Tulsi Gabbard

James Brown

notobtuse wrote: »

Six days of coverage? Knock me over with a feather! And were any of them 'mainstream media' entities calling for Hillary's arrest because of all the numerous crimes she committed in regards to those email?

And dear lord, did you even bother to see the name on those covers you show. None are legitimate media sources.

And I'm all in... and calling your Hillary email coverage, and raising you the study of media Trump hatred showing 92% negative coverage of his presidency:
https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/media-trump-hatred-coverage/

Yes, Trump allied rags.
The funny thing about Trump is the series of lame defences.
What if the negative coverage of Trump relates to Trumps actions and comments? Would probably balance out.

Overheal

Spencerfreeman wrote: »

Censure? I think he should be drummed out of politics forever.
He was caught by the bollix when Trump released the transcript.
I've read the transcript and watched the lying statement, which was carried live by most networks by the way.

And? He didn’t pass it off as verbatim.

Remember when Barr made a press release saying the Mueller report totally vindicated Trump - when Barr thought the public wasn’t going to get to see it? Why wasn’t Barr run out of politics?

Overheal

mad muffin wrote: »

Dude don’t deflect from your action. You posted a lie. I fact checked you. Just man up.

Fact checked what?

mad muffin

Overheal wrote: »

Fact checked what?

The video you posted. Which as you found out is a lie.

Spencerfreeman

Overheal wrote: »

And? He didn’t pass it off as verbatim.

Remember when Barr made a press release saying the Mueller report totally vindicated Trump - when Barr thought the public wasn’t going to get to see it? Why wasn’t Barr run out of politics?

I recommend you widen your news sources.
He did try to pass it off as verbatim, until the transcript was released that is.
The Mueller report did vindicate Trump. It unfortunately was clearly based on a lie. The Russians didn't hack the DNC servers.

Overheal

mad muffin wrote: »

The video you posted. Which as you found out is a lie.

It’s years old and not really up for debate. The video isn’t a deepfake he indeed mocked the reporter.

The point you’re continuing to ignore is that there isn’t anyone in Trumpworld that exemplifies any sort of ‘dignity’ available to be offended by Schiff’s exaggeration of the Ukraine call.

Overheal

Spencerfreeman wrote: »

I recommend you widen your news sources.
He did try to pass it off as verbatim, until the transcript was released that is.

Schiff, Sept. 26: It reads like a classic organized crime shakedown. Shorn of its rambling character and in not so many words, this is the essence of what the president communicates. We’ve been very good to your country, very good. No other country has done as much as we have. But you know what? I don’t see much reciprocity here. I hear what you want. I have a favor I want from you though. And I’m going to say this only seven times so you better listen good. I want you to make up dirt on my political opponent, understand. Lots of it. On this and on that. I’m going to put you in touch with people, not just any people, I am going to put you in touch with the attorney general of the United States, my Attorney General Bill Barr. He’s got the whole weight of the American law enforcement behind him. And I’m going to put you in touch with Rudy. You’re going to love him. Trust me. You know what I’m asking. And so I’m only going to say this a few more times. In a few more ways. And by the way, don’t call me again. I’ll call you when you’ve done what I asked.

This is in sum and character what the president was trying to communicate with the president of Ukraine. It would be funny if it wasn’t such a graphic betrayal of the president’s oath of office. But as it does represent a real betrayal, there’s nothing the president says here that is in America’s interest after all.

Where did he pass it off as verbatim? Show me.

The Mueller report did vindicate Trump. It unfortunately was clearly based on a lie. The Russians didn't hack the DNC servers.

Trump is an unindicted co-conspirator and Mueller took the stand and told America that any other american would have been indicted already for what Trump did, and that he is only not in custody today because of an OLC opinion.

mad muffin

Overheal wrote: »

It’s years old and not really up for debate. The video isn’t a deepfake he indeed mocked the reporter.

The point you’re continuing to ignore is that there isn’t anyone in Trumpworld that exemplifies any sort of ‘dignity’ available to be offended by Schiff’s exaggeration of the Ukraine call.

I’m not getting in to it with you. The videos speak for themselves.

You’ve already derailed this thread. This thread is about Tulsi Gabbard. Not Donald Trump.

There’s a Donald Trump bashing thread in the politics section. You can go post your videos there.

mad muffin

Overheal wrote: »

Schiff, Sept. 26: It reads like a classic organized crime shakedown. Shorn of its rambling character and in not so many words, this is the essence of what the president communicates. We’ve been very good to your country, very good. No other country has done as much as we have. But you know what? I don’t see much reciprocity here. I hear what you want. I have a favor I want from you though. And I’m going to say this only seven times so you better listen good. I want you to make up dirt on my political opponent, understand. Lots of it. On this and on that. I’m going to put you in touch with people, not just any people, I am going to put you in touch with the attorney general of the United States, my Attorney General Bill Barr. He’s got the whole weight of the American law enforcement behind him. And I’m going to put you in touch with Rudy. You’re going to love him. Trust me. You know what I’m asking. And so I’m only going to say this a few more times. In a few more ways. And by the way, don’t call me again. I’ll call you when you’ve done what I asked.

