It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Trump-Russia Narrative is Dying. Why?

page: 23
40
<< 20  21  22    24  25  26 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 1 2017 @ 01:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: Dfairlite
a reply to: Gryphon66

So basically you're just a troll with no interest in debate. Ok, back to my treating you to your own argument style.


Well, yes, TECHNICALLY I have trolled you and a few other posters here, but that was AFTER I had repeatedly stated the facts regarding this topic. Others here have repeatedly stated the obvious as well, that the premise of all the "there's nothing there" cries from Trump supporters are quite simply totally ludicrous.

It's not like this topic is brain surgery or rocket science. It's gross political theatre. You've started a thread implying that concerns about Russian interference in the 2016 Election and the Trump Campaign's obvious interactions with various levels of Russian agents are just going to go away, or, because there hasn't been a report or new conference from the FIVE investigations being conducted by REPUBLICANS into the issue, that there's nothing being discovered (an absurd conclusion simply on its face.)

Further, if you were interested in actual DEBATE on a legitimate topic, you wouldn't have placed this farce in the Mud Pit. However, since this is really nothing but another venue for you and the other Trump lunatics to attempt to convince yourselves that this bumbling, bloviating wreck of a Presidency is really some sort of new level of enlightened governance, you're utterly hypocritical at the very CORE of what you claim you're doing.




edit on 1-8-2017 by Gryphon66 because: NOted




posted on Aug, 1 2017 @ 06:20 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

You havent discussed facts. I could agree or not but you havent provided anything.

Once again, prove me wrong, quote it, but you havent once provided evidence of collusion because it doesnt exist. Not once.

Also, I wasnt even contesting or agreeing with the OP. WHO CARES if its a hot topic in the news or not.

It was always fake, since there is no evidence. Thats the point I have been making.

Also, the DNC is guilty of many crimes and you wont speak to that since you know its true.


edit on 8 1 2017 by tadaman because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 1 2017 @ 06:23 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

You insulted half the thread when they asked you for evidence.

Because there is none, and you are a rude dick to people based off what they believe



posted on Aug, 1 2017 @ 06:25 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

We do, its just against the T&C to post an untranslated message. I saw it said "you are silly"

Well, you are wrong and a liar.

Also, you ignored the fact that the DNC murdered Seth Rich and tried to incite a riot in Chicago the way the CIA and the DNC did in 68.


edit on 8 1 2017 by tadaman because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 1 2017 @ 06:25 AM
link   
a reply to: tadaman

You can not say that until all the results of the investigations are released.
No matter how much you say there was no colusion you can not be sure until it is all finished with.
You are just making yourselves look like fan boys tbh who do not care for the truth.
Let the investigations finish eh ? before stating he is as pure as snow.



posted on Aug, 1 2017 @ 06:27 AM
link   
a reply to: testingtesting

No, as of yet there is no evidence.

Right this second and until some evidence is provided....there is none offered.

When the investigation is over it will still be true.

Trump is NOT guilty, since that has not been proven.

If you say he is, prove it. If not he is absolutely innocent and that needs to be proven otherwise.

But yes, this moment, there is no evidence.

Provide it if not along with my crow.


edit on 8 1 2017 by tadaman because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 1 2017 @ 06:31 AM
link   
a reply to: tadaman

Prove he isn't...see works both ways but I will not say he 100% guilty or not guilty...only idiots deal in absolutes when they do not know the whole story.



posted on Aug, 1 2017 @ 06:33 AM
link   
a reply to: testingtesting

No one has to be proven innocent. Ever.

Everyone is 100% innocent until a court proves otherwise.

Is this news to you?
edit on 8 1 2017 by tadaman because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 1 2017 @ 06:35 AM
link   
a reply to: tadaman

Let's just let the investigations finish before anyone says he did or didn't 100% eh?.
Because you don't know neither do I. Just opinion tbh.



posted on Aug, 1 2017 @ 06:40 AM
link   
a reply to: testingtesting

Sure. Until they prove guilt, he is innocent. You wait.

Right now he is 100% innocent until proven otherwise. Thats just the way it is. Look it up.

I would entertain your stance of guilt if I had something to discuss like evidence. There is none after almost a year of the federal government looking. Unless they suck at their job, there is none to be found.

Otherwise, everyone who has not been proven guilty is right this second innocent. 100%

But hey, enjoy conjecture. Its not respectable is all.
Or logical, or honest.


edit on 8 1 2017 by tadaman because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 1 2017 @ 07:28 AM
link   
a reply to: tadaman
As we can see, your basic response to ANY post you don't agree with is two-fold: with no evidence you deny what the other poster said , and then you accuse them of poor logic and dishonesty.

Apparently, you consider this an "advanced debate technique."

It isn't.

I've repeatedly posted the basic, easily observable facts about a) individuals who have admitted collusion with Russian agents who were also involved with the Trump campaign (as have several others) as well as b) clear reasons why the "Trump Russia" question hasn't died or gone away (negating the thesis of this discussion).

