Lead Attorney In Anti-Clinton DNC Fraud Case Mysteriously Found Dead

Anung Un Rama said:
Lol. You just admitted that you think Putin and Trump are working together. I "walked back my claim" that you thought Putin was working FOR Vlad to working WITH Vlad. Keep up freshman.
Click to expand...
You can read. That's not what it says either. You are unable to stop lying even when directly confronted with the truth. It's hilarious.
 
No less than five mysterious deaths met people with dirt on Clintons...

...since June.

Nothing to see here, move along.
 
Fawlty said:
You can read. That's not what it says either. You are unable to stop lying even when directly confronted with the truth. It's hilarious.
Click to expand...
Maybe your freshman English class hasn't gone over the word collusion, but it means to cooperate or work with.

I love how you parrot Jacks technique when you squirm. It's so lame. Does the DNC reach a class on it? You have been pure faux rage at a ridiculous CT that started in DNC HQ and now when another ridiculous ct develops about your team you feel like you need to stamp it out. Lol
 
Anung Un Rama said:
Maybe your freshman English class hasn't gone over the word collusion, but it means to cooperate or work with.

I love how you parrot Jacks technique when you squirm. It's so lame. Does the DNC reach a class on it? You have been pure faux rage at a ridiculous CT that started in DNC HQ and now when another ridiculous ct develops about your team you feel like you need to stamp it out. Lol
Click to expand...
I've always thought you were a decent poster, but when it comes to disagreements on issues, you consistently misrepresent my POV. It's hard not to notice. We all do that to some degree, but you seem to be the least willing (of the intelligent half of the WR) to come around and admit it. It's quite striking when you go from being a reasonably intelligent and informed poster to being fully obstinate.

Even here you're trying to make it about a freshman English class, and the definition of a word I'm more familiar with than you could possibly be. I am worried that it's very likely Trump will explicitly collude with Putin in the future. I think there is plenty of evidence to suggest that is a likely outcome of a Trump presidency. I also think he should be investigated over his business ties to Russia and his personal ties to Putin (which he is on camera lying about- first he has a great relationship with Putin and talks to him, then the next minute he never heard of the guy), now that it appears that Russia has tampered with our election. Unless you believe it's a coincidence that Russia reportedly hacked the DNC for over a year, and Wikileaks happened to release internal DNC stuff on the eve of the convention. That would be a hell of a coincidence. I don't conclude that Trump was implicitly or explicitly colluding with Russia to commit espionage. But I would like it looked into.

Now if you're willing to be honest, even though you obviously disagree with me, you'll say that you realize you were wrong about my beliefs and you no longer have to misrepresent them.
 
Fawlty said:
I've always thought you were a decent poster, but when it comes to disagreements on issues, you consistently misrepresent my POV. It's hard not to notice. We all do that to some degree, but you seem to be the least willing (of the intelligent half of the WR) to come around and admit it. It's quite striking when you go from being a reasonably intelligent and informed poster to being fully obstinate.

Even here you're trying to make it about a freshman English class, and the definition of a word I'm more familiar with than you could possibly be. I am worried that it's very likely Trump will explicitly collude with Putin in the future. I think there is plenty of evidence to suggest that is a likely outcome of a Trump presidency. I also think he should be investigated over his business ties to Russia and his personal ties to Putin (which he is on camera lying about- first he has a great relationship with Putin and talks to him, then the next minute he never heard of the guy), now that it appears that Russia has tampered with our election. Unless you believe it's a coincidence that Russia reportedly hacked the DNC for over a year, and Wikileaks happened to release internal DNC stuff on the eve of the convention. That would be a hell of a coincidence. I don't conclude that Trump was implicitly or explicitly colluding with Russia to commit espionage. But I would like it looked into.

Now if you're willing to be honest, even though you obviously disagree with me, you'll say that you realize you were wrong about my beliefs and you no longer have to misrepresent them.
Click to expand...

That's a weird and wordy way of validating my posts...How can I retract my statement when every time you clarify your position you validate mine?
 
