Hillary: Trump is an illegitimate president

[Lord Temptation 11,209]

4 minutes ago, Bonkers said:

Or maybe everything she warned us about is coming true!? 

Oh yeah, that's exactly what happened.

Shame to those of you who have eaten up trumps lies, distortions and false equivalences, that was his plan and turns out that even here there are people who were daft enough to buy into.  

The worst part is how you sound like you think you're informed experts or something, when you're just repeating illogical garbage from a someone who intelligent people immediately recognize as a lame con-man.  

Having hate in your heart ages you really bad, gurl. It’s not a cute look. Just look at Crooked Hillary, or Creepy Joe Biden 

[Bonkers 30,860]

9 minutes ago, Lord Temptation said:

Having hate in your heart ages you really bad, gurl. It’s not a cute look. Just look at Crooked Hillary, or Creepy Joe Biden 

Why dont you go find a Kid Rock forum to be with your own kind.   

[VOLANTIS 16,504]

1 hour ago, Lord Temptation said:

Gurl give it up already and bow out with grace like a lady. She’s really just a parody at this point.

Hillary or Donald?

[Guest]

4 hours ago, Morphine Prince said:

First of all, The Clinton campaign HIRED Fusion GPS which is an AMERICAN research/intelligence firm in Washington D.C. 

Second, Christopher Steele is an ex-British intelligence officer. 

Third, conservatives were the first to conduct opposition research on Trump by hiring Fusion GPS.

The Clinton campaign and DNC then hired Fusion GPS to conduct opposition research which is the norm of all campaigns. They didn't collude with a foreign government. 

Furthermore, after the DNC stopped funding the dossier, Fusion GPS itself funded the last bits of the research because it was of that much interest to them. 

 

All of that is very different than directly threatening foreign leaders to get dirt on your opponent, or even directly meeting with people to ties with the Russian government who reached out to you in order to influence your country's elections. Which is what occurred with the Trump campaign. And then they proceeded to lie and hide details of these meeting. 

The Steele dossier is perfectly legal and US intelligence officials had knowledge of it. 

The comparison is BS and I will not let anyone spew this misinformation.  

I know Fusion GPS is in America and that Steele is an ex British intelligence, but they went to Russian officials to get dirt on Trump.

I dont care what America considers legal or not, the fact is she did exactly what Trump did. The only difference is she did not do the call directly. She hired someone to do her dirty work.

All progressives agree on this and everyone is explaining that its the same as what Hilary did. I dont want to give you sources because you will deny my source.

[Ziggy 14,148]

19 minutes ago, Faysalaaa said:

I know Fusion GPS is in America and that Steele is an ex British intelligence, but they went to Russian officials to get dirt on Trump.

I dont care what America considers legal or not, the fact is she did exactly what Trump did. The only difference is she did not do the call directly. She hired someone to do her dirty work.

All progressives agree on this and everyone is explaining that its the same as what Hilary did. I dont want to give you sources because you will deny my source.

However I will add that Trump is the president doing it which does slightly change things even if the act was the same lol I’m not saying I disagree with you or anything, just that where they sit in terms of power does change the gravity of their crimes.

[Red 99,200]

If I lost an election because my country’s electoral system is dumb I’d be upset too

[Morphine Prince 109,729]

5 minutes ago, Faysalaaa said:

I know Fusion GPS is in America and that Steele is an ex British intelligence, but they went to Russian officials to get dirt on Trump.

I dont care what America considers legal or not, the fact is she did exactly what Trump did. The only difference is she did not do the call directly. She hired someone to do her dirty work.

All progressives agree on this and everyone is explaining that its the same as what Hilary did. I dont want to give you sources because you will deny my source.

If you're afraid to share your sources it's probably BS.

Here are the facts: 

President Trump has conflated an infamous practice in and among political campaigns — "opposition research" — with foreign election interference like that launched by Russia against the United States in 2016.

Are they the same thing? Is foreign interference just a kind of "oppo research," as Trump said in an interview with ABC?

The short answer: No. Oppo research is part of politics. But the law prohibits American political campaigns from taking "a contribution or donation of money or any other thing of value" from foreigners. The ban isn't limited to money, as Justice Department investigators wrote.

The long answer: Trump told ABC News that essentially every political candidate is willing to accept information that could be of use against an opponent.

"You go and talk honestly to congressmen, they all do it. They always have. And that's the way it is. It's called 'oppo research,' " he said.

