Putin is preparing to elect trump

Putin has already started flooding social media with pro trump garbage. Once the Dems nominate....he will make false stories up about that person.

Putin knows trump is incompetent and will turn our country to another Authoritarian Regime....maybe we are already there with Barr?

 

No, AIPAC has strong ties to the terrorist groups that populate the Tel Aviv government.

 

Could you identify some of these Russian "social media with pro trump garbage?" If you've found evidence of Russian interference shouldn't this be reported to the FBI?

 

So now you hate Israel
You probably love hamas

 

Putin is preparing to elect trump.

I doubt it but, fortunately, he doesn't have the power to do so.

 

Quote or retract to retain your credibility. Or do neither if you wish to dispose of it.

The rest of your post is irrelevant until you produce this quote.

 

You were inferring the whole time that there was some denial of Russia influencing our election - such as

"And I have no choice but to question the patriotism of any so-called "American" who, regardless of their political affiliation, is not up in arms about a direct attack on us"

and now you are just trying to wiggle out of what you know is true.

 

Ear-lie in da mornin', sittin' here all alone, waitin' for Mr. Putin, ta call me on da telyphone . . ."

So bye, bye to the collusion lie,
Russian Agents, Putin’s Puppet and a plot to deny.
From each new event how the conjecture would fly.
Can they let it go and just let it die?
Let it go and just let it die. (Don Caron)

 

Try again...

You said: "In the previous post you accused me of claiming that Putin did not influence the election."

I repeat: Quote or retract to retain your credibility.

I must add that there is no shame in retracting (given that it looks like a quote is unlikely). There is only shame on doubling down on a claim that you know is false.

You get another chance. But you are quickly running out.

 

I claimed no such thing - desperate to avoid a conversation about the issues you are. You were the one inferring that I did not think Putin influenced the election - as discussed in a number of previous posts.

You are now so confused that you think it is you who is being accused of Putin not influencing the election - projecting your deeds onto others.

This is not the first time you have engaged in Classic Projection "Projection" - a psychological defense mechanism in which individuals attribute characteristics they find unacceptable in themselves to another person"
https://www.goodtherapy.org/blog/psychpedia/projection

 

You what? Are you for real? I'm quoting you! What the hell???

http://www.politicalforum.com/index...-to-elect-trump.568460/page-5#post-1071455972

I bolded and changed the font to highlight. Now you say you "claimed no such thing". What is going on?

This should probably be enough to show that you are not a serious poster. But I'll give you one last chance:

You said: "In the previous post you accused me of claiming that Putin did not influence the election." (show above in bold and large Font)

For the last time: Quote where I said that or retract to retain your credibility.

 

You said.
"And I have no choice but to question the patriotism of any so-called "American" who, regardless of their political affiliation, is not up in arms about a direct attack on us"

Which was part of your response with respect to a conversation about Putin influencing the election. ..

 

You said: "In the previous post you accused me of claiming that Putin did not influence the election."

After three (or four... ) opportunities, you produce no quote to justify your claim And you do not retract it.

You have proven that you do not expect to be taken seriously.

 

You are playing semantic games - you were insinuating that I did not give enough creedence - weight to the whole "Russiagate" affair.

Stating - "And I have no choice but to question the patriotism of any so-called "American" who, regardless of their political affiliation, is not up in arms about a direct attack on us"

and now you are wasting time on nonsense - desperately trying to avoid the topic. If you meant something else - do tell.

 

I don't hate anybody. Hatred is counterproductive.

I don't hate Israel, but I will not pretend they are an ally.

 

What a pathetic excuse. Starting by the fact that you eliminate a relevant part from my quote: "Putin is preparing to do this again. Trump is happy that he is. And I have no choice but to question the patriotism of any so-called "American" who, regardless of their political affiliation, is not up in arms about a direct attack on us " which clearly indicates that I'm talking about the attack in the future elections.

You eliminated the part in bold. That clearly means that you came up with the quote after the fact, as an excuse.

But regardless of the above, you state that there is some weird parallel between stating that real patriotic Americans would stand up against an attack by a foreign government on us and accusing you of claiming that Putin didn't influence the election.

I quote you again: "In the previous post you accused me of claiming that Putin did not influence the election."

Your credibility is tarnished. I don't know how you could recover it. If I were you, I would start by retracting. But feel free to keep digging and getting yourself into a deeper and deeper hole, if you so prefer.

