Posted by tangplay on 7/17/2018 9:12:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 7/17/2018 8:49:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 7/17/2018 8:45:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 7/17/2018 8:35:00 PM (view original):

Posted by DoctorKz on 7/17/2018 8:09:00 PM (view original):

Posted by The Taint on 7/17/2018 7:57:00 PM (view original):

Posted by DoctorKz on 7/17/2018 7:54:00 PM (view original):
Who knows what Trump and Putin's conversation was like. Putin, like Little Rocket Man, wants an audience, legitimacy, the means to make propaganda. So maybe Donald says I make nice for you in front of the cameras, in exchange for a toning down in Syria, or perhaps help on the world's stage to get NK to straighten up and fly right. The media will eat me alive, but they hate me anyway. I take the heat, so what? Perhaps better than escalating tensions between Washington and Moscow. Trump knows Putin is gonna work in the shadows, he's KGB. Why fan the flames? Perhaps Donald cut a better deal than we know...then again, perhaps he's a patsy...

LOL...you really think Donald could cut a killer deal and keep it quiet? Hell no.

Compared to the guy he replaced, yes...like I said, who knows? Surely he didn't go into that meeting to come out embarrassed. But go ahead, underestimate him. Again...

I deal with people I don’t necessarily like frequently as part of my job but in negotiations you sometimes have to eat it for the greater good.

I agree with Doc. No reason to anger Russia. We need all the allies we can get when dealing with Radical Islam.

If you think Putin is less of a threat than radical Islam you are the biggest moron on this forum. This may have been the dumbest thing you have ever said on this thread and that's saying something.

I 100% think so. When has Putin attacked us? Radical Islam caused 9/11, deaths in Afghanistan and Iraq. To me that is the biggest threat. And like bad luck you would never say that to my face, you are a coward. In terms of espionage and such, China is a bigger threat than Russia as well.

Thank you for making my point yet again that my 14 year old is smarter than you.

He meddled with our election?

Radical islam isn't equal to terrorism. Terrorists are one small branch on the radical islam tree. And those wars in Iraq and Afghanistan went real well didn't they? You cannot fight an idea.

Putin's Russia is directly at odds with American interests. He is trying to tear our country down. Additionally, he has a very corrupt government where rivals get killed.

How would you fight radical islam?

What was that virgin? Sorry, I missed that.

You are a coward, who is all for football players kneeling during the anthem and you argued that the US and the USSR were NOT allies in WWII. You are a moron. Radical Islam wants to wipe the US off the face of the Earth as do its people. You think Putin and the Russian people want to wipe the US off the face of the Earth? Dummy.

Radical Islam is 100x the bigger threat.

How would I fight it? I would firstly admit it exists. Something you refuse to do. You say small branch. If it is 1% and we know it is a lot more than that so it is 16 million terrorists. In the world right now there are about 16 million Jews in TOTAL.

Posted by DoctorKz on 7/17/2018 9:17:00 PM (view original):
We don't know to what extent, if any, his bias factored in. The optics are terrible, and they know it...

If he were unbiased Mueller would not have removed him.

Posted by The Taint on 7/17/2018 9:12:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 7/17/2018 9:09:00 PM (view original):
We have provided weapons that have endangered Russians too. Not the same. We just armed Ukraine and killed 200 Russians in Syria. This is not the same as Lybia, Afghanistan, Iraq and 9/11...here!!

If you cannot agree with me that the Russians have killed way fewer Americans than Radical Islam then this conversation is over and you are just trolling.

I agree that Russia and the US are adversaries. Trump is trying to fix this and create a temporary alliance. Same as took place in WWII so we can wipe out radical Islam. Or do you agree with idiot Tang that Russia and the US were not allies in WWII?

They are directly giving weapons to your people's enemies. You always talk about how high of a priority that Israeli affairs are in your book, yet you don't care that Russia is selling weapons to your greatest enemy. Talk about trolling...or just straight up talking out your *** about Israeli affairs.

Russia is not an ally of Israel. We give weapons to their enemies as well. I am talking about direct assaults. Don't try and tell me what I mean.

Posted by bad_luck on 7/17/2018 9:14:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 7/17/2018 9:01:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 7/17/2018 8:58:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 7/17/2018 8:55:00 PM (view original):
https://www.cnn.com/2018/07/13/opinions/strzok-hearing-bias-opinion-callan/index.html



Here it is again so that Tang can learn to read. From CNN...not exactly a DJT supportive site.




