International News Donald Trump 🍊🇺🇸

But Trump was not found 'not guilty' by Mueller. Do you really think the unsupported conclusions of one person prove anything? Where is the concurring evidence showing there was no collusion? To draw your conclusion based on what one person said is rather arrogant.

EDIT - I'm not complaining about anything, by the way, I just have this strange desire to hear the truth from reputable sources. Or from a few reputable sources.
There are plenty of sources out there, I have listed them many times, but you lot won't do it. Can't think why. Go off and take a look.

Look at the scope of the Mueller investigation and what it entailed. It is not hard to find
 
There are plenty of sources out there, I have listed them many times, but you lot won't do it. Can't think why. Go off and take a look.

Look at the scope of the Mueller investigation and what it entailed. It is not hard to find
For a start, I don't belong to a 'lot'. Believe it or not, I don't recall every source you've ever quoted. If reputable sources denying Russian influence are that common and that easy to find, kindly re-publish them.
 
I agree. Her problem is the lack of appropriate candidate on the Democrat side and the distinct issues with the candidate they have.

If they had an Obama esque candidate, it would scorch the earth for them. Joe Biden makes Trump look a flexible intellectual and the likes of Tara Reade haven't gone away from his past.

If Michelle herself would have run, she'd win 40 states.
Unfortunately she's been close enough to the Presidency to know what it entails, and wants no piece of it. Can't really blame her.

I want to laugh at Trump's response to her husband's speech last night, but at the same time it's so depressing that we've got such a manchild in the Oval Office.
 
If Michelle herself would have run, she'd win 40 states.
Unfortunately she's been close enough to the Presidency to know what it entails, and wants no piece of it. Can't really blame her.

I want to laugh at Trump's response to her husband's speech last night, but at the same time it's so depressing that we've got such a manchild in the Oval Office.
I agree. Michelle Obama has the "it" factor and not being a life long politician, can empathise, relate to and engage with normal people without it feeling false. She gets it more than most politicians do and will. The debates between her and Trump would have been excellent watching of 2 different worlds colliding.

I did just snigger at the comment about Obama. Bit of a backatcha to Obama, and really shows what a poor candidate Clinton was that he is able to make the comment in the White House. If he stays there again....
 
I agree. Michelle Obama has the "it" factor and not being a life long politician, can empathise, relate to and engage with normal people without it feeling false. She gets it more than most politicians do and will.
Well, yes, but she’s also a graduate of Princeton and Harvard Law School and has Held some senior responsibilities at prestigious universities like Chicago.
 
For a start, I don't belong to a 'lot'. Believe it or not, I don't recall every source you've ever quoted. If reputable sources denying Russian influence are that common and that easy to find, kindly re-publish them.
It's so easy to find. Search engine > type in terms > results > read. > refine > repeat.

You will have a cornucopia of documents and sources available. But don't waste your time on CNN as they just badly crib others.

Times yours!
 
It's so easy to find. Search engine > type in terms > results > read. > refine > repeat.

You will have a cornucopia of documents and sources available. But don't waste your time on CNN as they just badly crib others.

Times yours!
A logical person might think that in the time it's taken you to type all that out you could more quickly and easily have reproduced your sources. After all, there are loads of them and they are easy to find.

Please help us dullards out.
 
A logical person might think that in the time it's taken you to type all that out you could more quickly and easily have reproduced your sources. After all, there are loads of them and they are easy to find.

Please help us dullards out.
It's really not hard. My original post gives a list of stuff to look into - Steele Dossier, etc. It's there.
 
This thread really highlights the importance of the teaching of history (source evaluation and analysis) and library skills in schools. At least now at Universities students are being taught about how to discern the value of various sources and what counts as evidence because they've grown up in a world of googling and finding circle-jerking opinions from people masquerading as journalists. It's really easy, and slippery, to ask people to shoot down arguments but not hold yourself to account by citing where you got the information. But feeling smart about it and "winning" is clearly much more important than actual finding some truth.
 
To be fair, this is forum gold. The challenge is to prove something 100% that can't be proven 100%, otherwise I am shown to be correct, despite not being able to prove that 100% either. Put an incentive on it which plays to the audience, but has no danger of having its triggering terms met.

That's about the sum of it isn't it? ?
 
To be fair, this is forum gold. The challenge is to prove something 100% that can't be proven 100%, otherwise I am shown to be correct, despite not being able to prove that 100% either. Put an incentive on it which plays to the audience, but has no danger of having its triggering terms met.

That's about the sum of it isn't it? ?
I am not asking to be proven correct, I am asking for proof that no one else has found, that Trump is a Russian asset, that there was collusion etc. Apparently, I don't know what I am talking about on this, so clearly I have missed something

It should be easy for intelligent people such as yourself to enjoy the prospect of me being proven wrong and donating money to charity, while condemning Trump to a jail cell. It's a win, win isn't it Ste. It's your perfect world ?
 
This thread really highlights the importance of the teaching of history (source evaluation and analysis) and library skills in schools. At least now at Universities students are being taught about how to discern the value of various sources and what counts as evidence because they've grown up in a world of googling and finding circle-jerking opinions from people masquerading as journalists. It's really easy, and slippery, to ask people to shoot down arguments but not hold yourself to account by citing where you got the information. But feeling smart about it and "winning" is clearly much more important than actual finding some truth.
How can I source something that I've clearly not found so far? Nice try tho
 
How can I source something that I've clearly not found so far? Nice try tho
How about you show your sources for the claim in bold below? You should be able to find them as they should all be on YF, and you’ve said that this is what “you’ve alleged over the years”. I’ll do you a favour compared to your challenge, and say that it is limited to what you wrote below.
1. Provide clear proof Trump collaborated with Putin to slant the election and what he collaborated with him on it
Speeches and vague witness statements do not count. Meeting minutes, etc are a standard
  1. Also, show he was bought by the Russians
  2. Trump's campaign actively worked with Putin and Wikileaks
    1. Not, oh Manafort or Stone met with x, y or z, actual legal standard proof - I want to see this as Mueller couldn't find anything concrete. The fact Stone got the wrong end of the stick on Wikileaks suggests not.
    2. No other political campaign has met with foreign secret service/hangers on ever
    3. Trump made the decisions on that
  3. The Steele Dossier is 100% true
  4. Carter Page and General Flynn are guilty
  5. The FBI did not conspire to delegitmatise the Trump regime - Comey, Clapper, etc
  6. Adam Schiff isn't a lying POS
  7. The Obama regime was not complicit in creating the issue
    1. Why did Susan Rice feel compelled to send that email to herself if she wasn't worried about something?
    2. Joe Biden and Obama did not attempt to demask Flynn
This is what you've alleged over the years
 
Donald Trump Jnr is "Trumpier than Trump"....................... and far more eloquent... and pushing all the right buttons for them there A-Merry-Kans.....
 
Donald Trump Jnr is "Trumpier than Trump"....................... and far more eloquent... and pushing all the right buttons for them there A-Merry-Kans.....

Are some senior Republicans quietly stepping away from him as there seems quite a few Trump family (or partners of) members speaking at this convention?

I could see it getting quite tasty between Trump Jr and Pence for the next Republican nomination. Pence sees himself as the successor from what I've read whilst Trump Jr is definitely getting bullish.
 
Are some senior Republicans quietly stepping away from him as there seems quite a few Trump family (or partners of) members speaking at this convention?

I could see it getting quite tasty between Trump Jr and Pence for the next Republican nomination. Pence sees himself as the successor from what I've read whilst Trump Jr is definitely getting bullish.
Trump junior is a complete t**t
 
Back
Top Bottom