What's the difference?

Opposition research is what campaigns and political operatives use against each other. If one candidate running for office dug up a story about something embarrassing her opponent had done, the first candidate might bundle it together and see that it found its way into the newspaper.

https://www.npr.org/2019/06/13/732340501/fact-check-foreign-interference-and-opposition-research-are-not-the-same

The Clinton campaign, via a law firm, did seek “dirt” on Trump and Russia. Steele did rely on Russian sources, supposedly contacts mined from his years as a spy. Steele did actively seek to draw attention to what he had found, though virtually no reporters wrote about his allegations before the election because they could not confirm them. And the FBI did use Steele’s reports to help obtain a court order allowing surveillance of a Trump associate — but that was after Page had quit the campaign.

For some, that may seem like a lot of smoke. But it’s a huge leap to say Clinton colluded with Russians to do this. Instead, you have (a) the campaign hiring (b) a research firm that hired (c) a researcher who spoke (d) to Russian sources. Steele, for his part, has suggested he tried to alert reporters and the FBI because he was appalled by what he had discovered. The closest connection to Clinton is the fact that Steele gave to the FBI material written by Clinton associates

...

 there is no evidence that Clinton was involved in Steele’s reports or worked with Russian entities to feed information to Steele.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2018/02/09/did-hillary-clinton-collude-with-the-russians-to-get-dirt-on-trump-to-feed-it-to-the-fbi/

 

[Snorlax 6,371]

5 minutes ago, Morphine Prince said:

If you're afraid to share your sources it's probably BS.

Here are the facts: 

President Trump has conflated an infamous practice in and among political campaigns — "opposition research" — with foreign election interference like that launched by Russia against the United States in 2016.

Are they the same thing? Is foreign interference just a kind of "oppo research," as Trump said in an interview with ABC?

The short answer: No. Oppo research is part of politics. But the law prohibits American political campaigns from taking "a contribution or donation of money or any other thing of value" from foreigners. The ban isn't limited to money, as Justice Department investigators wrote.

The long answer: Trump told ABC News that essentially every political candidate is willing to accept information that could be of use against an opponent.

"You go and talk honestly to congressmen, they all do it. They always have. And that's the way it is. It's called 'oppo research,' " he said.

What's the difference?

Opposition research is what campaigns and political operatives use against each other. If one candidate running for office dug up a story about something embarrassing her opponent had done, the first candidate might bundle it together and see that it found its way into the newspaper.

https://www.npr.org/2019/06/13/732340501/fact-check-foreign-interference-and-opposition-research-are-not-the-same

The Clinton campaign, via a law firm, did seek “dirt” on Trump and Russia. Steele did rely on Russian sources, supposedly contacts mined from his years as a spy. Steele did actively seek to draw attention to what he had found, though virtually no reporters wrote about his allegations before the election because they could not confirm them. And the FBI did use Steele’s reports to help obtain a court order allowing surveillance of a Trump associate — but that was after Page had quit the campaign.

For some, that may seem like a lot of smoke. But it’s a huge leap to say Clinton colluded with Russians to do this. Instead, you have (a) the campaign hiring (b) a research firm that hired (c) a researcher who spoke (d) to Russian sources. Steele, for his part, has suggested he tried to alert reporters and the FBI because he was appalled by what he had discovered. The closest connection to Clinton is the fact that Steele gave to the FBI material written by Clinton associates

...

 there is no evidence that Clinton was involved in Steele’s reports or worked with Russian entities to feed information to Steele.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2018/02/09/did-hillary-clinton-collude-with-the-russians-to-get-dirt-on-trump-to-feed-it-to-the-fbi/

 

DRAG HA!!!!

[Lord Temptation 11,209]

3 hours ago, Bonkers said:

Why dont you go find a Kid Rock forum to be with your own kind.   

Gurl I don’t have a kind 

And please don’t put your labels on me 

[Guest]

46 minutes ago, Ziggy said:

However I will add that Trump is the president doing it which does slightly change things even if the act was the same lol I’m not saying I disagree with you or anything, just that where they sit in terms of power does change the gravity of their crimes.

That is very true, it does make a difference. But also, Hilary was not just an American citizen, she was a Candidate on her way to win the presidency, and colluded with foreign governments to win the nomination. She colluded with foreign government to get dirt on an American.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Morphine Prince said:

If you're afraid to share your sources it's probably BS.

