US Politics Thread

Nothing like taking a single thread and weaving a tapestry, eh, Bigga?!

ONE attorney is being accused of “lying” to the FBI about potential connections between Trump and a Russian Bank and you think him being indicted for that potential “red herring” (indictment words, not mine) means the whole “RussiaGate” (whatever that actually means to you) falls apart?

What next, an exclamation of “Ah Ha!” in front of the jury???!!!

Wake me up when Sussman goes to jail for the crime of lying to the FBI AND we find out definitively that Trump doesn’t have financial ties to shady Russians.

And by that I mean other than the money laundering we already know that he does for them, as in Trump Tower apartments and the Palm Beach estate he sold!

"Russiagate" to me means 'Russia helping him win the election'.

The rest he can burn for, I don't give a shit.

But, I guess that bit's not the important as it doesn't suit everybody else's frothing mouthed responses.
 
"Russiagate" to me means 'Russia helping him win the election'.

The rest he can burn for, I don't give a shit.

But, I guess that bit's not the important as it doesn't suit everybody else's frothing mouthed responses.
Ever heard of Bob Mueller. He wrote an interesting report on this very subject.

Spoiler alert: Russia helped Trump win the 2016 election.

The report didn’t find sufficient evidence to prove that the campaign actively conspired with the Russian government but it left no doubt that Russia actively helped the Trump campaign and that the campaign welcomed this assistance.
 
Last edited:
Indeed.

So, ever thought why Biden's judge has indicted Clinton's lawyer, then, over it?

Don't tell me, you're another who doesn't bother reading factual information documented via tweets.

Why would I be surprised...?
I was commenting on your illogical conclusion that this indictment means that “Russiagate” is false. It’s not difficult to understand my point if you really wanted to.
 
Ah... Remember #Russiagate that a few of us were telling you was utter bollocks...?


The problem with this is it’s a 15 minute clip of Russell Brand but I did manage 3.22 of it before having my interest sufficiently piqued to look for alternative sources of the same information and ways of interpreting it.

It seems to me that Brand has overcooked the significance of this and the lawyers defence also makes interesting reading.

Does this issue represent absolute proof that Trump and/or his campaign team had no links to Russia? Not according to some of the other links my admittedly brief research took me to and there was nothing as recent as this.

Does one lawyer making misleading statements mean that Hilary Clinton lied about this issue. Perhaps someone could extrapolate the pertinent information from all Brand’s bluster and faux intellectual posturing to inform us, or point to a source that doesn’t involve having to watch a 15 minute film
 
The problem with this is it’s a 15 minute clip of Russell Brand but I did manage 3.22 of it before having my interest sufficiently piqued to look for alternative sources of the same information and ways of interpreting it.

It seems to me that Brand has overcooked the significance of this and the lawyers defence also makes interesting reading.

Does this issue represent absolute proof that Trump and/or his campaign team had no links to Russia? Not according to some of the other links my admittedly brief research took me to and there was nothing as recent as this.

Does one lawyer making misleading statements mean that Hilary Clinton lied about this issue. Perhaps someone could extrapolate the pertinent information from all Brand’s bluster and faux intellectual posturing to inform us, or point to a source that doesn’t involve having to watch a 15 minute film
I think the key point is that there have been dozens of indictments of people in the Trump campaign, including key advisors like Roger Stone and Mike Flynn who were convicted of lying to the FBI about their contacts with Russia. One potentially dodgy Clinton lawyer does nothing that negates a single one of these convictions, and is barely relevant to anything in 2021 now that Hillary Clinton is no longer a front line politician. Students at Belfast University might be interested if they have concerns about their chancellor being tainted by these allegations but no one else is.

More to the point, anyone that can tolerate more than a few seconds of listening to Russell Brand is a wrong ‘un, and I was saying this for years before his idiotic political views became apparent.
 
I think the key point is that there have been dozens of indictments of people in the Trump campaign, including key advisors like Roger Stone and Mike Flynn who were convicted of lying to the FBI about their contacts with Russia. One potentially dodgy Clinton lawyer does nothing that negates a single one of these convictions, and is barely relevant to anything in 2021 now that Hillary Clinton is no longer a front line politician. Students at Belfast University might be interested if they have concerns about their chancellor being tainted by these allegations but no one else is.

More to the point, anyone that can tolerate more than a few seconds of listening to Russell Brand is a wrong ‘un, and I was saying this for years before his idiotic political views became apparent.
I think we can (nearly) all agree Russell Brand is a twat. The response to a video of him being posted is predictable, there would be possibly more debate about the apparent points he makes if they were presented by someone else in a different format. Posting videos of Brand and Rogan and getting the expected response allows the poster to accuse others of shying away from “the truth”
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.