Ambassador Says He Met WikiLeaks Source, and They’re Not Russian

Again...that's not "fixing primaries".

 

Actively working against one candidate and for another is the definition of "the fix is in".

 

No it's not. It's something for people like you to say.

Do you really think Sander's supporters were affected by any actions or words taken by he DNC? Sanders supporters weren't exactly fans of the DNC to start with.

But OK...put a number on it. How many votes did that account for? How many votes did Sanders lose by?
Sanders lost. The preferences of the DNC , as unprofessional and objectionable as that may be...did not cause it. He lost.

 

What's funny is Republicans absolutely APPALLED at the DNC showing a preference for one candidate over the other but when it's pointed out that a FOREIGN GOVERNMENT (one not particularly friendly to us at that) actively supported their candidate covertly...they shrug

 

Keep shrugging. Amazing, isn't it? It doesn't bother you in the slightest.

Julian Assange: Isis and Clinton Foundation are both funded by Saudi Arabia and Qatar

‘This is the most significant email in the whole collection’

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/p...oney-saudi-arabia-qatar-funding-a7397211.html

 

Conspiracy theories should be taken seriously?

 

but again, wikileaks was not the only source to publish information about the DNC, and as Julian Assange himself acknowledged, that information published by other sources may have come from Russia.

 

Don't know what other stuff you are referring too. It was the daily wiki leaks that hammered Hillary and the DNC and that's who and what all the whinning is about. The losers say wiki got it from the Russians but wiki says it was a DNC insider not the russians

 

This won't matter at all to you

But try this one time to compare both stories


CIA alleges
Assange got data from Russia

Asange denies

CIA has no sources

Assange does, he got the data


Said Ambassador says he met the source

CIA has not explained who they met. Nor has the CIA connected the dots.

 

Yet Assange is a slimebag and a felon. And your point is?

 

The only thing left to do is to ignore the lefties and have alpha men get back to running things. America has sent the lib agenda packing. And nobody cares about 3 million extra libs in NYC and CA. They were heard as much this election as in every previous one, isn't the EC a wonderful thing?

If you scream bloody murder at every thing Trump says, has said, or will say on a daily basis as you have been, (I'm talking about the news media) then your side will be the girl that cried wolf way too many times and will be ignored if/when Trump does actually do something that warrants a backlash from the public.

 

Letting CEO's run government is like letting a high school dropout perform brain surgery. It's playing with fire at best. If you consider the least qualified to be "Alpha Men," I would recommend you change your wording, because "Alpha" is polar opposite from who Trump has chosen.

 

I might agree with you if you agree that Bill Clinton himself is one too.

 

I and many others told you on the Democrats side that Obama was far less than a CEO.

He won with no experience. He had not so much as selected a janitor in his past.

 

A little government experience (Obama) trumps business experience when it comes to running government.

 

Obama may as well been a visitor to the Senate.

And you think that counts as experience?

To the correct minded posters

Why the job of CEO of very large operations matters so much,

First Trump was formally educated in business, all types, not merely real estate
Second, he has hired tens of thousands
Third he then had to manage tens of thousands

I wish we got Kasich or Walker but we will get by with Trump

We could never have got by with Hillary

Her chance at government got us a what the hell for reply in congress. She did not care that under her watch, an ambassador was murdered.

 

And Bush ended up with thousands of innocent brothers and sisters killed in the War In Iraq, spanning nearly a decade of bloodshed. Yet that doesn't rub you guys the wrong way, but 4 people killed in Benghazi does. What is wrong with that picture?

 

She did not care that under her watch, an ambassador was murdered.

Sill lying about that? Pure horse (*)(*)(*)(*)

 

Even YOU seem to realize what a ticking time bomb he is

 

I suppose your outrage kicks in once a particular level of killing has happened.
I have no clue why you assumed the deaths of our troops is no concern to me.

I will say this one more time.

Were it my decision, no war in Afghanistan nor Iraq would have taken place the way both took place.

So do you read this former Army soldier loud and clear?

I fail to understand your anger at Bush but no anger at Obama nor Hillary.

 

I have no clue why you assumed the deaths of our troops is no concern to me.


It's probably the fact that until now you never mentioned it. YOU did harp constantly about Benghazi which...wasn't anyone's fault.

 

Not entirely. What I'm saying is that there is no perfect person, and by extension, no president is to be without legitimate criticism. I don't worship golden calves and have no problem pointing out things I don't agree with in a elected official whether I voted for him or not.

The democrats and the news media (redundant I know) are hell bent on screaming bloody murder for every thing that Trump says, said, did, wants to do, etc. I think the girl who cried wolf analogy fits perfectly here.

When the time comes for a legitimate bad decision (presidents make decisions, and a wrong one is bound to be made period) to be scrutinized by the public he answers to, most people will have been desensitized to the faux outrage that preceded Trumps administration from the time he was just a candidate.

Make sense now?

 

Not entirely??

We're so glad our new President is ENTIRELY a ticking time bomb

 

I expected that my post would fly 30,000' over your head, and you didn't disappoint.

Good job.

 

Check and mate!