This is in sum and character what the president was trying to communicate with the president of Ukraine. It would be funny if it wasn’t such a graphic betrayal of the president’s oath of office. But as it does represent a real betrayal, there’s nothing the president says here that is in America’s interest after all.

Where did he pass it off as verbatim? Show me.



Trump is an unindicted co-conspirator and Mueller took the stand and told America that any other american would have been indicted already for what Trump did, and that he is only not in custody today because of an OLC opinion.

What has this got to do with the thread subject? Can you stick to the subject?

Spencerfreeman

Overheal wrote: »

Schiff, Sept. 26: It reads like a classic organized crime shakedown. Shorn of its rambling character and in not so many words, this is the essence of what the president communicates. We’ve been very good to your country, very good. No other country has done as much as we have. But you know what? I don’t see much reciprocity here. I hear what you want. I have a favor I want from you though. And I’m going to say this only seven times so you better listen good. I want you to make up dirt on my political opponent, understand. Lots of it. On this and on that. I’m going to put you in touch with people, not just any people, I am going to put you in touch with the attorney general of the United States, my Attorney General Bill Barr. He’s got the whole weight of the American law enforcement behind him. And I’m going to put you in touch with Rudy. You’re going to love him. Trust me. You know what I’m asking. And so I’m only going to say this a few more times. In a few more ways. And by the way, don’t call me again. I’ll call you when you’ve done what I asked.

This is in sum and character what the president was trying to communicate with the president of Ukraine. It would be funny if it wasn’t such a graphic betrayal of the president’s oath of office. But as it does represent a real betrayal, there’s nothing the president says here that is in America’s interest after all.

Where did he pass it off as verbatim? Show me.



Trump is an unindicted co-conspirator and Mueller took the stand and told America that any other american would have been indicted already for what Trump did, and that he is only not in custody today because of an OLC opinion.

Yes OK, i may have overstated it with the term verbatim but you tell me, what document was he reading from? It's still a gross misrepresentation of what was published.
Mueller, IMO, is the one guilty of collusion. He has lied at every turn.

SJW Lover

Overheal wrote: »

Schiff, Sept. 26: It reads like a classic organized crime shakedown. Shorn of its rambling character and in not so many words, this is the essence of what the president communicates. We’ve been very good to your country, very good. No other country has done as much as we have. But you know what? I don’t see much reciprocity here. I hear what you want. I have a favor I want from you though. And I’m going to say this only seven times so you better listen good. I want you to make up dirt on my political opponent, understand. Lots of it. On this and on that. I’m going to put you in touch with people, not just any people, I am going to put you in touch with the attorney general of the United States, my Attorney General Bill Barr. He’s got the whole weight of the American law enforcement behind him. And I’m going to put you in touch with Rudy. You’re going to love him. Trust me. You know what I’m asking. And so I’m only going to say this a few more times. In a few more ways. And by the way, don’t call me again. I’ll call you when you’ve done what I asked.

This is in sum and character what the president was trying to communicate with the president of Ukraine. It would be funny if it wasn’t such a graphic betrayal of the president’s oath of office. But as it does represent a real betrayal, there’s nothing the president says here that is in America’s interest after all.

Where did he pass it off as verbatim? Show me.



Trump is an unindicted co-conspirator and Mueller took the stand and told America that any other american would have been indicted already for what Trump did, and that he is only not in custody today because of an OLC opinion.

When is Schiff going to produce the direct evidence he said he saw of Russian collusion in advance of the Mueller Report?


Maybe he can produce it via interpretative dance given Schiff now seems to be afforded the luxury of being allowed to employ artistic licence when talking about extremely serious issues.

Danzy

Tulsi is a great candidate and one that would make a great VP, if in a different state.

notobtuse

SJW Lover wrote: »

When is Schiff going to produce the direct evidence he said he saw of Russian collusion in advance of the Mueller Report?


Maybe he can produce it via interpretative dance given Schiff now seems to be afforded the luxury of being allowed to employ artistic licence when talking about extremely serious issues.

The most Schiff will get is center stage in the rogues’ gallery of politicians, reporters, and pundits who absolutely assured us that Trump conspired with Putin to steal the presidency. I guess after all their lies... nevermind?

But Shiff should be kicked out of Congress. He had direct access to classified intelligence and lied anyway to further his despicable agenda. Yet he remains in control of the impeachment witch-hunt... the real miscarriage of justice.

