Author Topic: "No evidence of collusion" says Senate Intel Chairman  (Read 701 times)

I mean it's obvious what you wanted from this thread, you want people to suggest that there is collusion so you can continue jerking yourself off about being right about this whole thing because your political identity is literally the only facet of your personality and you have pretty much nothing else to talk about otherwise.
yeah it really seems when you post matthew it’s less about the politics itself just the fact you can make these random arguments directed towards no one really but your own particular satisfaction. once again this thread and all of your opinonated arguments are met with the ‘who cares’ or ‘why are you telling us’.

Any people I've seen use whataboutism is Fox news when they complain about Hillary's and Obama's actions when they're asked about Trumps idiocy.

Because the rules and scrutiny suddenly become invalid when the politician in play is blue

But aight

If they even find evidence of collusion, nothing will be done about it, Republicans will toe the party line.

Russiagate/the Mueller investigation is Qanon for libs

It's only suspicious because they're looking at it. If you look at LITERALLY any politician, they are surrounded by "shady" dealings and "suspicious" connections, because loving DUH, THEY'RE ALL CORRUPT

This is always going to wrap around to whataboutism because for anything you can try to pin Trump to the wall for, I guarantee you can do the same to mostly anyone else in the political sphere. It's a witch hunt in the truest fashion, but because it's Trump it's all good, gotta make sure Orange mesothelioma doesn't gas  anymore border babies
Every politician should have this stuff exposed to the public, not just Trump. Trump is a loving moron like the rest of them.
« Last Edit: February 09, 2019, 02:32:03 PM by ultimamax »

Because the rules and scrutiny suddenly become invalid when the politician in play is blue

But aight
There are a large group of people who think this shallowly, yes.
« Last Edit: February 09, 2019, 04:46:24 PM by Mr.Noßody »

Because the rules and scrutiny suddenly become invalid when the politician in play is blue

But aight
No, criticism is simply more relevant against people in office, right now Trump is in office so criticising him is more important than criticising people who are out of office. I am not saying that politicians who have done stupid things shouldn't be criticized just because they are out of office. I am saying that if a politician in office does stupid things, criticising them gets priority.

EDIT: Of course I am not saying that MSM criticized Obama as much as they do Trump now. Political bias in media is an unfortunate reality.

There's a difference between political bias and daily hit pieces meant to undermine the progress and authority of the president

And it's still relevant to criticize politicians out of office, especially to point out the blatant hypocrisy

Hillary Clinton destroys thousands of illegally sent emails? No jail time. Roger Stone lies or misspeaks on something? Bust his loving door down with fully kitted agents like its an Al Qaeda raid.

Clinton gets donations from Saudi Arabia and Qatar? Who cares. Trump has construction plans for a Trump tower in Russia? He's compromised, a Russian agent, Putin sucks his richard and they watch Brokeback Mountain together while plotting the downfall of the west

Clinton verifies she will create a no-fly zone over Syria, requiring soldiers to shoot down Russian planes, an act of war that would result in us going to war with another nuclear power. Nothing! No comments from anyone. Trump threatens to put North Korea, a rogue state with stuffty nuclear capabilities, in its place, and he's going to cause the destruction of Japan and the entire western seaboard.

Obama bombs the living stuff out of the Middle East, no one even reports on it. Ever. Trump pulls troops out of the area? Absolutely reprehensible. We must go to war with the towelheads. They can't take care of themselves.

Obama deports more illegals than the last two presidents combined. No comment. Trump continues enforcing border laws? Literal Nazi. White supremacist. He hates Mexicans.

If you don't understand how this is out of hand then w/e but let's not pretend like this is just political bias at hand
« Last Edit: February 10, 2019, 07:47:14 AM by Deus Ex »

I'm sorry but the watching brokeback mountain while plotting the downfall of the west really got me

-Snip-
Trump and Pharma
Trump and Iran deal
Trump and Saudi Arabia

That with the stupid retreat from Paris Climate Accord, Trump is worthy of criticism. And I agree with you, Hillary and Obama did shady stuff, but that still doesn't exclude Trump from the spotlight.

Why would he put the US in a Climate Accord that would tank our economy? That's forgetin' dumb. You don't need to agree to the Paris Climate Accord to fight climate change. That's just Green Peace activist shlock. We're already doing what we can in the private sector to move towards green energy. And everyone else is free to do what they can in their own countries. Literally no reason to make some big point by agreeing to that.

Trump wants to cut taxes to Pharma to reduce drug prices, how is that bad exactly? You see tax cuts for corporations and you think that must be a bad thing somehow because a pro-Trump group is involved? Makes no senes

Iran Deal didn't do anything we can't do via sanctions and they're still falling in line so, richard move but I don't really see the problem here

And Trump gets money when people visit his hotel... and one of those people happens to be the Saudi prince. Surely this means he is in cahoots? What I find interesting is why so many people suddenly give a giant stuff about Saudi Arabia murdering a journo? Like how often does that happen on a regular basis, and why is this one so egregious? Sure, Trump should call them out on it, but what happens if he does? What changes for the Saudis? It's just moral grandstanding that doesn't mean diddly richard at the end of the day

-Orange man good-

The Climate Change will damage your economy more than the Paris accord would.

As said in the article, cutting taxes for big pharma has not changed the drug prices. Tax cuts for corporations have been the gradual agenda for both democratic and republican governing and now half of the US is barely getting along with stuffty paychecks.

Iran deal stabilized the area and prevented Iran from gaining a nuclear weapon.

The Saudis are doing more than just murdering critical journalists. They are starving Yemen and killing thousands of civilians, they fund most of radical Islamic terrorism and they are a generally stuffty country if you're woman. All of those are good moral reasons to cease military co-operation, trading and any support. None of which Trump, the politician in office is willing to even recognize.

