Quote:Already proven false? Did HuffPo tell you that? Or was it CNN? Did they provide the formal request for immunity too? i think you and your fellow leftist loons are jumping the shark.
Almost as hard as they're laughing at your certainty that your girl was going to be president.
That worked out well for you, didn't it, snowflake?
I voted for Hillary simply because she isn't Donald Trump.
Let's see
• Nunes we now know got his leaked info from the White House
• Nunes even now States Obama didn't issue any surveillance
Sorry, but facts don't lie and your version don't fly. So team trump needs to create some other misdirection play now.
Quote:The Clinton Foundation was and is a hub for pure corruption, plain and simple. That was confirmed after your gal lost the election and their cash flow completely dried up and they started wining down pieces of the charity. It's the reason your gal is continuing to try to remain relevant by toying with running for Mayor of NYC, or holding some other high profile role somewhere. It's also the reason that moon barker, Hillary Jr. is being floated as a potential congressional or senate candidate. It's the only way they can get the slush fund back on track. Nothing to be embarrassed about. The fate of the foundation pretty much supports my point that people weren't donating to help the world. They were buying access. Now that she doesn't have access to sell, where are those donations?
I know you libs are desperately hoping to find something to bring Trump down. You don't find it the slightest bit curious that A) Trump is actually encouraging Flynn to ask for immunity because of the liberal witch hunt, and B.) the only source stating that Flynn has requested immunity is some unnamed source that can't be corroborated by anyone. In fact, both committees in the House and Senate who were supposedly offered this immunity deal for his testimony are saying that they have received no such formal request from Flynn or his lawyer. So, this could turn out to be a bit of fake news allowing you and your fellow socialists to get yourselves worked up into a froth over, only to be disappointed once again, kind of like knowing for certain that your gal was going to win in a landslide.
I understand why you're striking out in all directions. You've fallen for a reality-show con man who has published many self-promoting books. Which you apparently actually believed!
You're so unsure of your stance you continually name-call anyone who simply states the obvious as "liberal" or "leftist" or "Hillary-lover" or some such - even though you surely know that many of us didn't even vote for Clinton.
Not sure why you are so invested in your boy. Peer pressure, I guess. Don't want to disappoint to boys at the country club?
Well, don't worry. You'll always have Sean Hannity, lol.
Quote:I voted for Hillary simply because she isn't Donald Trump.
Let's see
• Nunes we now know got his leaked info from the White House
• Nunes even now States Obama didn't issue any surveillance
Sorry, but facts don't lie and your version don't fly. So team trump needs to create some other misdirection play now.
You voted for Hillary because she was your girl after your socialist messiah, the fraud known as the Bern, sold out for the trappings of capitalism including another vacation home and an expensive automobile.
Nunes got his information from the White House. It was leaked by the former administration. What Nunes did wasn't illegal. What the Obama administration did by unmasking and leaking the content of their surveillance was.
You libs really need to cling to that "Obama didn't issue any surveillance" line because that's all you really have. It's clear the administration made two FISA requests to monitor the Trump campaign. It's also clear that SOMEONE in the administration was aware of the monitoring because they leaked the details. You snowflakes need to interpret Trump's tweet literally when he says he was wiretapped by Obama. You're being contextually dishonest by doing so, but that's fine. You're still stinging from your girl's loss. We get it.
Sorry, but facts don't lie, and your version don't fly no matter how hard or fast you spin.
Quote:I understand why you're striking out in all directions. You've fallen for a reality-show con man who has published many self-promoting books. Which you apparently actually believed!
You're so unsure of your stance you continually name-call anyone who simply states the obvious as "liberal" or "leftist" or "Hillary-lover" or some such - even though you surely know that many of us didn't even vote for Clinton.
Not sure why you are so invested in your boy. Peer pressure, I guess. Don't want to disappoint to boys at the country club?
Well, don't worry. You'll always have Sean Hannity, lol.
I'm striking out in all directions? Is that what answering questions is called now?
Hate to burst your rainbow encrusted bubble, but I've never bought a Trump book, and I didn't support him in the primaries. Does that make your "I'm with Her" tramp stamp sad?
Clearly, you don't like being called out for what you are. The truth must be bothersome for you.
I'm not "invested" in anything. I just find it entertaining how you leftys will twist yourselves into pretzels to find some desperate new angle to take Trump down. It's pathetic, but not wholly unexpected coming from the likes of you and your fellow libs.
Can't listen to Hannity, btw, but hey, keep flailing away.
Quote:
I'm striking out in all directions? Is that what answering questions is called now?
Hate to burst your rainbow encrusted bubble, but I've never bought a Trump book, and I didn't support him in the primaries. Does that make your "I'm with Her" tramp stamp sad?
