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.

 

Clinton pushes back on Russian uranium deal reports: 'Baloney'

page: 10
55
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 25 2017 @ 07:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: DJW001

originally posted by: theultimatebelgianjoke
a reply to: DJW001

I'm getting ready to enjoy the sweet taste of your tears when the 'Muh Russia' narative you've been wetting your pants for will further fade away.


Put your money where your mouth is. If there is proof Russia was not playing American politics illegally I will leave ATS. If the Mueller campaign leads to criminal charges, you will leave ATS. Deal?


What about the third option; Russiains were peddling influence, but mostly through democrats.


Zero evidence of that option; it's fantasy and media-driven rhetoric.


Not surprised the person who thinks its a-ok for the dems to pay foreign agents including Russians involved with the Kremlin for dirt (oh look there is evidence right there of dems working with russians), and then having Obama use that dirt for fisa warrants would claim there is no evidence of that.

your stance on that issue proves what a shill you are, so I guess its pointless to expect you to be honest about evidence that exists.



Not surprised that the person who lies and prevaricates at every turn until called on their crap is suggesting that Democrats paid Russians for anything in the Peegate Dossier. I'm not surprised that you are one of the Trump Chorus that denies that some of that information was valuable and has been used in investigations into Russian interference. I'm not surprised that you seem to have forgotten every argument here from Trump lovers that there's nothing wrong or illegal about getting dirt on your opponent particularly when that dirt turns out to be factual.

It's against T&C to call other members shills Grambler ... please don't direct that garbage to me when you've been fronting for The Hill for the last week and are on the record now stating that you know there's no evidence of wrongdoing by Hillary Clinton in this matter.




posted on Oct, 25 2017 @ 07:53 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

What's really funny is to see the veracity you post with, thinking that somehow, your debate skills will change the facts in a congressional investigation. I mean, keep being you an all, but for sanity sake, I think you should realize that nothing you type here will do anything at all to change the reality that exists in these investigations. We can speculate, and hope, but the facts will be the facts, and all the wishing, won't change them.



posted on Oct, 25 2017 @ 07:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: Gryphon66

What's really funny is to see the veracity you post with, thinking that somehow, your debate skills will change the facts in a congressional investigation. I mean, keep being you an all, but for sanity sake, I think you should realize that nothing you type here will do anything at all to change the reality that exists in these investigations. We can speculate, and hope, but the facts will be the facts, and all the wishing, won't change them.


I'll take that as a compliment, Dude ... how kind of you this early in the morning.



posted on Oct, 25 2017 @ 07:57 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

I have gone over the facts over and over with you.

A repeat from earlier,

The Russian government clearly wanted the uranium one deal to go through.

The fbi under Obama knew that players in this deal were breaking the law before the ddeal went through.

Congress was never informed of this illegality, and an informant was told he couldn't speak to Congress.

That informant claims to have info Russians were trying to bribe the Clintons.

Around 140 million dollars was given to the Clinton foundation by people connected to the companies involved with this deal.

Bill Clinton met with putin personally right before the deal went through.

Bill then soon after personally received 500 thousand dollars from a Russian bank.

Hillary's assistant voted to allow the uranium one deal, which russia wanted.

What is a lie in their? Oh thats right, none of it.

As far as Affidavits, they were linked on the Hill article.

Sorry you didnt take the time to read them.



posted on Oct, 25 2017 @ 07:59 AM
link   
a reply to: theultimatebelgianjoke

Coward. Your fear is delicious. I don't normally talk like a bully like that. You do. That poisons the atmosphere here. I love the give and take of debate. I loathe the stench of bullying. That is why I cannot stand Donald Trump. That is why I think ATS would be better off without the Mud Pit dwellers. Still, letting the loud mouthed hate mongers bully the nerds brings in the revenue, so I guess we will just have to live with it... until the current trend makes anonymous posting illegal. Should that happen, I will still be here. Will you?



posted on Oct, 25 2017 @ 08:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: DJW001

originally posted by: theultimatebelgianjoke
a reply to: DJW001

I'm getting ready to enjoy the sweet taste of your tears when the 'Muh Russia' narative you've been wetting your pants for will further fade away.