The "game" I'm playing is called "credibility game". And you're loosing bad...

 

Now you have gone completely off the ranch

1) I did not make up the quote - don't blame me that you can not remember your own words. - and in fact you repeat them in this post.
2) what you are quoting has no relevance to what is being discuss - which is your inference that I did not think that Putin influenced our electoral process.

You stating " Putin did it" - has nothing to do with your inference - followed by name calling - Ad Hom.

The fact of the matter is that I agreed - numerous times - that the release of info about the dirty deeds of Hillary/DNC influenced the election.
So you going on and on - on a trivial point of semantics - is thought avoidance.

We both agree - on the fact that there was influence. What you can't deal with - and are desperately trying to avoid - is the fact that the release of this information did not HARM our electoral process.

Your credibility has been wallowing in mud - post after post - fallacy central - no substance - .. finally - after committing numerous fallacious acts - in pure desperation - you think ?OH OH _ I have finally caught Gift creating a strawman. "I Win I Win" You are desperate to project your flaws onto others.

If my credibility is tarnished for inferring from your rant " No Patriot American would not fight against Russian influence" - that you were claiming I did not take this influence as fact - is a potential strawman - with really weak legs - Then where is your credibility given that fallacy is often your modus operandi. - and that has certainly been the case in this discussion - because you have nothing else with which to defend your claims.

You claim "Trump is Happy". I would not think he would be happy in 2020 - I see more negative than good from that one from a Candidates perspective. You are guessing. Trump would want anything that would help him. It is not clear at all how the Russians could pull of an act similar to the Wiki Leak in the first place - such that Trump would be helped .. but the negative cloud he probably want to avoid.

Either way - it is not clear at all that Trump would welcome Russian influence in the election. He may not view it as to his benefit.

More to the point - I agree that Trump was happy during the 2016 election - at least initially - about the release of information damaging to Hillary.

What candidate would not be happy about that ? At the time Trump would not know that the Russians did the Hack - he may have suspected if it were a Russian who was offering the information - but so what. The Hack and the release of information are two separate things.

You are conflating the two. You are saying "Every American should be against the Attack on our Democracy" - The attack was the HACK.
And - there are few Americans that do not realize that this is illegal.

The release of information from the Hack however, - is not illegal.

It turns out that you are the "Anti-Patriot" for conflating the two - The HACK did not influence our electoral process - It was the release of information that influenced our electoral process.

So one can be against the Hack - but for the release of information from that Hack - and still be a Patriot. Claiming otherwise is anti Patriot - and it is you who is on the wrong side of the Constitution.

 

Trump was talking about a rumor being started that Russia was backing him for President. People have to be out of their mind to think Russia wants Trump elected again. Sure they wanted him the first time, they were afraid Hillary was going to drag them into a war by putting up a no fly zone over Syria. Her own General told her not to do it that it could lead to war, along with a Russian Allie. Hillary didn't think so even after Russia brought in an aircraft carrier and ground to air missiles. It didn't come off because Obama wouldn't go along with her. But Russia wanted no part of Hillary. Trump looked good to them. He talked of pulling out of Syria and allowing Assad to stay under certain conditions. They thought they could do with him like they did with Obama, but soon found out different after Trump got elected. He was nothing like Obama and they had no idea how he would act under certain conditions. They felt he could go off at any time. Besides, Bernie was more like them, he thinks like they do. If they said they wanted Trump again, (which I doubt) they knew it would hurt him much more than help him. Who in their right mind is going to vote for Trump because our enemy wants him? That's stupid to even think so.

 

Simple....trump has NOT paid off his debt to Putin yet....

 

No. You just edited out part of it removing the context. The edited part didn't alter the point I was making, but you used it to justify a false accusation.

As for the "harm", already showed you that it did and in what ways. The release of the information is most certainly illegal. 52 USC 30121 a.1.A but that's absolutely irrelevant to anything I have said. Just a lame strawman.

The rest of your post is just a collection of ad-hominems. Let me know when you are ready to retract your false accusation. I can't take anything you say seriously until you do.

 

Now you have been reduced to cherry picking a short sentence out of a post - because you want to hide from the content of the post - and twirling about name calling - rather than respond to my comment on irrelevance.

 

So Pootin' is trying to get his comrade Bernie nominated so Trump can beat him?