Official LRC President Donald J Trump Thread

Again, the definition that you originally provided did not support your original claim. I correctly pointed this out to you.

Let me ask you a simple question - why are you now trying for alternate definitions if your first one (which is the entire subject of this mini-thread) did in fact support your original claim? Sorry brother but the answer is pretty obvious.

And since the answer is pretty obvious, let's move to the second question - Why, since you know for a FACT that your original definition did not support your original claim, do you not simply admit your error and move on? Oh, that's right, because you're Flaggy. And that's just a fundamental character flaw you have.

Anyway, I'm done beating you up. I recognize you are simply incapable of admitting your error (haven't you proven that repeatedly already, and to disastrously comical effect?).

Go ahead, fire away one more time trying to defend the indefensible. We'll all be laughing at you. But I'm done with you. It's been a blast.

Actually we are laughing at you! It's funny.

Ha! No one beats me up, brother. I am not hanging my hat on any one definition. My point was that collusion (certainly as used in this Trump issue) is a crime. If you find some glee that the first definition I supplied isn't as concrete as some others, then fine...point is that collusion is a crime...if they find that Trump and his administration "colluded" with Russia, no one will be saying, "they just had some secret meetings." No. They will be using that word to mean that the campaign entered into illegal dealings with Russia to try to beat Hillary Clinton. They are looking for criminal behavior here.

I find it sad, not funny. Attempting to defend Trump in any way is sad...that man is wholly unqualified to be the President. He won't last.

Trrrrhhh wrote:

I fixed it for you. It was wonderful to watch the Republicans love Come for bringing down Hillary, and have The Donald talk about how wonderful he was. And then have Donnie can him the second he was about to reveal the ties to Russia.

While meanwhile, the Republicans went from talking about him like it was the greatest thing since sliced bread, to the worst person since Hillary.

Ok- So that's where you're clearly making things up: the Republicans never loved Comey for "bringing her down." We don't feel like he did anything if the sort. The Left flipped out, but that doesn't mean the Right celebrated. Remember, he still had to come out and say, "Hillary's all clear" the Sunday before the election.

We are aware of Comey's close ties with the Clintons (look it up if you need to), and believe he did a terrible thing by not indicting her for her blatant INTENT to mishandle classified/confidential information. From that point forward he was dead to us.

So again, we only have one instance of a certain party that has switched its stance on Comey out of political convenience- the Democrats. If you haven't watched that Colbert clip, you need to do so. And then realize how stupid sheep are that need to be told what to think. They thought they should cheer, but were told they should jeer. Hilarious.

Cool story brah - equating a crowd at a late night show to half a nation's voting base, yeah smart one

Who does Theresa May think she is? The US says what it wants when it wants to who it wants - even if that means putting people's lives in danger. Trump should just grab her by the p***y and send her on the way!

http://www.cnn.com/2017/05/25/europe/manchester-terror-attack-uk/index.html

shockandawe wrote:

Who does Theresa May think she is? The US says what it wants when it wants to who it wants - even if that means putting people's lives in danger. Trump should just grab her by the p***y and send her on the way!

http://www.cnn.com/2017/05/25/europe/manchester-terror-attack-uk/index.html

Focus on the LEAKS!!! The LEAKS are our main problem! I mean other people's LEAKS of course, not my LEAKS which are "wholly appropriate". Or focus on voter FRAUD. Basically, focus on ANYTHING other than the TRUMP-Russia thing. The TRUMP-Russia thing is fake news, that's why I fired Comey.

Cool thought, brah. If Hillary had won and fired Comey, all the Libby sheep would have celebrated. You know it. I know it.

Truth be told tho wrote:

Psychologist wrote:

Cool story brah - equating a crowd at a late night show to half a nation's voting base, yeah smart one

Cool thought, brah. If Hillary had won and fired Comey, all the Libby sheep would have celebrated. You know it. I know it.

^This. Bigly!!! Focus on the ELECTION. Focus on CLINTON. Focus on anything but the TRUMP-Russia thing....I fired coming for focusing on that....I can fire you too!!!!

