Trump - Russian connections....FAR DEEPER than anyone ever imagined

Now that the credibility of the Ex Mi-6 agent has been vouched for by various intelligence communities from NATO

You have to take that with a pinch of salt, the man in question now works for anyone that wants dirt on people in power, the dirt sometimes is just made up guff thrown in with random info to pad it out. Clearly there's not been enough to warrant this dossier being released before so its being trawled out as a destabilising ploy.

Names, places and facts, only then is it credible..

As for Trump and the piss-gate, do I really care if he likes pee on people hence the joke

Q: What's the difference between a lentil and a chickpea?

A: I wouldn't pay $200 to have a lentil on my face...

I'm more worried he will press the big red button just because he can...

a reply to: Mclaneinc

Names, places and facts, only then is it credible.

Please read the document. It includes names, places, and dates. Some of the details are difficult to corroborate, but it is a fact that Trump stayed in the hotel mentioned.

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: Mclaneinc

Names, places and facts, only then is it credible.

Please read the document. It includes names, places, and dates. Some of the details are difficult to corroborate, but it is a fact that Trump stayed in the hotel mentioned.

But is there video of him doing these acts?

At the moment they are accusations...

Trust me, I don't like Trump, I think there's a very dark side that could be incredibly dangerous but every one desrves to have things verified, especially at the level of power this demands.

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: Mclaneinc

Names, places and facts, only then is it credible.

Please read the document. It includes names, places, and dates. Some of the details are difficult to corroborate, but it is a fact that Trump stayed in the hotel mentioned.

Writing the name of a public figure in a document is not interesting.
Alleging meetings were confirmed by unnamed sources is not evidence.
We do know that one such name and an alleged meeting in Prague is most likely false.

Some of the evidence I would like to see includes details confirming that Mr Cohen was in Prague when the author claims. The subsequent CNN back tracking, from their initial fake news, that it was a different Michael Cohen sounds like BS. The author clearly said: 'Trumps lawyer' Michael Cohen. It now requires proof.

The fact Trump was in Russia in 2013 is already public knowledge and we know why he was there already.
Several people have been there over the years.

Muse 7 under your User ID you have "Establishment Shill."
I guess you were just pulling our leg, right???????

a reply to: UKTruth

It seems some have disappeared down a rabbit hole and ended up trying to push a false notion that now the document is out there, it has to be proven fake. It's an effort to legitimise fake news, but the tried and trusted process of requiring allegations to be proven before they are accepted will not yield to such poor debating tactics.

Congratulations! By posting lengthy quotes and irrelevant jabs you and your cronies have rolled the page over to bury these posts:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

A document has been submitted to the Senate Intelligence Committee. That is a fact, not "fake news." Are you saying that this document should be kept from the public? That would be censorship, plain and simple. The people have a right to determine for themselves if the document is authentic and if its claims are true.

You have asserted, not that you doubt that the document is authentic, or its contents potentially false, but that it is a fake. This puts the burden of proof on you.

Personally, I have no doubt that the dossier contains some creative writing. It was intended to be used by Trump's political enemies to sully his already bad reputation. My contention has always been that Trump's public personality leaves him open to allegations of this sort because his behavior makes them seem plausible.

Now, please stop propping up your straw man and explain why you think this is not the case. Is Trump so virtuous that no-onw would believe that he is corrupt or potentially a sexual deviant?

a reply to: UKTruth

The fact Trump was in Russia in 2013 is already public knowledge and we know why he was there already.
Several people have been there over the years.

And as I have shown, Russian intelligence has attempted to blackmail them. You're not really addressing the issue, are you?

a reply to: Mclaneinc

But is there video of him doing these acts?

What if there is? His supporters would claim that they are "fake." Incidentally, it is not in Russia's interest to release these tapes, so, as the Kremlin would say: "We may never know the truth."

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: UKTruth

It seems some have disappeared down a rabbit hole and ended up trying to push a false notion that now the document is out there, it has to be proven fake. It's an effort to legitimise fake news, but the tried and trusted process of requiring allegations to be proven before they are accepted will not yield to such poor debating tactics.

Congratulations! By posting lengthy quotes and irrelevant jabs you and your cronies have rolled the page over to bury these posts:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

A document has been submitted to the Senate Intelligence Committee. That is a fact, not "fake news." Are you saying that this document should be kept from the public? That would be censorship, plain and simple. The people have a right to determine for themselves if the document is authentic and if its claims are true.

You have asserted, not that you doubt that the document is authentic, or its contents potentially false, but that it is a fake. This puts the burden of proof on you.

Personally, I have no doubt that the dossier contains some creative writing. It was intended to be used by Trump's political enemies to sully his already bad reputation. My contention has always been that Trump's public personality leaves him open to allegations of this sort because his behavior makes them seem plausible.

