Announcement

Collapse

Forum Rules - You must read(Updated!)

DISCLAIMER

You agree to NOT use this site or its affiliated sites, services you may have access to as a result of being a member here (subscriber or otherwise), to post items (images, textual material, etc.) that are pornographic in nature, illegal in the United States and/or the country you reside in, support or encourage illegal activities (e.g., terrorism), advertise for your own personal profit, or send unsolicited messages (i.e. SPAM) to members or non-members.

AND

You agree that if any clause or component of this document is found to not be legally binding in a court of law of proper jurisdiction then the remainder of this document shall remain fully binding and in full force.

AND

You agree to NOT hold Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. (makers of the forum software), uspoliticsonline.com, sites affiliated with uspoliticsonline.com, its administrators, its moderators, others associated with its operation, and its owners liable for any and all of the following (in whole or in part):
Personal insults/attacks by other members.
The content posted by other members, whether directed at you personally or a label/classification you associate with. This includes remarks you consider to be libelous or slanderous in any way.
Any financial or time loss due to your participation here or as a result of something you read at this site, including posts/PMs by other members and feature(s)/software available at the domain uspoliticsonline.com.
The dissemination of any personal information about you as a result of either your negligence (e.g. staying logged into a computer that others have access to) or willingness to post such information on a public and or private forum, private message or chat box. This includes using your real name or other details that could allow other members and/or the general public to determine your true identity. You are prohibited from using your real name on these forums, either as your username or in posts / PMs you write.

FORUM RULES, IN ADDITION TO THE DISCLAIMER

1. These rules apply to all sections of USPOL, including public and private forums, blogs, and visitor messages.

2. You cannot attack and/or personally insult someone. You cannot bait other forum members; this includes referring to posters by derogatory terms. Please, remain courteous and respectful to all forum members at all times. You agree to take responsibility for reporting such posts when you come across them. Please, use the ignore feature if need be. Any member who intentionally and continually posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response, or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion, may be regarded as a “troll” by staff, and have their account suspended or banned.

3. You cannot harass (sexually or otherwise) other members. This includes malicious, slanderous, or defamatory comments. If you are not sure if something you write is inappropriate or not then don't say it. Err on the side of caution.

4. Copying and Pasting Articles, and Starting New Threads. You cannot simply cut and paste in posts or when starting threads. You MUST provide the identifying information (source, author, date, and URL). You must also offer some original thoughts along with the cut and paste. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts from the article. Excerpts really shouldn’t be more then a paragraph or two. Furthermore, if you use images or other copyrighted material in your posts or signature you must have permission of the copyright holder unless you know for a fact that the image is in the public domain. In addition:
a. It must include the identifying information; e.g., where available, the author, the publication, the date, the URL.
b. The member must offer some context, including: How did you hear of this article? What is your opinion? Why is it important to you? Why should it be important to forum readers? The more context you provide, the more you assist others in gauging the excerpted information's significance.
c. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts, not the whole thing or even the majority of the whole thing to encourage people to read the entire article.

A violation of any of the above will result in the deletion or closing of the post or thread and could earn you a warning or suspension. If you have any questions concering any of the above please PM a moderator and we will be happy to clarify.

5. You cannot post the same thing in multiple forums. You must not open similar threads about the same or a similar topic. You cannot spam the board or send unsolicited messages to members via PM, email or any other means.

6. Do not post off-topic. You cannot derail a thread with off topic posts.

7. You cannot shout in posts. This includes posting in all CAPS, bold, lIkE tHiS, and extra large font. Posts should also be one color, although you may use an additional color for highlighting ideas you wish to address.

8. You may not alter quotes in a way that misrepresents what was originally said.

9. Multiple accounts are not allowed. If you are found to have more than one account all accounts will be permanently terminated.

10. You cannot have a user name, avatar, signature, or post images that are deliberately offensive. That includes the display of overly explicit or graphic images that may not be suitable for minors.