James Brown

notobtuse wrote: »

The most Schiff will get is center stage in the rogues’ gallery of politicians, reporters, and pundits who absolutely assured us that Trump conspired with Putin to steal the presidency. I guess after all their lies... nevermind?

But Shiff should be kicked out of Congress. He had direct access to classified intelligence and lied anyway to further his despicable agenda. Yet he remains in control of the impeachment witch-hunt... the real miscarriage of justice.

What's witch-hunty about it? We know Trump withheld money for dirt on Biden. That's a concern, no?

Overheal

Spencerfreeman wrote: »

Yes OK, i may have overstated it with the term verbatim but you tell me, what document was he reading from? It's still a gross misrepresentation of what was published.
Mueller, IMO, is the one guilty of collusion. He has lied at every turn.

It was a dog and pony show. They happen a lot on the hill, they are often equal parts cringeworthy and offensive to one half or the other. I’d say the number of Americans who thought trump really said “I’m going to tell you this seven times” etc. is freakishly low.

mcmoustache

The polling and this thread show that she's only popular with the right. Maybe what the likes of Tucker Carlson, Trump fans, David Duke and the Russians are looking for is not the same thing that the Dems are looking for?

Spencerfreeman

Matt Barrett wrote: »

What's witch-hunty about it? We know Trump withheld money for dirt on Biden. That's a concern, no?

Can you take this bollix back to the swampy Trump thread please?
Read the transcript, he didn't withhold any money and he was enquiring into Bidens
role in relation to the 2016 election. Away with your propaganda please.

Spencerfreeman

mcmoustache wrote: »

The polling and this thread show that she's only popular with the right. Maybe what the likes of Tucker Carlson, Trump fans, David Duke and the Russians are looking for is not the same thing that the Dems are looking for?

Go and get your bow restrung. Away.

Spencerfreeman

Overheal wrote: »

It was a dog and pony show. They happen a lot on the hill, they are often equal parts cringeworthy and offensive to one half or the other. I’d say the number of Americans who thought trump really said “I’m going to tell you this seven times” etc. is freakishly low.

The main issue I have is that it was carried live by at least three major TV networks.
Real collusion.

Overheal

Spencerfreeman wrote: »

The main issue I have is that it was carried live by at least three major TV networks.
Real collusion.

You are crying collusion that television outlets carried live proceedings of the House?

Networks carried the Lewendowski, Mueller, Clinton, Clinton, Shkreli, Gardner, Mr. Rogers, etc etc etc testimonies live - were those all collusion too?

mcmoustache

Spencerfreeman wrote: »

Go and get your bow restrung. Away.

It hasn't been addressed though. A Dem primary is the process where voters ultimately select the Dem presidential nominee.

Dem's don't tend to vote for David Duke's favourite.

Spencerfreeman

Overheal wrote: »

You are crying collusion that television outlets carried live proceedings of the House?

Networks carried the Lewendowski, Mueller, Clinton, Clinton, Shkreli, Gardner, Mr. Rogers, etc etc etc testimonies live - were those all collusion too?

Well paddle my arse and call me a skeptic.

Overheal

Spencerfreeman wrote: »

Well paddle my arse and call me a skeptic.

About what though? What is so collusive about networks carrying live proceedings? What’s immoral about it? What’s the conspiracy?

notobtuse

Matt Barrett wrote: »

What's witch-hunty about it? We know Trump withheld money for dirt on Biden. That's a concern, no?

I see you've adopted the Adam Schiff School of Factual Reporting.

SJW Lover

notobtuse wrote: »

I see you've adopted the Adam Schiff School of Factual Reporting.

When proved wrong they'll tell us they it was a surrealist reimagining of events and, therefore, fine.

Spencerfreeman

Overheal wrote: »

About what though? What is so collusive about networks carrying live proceedings? What’s immoral about it? What’s the conspiracy?

Timing dear boy, timing.

Overheal

Spencerfreeman wrote: »

Timing dear boy, timing.

For a live testimony? The media has no control over what Congress schedules.

Overheal

SJW Lover wrote: »

When proved wrong they'll tell us they it was a surrealist reimagining of events and, therefore, not the word for word verbatim slander that we’re trying to campaign that it is because we need strawmen to win against its been a hard month

FYP

Spencerfreeman

Overheal wrote: »

For a live testimony? The media has no control over what Congress schedules.

They shouldn't should they. Look at the usual programming on those channels.
I'm not going to respond to any more of this defense of a gross liar.
In other news Tulsi's everywhere in the cycle now. Excellent.

Overheal

Spencerfreeman wrote: »

They shouldn't should they. Look at the usual programming on those channels.

Meaning what?