Clearly, you don't like being called out for what you are. The truth must be bothersome for you.
I'm not "invested" in anything. I just find it entertaining how you leftys will twist yourselves into pretzels to find some desperate new angle to take Trump down. It's pathetic, but not wholly unexpected coming from the likes of you and your fellow libs.
Can't listen to Hannity, btw, but hey, keep flailing away.
It's got to be extremely tough times for an Official Trump Apologist these days. But hang in there! This is what you sighed up for, so you're just going to have to keep plugging away.
You need to change your avatar to Sean Spicer.
Quote:It's got to be extremely tough times for an Official Trump Apologist these days. But hang in there! This is what you sighed up for, so you're just going to have to keep plugging away.
You need to change your avatar to Sean Spicer.
Actually, it's not tough at all. Definitely not as difficult as it is to find someone to remove that Hillary tat of yours.
Quote:Actually, it's not tough at all. Definitely not as difficult as it is to find someone to remove that Hillary tat of yours.
You seem seriously fixated in Hillary Clinton.
Quote:You seem seriously fixated in Hillary Clinton.
Not quite as much as you seeing how she was your gal and all.
Quote:His request has already been denied at this time.
I bet he ends up in front of the firing squad with the rest of them.
Someone always ends up against the wall with you lefties.
Quote:Someone always ends up against the wall with you lefties.
It's how they build their butch credentials.
Quote:It's how they build their butch credentials.
Lol why don't you just get the sex change over with Fat Boy Tim? You republicans ought to open a movie theater chain, with all your projections.
In jib's words:
LOL
Quote:Lol why don't you just get the sex change over with Fat Boy Tim? You republicans ought to open a movie theater chain, with all your projections.
In jib's words:
LOL
It's funny how weak the lib retorts are as their desperation grows and grows.
You and your gal pals might want to get to work on your spin machine now that it's exposed that
Susan Rice was behind the unmasking of the data that was leaked to the NY Times and others. Obama's General Counsel office tried to squash the investigation that exposed it, bu when Trump's general counsel took over, they continued the research and ultimately gave their discovery to Nunes, which is by the way, perfectly legal.
This isn't going to end well for you and your pals, so it's no wonder you're trying to shift the conversation to something you're far more accustomed to living with, like transgenderism.
Quote:It's funny how weak the lib retorts are as their desperation grows and grows.
You and your gal pals might want to get to work on your spin machine now that it's exposed that <a class="bbc_url" href='https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-04-03/top-obama-adviser-sought-names-of-trump-associates-in-intel'>Susan Rice was behind the unmasking of the data that was leaked to the NY Times</a> and others. Obama's General Counsel office tried to squash the investigation that exposed it, bu when Trump's general counsel took over, they continued the research and ultimately gave their discovery to Nunes, which is by the way, perfectly legal.
This isn't going to end well for you and your pals, so it's no wonder you're trying to shift the conversation to something you're far more accustomed to living with, like transgenderism.
I haven't read that she gave the NYT the information anywhere. But it'a Trump time. We don't have to prove anything.
Quote:I haven't read that she gave the NYT the information anywhere. But it'a Trump time. We don't have to prove anything.
Whether she gave the information to the NYT personally or not is irrelevant You seem to constantly miss that point. The unmasking of the data ultimately lead to that data being leaked with details that should never have been exposed in the first place. You wanted to fixate on the fact that Nunes got the information from the White House, but you're more than happy to ignore WHAT it was they were providing him with...legally. The leak was illegal, and obviously being wielded as a political weapon by the Obama administration to undermine his successor.
Quote:Whether she gave the information to the NYT personally or not is irrelevant You seem to constantly miss that point. The unmasking of the data ultimately lead to that data being leaked with details that should never have been exposed in the first place. You wanted to fixate on the fact that Nunes got the information from the White House, but you're more than happy to ignore WHAT it was they were providing him with...legally. The leak was illegal, and obviously being wielded as a political weapon by the Obama administration to undermine his successor.
And yet Susan Rice could legally unmask as well. Find the leaker and let's talk.
Quote:And yet Susan Rice could legally unmask as well. Find the leaker and let's talk.
We know the leaker came out of the Obama administration since they had the unmasked data. Conveniently, Obama changed the rules to expand who could have access to unmasked data right before the leaks started. I'm sure that was just a coincidence, right? Keep ignoring.
Quote:We know the leaker came out of the Obama administration since they had the unmasked data. Conveniently, Obama changed the rules to expand who could have access to unmasked data right before the leaks started. I'm sure that was just a coincidence, right? Keep ignoring.
It still doesn't validate his tweet.
Maybe he should tell his inner circle to be less shady?
![[Image: 258460f078150991d9470326371dd8ac.gif]](https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/25/84/60/258460f078150991d9470326371dd8ac.gif)