Some may assume that if Strzok really wanted to sabotage the election of Trump all he had to do was leak the fact that the FBI was investigating Trump. But that logic doesn't fly. Strzok would have feared loss of his job or possible criminal prosecution for such a leak -- particularly if classified information were involved. The true test of Strzok's biases and intentions can be found in his malicious text messages.

You know that’s an opinion piece, right?

Yes, I do from a CNN contributor. Is there anything in the article that you read that you disagree with? I mean you with your law degree and all...You do realize that all your comments are opinion pieces and you have yet to tell me why Whitlock is an idiot. Waiting....

You and Tang...equal cowards. LMAO.

Tell me again how I should raise my kids? #1...don't be a coward.

Yes, I disagree with the idea that an FBI can’t do his job if he has an opinion on politics.

Agreed. The Penitent Man is not employed by the FBI. Every agent with a pulse has a political opinion. It looks shoddy when your lead investigator has it in for the President. They have a serious credibility problem on their hands...

http://www.businessinsider.com/arms-sales-by-the-us-and-russia-2014-8?r=UK&IR=T

Both sell weapons to questionable entities.

Posted by DoctorKz on 7/17/2018 9:15:00 PM (view original):
Strzok led both investigations, Clinton and Trump, his text messages are clearly slanted against Trump. Horowitz's report was clear, he was biased. In no way should he have taken part in either investigation. Once the Bureau got wind of the messages, he was out. The investigations are forever tainted. No pun intended...

Which investigation went public before the election?

Posted by cccp1014 on 7/17/2018 9:13:00 PM (view original):

Posted by The Taint on 7/17/2018 9:10:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 7/17/2018 9:06:00 PM (view original):

Posted by The Taint on 7/17/2018 9:04:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 7/17/2018 8:55:00 PM (view original):
https://www.cnn.com/2018/07/13/opinions/strzok-hearing-bias-opinion-callan/index.html



Here it is again so that Tang can learn to read. From CNN...not exactly a DJT supportive site.




Some may assume that if Strzok really wanted to sabotage the election of Trump all he had to do was leak the fact that the FBI was investigating Trump. But that logic doesn't fly. Strzok would have feared loss of his job or possible criminal prosecution for such a leak -- particularly if classified information were involved. The true test of Strzok's biases and intentions can be found in his malicious text messages.

His text messages are just that, text messages. For someone hellbent on destroying Trump, he sure was kinda a ***** about it if he was fearful for his job.

We agree. He is a sissy boy.

Let me ask you this Taint. You are about to play a hoops game against another team and I am your ref. I walk over to you and say, man you guys should lose 100-0 and you are all losers and then laugh. Do you think I will be an unbiased ref?

Honestly.

I don't know. You said earlier this week you could be unbiased in the work you do for clients even when you don't like them. I'm certainly capable of it. What makes you think he can't either?

Answer my question please. Yes or No. If you had to bet your life would you say I would be unbiased.

To answer you. I don't text fellow bankers stating how I wish these clients would go bankrupt. I also told you that I have a higher moral compass than Petey. I would never cheat on my wife and embarrass her the way he did. If he lied to his wife he can lie to Congress and the American People.

Taint? Where is my answer....Yes or No. Don't wuss out and say IDK.

Posted by bad_luck on 7/17/2018 9:23:00 PM (view original):

Posted by DoctorKz on 7/17/2018 9:15:00 PM (view original):
Strzok led both investigations, Clinton and Trump, his text messages are clearly slanted against Trump. Horowitz's report was clear, he was biased. In no way should he have taken part in either investigation. Once the Bureau got wind of the messages, he was out. The investigations are forever tainted. No pun intended...

Which investigation went public before the election?

Why do you do that? Why do you ask questions where you know the answer?

I told you why he could not go public with info. about Trump. Can you not read? Dummy.


since you can't read:

Some may assume that if Strzok really wanted to sabotage the election of Trump all he had to do was leak the fact that the FBI was investigating Trump. But that logic doesn't fly. Strzok would have feared loss of his job or possible criminal prosecution for such a leak -- particularly if classified information were involved. The true test of Strzok's biases and intentions can be found in his malicious text messages.

Mueller has served several administrations with distinction. He must be ****** how this has gone. It reflects poorly on him. But I believe he has and will do a good job of getting to the bottom of this. His legacy rides on this... Then again, I used to think highly of Comey as well.