11. Signatures can not have more than three lines of text, with a font size no larger than "4", and no more than two font colors. Images in signatures cannot be any larger than 800 pixels wide x 200 pixels tall. Animated images are not allowed.

12. You are prohibited from taking any action to disturb the use of the services by others, distribute material that contains viruses, spyware or any other malicious code or harmful programs. This includes interfering with the working of the network, attempts to gain unauthorized access to a service or other computer systems that are part of the site or any other site, by use of the available services.

13. Discussion of moderation actions in public and/or private forums is not permitted. Moderation actions include warnings, suspensions and the editing or deletion of posts. If a member has a concern about a moderation action, he or she is invited to address it with the board staff via Private Message. This rule exists to protect the privacy of all posters with regards to disciplinary action. The moderator team will never publicly discuss the warnings/suspensions of any posters, and we ask that you return the favor, whether about yourself or another poster. Posting about moderation actions in the public forums constitutes a violation. You are free to discuss a moderation action via Private Message with the moderator involved, but you may not harass or abuse the moderators (as already specified in the forum rules). In practical terms, this means that once a moderator tells you his or her decision is final, no further PMs about that moderation action are permitted. If you have a concern about a moderation action, you are free to appeal to a Forum Administrator via Private Message. You may only discuss moderator activities or discussion of moderation with staff member if you chose to private message and are not under any circumstances allowed to use the PM function to forward or promote moderator discussion in regards to specific forum action, amongst other regular members. Administrators do reserve the right to read said PMs and may do so ; if that results in discovery of messaging between posters of such moderator discussion then it will lead to the same violation being received for discussing said moderator actions on the forum. If you receive a message to the effect of having been given moderator information, please report it to a member of staff. Engaging back in that discussion with the original violator will earn you just as stiff a sanction.

14. Do not ignore moderators or administrators. Do not repost something a moderator or administrator has deleted. You cannot have moderators or administrators on your ignore list.

15. Only post in English. Short passages in foreign languages may be acceptable if its use seems helpful for the ongoing discussion and when there is no indication of a potential violation of the forum rules. Always provide a translation into English in such cases. In case of doubt, the incident will be regarded as a violation, no matter of the actual meaning of the foreign language text.

16. The use of words/comments etc. written by other posters, without approval of the poster in your personal signature is not allowed nor are references, by name, to other posters allowed.

17. Please pay attention to announcements by Forum staff that will be found in the "Welcome! / News & Announcements" forum from time to time.

18. Use of "liar", "lies", "lying", etc. Accusing someone of being a "liar" or similar accusations towards other posters will generally be regarded as implying an insult and therewith as a violation of the forum rules. "I question the validity of your statement because...", "That's not the truth" or "you are wrong about that" are sufficient for any decent discussion if you want to disagree with somebody's assertions.

19. Thread opening restriction for new members. In order to control SPAM, new members must have moderator approval to start their own threads.

20. Thread titles must relate to the discussion within. Do not make misleading titles, or titles such as "Guess what..." or "You'll never believe this...". Members need to be able to identify the general gist of the thread via the title. Profanity in thread titles is not permitted.

21. Forum members are instructed to use forum tools and abilities for their intended purposes and no other. If members identify a forum glitch or weakness of any kind that allows you to see or do something you know you shouldn't, please report it. Being aware of any unintended access to the Forum and failing to take appropriate steps to notify staff of said access issues, will create a presumption of seeking to take advantage of the issue, will result in either account suspension, or banishment.

22. Any link to a site that contains graphic content, must contain a warning describing what a person might reasonably expect to view if they click on said link. No graphic pictures are to be posted on the Forum.

23. Threats or advocations of violence toward a public figure, or member of the Forum, will not be tolerated. Conversation about revolution or the like is not prohibited by this rule; directly calling for violence is, eg “It's time to kill every <redacted> that voted for the bill,” is not permitted.

24. Accounts with no posts will be deleted after 30 days. Inactive accounts with low post histories may be deleted after one year.