Anung Un Rama said:
That's a weird and wordy way of validating my posts...How can I retract my statement when every time you clarify your position you validate mine?
Click to expand...
More bullshit from you. It's not worth explaining my position, because you'll turn around and say that my position is that Trump is conspiring with Putin. There's a serious difference between that and my position. I believe it is likely that he will collude with Putin if elected, and I believe there is enough circumstantial evidence to warrant an investigation into his finances and his communications re: Moscow. This is your last opportunity to be honest with me.


"The worst case is that Putin and Trump are in collusion or independently working toward it, obviously. I don't think the reality is the worst case, but it's not out of the question down the road given Trump's heavy investments in Russia and Putin's desire to squeeze eastern Europe and weaken NATO. The likely case is that the Russians who broke in to the DNC and released through wiki are attacking our election in the interests of Putin. An investigation into Trump's finances and campaign are necessary, imo."

That quote does not say that I believe Putin and Trump are working together. Most people I respect think that Trump is just a bumbling blowhard and easily manipulated. I think that's the most likely, but I think it should be looked into anyway.
 
Last edited:
Fawlty said:
More bullshit from you. It's not worth explaining my position, because you'll turn around and say that my position is that Trump is conspiring with Putin. There's a serious difference between that and my position. I believe it is likely that he will collude with Putin if elected, and I believe there is enough circumstantial evidence to warrant an investigation into his finances and his communications re: Moscow. This is your last opportunity to be honest with me.


"The worst case is that Putin and Trump are in collusion or independently working toward it, obviously. I don't think the reality is the worst case, but it's not out of the question down the road given Trump's heavy investments in Russia and Putin's desire to squeeze eastern Europe and weaken NATO. The likely case is that the Russians who broke in to the DNC and released through wiki are attacking our election in the interests of Putin. An investigation into Trump's finances and campaign are necessary, imo."

That quote does not say that I believe Putin and Trump are working together. Most people I respect think that Trump is just a bumbling blowhard and easily manipulated. I think that's the most likely, but I think it should be looked into anyway.
Click to expand...

"The worst case is that Putin and Trump are in collusion"

"I don't think the reality is the worst case, but ..."

"It's not out of the question because [Trump is an international billionaire businessman and Putin wants to squeeze E. Europe and crush NATO]". (It's so clear, how did I not miss this!!! Lol)

"I believe it is likely that he will collude with Putin if elected"

"That quote does not say that I believe Putin and Trump are working together."


Black-Guy-Meme-Question-Marks-01.jpg


So you believe they're not working together now, but will, but maybe they're working together now, but probably not, but yeah definitely, but not likely wink wink.
 
Last edited:
Zankou said:
Taking out the process server is like killing the secretary who staples the complaint together.

It's not a serious basis for a conspiracy theory.

Assassinations are by far the most plausible form of conspiracy---they require no grand coordination, they are a historically commonplace political action, and they are effective means for accomplishing a goal---but to even get in the arena of possibility they have to not be completely imbecilic, and this one fails that test.
Click to expand...
"Drop the suit or we'll start dropping you."

It's possible, not super plausible.
 
Anung Un Rama said:
"The worst case is that Putin and Trump are in collusion"

"I don't think the reality is the worst case, but ..."

"It's not out of the question because [Trump is an international billionaire businessman and Putin wants to squeeze E. Europe and crush NATO]". (It's so clear, how did I not miss this!!! Lol)

"I believe it is likely that he will collude with Putin if elected"

"That quote does not say that I believe Putin and Trump are working together."


Black-Guy-Meme-Question-Marks-01.jpg


So you believe they're not working together now, but will, but maybe they're working together now, but probably not, but yeah definitely, but not likely wink wink.
Click to expand...
Yes, Trump has indicated that he is very likely to allow Russian aggression. He minimizes what already happened in Crimea and E. Ukraine (either that or he didn't even realize that particular major world event had occurred...). He would like to see a weaker NATO. These goals align with Putin's goals.