Now, please stop propping up your straw man and explain why you think this is not the case. Is Trump so virtuous that no-onw would believe that he is corrupt or potentially a sexual deviant?

More failed logic.

The burden of proof remains on those making allegations. It won't change no matter how many times you try to reverse a process that has served society well for hundreds of years.
You don't get to avoid the burden of proof because someone says the document is fake, lol.

The Senate Committee will be looking for evidence to prove whether or not the document is true. That makes sense, given it is now in the public domain. The fact they are looking for evidence is not fake news.

You are just deflecting away from the fake news of Buzzfeed and CNN.

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: Mclaneinc

But is there video of him doing these acts?

What if there is? His supporters would claim that they are "fake." Incidentally, it is not in Russia's interest to release these tapes, so, as the Kremlin would say: "We may never know the truth."

You will need to prove there is a video. Something you can't get round if you want to go beyond the fact that someone has claimed there is a video.
There was also a claim that Bill Clinton was on video raping a child. That was fake news too.

a reply to: UKTruth

I STILL await evidence that the detail in the document are true. I know you don't have any as I am following the story and nothing of any substance has been confirmed.

I STILL await evidence that the details in the document are fake. I know you don't have any either, so why are you so convinced it is fake?

You have yet to explain why you feel it is inherently implausible, or why Trump, unlike every other human being, is incapable of being targeted for blackmail.

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: UKTruth

I STILL await evidence that the detail in the document are true. I know you don't have any as I am following the story and nothing of any substance has been confirmed.

I STILL await evidence that the details in the document are fake. I know you don't have any either, so why are you so convinced it is fake?

You have yet to explain why you feel it is inherently implausible, or why Trump, unlike every other human being, is incapable of being targeted for blackmail.

Once again...
I do not need to prove the document is fake or speculate on why something might be plausible or not.
The burden of proof is on those that say the document is not fake.
That is how the world works. Prove the allegations in the document.

a reply to: UKTruth

The burden of proof remains on those making allegations.

You are the one alleging they are fake. I am not alleging they are true, only that they exist. I have proven the document exists. The fact that it has been submitted to a Senate Committee makes it news, which has been reliably reported. Not to report it would be censorship. Now please stop deflecting.

a reply to: UKTruth

You will need to prove there is a video.

Why? I have never claimed that one exists.

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: UKTruth

The burden of proof remains on those making allegations.

You are the one alleging they are fake. I am not alleging they are true, only that they exist. I have proven the document exists. The fact that it has been submitted to a Senate Committee makes it news, which has been reliably reported. Not to report it would be censorship. Now please stop deflecting.

No one is saying the document does not exist.
I am saying I don't believe anything in the document and therefore I believe it to be fake. I do not need to prove that and nothing you say will change that simple fact.
Those that claim the document is not fake need to prove it.
It seems the obvious needs to be repeated to you over and over again.

a reply to: UKTruth

Prove the allegations in the document.

Drop the strawman. I have never claimed the allegations are true. You, on the other hand, keep claiming that the document is fake. That is a positive assertion and it puts the burden of proof squarely on you.

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: UKTruth

You will need to prove there is a video.

Why? I have never claimed that one exists.

Ok. Progress.
Neither of us are claiming a video exists.
Good.

originally posted by: UKTruth


No one is saying the document does not exist.

Then why are Trump and his followers screaming about CNN, Buzzfeed and fake news about the document? All they reported was that the document existed and the info in the document had not been verified.

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: UKTruth

Prove the allegations in the document.

Drop the strawman. I have never claimed the allegations are true. You, on the other hand, keep claiming that the document is fake. That is a positive assertion and it puts the burden of proof squarely on you.

Nope.
Donald Trump has said that the document is fake and all lies.
In your world, does that mean the onus is on him now to gather evidence and prove the document is fake?
Your world, if realised, would be chaos.
There is a reason why people do not need to prove allegations against them are false and they do not take on any burden of proof because they refute an accusation.
Your logic is pure nonsense.

Now, if you believe the document is not fake, you need to prove it.

originally posted by: kaylaluv

originally posted by: UKTruth


No one is saying the document does not exist.

Then why are Trump and his followers screaming about CNN, Buzzfeed and fake news about the document? All they reported was that the document existed and the info in the document had not been verified.

Because they are saying the document is fake and are annoyed at CNN and Buzzfeed for publishing fake news. Fairly reasonable reaction.
Lets say that someone decided to drop leaflets through the closest 1,000 homes to yours that falsely claimed you were a child molester, and they added a note to say... found this about Kaylaluv, we can't verify it is true but we thought you should know. I think you would be fairly pissed off, rightly so.