because the guy behind wikileaks is batshit crazy and on the run from the law??/
i mean i always take the words of crazy felons at face value right? lol
lol you think Putin's citizens are allowed to protest?
You're only allowed to protest in Russia if the government gives you permission first and you protest in the designated protest zones.
If you protest without permission or outside the designated areas you will be arrested and likely roughed up a bit.
Somewhere out there the Russians are sitting on trump info and emails. Trump knows it
Except he didn't say that. What he said, was that they attempted to hack both parties, and were only successful at hacking the DNC. Likely because the RNC didn't have someone stupid enough within their ranks, to fall for a phishing scam.
lol you think Putin's citizens are allowed to protest?
You're only allowed to protest in Russia if the government gives you permission first and you protest in the designated protest zones.
If you protest without permission or outside the designated areas you will be arrested and likely roughed up a bit.
I don't think that was ever said.Did anyone note the part where the NSA and Coney said "there is no evidence of Russia interfering in election"
And did anyone note Comey talking about briefing Obama on Flynn situation?
Somewhere out there the Russians are sitting on trump info and emails. Trump knows it
I'm calling fake news on Russia hacking the dems. We just found out last week about how the US intelligence community often hacks people and makes it look like Russia did it.
Even then, no voting booths or machines were hacked so it doesn't even matter who hacked the DNC.
Rerepresent them then short-round.Or your gross misrepresentation of events?
You're simply reading Trump's tweets on this aren't you.Did anyone note the part where the NSA and Coney said "there is no evidence of Russia interfering in election"
And did anyone note Comey talking about briefing Obama on Flynn situation?
Rerepresent them then short-round.
How else do you interpret "maybe the 2nd amendment folks want to do something about her"? And yes, saying he offered recompense is an exaggeration, but not by much when you see how much interaction there has been between people close to Trump and the Russians.I don't need to. The videos are out there. He did express wishes that Russia find Hillary's missing e-mails. However, adding that he outright requested it, and even offered a reward for doing so, is a giant exaggeration of what he actually said.
The notion that he called for Hillary Clinton's assassination on the other hand, is pure, unsubstantiated nonsense. An interpretation of his actual words, only a hysterical Lib would make.
It's just fits the pattern of Libs blowing everything out of proportion, and in some cases taking something he said which was actually foolish, and unnecessarily piling a heap of bullshit on top of it, which actually ends up diluting the foolish thing he did. You guys are still banging the drum that he mocked a reporter's disability, when in fact he just childishly mocked the reporter in a general sense. Like, it's bad enough that he acted that way, but you guys just have add a layer of bullshit to it, which actually ends up victimizing Trump. You guys love trying to stretch singles into inside the park home runs. You just can't help yourselves.
Why are you quoting some random idiot on twitter when the FBI director said that Russia hacked the DNC in this hearing, but said there was no evidence that Obama had Trump wiretapped.
How else do you interpret "maybe the 2nd amendment folks want to do something about her"?