Here is how you really threaten people with their job if they don't do what you want.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cfby0FYLBkM&feature=youtu.be&t=1h26m40s

The Orange Snowflake wrote:

Truth be told tho wrote:

Cool thought, brah. If Hillary had won and fired Comey, all the Libby sheep would have celebrated. You know it. I know it.

^This. Bigly!!! Focus on the ELECTION. Focus on CLINTON. Focus on anything but the TRUMP-Russia thing....I fired coming for focusing on that....I can fire you too!!!!

Huh? Are you that dull that you can't understand firing someone that you don't trust and who continues meddling in issues you don't even believe happened?

And how about you get your Democratic representatives to stop saying they "haven't seen any evidence of collusion" before you continue pushing the "But but but... RUSSIA!!" narrative?

The vast majority of democrats believe that Russia hacked into voting machines. But wait, Obama, Comey, et al said that there is no evidence that voting machines were hacked ... yet! ...

LOL

http://www.informationliberation.com/?id=56789

Truth be told tho wrote:

The Orange Snowflake wrote:

^This. Bigly!!! Focus on the ELECTION. Focus on CLINTON. Focus on anything but the TRUMP-Russia thing....I fired coming for focusing on that....I can fire you too!!!!

Huh? Are you that dull that you can't understand firing someone that you don't trust and who continues meddling in issues you don't even believe happened?

And how about you get your Democratic representatives to stop saying they "haven't seen any evidence of collusion" before you continue pushing the "But but but... RUSSIA!!" narrative?

What!?!? We are on the same side my friend! We're going to do tremendous things for this country. You'll get the best schools thanks to Betty and Tom is working hard to insure that you don't have insurance. We're making America Great Again, bigly!

Btw, I am having a big rally in Tuscaloosa when I get back from Europe (it's a total disaster here by the way but it could be tremendous if they put me in charge...) do you want to come? This is our new rallying cry....

itbaddude wrote:

The vast majority of democrats believe that Russia hacked into voting machines. But wait, Obama, Comey, et al said that there is no evidence that voting machines were hacked ... yet! ...

LOL

http://www.informationliberation.com/?id=56789

That number would have been 90% for Trump voters.

"If I lose, it was rigged!" - DT

bigtime wrote:

http://money.cnn.com/2017/05/24/news/economy/donald-trump-voters-budget-cuts/

This is an example of a story devoid of any factual information, otherwise known nowadays as Fake News. A clear example of media bias.

Appeal to leftist stereotypes:

1) Trump voters are poor whites

2) Single mothers are poor

Uses loaded words:

I voted for Trump. Now he wants to cut the aid I need

Appeal to liberal causes:

Shockey is on Supplemental Security Income (SSI), a program to help low-income Americans who are disabled

Summary

There is 0 evidence that any claim reported by that article is true or will be true.

Phife wrote:

itbaddude wrote:

The vast majority of democrats believe that Russia hacked into voting machines. But wait, Obama, Comey, et al said that there is no evidence that voting machines were hacked ... yet! ...

LOL

http://www.informationliberation.com/?id=56789

That number would have been 90% for Trump voters.

"If I lose, it was rigged!" - DT

I give you factual information and you make up information. Is that the best you have?

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Thursday shows that 48% of Likely U.S. Voters approve of President Trump’s job performance. The latest figures include 31% who Strongly Approve of the way Trump is performing. We are back were we started.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/trump_administration/prez_track_may25

itbaddude wrote:

Phife wrote:

That number would have been 90% for Trump voters.

"If I lose, it was rigged!" - DT

I give you factual information and you make up information. Is that the best you have?

I've said it many times before, we are a conspiracy theory Nation raised on the x-files, Democrats and Republicans. However, had Hillary won and the same poll was taken of Trump voters, I will assure you that at least 90% would have answered definitely true.

And when you say "I give you factual information" and "the vast majority of Democrats" be aware that this is a sample size of 544 people . Since your source is a conservative conspiracy publication, also note how they say CNN, NYT Wash Post promoted this theory with their reporting. They nevr did identify one of these reports. Because it didnt happen