25. Private forums are something offered to members that decide to contribute directly to this site via donations. These donations help immensely in keeping this site up and running. Private forums are designed to allow the contributing member discuss whatever he/she wants to and to have the power to direct that discussion in whatever way he/she chose. They were not designed nor are they intended for simply talking trash about members that don't have access to the forum. While the targeted members cannot see the forum or the comments, it creates a negative atmosphere that really isn't necessary. If you want to totally rip apart ideas, ideologies, political parties, etc. that is fine. We simply ask that you don't use the private forums as a means to attack other members that aren't privy to such comments. It is difficult enough to have a political discussion forum because the discussion of politics is inherently heated as people are so passionate about their beliefs...the ones that take the time to come to such a site in the first place at least. The idea of private forums is so people of similar political persuasions can discuss whatever they want without fear of being attacked. Nonetheless, we hope that a certain level of maturity would foster itself within such an arena and not simply lend itself to a bashing forum.

Private Forums are governed by all of the above Forum rules. In addition:
  • Private forums that essentially become abandoned homes will be subject to deletion, donation or reorganization. Just like elsewhere in life, clubs sometimes lose their vitality and purpose for a myriad of reasons. If it becomes clear that a private forum has clearly lost its vitality and nobody is going to really use it anymore, owners are advised to consider whether to reuse the forum for something new and productive rather than let them linger or notify the Administration that the forum should be rearranged for other purposes, closed, merged with other compatible private forums, donated to others for new purposes, etc. Do not be concerned that your forum must be a membership and post count race with others to avoid falling under this policy; the question is whether your forum has actual vitality instead of being 'brain dead.'
  • Additionally, private forums may only be owned by subscribed members in the Platinum or Diamond categories.
  • Should the owner of a private forum be banned, quit USPOL or otherwise abandon the forum the PF will be transferred to another owner or closed.
  • Propriety of private forums. Administration staff will determine the desirability of a proposed private forum and enact any conditions upon it to ensure its purpose is productive.
  • Any and all instances of sharing accounts by allowing someone else to log in under their own account so they can see into private forums for which they are otherwise not permitted to access, will be deemed violation of the double account rule and all caught doing so will be permanently banned.
  • Relaying private forum posts and information to other posters who are not members of the particular private forum for any negative or destructive purpose (eg mean-spirited gossip, fueling interpersonal disputes, etc), is not permitted, and will constitute a violation of the Forum rules.
  • For purposes of monitoring USPOL Terms of Service Administrative staff (not Moderators) will have access to Private Forums.
  • All Private Forums must have at least one active Administrator as a member for purposes of handling issues which cannot be addressed through moderation permissions.
  • Discussion of moderation activities is prohibited on the open site and is likewise prohibited in Private Forums.

26. The administrators and moderators reserve the right to edit and/or delete a post,and/or close a thread, and/or delete a thread at any time if of the opinion that the post is too obscene, inappropriate, or the discussion has run its course.

27. 'Back seat moderating' is not allowed. If you take issue with another poster's contribution to the forum, you're welcome to report any posts you think are out of line, but you should not bring it up publicly within the forum.

28. Images in posts (whether embedded or hot linked) must be reasonable in size. 800x800 should be considered a good rule of thumb. Excessively large images make it difficult for users on mobile devices to load pages. If necessary please simply link to very large images using the URL tags. In addition, the following images are not permitted (including, but not limited to pages with images or videos containing):
  • Strategically covered nudity
  • Sheer or see-through clothing
  • Lewd or provocative poses
  • Close-ups of breasts, buttocks, or crotches

29. Any solicitation or communication involving sports betting / gambling / online casinos / bookies and or internet based card or slot machine systems or sites will lead to all said content being physically removed from the site and server, and will lead to any and or all parties involved being permanently removed and banned from the site to the farthest extent possible. This includes any links to any form of bookmaker, casino, any type of game or match or event where money transfers on the outcome or link of any sort to wire act violations and or anything in violation of either the Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act, Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006, or the Federal wire Act. This applies not only to the open forum but all and or any chat rooms, articles, private messages and or private forums. All content that violates this rule will be deleted, without notice.