And no, there is not any evidence they are working together as of now. But there is enough money on the line in Moscow for the Trumps that the relationship needs to be investigated- the tipping point being that there is the appearance of Russian espionage against the DNC. Let's get it all out there and either clear him as merely an ignoramus, or expose the truth of this nebulous relationship with Putin that Trump both claims and disclaims.

This is not as difficult a concept as you're trying to pretend it is, Comrade. And trying to compare speculation of this kind with this fucking Clinton Body Count abject goddamn nonsense- well, you should slap yourself.
 
Thurisaz said:
No less than five mysterious deaths met people with dirt on Clintons...

...since June.

Nothing to see here, move along.
Click to expand...
He didnt have dirt on clinton. he was a process server. It would be like murdering the mailman for bringing bills.
 
Fawlty said:
Yes, Trump has indicated that he is very likely to allow Russian aggression. He minimizes what already happened in Crimea and E. Ukraine (either that or he didn't even realize that particular major world event had occurred...). He would like to see a weaker NATO. These goals align with Putin's goals.

And no, there is not any evidence they are working together as of now. But there is enough money on the line in Moscow for the Trumps that the relationship needs to be investigated- the tipping point being that there is the appearance of Russian espionage against the DNC. Let's get it all out there and either clear him as merely an ignoramus, or expose the truth of this nebulous relationship with Putin that Trump both claims and disclaims.

This is not as difficult a concept as you're trying to pretend it is, Comrade. And trying to compare speculation of this kind with this fucking Clinton Body Count abject goddamn nonsense- well, you should slap yourself.
Click to expand...


The only equated them as ridiculous CTs, so...
 
While he was not the lead attorney (messed up and got that headline from another article) he was the one who served them. Doesn't negate the fact that they could have still killed him to send a message.
 
Anung Un Rama said:
What part of the word "ridiculous" are you having trouble with?
Click to expand...
It wouldn't surprise me even a little bit if you had a "where there's smoke there's fire" opinion of the Clintons. I just don't know if you would be brave enough to say so, to own it. From what I see, you're a real weasel.
 
The worst case is that Putin and Trump are in collusion or independently working toward it, obviously. I don't think the reality is the worst case
Click to expand...

I've got no dog in the fight but @Anung Un Rama can you explain to me what the above quote means?


I really love these threads, it's great seeing who swallows up this kinda shit without even stopping to think.

Process server=lead attorney? Lol for fucks sake....

*Edit; I have no idea why this post is bolded and I'm unable to fix. My apologies to everyone's eyes.
 
J. Bernie Cunningham said:
I've got no dog in the fight but @Anung Un Rama can you explain to me what the above quote means?


I really love these threads, it's great seeing who swallows up this kinda shit without even stopping to think.

Process server=lead attorney? Lol for fucks sake....

*Edit; I have no idea why this post is bolded and I'm unable to fix. My apologies to everyone's eyes.
Click to expand...


mye.gif

Those are @Fawlty quotes.


Edit: I see what you're getting at. Why not interpret my entire post?

It's obvious that Fawlty is implying that Putin and Trump are colluding together. He wants to have his cake and eat it too by believing in and pushing a very extreme CT while trying to pretend that he's above believing in CTs. It's dishonest and hypocritical. Then to top it off he implies that I'm a coward for believing in a CT I've thrice called ridiculous.

Notice I didn't say that the fear is that Clinton killed this man, I don't believe that, but let me list a bunch of reasons why I think it's plausible. Oh, and I think she'll kill some body when she's elected.
 
Last edited:
Fawlty said:
It wouldn't surprise me even a little bit if you had a "where there's smoke there's fire" opinion of the Clintons. I just don't know if you would be brave enough to say so, to own it. From what I see, you're a real weasel.
Click to expand...

So are you saying I'm a weasel or not a weasel but could be a weasel because there is evidence I'm a weasel because I don't play your game?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,237,091
Messages
55,467,181
Members
174,786
Latest member
plasterby

Share this page

Back
Top