Posted by bad_luck on 7/17/2018 9:23:00 PM (view original):

Posted by DoctorKz on 7/17/2018 9:15:00 PM (view original):
Strzok led both investigations, Clinton and Trump, his text messages are clearly slanted against Trump. Horowitz's report was clear, he was biased. In no way should he have taken part in either investigation. Once the Bureau got wind of the messages, he was out. The investigations are forever tainted. No pun intended...

Which investigation went public before the election?

What does "WE WILL STOP HIM"

Mean to you?

Posted by DoctorKz on 7/17/2018 9:15:00 PM (view original):
Strzok led both investigations, Clinton and Trump, his text messages are clearly slanted against Trump. Horowitz's report was clear, he was biased. In no way should he have taken part in either investigation. Once the Bureau got wind of the messages, he was out. The investigations are forever tainted. No pun intended...

Yet he ****** Clinton and not Trump, 11 days before the election.


Crazy.

Posted by DoctorKz on 7/17/2018 9:26:00 PM (view original):
Mueller has served several administrations with distinction. He must be ****** how this has gone. It reflects poorly on him. But I believe he has, and will do a good job of getting to the bottom of this. Then again, I used to think highly of Comey as well.

Whatever the final outcome is, 50% of the country will love it and 50% will hate it.

Identity politics all the way.

Posted by The Taint on 7/17/2018 9:26:00 PM (view original):

Posted by DoctorKz on 7/17/2018 9:15:00 PM (view original):
Strzok led both investigations, Clinton and Trump, his text messages are clearly slanted against Trump. Horowitz's report was clear, he was biased. In no way should he have taken part in either investigation. Once the Bureau got wind of the messages, he was out. The investigations are forever tainted. No pun intended...

Yet he ****** Clinton and not Trump, 11 days before the election.


Crazy.

He did? Did he enjoy it? LOL



Here is what he said:




Comey writes: “Assuming, as nearly everyone did, that Hillary Clinton would be elected president of the United States in less than two weeks, what would happen to the FBI, the justice department or her own presidency if it later was revealed, after the fact, that she still was the subject of an FBI investigation?”

Posted by cccp1014 on 7/17/2018 9:23:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 7/17/2018 9:13:00 PM (view original):

Posted by The Taint on 7/17/2018 9:10:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 7/17/2018 9:06:00 PM (view original):

Posted by The Taint on 7/17/2018 9:04:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 7/17/2018 8:55:00 PM (view original):
https://www.cnn.com/2018/07/13/opinions/strzok-hearing-bias-opinion-callan/index.html



Here it is again so that Tang can learn to read. From CNN...not exactly a DJT supportive site.




Some may assume that if Strzok really wanted to sabotage the election of Trump all he had to do was leak the fact that the FBI was investigating Trump. But that logic doesn't fly. Strzok would have feared loss of his job or possible criminal prosecution for such a leak -- particularly if classified information were involved. The true test of Strzok's biases and intentions can be found in his malicious text messages.

His text messages are just that, text messages. For someone hellbent on destroying Trump, he sure was kinda a ***** about it if he was fearful for his job.

We agree. He is a sissy boy.

Let me ask you this Taint. You are about to play a hoops game against another team and I am your ref. I walk over to you and say, man you guys should lose 100-0 and you are all losers and then laugh. Do you think I will be an unbiased ref?

Honestly.

I don't know. You said earlier this week you could be unbiased in the work you do for clients even when you don't like them. I'm certainly capable of it. What makes you think he can't either?

Answer my question please. Yes or No. If you had to bet your life would you say I would be unbiased.

To answer you. I don't text fellow bankers stating how I wish these clients would go bankrupt. I also told you that I have a higher moral compass than Petey. I would never cheat on my wife and embarrass her the way he did. If he lied to his wife he can lie to Congress and the American People.

Taint? Where is my answer....Yes or No. Don't wuss out and say IDK.

It's a dumb hypothetical.

The ref isn't going to play the game for us. Just because you may be biased doesn't mean what you say is going to come true.

Posted by The Taint on 7/17/2018 9:26:00 PM (view original):

Posted by DoctorKz on 7/17/2018 9:15:00 PM (view original):
Strzok led both investigations, Clinton and Trump, his text messages are clearly slanted against Trump. Horowitz's report was clear, he was biased. In no way should he have taken part in either investigation. Once the Bureau got wind of the messages, he was out. The investigations are forever tainted. No pun intended...

Yet he ****** Clinton and not Trump, 11 days before the election.


Crazy.

She did it to herself. Yet she amuses us by blaming everyone without the initials HRC. ..