CONSEQUENCES

Failure to comply with any of the forum rules may result in your posts being edited or deleted and/or your account being temporarily or permanently banned from the forums. U.S. Politics Online uses a warning system that generates an automated Private Message to members when they are in violation of Forum rules. The decision to issue a warning is left to the discretion of the moderator or administrator handling the violation. If a member does not agree with an action taken by a moderator, they can appeal to an administrator after seeking clarification from the moderator who issued the warning/infraction and appealing to them in the first instance. Members MAY NOT harass a moderator or administrator by sending excessive PMs when they are discussing an appeal.

Violations are assigned a point value. Points are valid for 30 days. When a members earns 10 points, their account will be automatically suspended: five (5) days for a first suspension; ten (10) days for a second suspension; and twenty (20) days for a third suspension. If a member incurs an additional 10 points after having served three periods of suspension, then they will be permanently banned from the Forum.

Point values are as follows:
Zero (0) points – Warning
Two (2) points - Minor infraction / Non post infraction (minor) / Off topic posts / spamming
Four (4) points - Academic dishonesty / Baiting / Discussing moderator or administrator actions / Implying an insult / Minor insults / Moderate infraction / Non-post infraction (moderate) / Thread dumping
Six (6) points - Direct insult at another member / major infraction / Non-post infraction (major)
Ten (10) points - Act of criminality, or advocating thereof

The administrators and moderators also bear the right to issue warnings, temporarily suspend or ban posters for continued trolling or other serious misconduct (eg. professional spamming) even if the poster has not yet reached the maximum warning points or suspensions level. Other options if the above consequences do not seem adequate include placing the member in a moderation queue, which means all posts will have to be approved before they are posted to the board.

PRIVACY POLICY

All information obtained by the end user via the registration process is for internal purposes only and will not be sold to or shared with any third parties. However, if the end user participates in illegal activities and a court of proper jurisdiction orders U.S. Politics Online to release certain information about said user then we will act according to the law. Furthermore, no information will be released on threat of a lawsuit, attempted or actual intimidation, or due to any other reason except as notated in the first sentence of this paragraph. Nonetheless, keep in mind that the information we do have is very limited and generally only consists of the IP address a member uses.

SUBSCRIPTIONS

U.S. Politics Online offers several subscription plans to help cover the operational costs of the site. As a thank you for your donation, you will receive special added benefits meant to enhance your U.S. Politics Online experience. Plans vary in price, starting at only $0.05/day, and benefits vary with the price. Benefits include ability to go straight to new posts, to search the forum, larger avatar, private forums, invisible mode, photo gallery, email, web hosting, and no advertisement banners. Please, click here for more details.
See more
See less

Putin elected Trump ?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by redrover View Post

    I never heard a word about it Wasn't 1984 Mondale then we had Iran - Contra which should have been worthy of impeachment but by then he was so befuddled no one wanted to pile on the poor old fool.
    Of course you never heard a thing about it. But you obviously don't care, what hypocrisy.

    What about all the money the Chinese Communists funneled illegally to the Democrats in the 1990s?

    מה מכילות החדשות?


    • Originally posted by Marcus1124 View Post

      Of course you never heard a thing about it. But you obviously don't care, what hypocrisy.

      What about all the money the Chinese Communists funneled illegally to the Democrats in the 1990s?
      I remember that story which turned out to be much ado about nothing. That was even before the wing nuts had the internet to disseminate their garbage.

      מה מכילות החדשות?


      • Originally posted by redrover View Post
        I remember that story which turned out to be much ado about nothing. That was even before the wing nuts had the internet to disseminate their garbage.
        Which "wing-nuts" ?

        Oh, oops, I apologize, forgive me, forgive me - does three deep knee bends and two bows - I forget that it's only conservatives that have "wing-nuts." . . nevermind

        מה מכילות החדשות?


