|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 20 days
|
Re: TRUMP 2020 [Re: Kryptos]
#26344514 - 11/25/19 12:14 PM (4 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
What "Ukraine conspiracy" has been debunked? Has it been shown that the people in the cartoon or their families weren't making outragious amounts of money in Ukraine?
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
The Ecstatic
Chilldog Extraordinaire


Registered: 11/11/09
Posts: 33,362
Loc: 'Merica
Last seen: 1 hour, 3 minutes
|
|
Not gonna read the thread but I believe the conspiracy they’ve debunked is the one that Giuliani basically invented by saying Ukraine was meddling in 2016 and they have this private server or some shit. All been debunked by testimony.
--------------------
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 20 days
|
|
Was corruption by the people in the cartoon in Ukraine debunked?
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
Edited by Falcon91Wolvrn03 (11/25/19 12:34 PM)
|
The Ecstatic
Chilldog Extraordinaire


Registered: 11/11/09
Posts: 33,362
Loc: 'Merica
Last seen: 1 hour, 3 minutes
|
|
Not that I’m aware of. I’m also not aware of any Ukrainian corruption allegations surround Kerry, Romney, or Pelosi though so 
I just know that the Dems did their best to kill the conspiracy theory about Trump really going after Biden and Ukraine because Ukraine was influencing the 2016 election.
--------------------
|
Kryptos
Stranger

Registered: 11/01/14
Posts: 12,258
Last seen: 1 day, 50 minutes
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said: What "Ukraine conspiracy" has been debunked? Has it been shown that the people in the cartoon or their families weren't making outragious amounts of money in Ukraine?
It was never shown that any of the people in the cartoon, or their families, were making any money illegitimately in Ukraine.
|
Kryptos
Stranger

Registered: 11/01/14
Posts: 12,258
Last seen: 1 day, 50 minutes
|
Re: TRUMP 2020 [Re: Kryptos]
#26344676 - 11/25/19 01:24 PM (4 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
The key word here being "illegitimately".
That would be Rick Perry's oil buddies, the ones that just recieved a 50 year contract to drill for oil in Ukraine after undercutting the competing Ukrainian bid by several million dollars.
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 20 days
|
Re: TRUMP 2020 [Re: Kryptos] 1
#26344678 - 11/25/19 01:24 PM (4 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
I thoght corruption was the main issue, but the establishment is determined to keep the conversation from ever going there, and to confuse people whenever it does.
I previously wrote about how Dems rejected a GOP subpoena request, and that post also provided other details about corruption. There's a LOT more out there, but you won't find it in the mainstream news.
I'd be happy to provide links to the corruption allegations against each of the people in my comic and/or their families if you're interested.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 20 days
|
Re: TRUMP 2020 [Re: Kryptos]
#26344685 - 11/25/19 01:26 PM (4 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Kryptos said: The key word here being "illegitimately".
Exactly. I was about to ask what that meant. Is corruption legit when there isn't a specific law against it?
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Kryptos
Stranger

Registered: 11/01/14
Posts: 12,258
Last seen: 1 day, 50 minutes
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said: I thoght corruption was the main issue, but the establishment is determined to keep the conversation from ever going there, and to confuse people whenever it does.
I previously wrote about how Dems rejected a GOP subpoena request, and that post also provided other details about corruption. There's a LOT more out there, but you won't find it in the mainstream news.
I'd be happy to provide links to the corruption allegations against each of the people in my comic and/or their families if you're interested.
You previously laid out why the previous administration of Ukraine was corrupt. neither of your articles provide anything other than a tenuous connection to Biden, and neither of them is particularly specific. One completely discounts Hunter Biden's pretty impressive credentials as a business manager. The other simply states that a guy involved with a hedge fund that potentially made money off Ukranian corruption also happened to be an Obama donor.
And yes, democrats voted down subpoenaing unrelated witnesses. This was addressed in the testimony. "There is no credible evidence of Ukrainian interference in the 2016 elections". Similarly, if I am on trial for murder, there is absolutely no need to subpoena some random dude I went to high school with and haven't seen in decades.
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
Kryptos said: The key word here being "illegitimately".
Exactly. I was about to ask what that meant. Is corruption legit when there isn't a specific law against it?
If there is no specific law against it, it isn't corruption.
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 20 days
|
Re: TRUMP 2020 [Re: Kryptos]
#26344840 - 11/25/19 02:32 PM (4 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Kryptos said: If there is no specific law against it, it isn't corruption.
Wikileaks has an entire section devoted to legal corruption.
I'll give an example:
There are currently laws prohibiting Congresspeople and their spouses from making business deals abroad, so now corrupt Congresspeople simple have family members make these deals instead. That's still corrupt, but legal.
And do you really believe Hunter Biden has "pretty impressive credentials as a business manager" that allow him to make far more than his Yale classmates, or are you being partisan?
Also, it's funny how when I argued there was no credible evidence of Trump-Putin collusion, people told me that we should still look at all the evidence just to be sure, and I actually agreed. Now that the dems are being investigated, we see a clear double standard.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 20 days
|
Re: TRUMP 2020 [Re: Kryptos]
#26344883 - 11/25/19 02:50 PM (4 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Kryptos said: Democrats voted down subpoenaing unrelated witnesses. This was addressed in the testimony. "There is no credible evidence of Ukrainian interference in the 2016 elections".
By the way, I thought this was mainly about corruption, but now everyone seems to think it's about Ukrainian interference? That was a good sleight of hand by the Dems.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
The Ecstatic
Chilldog Extraordinaire