The Climate Change will damage your economy more than the Paris accord would.

As said in the article, cutting taxes for big pharma has not changed the drug prices. Tax cuts for corporations have been the gradual agenda for both democratic and republican governing and now half of the US is barely getting along with stuffty paychecks.

Iran deal stabilized the area and prevented Iran from gaining a nuclear weapon.

The Saudis are doing more than just murdering critical journalists. They are starving Yemen and killing thousands of civilians, they fund most of radical Islamic terrorism and they are a generally stuffty country if you're woman. All of those are good moral reasons to cease military co-operation, trading and any support. None of which Trump, the politician in office is willing to even recognize.

Ceasing those things w/ Saudi Arabia will forget with the economy

Are you willing to compromise the economy on moralistic grounds? I'm not, and most of America isn't either. If you told them we can morally condemn a nation at the cost of money out of their pockets they'd tell you to forget off with that. And it's funny how no one mentions anything you said. They're all focused on Kahshoigiggi. Your point is valid sure but it doesn't really do much in the real world

Climate Change affects the economy how? Climate scientists have been singing the doomsday song for literal decades. Every new decade they say the next decade will the end! The turning point from which there will be no return!

The Climate Change will damage your economy more than the Paris accord would.
In one ear and out the other with you. Leaving the Paris Accord =/= thrusting the factories into full CO2 Productions and sawing down every forest in sight. The Paris Accord was a a scam. Asking for "rules for thee but not for me" systems for "progress." The best way to go green is to innovate not hamper current situations.
As said in the article, cutting taxes for big pharma has not changed the drug prices. Tax cuts for corporations have been the gradual agenda for both democratic and republican governing and now half of the US is barely getting along with stuffty paychecks.
What the actual forget are you talking about? Where the hell is this "half the US is barely living with their current paychecks" coming from??
Iran deal stabilized the area and prevented Iran from gaining a nuclear weapon.
Except Iran completely ignored the deal and violated the agreement several times. So why would we hold up our end of the deal if they won't hold up their's?
The Saudis are doing more than just murdering critical journalists. They are starving Yemen and killing thousands of civilians, they fund most of radical Islamic terrorism and they are a generally stuffty country if you're woman. All of those are good moral reasons to cease military co-operation, trading and any support. None of which Trump, the politician in office is willing to even recognize.
iirc aren't we attempting to pull more troops out of the middle East right now anyway? Perhaps the reason he doesn't want to acknowledge it is that he doesn't want to alert the Saudi government that he is making strides against it.

It's not wise to announce every military action and decision just to hush an over emotional vocal minority. In military events the element of surprise is vital in various situations.

-Snip-
Last time I checked you lot hated slavery, but apparently if it benefits economy it's ok. Do you think most of america is aware of these things? Do you think that one side of America's soaring economy is that important? I thought Trump said that the economy is doing better than ever, if so, then acting morally with Saudi Arabia wouldn't hurt that much.

Here's a nice graph


You can shout that there have always been disasters, but that doesn't change the fact that they are rising in frequency and as you know, more disasters means more money lost.


-Snip-
Paris Accord didn't force anyone to do anything either, pulling out of it was simply a loud statement about Trump's opinion on climate change.

Paycheck to paycheck

Iran following nuclear deal

"Perhaps" is not something to rely on. Trump needs to act directly, hell he would even be supported more if he did act against Saudi Arabia. Unfortunately we are not seeing anything that would hint to him doing the right thing.
Also, trump may have announced that he is pulling out, which would be good, but unfortunately there's this and this
Quote
“We’re getting out, we’re getting out smart, and we’re winning,” Trump said during a Cabinet meeting, in response to reporters’ questions about U.S. forces there. “I never said we’re getting out tomorrow. We’re getting out of Syria, but we’re getting out very powerfully.”

Paris Accord didn't force anyone to do anything either, pulling out of it was simply a loud statement about Trump's opinion on climate change.
If it didn't force anyone to do anything, what was the big deal in pulling out?
Paycheck to paycheck
Not the government's fault, that's just the result of poor choices in regard to investment of money.
Iran following nuclear deal
Iran breaking nuclear deal. the amount of "look at how long they followed the rules!" Doesn't matter. This isn't a toddler with a good noodle board this is a country with an agreement. Breaking the agreement once should be grounds enough to end the deal, 3 times should be and is the death knell for this agreement
"Perhaps" is not something to rely on. Trump needs to act directly, hell he would even be supported more if he did act against Saudi Arabia. Unfortunately we are not seeing anything that would hint to him doing the right thing.
Also, trump may have announced that he is pulling out, which would be good, but unfortunately there's this and this
Yeah well, All I can offer you is a perhaps. Otherwise don't expect president Trump to have an emotional meltdown into the sunset against Saudi Arabia. If he acts smart and not knee jerking to every journalist with a loud voice saying "WHAT ABOUT SAUDI ARABIA!?" then something will get done. The reasons I think this is what he is doing is because:

A. The US is becoming energy independent, fast. But we're not there yet. If he angers them it could be a problem right now, but we're biding our time since soon it won't matter.
B. If we openly started calling out a nation like Saudi Arabia they almost certainly would immediately declare war. We have troops in the nation, imagine the mess of a situation if they're scattered over in different areas and suddenly they get called to act in a war.
C. CIA was just recently defeated that gives President Trump an excellent smoke screen to pull troops out under. By using the defeat of CIA as the reason for pulling out of the middle East in general, it may decrease the chance of The Saudi Government suspecting he's planning to turn against them.
« Last Edit: February 10, 2019, 10:53:31 AM by Master Matthew² »

This whole argument isn't even worth it nicepoint, these yolks will literally never concede lol