        • Originally posted by redrover View Post

          I remember that story which turned out to be much ado about nothing. That was even before the wing nuts had the internet to disseminate their garbage.
          Well, if by "much ado about nothing" you mean the DNC having to return nearly $3 million in illegal contributions from foreign nationals, and over 20 guilty please for election law violations, then yeah.

          My point is that for those of you hyperventillating over Russia's efforts to interfere in our elections from 2014-2016, why weren't you as concerned over equally (if not greater) efforts on the part of foreign governments and citizens to do the same in favor of the democrats in the 1990s, especially when there is far more evidence of a direct desire to aid democrats (in the case of the Chinese), rather than sowing general discord and distrust of the system (in the case of the Russians in this decade).

          I don't recall anyone declaring China's actions "an act of War"

          Of course we should engage in counter-intelligence activities to ameliorate or block the efforts of foreign citizens and powers from trying to unduly influence our elections, but those efforts should (as with all things) be measured and proportional to the efforts and threats. The problem with that, of course, is an age-old one for those of us who are NOT silly partisan reactionaries, how do you guard against the abuse of basic freedom of speech in a free society? Regulation of social media? That will require some pretty onerous things that could have substantial costs on the exercise of free speech by citizens as well as those we seek to thwart. It is a very dicey balancing act, and one that doesn't always have a great answer. Just as we as a society have long put in place due process requirements for criminal law under the premise that it is better to let many guilty go free to minimize the risk of one innocent being convicted, the same types of value judgments will likely need to be made with regard to just how far we can go to block such actions. And the trade-offs must be informed by just how impactful the efforts are. So far, there is no evidence that there was any impact on the outcome of the election from Russia's efforts (and the overwhelming evidence is that this was not even their intent, but to sow general discord and distrust and to politically weaken the winner...to which those who are overreacting to their actions are playing the traditional role of "useful idiots").

          Also, insofar as the truly miniscule money and efforts to use social media to influence the outcome of the race, to believe this was a successful effort on Russia's part requires that acceptance of the fact that this means that a handful of Russian spooks had a better understanding and were more in touch with the mood of the American electorate than the Clinton campaign and its supporters and surrogates. In otherwords, whether or not Russia's "meddling/interference/war" had any impact at all, Hillary lost because she was an out of touch, corrupt, terrible candidate (one who, unlike Trump, was actually the preferred candidate of the overwhelming majority of the party that nominated her).

          Now, I am readily willing to reasses this conclusion, if, for example, evidence surfaces that Putin had secretly deployed new Russian cloaking technology that concealed the states of Michigan and Wisconsin from Hillary's campaign, causing her instead to campaign in Arizona and other states she thought she could flip to run up her presumed electoral victory into a massive landslide (for now--call me crazy, but--I am chalking it up to hubris rather than secret Russian cloaking technology).

          מה מכילות החדשות?


          • Originally posted by Marcus1124 View Post

            Well, if by "much ado about nothing" you mean the DNC having to return nearly $3 million in illegal contributions from foreign nationals, and over 20 guilty please for election law violations, then yeah.

            My point is that for those of you hyperventillating over Russia's efforts to interfere in our elections from 2014-2016, why weren't you as concerned over equally (if not greater) efforts on the part of foreign governments and citizens to do the same in favor of the democrats in the 1990s, especially when there is far more evidence of a direct desire to aid democrats (in the case of the Chinese), rather than sowing general discord and distrust of the system (in the case of the Russians in this decade).

