Why do you and Ricter refer to AAA as "Ann" all the time? This is a serious question.
Art Of The Deal
- Thread starter vanzandt
- Start date
Why do you and Ricter refer to AAA as "Ann" all the time? This is a serious question.
You referred to Clinton's e-mails in your prior post. Thanks for correcting yourself. Personally, I'd love to have seen the private correspondence between and among the various Trump campaign team as well as that of the RNC. You know, for comparative purposes. But, as luck would have it, Putin was not quite as accommodating.
Wow, you sure got me on the whole "Clinton writing the email" thing. Score a point for you! Not that it reeks of debate desperation or anything. What's next? Spelling and Grammar?
You can either waste both our time on nitpicking or debate the issue at hand (assuming you can). The issue, of course, is that there is no proof that Russia had anything to do with the hacking of Podesta's emails - despite dozens of your posts claiming there is. I know, maybe you can point out how "all my pals" do stuff like that, again. Guilt by association seems to be a favorite "go to" for you. I've tried to be cordial in this debate, but if you can't or have no substance, I suppose we can just go back to being assholes to each other again.
As for Trump's emails, with all the folks in the media and government doing their best to take him down, I'm quite sure people got a hold of everything Trump had and found zilch. Hell, they dug up an audio recording of him and Billy Bush, I'm sure all the dirt there was on Trump came out.
Regardless, we will never know because there is no proof.
Thank you for so definitively confirming the sum and substance of the intelligence findings. And before the matter was so evidently and obviously conclusive, as you just pointed out, thanks for showing that you are prepared to give the benefit of the doubt to a Machiavellian foreign dictator before you show the same consideration to your own government.
Words have meaning. Yours either do or they don't. You just made a case that they don't.
If I had used "their" instead of "there", you would have understood the point just as much as you understood what I meant when I typed "Hillary's email" vs. "Podesta's". You knew where I was going with that. You chose to make a stand on the issue because you have no other place in the argument to make a stand. You cheapened the debate to distract from the fact that you continue to claim Russia's involvement, but cannot answer the question of proof. You do this quite often when boxed in, and not just with me. I've observed this as a part of your "fighting style" before with others.
That's what happened. Spin it any other way you want.
I guess we just have to understand that to these guys their greatest existential threat is not a foreign dictator, or a madman playing with nukes, or even crazy religious fanatics. Their greatest threat is the...Democrat. And worst of all is the evil liberal Democrat, who has superpowers bent on destroying the world as they know it.
What intelligence findings? Where are they?
No. You were resorting to fake news tactics by overreaching, and most probably intentionally so. And there went your credibility.
I think, deep down on some subconscious level, you might realize there's a lot more truth than sarcasm in this statement. It's a shame you've brainwashed yourself to ignore that little voice.