Put your money where your mouth is. If there is proof Russia was not playing American politics illegally I will leave ATS. If the Mueller campaign leads to criminal charges, you will leave ATS. Deal?


What about the third option; Russiains were peddling influence, but mostly through democrats.


Zero evidence of that option; it's fantasy and media-driven rhetoric.


Not surprised the person who thinks its a-ok for the dems to pay foreign agents including Russians involved with the Kremlin for dirt (oh look there is evidence right there of dems working with russians), and then having Obama use that dirt for fisa warrants would claim there is no evidence of that.

your stance on that issue proves what a shill you are, so I guess its pointless to expect you to be honest about evidence that exists.



Not surprised that the person who lies and prevaricates at every turn until called on their crap is suggesting that Democrats paid Russians for anything in the Peegate Dossier. I'm not surprised that you are one of the Trump Chorus that denies that some of that information was valuable and has been used in investigations into Russian interference. I'm not surprised that you seem to have forgotten every argument here from Trump lovers that there's nothing wrong or illegal about getting dirt on your opponent particularly when that dirt turns out to be factual.

It's against T&C to call other members shills Grambler ... please don't direct that garbage to me when you've been fronting for The Hill for the last week and are on the record now stating that you know there's no evidence of wrongdoing by Hillary Clinton in this matter.


Is it T and C to call people liars?

I said there is no evidence I have seen that proves Hillary broke the law. Unlike you, I would want to see an investigation before I declared her guilty of pay for play here.

Everything I outlined in my previous post are actual facts from this uranium one case. You just don't want to deal with them, as you haven't for 10 plus pages now.

And now we know Hillarys team paid for the dossier, and this was apparently used as part of the reason to get fisa warrants.

The fact that you are ok with this is disgusting, and proves that you are to partisan to take seriously.



posted on Oct, 25 2017 @ 08:03 AM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

How do you "know" Hillary paid for the dossier? Aren't you supposed to wait for some kind of investigation?



posted on Oct, 25 2017 @ 08:07 AM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

Is it? When you're overtly and blatantly lying and have been shown in that activity? Why don't you ask a Mod?

Actually, this is what you said: "You have as much evidence for trump people money laundering as I do against hillary, none. "

You know it, I know it. You let slip that you understand fully that despite your numerous claims to the contrary, there is ZERO evidence against Hillary Clinton. Now, you can argue that you misspoke if you wish, but you said what you said.

Like your friends over at The Hill, you've done nothing more than toss in everything that any right-wing fringe theory has ever tried to tie to the non-existent "Uranium One scandal" as you guys are desperately trying to sell it.

You're misrepresenting the facts again. You know that an attorney was paid to engage Fusion GPS which employed Steele. That's all you know.

Pardon me if pointing out the facts in the face of your multiple continuing and feculent lies disgusts you; actually I'll take that as a compliment of the highest order.



posted on Oct, 25 2017 @ 08:09 AM
link   
a reply to: DJW001

Last time you did bully outside the mud-pit you ended up with two months posting ban ...
IgnorenceIsntBlisss could probably testify.

What do you still expect from Mueller at this stage ?



posted on Oct, 25 2017 @ 08:14 AM
link   

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: Grambler

How do you "know" Hillary paid for the dossier? Aren't you supposed to wait for some kind of investigation?


We have bank records and a letter from the lawyers hired by the DNC confirming it.



posted on Oct, 25 2017 @ 08:15 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66
Let me sum up your post.

"Yes again you are right will all of the facts you listed. I will again refuse to scomment on them, and instaed call you a liar"

Great job!



posted on Oct, 25 2017 @ 08:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: Grambler

How do you "know" Hillary paid for the dossier? Aren't you supposed to wait for some kind of investigation?


We have bank records and a letter from the lawyers hired by the DNC confirming it.


Can you link to those records? Post an image? Anything?



posted on Oct, 25 2017 @ 08:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: Grambler

How do you "know" Hillary paid for the dossier? Aren't you supposed to wait for some kind of investigation?


