trump were the cartoonishly unrealistic Disney villain you childish demagogues endlessly smear him as being, wouldn't the results have been better than Democrats only gaining 40 seats out of 435, almost entirely in districts that "had given a majority or a plurality of their vote to Hillary Clinton in the 2016 presidential election," with "Republicans [defending] the vast majority of their rural seats" (see here), WITH Republicans having an unusually wildly disproportionate amount of retirements hindering them, and WITH rampant Democrat cheating?

What's clear is you haven't done the work to be informed here at all. You're just shitting forth bullshit because you are desperate.

Says the person peddling hilarious cheer-leading propaganda about a blue wave that takes literally five minutes on Wikipedia to debunk.

Next.

 

[artichoke]

You have no "established facts". All you've got is propaganda, disinformation, empty posturing and ad hominems. You are acutely paranoid about the investigation into the Trump campaign's connections to Russia. What I understand is that you are completely divorced from reality, being totally consumed by the disinformation from the GOP.

Says the gullible conspiracy theorist who has fallen for every hoax under the Sun responding to facts and evidence with nothing but ad hominems.

 

[artichoke]

A class you have never taken in your entire life, and never will.

Assuming facts not evidence. That's not the conduct of someone who is concerned with the truth. That's the conduct of an angry, triggered snowflake trying to lash out.

Because anyone who did take a PolySci class knows that the largest aggregate vote margin before 2018 was in 1974.

You misspelled Poli Sci, since we're discussing who here is least likely to have ever taken the course.

And not caring about your irrelevant fact in no way indicates lack of Poli Sci experience. It just indicates that you're the only one here too stupid to tell the difference between a lot of blue state Democrats showing up to "resist" Trump at the ballot box in 2018 (hence, a strong showing among those who were already going to vote anti-Trump) and this imaginary "blue wave" you desperate propagandists cling to like a pacifier to console yourselves.

You don't seem to understand anything you're saying.

Says the guy who thinks high voter turnout in already blue states constitutes a "blue wave."

Except that Trump said no one in his campaign had any contact with Russia.

So that was a lie, then.

You're probably just hyperventilating like a gullible moron again over deliberately dishonest spoon-fed propaganda, like Democrats did when Trump said he can do whatever he wants with political appointees and Democrats blatantly misinformed the mindless herd (you) to manipulate them into thinking what he said was that he can do whatever he wants...about anything, instead of what he actually said.

But I'll play along. Show me.

Wait a second, this makes no sense.

Trump wasn't able to establish connections with foreign government ahead of elections? Then what do you say to the fact that he signed a letter of intent in 2016 to build Trump Tower Moscow with the Russian government?

http://cdn.cnn.com/cnn/2018/images/12/18/attachment.1.pdf

Ouch. How inconvenient for your argument.

I say, nice completely irrelevant "counterpoint."



Manafort tried to establish ties with foreign governments as part of his job, as every transition team does, and no one would take him seriously, citing garbage propaganda from the NY Times showing that Hillary had a 92% chance of winning, based on polling that deliberately wildly oversampled Democrat voters to manufacture those results. He provided publicly available polling data to them to show that when the polls weren't blatantly rigged by lying media hacks, Trump actually had a really good chance of winning. There is nothing criminal or even controversial about these actions.

Him having to work around rampant Democrat lying, cheating, and stealing to conduct normal business in no way indicates that Trump couldn't separately accomplish any endeavor of any kind with any foreign government anywhere. That's moronic on its face.

What does polling data have to do with transition team business? Nothing. The transition wouldn't happen until after the election, not before it while the polls are being run.

Speaking of ignorance.

Newsflash: Literally every single presidential campaign reaches out to foreign governments to establish back channels and contacts between the campaign and the foreign government long before they win the election, just so that there isn't a huge disruption in country-to-country relations should they win. This is absolutely standard practice. But rampant Democrat lying, cheating, and stealing was hindering this process.

Comprehend it now? It's still not to late to sign up for that first-year Poli Sci course (notice how people who've actually taken it know how to spell it?).

Look man...there are a lot of things I tolerate from Conservatives on these boards. One of the things I don't is when the Conservative lack of imagination is so apparent, the best you can do is plagiarize what I post and spit it back to me because you're incapable of coming up with original responses of your own.

You're just a hack.

Mocking you with your own words when you contradict yourself is now "plagiarism."

