Why the collusion myth might destroy the Democrats in 2020

[iluvatar5150]

That made me throw up a little in my mouth.

Obama's kept the US at war longer than Bush and we suffered more casualties during the Obama years than before on two war fronts. Our National debt skyrocketed during Obama.

The vomiting might have been a result of all the spinning you just did.

 

[jgarden]

Why the collusion myth might destroy the Democrats in 2020

For the record "collusion" is not a crime - thus the Mueller Investigation was never going to charge this President and his surrogates with "collusion!"

The meeting in Trump Towers where included Donald Jr, Jared Kushner and Paul Manafort were suppose to receive "dirt" on Hillary Clinton from the Russians - how comfortable are Republicans when it comes to allowing this President to co-operate with foreign powers when attempting to influence American elections?

Then there is the small matter of this President attempting to deceive the American people about the Trump Tower meeting by inventing a "cover story" about adoptions - what was he trying to keep secret if there were no sinister intentions?

 

[yougottabekidding]

Obama's kept the US at war longer than Bush and we suffered more casualties during the Obama years than before on two war fronts. Our National debt skyrocketed during Obama.

Weird you'd ignore who started the Bush2 wars here. Very weird.

Not at all - you'll note I did mention Mr. Bush - in the context of my statement, who started the wars wasn't relevant. I bolded in red the relevant point that I was making - Mr. Obama's administration saw more causalities on one war front, than Mr. Bush saw on two.

 

[yougottabekidding]

The meeting in Trump Towers where included Donald Jr, Jared Kushner and Paul Manafort were suppose to receive "dirt" on Hillary Clinton from the Russians - how comfortable are Republicans when it comes to allowing this President to co-operate with foreign powers when attempting to influence American elections

It is interesting to note the frequency that this is brought up, yet those same voices are silent towards a Presidential candidate, her campaign team and the entire political party to which she is a member of paid millions of dollars to a foreign national and eventually the Russians, and did in fact receive "dirt" on President Trump.

Somehow that is not at all relevant. You have to ask why?

 

[Speedwell]

It is interesting to note the frequency that this is brought up, yet those same voices are silent towards a Presidential candidate, her campaign team and the entire political party to which she is a member of paid millions of dollars to a foreign national and eventually the Russians, and did in fact receive "dirt" on President Trump.

Somehow that is not at all relevant. You have to ask why?

Because she is not the President.

 

[iluvatar5150]

Not at all - you'll note I did mention Mr. Bush - in the context of my statement, who started the wars wasn't relevant. I bolded in red the relevant point that I was making - Mr. Obama's administration saw more causalities on one war front, than Mr. Bush saw on two.

Where are you getting those numbers?

iCasualties Iraq: iCasualties Home Page

I count around 4200 US fatalities in Iraq during the Bush years, and only around 300 during Obama, with ~2400 killed in the entire war in Afghanistan.

 

[SimplyMe]

It is interesting to note the frequency that this is brought up, yet those same voices are silent towards a Presidential candidate, her campaign team and the entire political party to which she is a member of paid millions of dollars to a foreign national and eventually the Russians, and did in fact receive "dirt" on President Trump.

Somehow that is not at all relevant. You have to ask why?

Because she did not actually pay a foreign national. Instead, she paid a US company to find background information on Donald Trump. That the company is partially owned by a foreign national, and he paid of Russians, in order to find information, is irrelevant.

Think of it like this: you want a TV. So, you go to your local store, or even Amazon or other US based company. Now, some of your money ended up in China, because the TV was manufactured in a plant there.

By contrast, say that a Chinese agent calls you and tells you that they heard you want a new TV and that they can give you one free. Of course, logic tells you that you won't get it for "free," rather that he'll want "repayment" of some type at a later date.

Can you see the difference? You do realize, for political campaigns, and even someone holding a security clearance, that one is completely and totally legal and the second (at least for those with security clearances) is likely to land you in jail?

 

[KCfromNC]

Not at all - you'll note I did mention Mr. Bush - in the context of my statement, who started the wars wasn't relevant. I bolded in red the relevant point that I was making - Mr. Obama's administration saw more causalities on one war front, than Mr. Bush saw on two.

What was the correct course of action for Obama to take, given the wars he inherited from Bush2?

ETA - saw the other post. Never mind, more right wing spin. My fault for not questioning it was made up.

 

[KCfromNC]

It is interesting to note the frequency that this is brought up, yet those same voices are silent towards a Presidential candidate, her campaign team and the entire political party to which she is a member of paid millions of dollars to a foreign national and eventually the Russians, and did in fact receive "dirt" on President Trump.

I don't know. It isn't that interesting that some people know how to separate conspiracy theory and right wing spin like this from reality. The interesting thing to me is how some people can't.