Oh, the hypocrisy...

so, if the elections were hacked into, and Hillary should have been president, shouldn't Trump stay out of that hacking investigation?
If the investigation proves that Hillary won,will he come out in public saying 'look guys, im sorry i took over the office, but this was a mistake. i will now hand my seat over to Hillary"

he would do so if he was a correct person, but he's not. he doesn't even like facts. he only likes many zeros on the checks he receives.. so

originally posted by: Kryscent
so, if the elections were hacked into, and Hillary should have been president, shouldn't Trump stay out of that hacking investigation?
If the investigation proves that Hillary won,will he come out in public saying 'look guys, im sorry i took over the office, but this was a mistake. i will now hand my seat over to Hillary"

he would do so if he was a correct person, but he's not. he doesn't even like facts. he only likes many zeros on the checks he receives.. so

Your entire premise is wrong, so no he should not hand his seat over. "The elections were hacked" isn't even possible. Nobody is saying the Russians were able to hack the election machines and change votes. Go ahead, prove me wrong and find someone with any degree of credibility who says this happened. Information (ie, e-mails) can be hacked, but there's no proof that even that happened. Remember, Crowdstike is on the DNC's payroll. They reached the conclusion they were paid to reach. Most other experts say it was probably an internal leak.

And no Hillary did not win. She ran a terrible campaign, lost in a solid majority of the states, and consequently Trump secured a majority of the electoral votes.

a reply to: redtic

Well this investigation is costing ME/US Taxpayers money, Either end it or solve it. Time to put up or STFU already and move on.

Stop wasting my money.

Its getting to the point that I don't really care anymore about this whole Russian thing. They keep beating us over the head with it day in and day out. Just end it already, who cares.

I say that we demand they provide some sort of concrete proof to justify wasting Tax payers money by keeping an investigation open for no reason, if they cannot provide concrete proof, then it needs to be case closed.

a reply to: Skorpy
I wonder what the actual costs of these investigations are up to now.

originally posted by: tadaman
a reply to: Blarneystoner

www.nytimes.com...

www.nationalreview.com...

I can give you the info you already had and knew you had, at your fingertips.

I cant make you read for yourself. I cant make you believe what I think is true. I only ask that you dont waste our time.

Clinton is not hiding the fact in DC. This is absurd. It is accepted at this point. Only CTR still harps on about Mrs Clinton's BS integrity because they are still under contract to do so.

EDIT TO ADD:
Why are we even talking about this? Oh yeah there is no actual evidence of collusion and this is the only thing we got going that sounds like a Them VS us play by "trumpets"

The lie is that its "trumpets" or the entirety of the world wide awake to the BS of the divide.

I used two polar opposite papers. One a right leaning and one a social liberal press.

Its a fact, you just dont know as much as you thought,

Surprise!

TADA

Complete bunk. There were 8 other members of the committee who also had to approve the deal. If there was any kind of impropriety, the Republican Majority Congress in 2013 would have investigated. Clinton had no power to individually approve or veto the deal.

Stop wasting my time with this BS.... FFS.

HYPOCRICY?!?! REALLY?!
The REAL hypocricy is when people use a forum that was meant to bring people together for debate and discussion, and turn the whole site into a platform used to insult, to disrespect, and attempt to degrade others intelligence!!! All based on whether you support Trump, or despise him, or you lean left, or you lean right.
I also understand this is an open forum where people can what they like and I don't have to read a thread, or participate in it, but we've come well past debate, straight into division. Team A vs. Team B. Why is it so hard to see there will NEVER be a winner? What would constitute a win in the first place? If (a really BIG if) one team did win, would we not ALL lose???
The past year I've seen many threads posted that are not debates, or discussions, but hit pieces designed to anger, incite, and infuriate others, simply because 2 groups have different opinions. Group A insists Group B is stupid and ignorant for not agreeing their thoughts and ideology, and vice-versa.
When was the last time someone actually 'won' a political debate? I mean REALLY won, where one side concedes, and says, "you're right and I'm wrong"? Then shakes hands and walks away?

Mark my words, there has NEVER been a point where 100% of citizens agree with the political climate, nor will there ever be one.
Here on ATS, its ok to disagree. Its ok to share thoughts and opinions. Its ok to get a lil heated during an intense debate. But it is not ok to insult. It is not ok to berate. It is not ok to disrespect.

There's a TON of intelligence in this forum. Im sure most of us have heard of the 2 topics not to be discussed at work, on dates, or in social settings.
1. Religion
2. Politics
Id like to think that here on ATS, we can be respectful enough to discuss either of those, because there is some very skilled debaters here!
Somehow, some way, we have ALL forgotten thats its ok to disagree.

A.T.S.- Fight nearly to the death, then shake hands and walk away.

a reply to: Blarneystoner

Yes, ok

HOW is it bunk?

You could have not wasted time posting that you simply dont like it.

You cant actually disprove anything.

This is funny. How sad.

Derp, stick your head in a hole. Its less stressful and doesnt require you to actually prove the things you say.

It is your turn though. You asked, and I provided.

What you say DOESNT actually validate your ignorant stance.

What you say is like : murder is illegal, so it doesnt happen.

LoL.

a reply to: abago71

Less than Benghazi.

originally posted by: tadaman
a reply to: Blarneystoner

Yes, ok

HOW is it bunk?

You could have not wasted time posting that you simply dont like it.

You cant actually disprove anything.

This is funny. How sad.

Derp, stick your head in a hole. Its less stressful and doesnt require you to actually prove the things you say.

It is your turn though. You asked, and I provided.

What you say DOESNT actually validate your ignorant stance.

What you say is like : murder is illegal, so it doesnt happen.

LoL.

lol... you're a real piece of work aren't you. No substance... all snark. No wonder no one takes you seriously.

a reply to: redticyou do know that all the crap floating around her and the fact she was so smug about it not even trying to deny the accusations of sleeping with saudis killed her election right.

a reply to: Blarneystoner

Wow, youre being a dick.

Say what is incorrect or stop replying.

A whole post and not a single shred of evidence.

4 years buddy.

originally posted by: tadaman
a reply to: Blarneystoner

Wow, youre being a dick.

Say what is incorrect or stop replying.

A whole post and not a single shred of proof.

Lame.

Who's being a dick?

I've already provided my thoughts as to why I think that nonsense is bunk and you didn't respond to any of it. You completely ignored those points and instead decided to attack me personally.

I'm not going to waste my time responding to a POS little troll like yourself any further. You're just a punk and everyone here knows it.... FFS. Get a life boy.

a reply to: abago71

Millions.

I wonder how proportionate media gains are to tax payer spending on this?

Dollar to dollar? 2:1....

a reply to: Blarneystoner

Your thoughts are your OPINION

You do know there is a difference between your opinion on something, evidence of it and then proof?

Yes?

Ok bye!

It stands. Not bunk. Actually, near proven. Much evidence.

All things being equal, we can go ahead and say that the Clintons "sold the US out" as far as selling our uranium deposits to Russia DIRECTLY through the back dealings of the Clinton foundation and the DNC.

250 million in declared personal assets aint bad for a "poor mans run" in politics.

Omg, just omg, one fing meeting where the person misreprented themselves isnt god dam collusion you #ing god dam idiot. What he dod isnt even a crime, wrong yes, crime nope

originally posted by: redtic
I find it very hypocritical

I do too.

Where is your concern that the Russian lawyer is anti Trump and is connected to the company the DNC hired to dig up dirt on Trump?

Where is your concern that the dossier against Trump gets all it's information from Kremlin sources.

Hypocrite?