You are officially too stupid for adult interaction.

 

[artichoke]

Just another paranoid conspiracy theory without even a trace of reality.

The people who spent the last four years covering their ears, closing their eyes, and screaming, "Secret Russian agents!" at everything that moves are now calling other people paranoid conspiracy theorists for stating established facts?

You don't deal with facts. All you've got is GOP disinformation which you are desperate to believe is factual.

Say the people who fell for every Democrat hoax under the Sun, to the people whose facts have been vindicated at every turn.

All you do is lie.

Say the people caught lying at every turn to prop up every Democrat hoax imaginable.

Nothing that Arminimium says makes sense. He either spouts right-wing lies or he just posts stream of consciousness from his fantasies about how things work.

I'm sure that's what facts and evidence look like to crack-smoking halfwits.

Next tantrum please.

 

[rjhenn]

So much for the claim "no one in my campaign had any contact with Russia."

That was a lie, right?

So since that was a lie, isn't it possible they're lying about other things too?

Trump lies about everything. He expects the same from his sycophants.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

 

[rjhenn]

It's right there in the link, genius. He spent almost $40 million to fight Freedom of Information Act requests and keep his college records from being released. That's a ridiculous shit ton of money to spend for someone who has nothing to hide.





Someone needs to brush up on how Freedom of Information Act requests work.



Did he spend almost $40 million to keep them from being released?

After Democrats railroading every Trump associate they could manufacture BS "process crimes" against, any reasonable person would lock away his tax returns inside Fort Knox and throw away the key. To do anything else would give them a target-rich environment for another round of lawless smear campaigns and McCarthyite witch hunts.





Says the person who just watched every single bullshit talking point of theirs collapse and get laughed off this thread. [emoji38]up:

And need we review the gigantic list of hoaxes you fell for again? Or would you like to go ahead and retract your hilariously pot-kettle projection now? [emoji23]



Because the House didn't conduct an investigation. They cherry-picked and coached a bunch of Hillary donor "witnesses" who didn't even witness the non-crime. That's not an investigation. It's a hoax.

You don't legitimize obvious hoaxes. You end them with extreme prejudice and hope the scam-artist demagogues who launched them learn from their humiliation.



Which they did. Even your own partisan "fact-checkers" say you are lying by repeating this debunked misinformation like an embarrassingly gullible lemming. WHO was "swimming in" misinformation?

Exonerating him is denying him due process?

Nice logic there, Socrates. [emoji23]



Says the guy being contradicted by his own "fact-checkers."



Gerrymandering is done by both sides and is nothing like Democrats weaponizing law enforcement to rig elections, welcoming illegal immigrants with voter registration forms, and openly committing mass voter fraud.



By preventing rampant Democrat voter fraud with requirements for free government IDs to vote, like virtually every country with any kind of democratic function on the planet. How exactly does it discriminate against minorities to require a free or $5 ID to vote again? Are you saying they are too stupid to fill out the forms or that they cannot come up with $0-5? Because even the poorest countries manage to pull that off.

View attachment 14393



Yes, the .0000001% of Americans who can't afford a free ID being allowed to vote at the expense of the entire rest of the voting system Democrats pretend to be so concerned about would have totally made up for millions of illegal immigrants Democrats help to illegally vote and all the votes they cost Trump by orchestrating open voter fraud and colluding with Russia to manufacture fake evidence, lie to federal judges, illegally spy on and frame him throughout Election 2016.

Try again, impotent wannabe demagogue. [emoji23]

You are totally devoid of facts, as always. Where does your link about FOIA requests say anything about college records? That's just another product of your fevered imagination and ODS. And college records are not federal records, so FOIA doesn't even apply. Your deliberate ignorance destroys your 'facts' again.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

 

[rjhenn]

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

 

[rjhenn]

The people who spent the last four years covering their ears, closing their eyes, and screaming, "Secret Russian agents!" at everything that moves are now calling other people paranoid conspiracy theorists for stating established facts?





Say the people who fell for every Democrat hoax under the Sun, to the people whose facts have been vindicated at every turn. [emoji23]



Say the people caught lying at every turn to prop up every Democrat hoax imaginable.





I'm sure that's what facts and evidence look like to crack-smoking halfwits.

Next tantrum please.

Your delusions are not facts and evidence. All you've got is disinformation and ad hominems.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk