Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Oooh Trump talked to a Russian and Tulsi disagreed with our Russia policy. That is awful and horrible and Russia Russia Russia:

The Clintons:

Quote

The main question is: At the time of the deal's consummation, did the Clinton Foundation and the former president himself, receive money from the Russians to grease the wheels for the deal?

Bill Clinton did receive $500,000 to deliver a speech at a Russian bank that was promoting Uranium One stock, according to The New York Times, and the company's chairman donated $2.35 million to the foundation in four installments as Uranium One was being acquired by Rosatum between 2009 and 2013.

All told, $145 million went to the Clinton Foundation from those linked to Uranium One and UrAsia, but it went to the charity organization and not the Clinton family. Furthermore, most of those donations occurred before and during Hillary Clinton's 2008 campaign, according to The Post.

https://www.newsweek.com/fact-check-clintons-russia-trump-688592

 

Obama

Quote

According to the indictment, between June 2012 and November 2012, Low directed the transfer of approximately $21,600,000 from foreign entities and accounts to Michel for the purpose of funneling significant sums of money into the United States presidential election as purportedly legitimate contributions, all while concealing the true source of the money.  To facilitate the excessive contributions and conceal their true source, Michel paid approximately $865,000 of the money received from Low to about 20 straw donors, or conduits, so that the straw donors could make donations in their names to a presidential joint fundraising committee.  In addition, Michel personally directed more than $1 million of the money received from Low to an independent expenditure committee also involved in the presidential election in 2012.

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/entertainerbusinessman-and-malaysian-financier-indicted-conspiring-make-and-conceal-foreign

The Bidens

Quote

WASHINGTON — Two Russian billionaire pals of Hunter Biden were again spared from being hit by financial sanctions as President Biden announced his latest round of penalties on numerous Vladimir Putin-connected people Friday, the Post has learned.

Though some 500 Russian oligarchs, companies and third-country sanctions evaders were hit, real estate developer Yelena Baturina and Vladimir Yevtushenkov again skated free of winding up on the list.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/hunter-biden-linked-russian-oligarchs-spared-in-latest-500-name-sanctions-list/ar-BB1iMkAh

A real estate company with ties to first son Hunter Biden received more than $100 million from a Russian billionaire for property investments across the US that date back a decade, sources have told The Post.

The hefty cash injections into Rosemont Realty came from Elena Baturina — one of Russia’s wealthiest women, the widow of the former mayor of Moscow, and a close ally of Moscow tyrant Vladimir Putin, the sources said.

https://nypost.com/2022/10/17/hunter-bidens-real-estate-firm-received-over-100m-from-russian-oligarch/

But Holy shìt! Some guy you never heard of didn't say the exact same thing as you so he's a Russian asset!

You lefties shouldn't throw stones in your glass house.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2

The Rules for Liberal tactics:

  1. If they can't refute the content, attack the source.
  2. If they can't refute the content, attack the poster.
  3. If 1 and 2 fail, pretend it never happened.
  4. Everyone you disagree with is Hitler.
  5. A word is defined by the emotion it elicits and not the actual definition.
  6. If they are wrong, blame the opponent.
  7. If a liberal policy didn't work, it's a conservatives fault and vice versa.
  8. If all else fails, just be angry.
Posted
16 minutes ago, DUI_Offender said:

Duplicate thread.

Poor quality. 

Inaccurate.

0/5 stars. 

Would not recommend. 

 

You got pwned and you know it. You couldn't counter when I destroyed your Russia connection thread and now you have nothing here either.

 

  • Haha 1

The Rules for Liberal tactics:

  1. If they can't refute the content, attack the source.
  2. If they can't refute the content, attack the poster.
  3. If 1 and 2 fail, pretend it never happened.
  4. Everyone you disagree with is Hitler.
  5. A word is defined by the emotion it elicits and not the actual definition.
  6. If they are wrong, blame the opponent.
  7. If a liberal policy didn't work, it's a conservatives fault and vice versa.
  8. If all else fails, just be angry.
Posted
30 minutes ago, DUI_Offender said:

Duplicate thread.

Poor quality. 

Inaccurate.

0/5 stars. 

Would not recommend. 

 

On the contrary....

Singular thread

Stunning quality

Totally accurate

10/5 Stars

Highly recommended (Qualifier...must posses an I/Q of at least 100. The management accepts no responsibility for exploding heads)

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Posted
1 minute ago, Legato said:

On the contrary....

Singular thread

Stunning quality

Totally accurate

10/5 Stars

Highly recommended (Qualifier...must posses an I/Q of at least 100. The management accepts no responsibility for exploding heads)

 

Supposedly I'm on Ignore because I don't have any substance.

🤨🤔🤭

The Rules for Liberal tactics:

  1. If they can't refute the content, attack the source.
  2. If they can't refute the content, attack the poster.
  3. If 1 and 2 fail, pretend it never happened.
  4. Everyone you disagree with is Hitler.
  5. A word is defined by the emotion it elicits and not the actual definition.
  6. If they are wrong, blame the opponent.
  7. If a liberal policy didn't work, it's a conservatives fault and vice versa.
  8. If all else fails, just be angry.
Posted
18 hours ago, DUI_Offender said:

Duplicate thread.

Poor quality. 

Inaccurate.

0/5 stars. 

Would not recommend. 

 

Where is your proof that any or all of it is false?

"Socialism in general has a record of failure so blatant that only an intellectual could ignore or evade it." Thomas Sowell

Posted
31 minutes ago, ironstone said:

Where is your proof that any or all of it is false?

It feels false. It is emotionally unsettling. So he says it's false because he doesn't want to believe it.

The Rules for Liberal tactics:

  1. If they can't refute the content, attack the source.
  2. If they can't refute the content, attack the poster.
  3. If 1 and 2 fail, pretend it never happened.
  4. Everyone you disagree with is Hitler.
  5. A word is defined by the emotion it elicits and not the actual definition.
  6. If they are wrong, blame the opponent.
  7. If a liberal policy didn't work, it's a conservatives fault and vice versa.
  8. If all else fails, just be angry.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,912
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    AlembicoEMR
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...