Here are the facts: 

President Trump has conflated an infamous practice in and among political campaigns — "opposition research" — with foreign election interference like that launched by Russia against the United States in 2016.

Are they the same thing? Is foreign interference just a kind of "oppo research," as Trump said in an interview with ABC?

The short answer: No. Oppo research is part of politics. But the law prohibits American political campaigns from taking "a contribution or donation of money or any other thing of value" from foreigners. The ban isn't limited to money, as Justice Department investigators wrote.

The long answer: Trump told ABC News that essentially every political candidate is willing to accept information that could be of use against an opponent.

"You go and talk honestly to congressmen, they all do it. They always have. And that's the way it is. It's called 'oppo research,' " he said.

What's the difference?

Opposition research is what campaigns and political operatives use against each other. If one candidate running for office dug up a story about something embarrassing her opponent had done, the first candidate might bundle it together and see that it found its way into the newspaper.

https://www.npr.org/2019/06/13/732340501/fact-check-foreign-interference-and-opposition-research-are-not-the-same

The Clinton campaign, via a law firm, did seek “dirt” on Trump and Russia. Steele did rely on Russian sources, supposedly contacts mined from his years as a spy. Steele did actively seek to draw attention to what he had found, though virtually no reporters wrote about his allegations before the election because they could not confirm them. And the FBI did use Steele’s reports to help obtain a court order allowing surveillance of a Trump associate — but that was after Page had quit the campaign.

For some, that may seem like a lot of smoke. But it’s a huge leap to say Clinton colluded with Russians to do this. Instead, you have (a) the campaign hiring (b) a research firm that hired (c) a researcher who spoke (d) to Russian sources. Steele, for his part, has suggested he tried to alert reporters and the FBI because he was appalled by what he had discovered. The closest connection to Clinton is the fact that Steele gave to the FBI material written by Clinton associates

...

 there is no evidence that Clinton was involved in Steele’s reports or worked with Russian entities to feed information to Steele.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2018/02/09/did-hillary-clinton-collude-with-the-russians-to-get-dirt-on-trump-to-feed-it-to-the-fbi/

 

Hilary spent millions of dollars to try to get dirt on Trump by using information from the Russian government. Hilary lied and said she did not fund it and it was later all exposed. This is a fact you cant deny. Then she created this narrative that Trump is the one who colluded with Russia and faked the story. Many sources like SecularTalk and David Packman agree with this and most progressives do.
 

 

 

[Morphine Prince 109,729]

7 minutes ago, Faysalaaa said:

Hilary spent millions of dollars to try to get dirt on Trump by using information from the Russian government. Hilary lied and said she did not fund it and it was later all exposed. This is a fact you cant deny. Then she created this narrative that Trump is the one who colluded with Russia and faked the story. Many sources like SecularTalk and David Packman agree with this and most progressives do.
 

 

 

She didn’t collude. She did get dirt. There is no investigation on her “illegal” act because they aren’t. Trump just keeps repeating it but where is the investigation? Nowhere to be seen because it’s BS. 

Trump was very close to collusion. Mueller decided there wasn’t enough evidence to be indicted. 

Those are the facts. You can keep denying them. Won’t make them any less true.

[Guest]

8 minutes ago, Morphine Prince said:

She didn’t collude. She did get dirt. There is no investigation on her “illegal” act because they aren’t. Trump just keeps repeating it but where is the investigation? Nowhere to be seen because it’s BS. 

Trump was very close to collusion. Mueller decided there wasn’t enough evidence to be indicted. 

Those are the facts. You can keep denying them. Won’t make them any less true.

Trump and Hilary both did the same thing which is getting dirt on their opponent using foreign government information. If you want to go with literal official information, then Trump did not collude according to the US government.

[Morphine Prince 109,729]

17 minutes ago, Faysalaaa said:

Trump and Hilary both did the same thing which is getting dirt on their opponent using foreign government information. If you want to go with literal official information, then Trump did not collude according to the US government.

You've failed to realize the issue isn't with getting dirt. It's how it's done. Trump's campaign even tried to hide details while many speculated Russia had dirt on him that opened him up to potential blackmailing/manipulation etc. 

There is a difference between opposition research and outright collusion, especially done in a way where things could be fabricated. 

Such as this Biden incident where Ukraine is in a position where they need to defend themselves and are probably willing to do whatever it takes. 

Mueller came to the conclusion there was no direct collusion. But the evidence is troubling and they were open to it. It's unethical and this is why they've received so much criticism.