ermy

Wasn't Trump, you cocksucking S.O.B.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/nsa-differed-from-cia-others-on-russia-bounty-intelligence-11593534220

When the article has this headline:

NSA Differed From CIA, Others on Russia Bounty Intelligence

I think it's pretty safe to say there was a definite lack of certainty within the administration about what was going on.

Plus, just think about the situation. If true, you have a foreign power, who the Democrats now suddenly consider a threat (since they found an angle the *think* they can use against Trump) even though they sucked up to them for the entire eight years during the previous administration, that is doing something utterly reprehensible, no doubt illegal, and something any US citizen, especially a president, would like to stop.

So, what should he have done? If he's not Putin's bitch, then Putin would ignore him if confronted by Trump, and not stopped. If he is Putin's bitch, then Putin would have ignored him, laughed at him, etc., and not stopped.

So, what magical power would you have Trump wield to make Russia stop? And I don't want to hear any crap about things like sanctions, expelling diplomats, or any of the other things Trump has already done, or is already doing to Russia, because you guys have already ignored all of that when you were making up shit about Trump colluding with Russia.

He colluded IN PUBLIC... "Russia if you are Listening: perhaps you could hack my fellow Americans computers and steal their emails"..... 24 hours later... they did.

Name calling, first sign of losing an arguement

Shut up, noob. 1st sign of losing an argument is when you can't spell argument.

Another sign of losing an argument is when you call somebody a noob

When the noob shoe fits...

Don't stick your nose in when you don't have a clue. Manhattan insults people just the same and that's fine, what we don't need is your whiteknighting. For a guy, no less.

Who's arguing?
I don't argue with Manahattan.
He is a disingenuous liar. He/she/it will distort any and everything.
If he were an honest broker of information or had the capacity to be persuaded with truth and logic, I would be more than willing to "argue" anything with him/her/it.
It, She, He has proven repeatedly that he/she/it doesn't.

Or utter frustration at people making up shit about the president. Still doesn't make it okay, but it does explain it. Well, it's okay to do it to Trump, but not when defending him, right?

Name calling for liberals, democrats, conservatives and all political partys is a sign of losing the arguement, if i called you and trump *dumbasses that got the iq of a peanut* then that would be a sign of losing the arguement

Fake news, anonymous sources I'm sure you've already been told.
But wait until you find out the real origins of this story about bounties being paid by foreign powers, you're not going to like it. Mark my words it goes back to 2010 and the real culprit is?

Report: Iran pays $1,000 for each U.S. soldier killed by the Taliban

Jan 5 2010

Afghan group’s treasurer admits receiving money from Iran, newspaper says
Iran is paying Taliban fighters $1,000 for each U.S. soldier they kill in Afghanistan, according to a report in a British newspaper.
The Sunday Times described how a man it said was a “Taliban treasurer” had gone to collect $18,000 from an Iranian firm in Kabul, a reward it said was for an attack in July which killed several Afghan government troops and destroyed an American armored vehicle.
The treasurer left with the cash hidden in a sack of flour, the newspaper said, and then gave it to Taliban fighters in the province of Wardak. In the past six months, the treasurer claimed to have collected more than $77,000 from the company.
The Sunday Times said its investigation had found that at least five Kabul-based Iranian companies were secretly passing funds to the Taliban.
The newspaper’s correspondent, Miles Amoore, said he met and interviewed the treasurer, who he said had been an illiterate farmer who was taught to read and write, plus basic accountancy, by the Taliban last winter.
Source: nbcnews.com

but what about but what about but what about.... WHO IS POTUS RIGHT NOW?

Wasn't Obama having a good suck of the Mullahs balls.

[image deleted] It's always what about, what about hey?.
Often it is because it's all disingenuous reaction by a bunch of reactionary cry babies. So explain why you all said nothing back in 2010?
And for your viewing pleasure take a look at the NSC release which still wont make you quiet when you should be. .

Hahaha more lies, your case is really weak and you are desperate