Registered: 11/11/09
Posts: 33,362
Loc: 'Merica
Last seen: 1 hour, 3 minutes
|
|
???
The Trump camp is the one who tried to make it about Ukrainian interference in 2016 to deflect away from the quid pro quo, not Dems.
Doesn’t really matter though because nobody who thought Trump was innocent at the start of this now thinks he’s guilty.
--------------------
|
Bigbadwooof
Trumps Bone Spurs



Registered: 12/07/13
Posts: 13,304
Last seen: 36 minutes, 34 seconds
|
|
Never thought I would have to say this, but my hat is off to Trump for this little gem right here:
He doesn't even realize the ideological chain of thought he is pursuing here, because he's never been terribly interested in politics, or classic arguments on popular issues, such as the drug war. Still, he said it better than any president has since we began this disastrous war on drugs.
-------------------- "It is no measure of good health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society," - Jiddu Krishnamurti FARTS "There is no need for conspiracy where interests converge" - George Carlin Every one of you should see this video. "If you bombard the earth with photons for a while, it can emit a roadster" - Andrej Kerpathy
 
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 20 days
|
|
Quote:
The Ecstatic said:
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said: I thought this was mainly about corruption, but now everyone seems to think it's about Ukrainian interference? That was a good sleight of hand by the Dems.
???
The Trump camp is the one who tried to make it about Ukrainian interference in 2016 to deflect away from the quid pro quo, not Dems.
You don't remember? Trump/Giuliani lobbying Ukraine for dirt on Biden and his son
I'm not saying the Trump campaign didn't bring up Ukrainian interference as a result of Ukraine releasing dirt on Manafort, I'm saying that wasn't originally the focus.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
Edited by Falcon91Wolvrn03 (11/25/19 03:35 PM)
|
dreamachine

Registered: 11/17/19
Posts: 663
Last seen: 4 years, 1 month
|
|
Know what's hilarious? The fact that anyone could believe that Trump needed to dig up dirt on Biden in order to win 2020. I mean come on. MSM might like to suck Biden's dick, but the people have known for a long time that Biden never had a shot against Trump, not to mention the fact that almost no Democrat wants Biden over Bernie/Tulsi/Yang.
--------------------
|
ZombiWurm
Stranger

Registered: 10/15/18
Posts: 644
|
|
I bet you would lick the shit off his asshole for the right amount of money.
|
The Ecstatic
Chilldog Extraordinaire


Registered: 11/11/09
Posts: 33,362
Loc: 'Merica
Last seen: 1 hour, 3 minutes
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
The Ecstatic said:
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said: I thought this was mainly about corruption, but now everyone seems to think it's about Ukrainian interference? That was a good sleight of hand by the Dems.
???
The Trump camp is the one who tried to make it about Ukrainian interference in 2016 to deflect away from the quid pro quo, not Dems.
You don't remember? Trump/Giuliani lobbying Ukraine for dirt on Biden and his son
I'm not saying the Trump campaign didn't bring up Ukrainian interference as a result of Ukraine releasing dirt on Manafort, I'm saying that wasn't originally the focus.
Well of course not, the Dems have been saying _____ will be the end of Trump for 4 years now. I think the reason Pelosi finally followed through on impeachment was because of how clear cut the Ukraine thing is. It’s hard to prove corruption at that level.
--------------------
|
Kryptos
Stranger

Registered: 11/01/14
Posts: 12,258
Last seen: 1 day, 50 minutes
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
Kryptos said: If there is no specific law against it, it isn't corruption.
Wikileaks has an entire section devoted to legal corruption.
I'll give an example:
There are currently laws prohibiting Congresspeople and their spouses from making business deals abroad, so now corrupt Congresspeople simple have family members make these deals instead. That's still corrupt, but legal.
And do you really believe Hunter Biden has "pretty impressive credentials as a business manager" that allow him to make far more than his Yale classmates, or are you being partisan?
Also, it's funny how when I argued there was no credible evidence of Trump-Putin collusion, people told me that we should still look at all the evidence just to be sure, and I actually agreed. Now that the dems are being investigated, we see a clear double standard.
Legal impossibility is a valid defense. I.e., doing something that isn't a crime is not criminal.
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
Kryptos said: Democrats voted down subpoenaing unrelated witnesses. This was addressed in the testimony. "There is no credible evidence of Ukrainian interference in the 2016 elections".
By the way, I thought this was mainly about corruption, but now everyone seems to think it's about Ukrainian interference? That was a good sleight of hand by the Dems.
Yes, it is about corruption. The GOP decided to bring up a Putin point as their defense. It is being dismantled.
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 20 days
|
|
Quote:
The Ecstatic said: Well of course not, the Dems have been saying _____ will be the end of Trump for 4 years now. I think the reason Pelosi finally followed through on impeachment was because of how clear cut the Ukraine thing is. It’s hard to prove corruption at that level.
Look, I'm not arguing Trump isn't corrupt. I'm arguing that many establishment Democrats are as well, which I'm sure you would agree with.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 20 days
|
Re: TRUMP 2020 [Re: Kryptos]
#26345542 - 11/25/19 08:31 PM (4 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Kryptos said: doing something that isn't a crime is not criminal.
I agree. But it can still be corrupt.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
|