Anyone who can read English can see these two facts plainly.

You've spent most of your interaction with me claiming that because I don't deal with the obtuse issues that you keep droning on about (Seth Rich), or because you clearly think that I've made claims here that I haven't (your own words) and now you want to celebrate that SILLINESS as "winning a debate"?

I don't think so. You and several others here can't seem to understand that just because you disagree with a fact doesn't make it false.

And apparently, neither you nor I need to be quoting T&C at this point ... eh?
edit on 1-8-2017 by Gryphon66 because: Noted



posted on Aug, 1 2017 @ 07:31 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

I am not the subject.

Be nice or I will be rude. Duh.

You havent provided any evidence. Not once, if you did quote it. Serve me my crow.

You cant because there is none.

Hey I didnt alert your post. The truth is that it is against the T&C. Look it up.

Also, the DNC murdered Seth Rich

My posting history in this thread is full of verifiable facts like the DNC inciting riot in Chicago like they did in 68 with the CIA. As proven by the Project veritas videos.

Just look and pick one. Start debating which you havent yet.

I warn you, you may have to actually back up what you say.

You started this page admitting to trolling. Lets start there.

Why do you troll people? Is it because you cant verify what you say with ANYTHING?

edit on 8 1 2017 by tadaman because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 1 2017 @ 07:38 AM
link   

originally posted by: tadaman
a reply to: Gryphon66

I am not the subject.

Be nice or I will be rude. Duh.

You havent provided any evidence. Not once, if you did quote it. Serve me my crow.

You cant because there is none.

Hey I didnt alert your post. The truth is that it is against the T&C. Look it up.

Also, the DNC murdered Seth Rich



Yeah, I'm good with the eye-for-an-eye thing ... right back at you as we saw in the thread.

You keep saying that I haven't posted any evidence when I have done so repeatedly and even explained the evidence to you in painful detail.

For example, an easy one. Donald Trump Jr. ADMITTED that he took a meeting during the campaign with Russian agents because he thought they were bringing dirt on Hillary Clinton, and of course, yesterday, we discovered that Daddy himself was involved in the (WH admitted) false public release of that information.

That, my fried is clear evidence of the claim that the TRUMP CAMPAIGN COLLUDED WITH RUSSIAN AGENTS.

No, I'm not going to go back through and quote to you every incident in which I stated this obvious, well-known fact, because that's ridiculous.

We could do the same thing with Flynn, Manafort, Sessions, etc.

Are you confused about what "collusion" means? What's the disconnect here?



posted on Aug, 1 2017 @ 07:42 AM
link   
Project Veritas videos are known hoaxes.

Next?



posted on Aug, 1 2017 @ 07:48 AM
link   
a reply to: tadaman

On the subject of Trolling ... it's painfully obvious in this thread, and in most threads in the Mud Pit, that's what happens here ... I've trolled you, you've trolled me; others have trolled me, and I've trolled them back.

Whole lotta trollin' goin' on. We could rename this forum The Troll Hut.

So that's that. With me, it's easy: don't start nothin' won't be nothin'.

Now, with that out of the way ... your ludicrous droning about the fact that I don't provide evidence or that I can't back up my claims.

You don't only use this technique with me but with anyone you disagree with.

Not only that, you're utterly hypocritical ... have you for example PROVEN any of the wild fringe theories you keep spouting? All of which, by-the-by, are OFF TOPIC in this discussion. I don't respond to OFF TOPIC garbage as a rule.

Have you PROVEN any of your nutty claims? Of course you haven't.
edit on 1-8-2017 by Gryphon66 because: Noted



posted on Aug, 1 2017 @ 07:50 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

Those Russian agents were let in by Obama exempting their VISA on the condition they meet with Don Jr. I think Obama is the one to be blame. This act was Watergatey.



posted on Aug, 1 2017 @ 07:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: allsee4eye
a reply to: Gryphon66

Those Russian agents were let in by Obama exempting their VISA on the condition they meet with Don Jr. I think Obama is the one to be blame. This act was Watergatey.


Why don't you provide us some evidence for this claim?



posted on Aug, 1 2017 @ 07:54 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

Because Natalia didn't have a VISA when she was in the US.



posted on Aug, 1 2017 @ 07:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: allsee4eye
a reply to: Gryphon66

Because Natalia didn't have a VISA when she was in the US.


I see.



EDIT: Here's a perfect example ... a wild claim is made, evidence is requested, and a true statement is made in return (with exception of the "Because" portion of the statement).

Now, I could spend post after post asking more questions, but that would be pointless and off-topic.

Have I therefore refused debate?
edit on 1-8-2017 by Gryphon66 because: Noted



posted on Aug, 1 2017 @ 08:30 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

Hey, so you dont have any evidence then

Thats all I want. If not I dont buy any of this. How could I? Faith.



new topics

top topics



 
40
<< 20  21  22    24  25  26 >>

log in

join