He has been owned by the Russian Gov all along
- Thread starter Duck_walk
- Start date
derangement is when you find out you are worshiping a false god and you refuse to believe the truth.
Even if it’s true, which I really doubt
International businessmen do business with banks all over the world. They arrange billion dollar loans wherever they can get the best rates.
Russia is cheering in the streets that Trump killed an Iranian leader......not.
They should own him better.
They should own him better.
Do you mean other than if Trump was "OWNED" by Russia he would be doing what they want? Killing Iranians isn't a directive from Russia......K punkin?
And you know this because you have a back channel with Putin? Chaos in the Middle East is something Russia loves. I won’t be taking the word of anyone who is too lazy to google and read.
I love how Trump is simultaneously starting World War Three over Iran because they are allies with Russia, but also that Trump is working for Putin and has been doing what Putin wanted all along...
Last edited:
So you know for sure with your inside information that Putin did not want that particular general out of the way? You have classified intel the rest of us don’t have detailing relationships between those countries. No you don’t.
Does it get exhausting doing all your mental gymnastics?
Reading your posts, you don’t seem to have any answers you just criticize everyone else. That is what is really exhausting. No one else is ever right.
I just ask questions. You'll never hear me say anyone else is wrong, but I will ask them to defend their assertions. What's wrong with that on a discussion board?
Let's look at what everyone else posts shall we?
Duck: Anti-trump rhetoric, tweets, insults.
SadButTrue: Anti-trump rhetoric, insults.
3R: CNN talking points
MoscowMitch: Insults, anti-Trump rhetoric
And yet you ONLY call me out? News flash, I'm on your side on this issue. Trump goes to war with Iran and there is ZERO chance I vote for him. I try to be respectful to others, but people kind of get what they give, so yeah I fall short there sometimes. At least I'm willing to admit it.
You libs are getting pretty good at demanding evidence that some conspiracy isn't true while insisting there is no evidence needed to support the conspiracy.
Do you think it is possible that the Iran deal was actually not a bad thing? Iran seemed to be behaving prior to Trump nixing the deal. Now all hell has broken loose. Please don’t say Obama was giving them millions of dollars. Those were Iran’s funds which were frozen until Obama agreed to release them.
Iran was still allowed to have their nuclear program under the deal, and with no intrusive inspections. UN teams could only go where Iran told them they could go.
Sounds exactly like the deal with South Korea by Clinton that allowed them to develope nuclear weapons
They never shut it down so it can’t be any worse .
I could care less about Iraq or Syria. We need to put a dozen carriers in the Persian gulf point them into the wind and keep launching planes and missiles until everything remotely associated with Irans nuclear program and electrical generation and distribution is rubble. Then let them dig out.
U.S. Intelligance doesn’t agree. But tough guys gotta tough guy.
I agree with most of you assessments. Now lets see what kind of coward you are and give us a fair assessment off the following:
Veerman_12
Blondee
BigMoDog
MillerBleach
BUMP for veerman.
Veerman_12 said: ↑
Let's look at what everyone else posts shall we?
Duck: Anti-trump rhetoric, tweets, insults.
SadButTrue: Anti-trump rhetoric, insults.
3R: CNN talking points
MoscowMitch: Insults, anti-Trump rhetoric
I agree with most of you assessments. Now lets see what kind of coward you are and give us a fair assessment off the following:
Veerman_12
Blondee
BigMoDog
MillerBleach
Veerman_12 said: ↑
Let's look at what everyone else posts shall we?
Duck: Anti-trump rhetoric, tweets, insults.
SadButTrue: Anti-trump rhetoric, insults.
3R: CNN talking points
MoscowMitch: Insults, anti-Trump rhetoric
I agree with most of you assessments. Now lets see what kind of coward you are and give us a fair assessment off the following:
Veerman_12
Blondee
BigMoDog
MillerBleach
You are always demanding that we find links to everything for you.
I mean when you make an assertion, the burden of proof then falls on you to prove it.
Uh, that is saying proof IS needed! Kind of the exact opposite!
Not if you are a lib. All you need is an anonymous source who heard an anonymous source say they heard an anonymous source was afraid something bad might happen.
That's crap and you know it. Anonymous sources are not fake. Depending on the reporter, an anonymous source can be trusted, because they want to do the right thing, but they don't want to lose their job.
If this a fake story, then why fight so hard to keep the records from being released. If he was a legit businessman, why not just prove it.
Yes depending on the reporter. What reporter do you have a lot of trust in?
They want to do the right thing. Do they? What gets more viewership, the right thing or compelling news? No one loses their job over embellishing news. They win awards for it.
Maybe so, but we wouldn't know the extent to which the Nixon administration was corrupt without an anonymous reporter. Bradley, Woodward and Bernstein knew who he was, but no one else. Did that make him less of a credible source?
They also took their time to vet their source. They didn't just go to print or TV immediately in an effort to be first to break the news.
Similar threads