We have bank records and a letter from the lawyers hired by the DNC confirming it.


You do? Hold the letter up to the light and tell me what the watermark looks like.



posted on Oct, 25 2017 @ 08:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: Gryphon66
Let me sum up your post.

"Yes again you are right will all of the facts you listed. I will again refuse to scomment on them, and instaed call you a liar"

Great job!



Resorting to straw man arguments already? You lied, you got caught, and now you're trying to blow a smoke screen up.

Let me know when you calm down enough to speak rationally.



posted on Oct, 25 2017 @ 08:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: Grambler

How do you "know" Hillary paid for the dossier? Aren't you supposed to wait for some kind of investigation?


We have bank records and a letter from the lawyers hired by the DNC confirming it.


Can you link to those records? Post an image? Anything?


Hahahaha!

Funny how your standards of proof are different when it comes to Hillary.

Here are the relevant parts from the article.


Some of the details are included in a Tuesday letter sent by Perkins Coie to a lawyer representing Fusion GPS, telling the research firm that it was released from a ­client-confidentiality obligation. The letter was prompted by a legal fight over a subpoena for Fusion GPS’s bank records.

...

The Clinton campaign paid Perkins Coie $5.6 million in legal fees from June 2015 to December 2016, according to campaign finance records, and the DNC paid the firm $3.6 million in “legal and compliance consulting’’ since November 2015 — though it’s impossible to tell from the filings how much of that work was for other legal matters and how much of it related to Fusion GPS.


www.washingtonpost.com... -a908-a3470754bbb9_story.html?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-main_dossier-630pm%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&tid=a_inl&utm_term=.4abd08abd423

Just want to get you on record then. You don't believe that Hillarys campaign did in fact pay for this.

It will be another in a long line of things you are absolutely wrong on.



posted on Oct, 25 2017 @ 08:20 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: Gryphon66
Let me sum up your post.

"Yes again you are right will all of the facts you listed. I will again refuse to scomment on them, and instaed call you a liar"

Great job!



Resorting to straw man arguments already? You lied, you got caught, and now you're trying to blow a smoke screen up.

Let me know when you calm down enough to speak rationally.


Oh so you did address the points i raised.

Can you link me where that happened?



posted on Oct, 25 2017 @ 08:21 AM
link   
a reply to: theultimatebelgianjoke

I expect Mueller to make his report. It will call for indictments of Manafort, Flynn, and Cohen. Money laundering, acting as an undeclared agent of a foreign power, falsifying documents. Just a strong enough whiff of treason that they will cut major deals. Then Trump supporters will finally have to face the facts about their orange calf.



posted on Oct, 25 2017 @ 08:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: theultimatebelgianjoke

I expect Mueller to make his report. It will call for indictments of Manafort, Flynn, and Cohen. Money laundering, acting as an undeclared agent of a foreign power, falsifying documents. Just a strong enough whiff of treason that they will cut major deals. Then Trump supporters will finally have to face the facts about their orange calf.


Looks like manafort may on fact be charged. And perhaps the Podestas.

Then you will have to face the facts about your team, that they were the ones knowingly peddling russian influence for years.



posted on Oct, 25 2017 @ 08:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: Gryphon66
Let me sum up your post.

"Yes again you are right will all of the facts you listed. I will again refuse to scomment on them, and instaed call you a liar"

Great job!



Resorting to straw man arguments already? You lied, you got caught, and now you're trying to blow a smoke screen up.

Let me know when you calm down enough to speak rationally.


Oh so you did address the points i raised.

Can you link me where that happened?


Why would I respond to points that have proven to be based on your own dishonesty? Did you or did you not state clearly and openly that "You have as much evidence for trump people money laundering as I do against hillary, none."

Did you say that or not?



posted on Oct, 25 2017 @ 08:24 AM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

Since when does legal fees= compiling a dossier with the help of a British ex-spy? Aren't you jumping to the sort of conclusions the way you accuse others of doing?



new topics

top topics



 
55
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join