            I don't recall anyone declaring China's actions "an act of War"

            Of course we should engage in counter-intelligence activities to ameliorate or block the efforts of foreign citizens and powers from trying to unduly influence our elections, but those efforts should (as with all things) be measured and proportional to the efforts and threats. The problem with that, of course, is an age-old one for those of us who are NOT silly partisan reactionaries, how do you guard against the abuse of basic freedom of speech in a free society? Regulation of social media? That will require some pretty onerous things that could have substantial costs on the exercise of free speech by citizens as well as those we seek to thwart. It is a very dicey balancing act, and one that doesn't always have a great answer. Just as we as a society have long put in place due process requirements for criminal law under the premise that it is better to let many guilty go free to minimize the risk of one innocent being convicted, the same types of value judgments will likely need to be made with regard to just how far we can go to block such actions. And the trade-offs must be informed by just how impactful the efforts are. So far, there is no evidence that there was any impact on the outcome of the election from Russia's efforts (and the overwhelming evidence is that this was not even their intent, but to sow general discord and distrust and to politically weaken the winner...to which those who are overreacting to their actions are playing the traditional role of "useful idiots").

            Also, insofar as the truly miniscule money and efforts to use social media to influence the outcome of the race, to believe this was a successful effort on Russia's part requires that acceptance of the fact that this means that a handful of Russian spooks had a better understanding and were more in touch with the mood of the American electorate than the Clinton campaign and its supporters and surrogates. In otherwords, whether or not Russia's "meddling/interference/war" had any impact at all, Hillary lost because she was an out of touch, corrupt, terrible candidate (one who, unlike Trump, was actually the preferred candidate of the overwhelming majority of the party that nominated her).

            Now, I am readily willing to reasses this conclusion, if, for example, evidence surfaces that Putin had secretly deployed new Russian cloaking technology that concealed the states of Michigan and Wisconsin from Hillary's campaign, causing her instead to campaign in Arizona and other states she thought she could flip to run up her presumed electoral victory into a massive landslide (for now--call me crazy, but--I am chalking it up to hubris rather than secret Russian cloaking technology).
            Here is the most compelling defense of the Trump campaign. Kushner of all people is saying you see how incompetent we are. Do you really think we would be capable of pulling off something like that?https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ggsvW3ojdQ

            מה מכילות החדשות?


            • Originally posted by redrover View Post

              Here is the most compelling defense of the Trump campaign. Kushner of all people is saying you see how incompetent we are. Do you really think we would be capable of pulling off something like that?https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ggsvW3ojdQ
              Yeah, Dems claimed that Bush was dumber than a box of rocks and still created an evil government.

              מה מכילות החדשות?


              • Originally posted by redrover View Post

                Here is the most compelling defense of the Trump campaign. Kushner of all people is saying you see how incompetent we are. Do you really think we would be capable of pulling off something like that?https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ggsvW3ojdQ
                And yet again, you respond to nothing I actually posted.

                מה מכילות החדשות?


                • The mainstream idiots - er, ah uh, I mean democrat propaganda machine AKA "media" has been breathlessly pushing this stupidity at us for over a year...

                  ... and ....

                  Guess what ?

                  There's nothing there. We have Adam squif desperately making a fool of himself . . still.... fools will be fools. Keep yapping & making yourself and your party look like imbeciles adam.

                  --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                  Mike Conaway, the Texas Republican leading the Russia investigation on the House Intelligence Committee, on Monday told Fox News the panel has concluded its interviews and that it found no evidence of collusion.

                  “We found no evidence of collusion, and so we found perhaps some bad judgment, inappropriate meetings,” Conaway said. “
                  We found no evidence of any collusion of anything people were actually doing, other than taking a meeting they shouldn’t have taken or just inadvertently being in the same building.”


                  "We will now be moving into the next phase of this investigation, working with the minority on a report to give the American people answers to the questions they've been asking for over a year," said Conaway. "With the 2018 primary elections already underway, and just 238 days until the mid-term elections in November, it's important that we give the American people the information they need to arm themselves against Russian attempts to influence our elections."

                  [ The American people weren't asking this for over a year, democrats and the democrat propaganda machine AKA "media" have been pushing this garbage at us for over a year !! Only because they're mad that hilary didn't win the Whitehouse. Foolish, sore losers. So ridiculous. ]

                  Democrats were reportedly not consulted on the findings, and some have said there are still witnesses to be interviewed, according to CNN.

                  "There are a number of steps that I think any credible investigator would say, 'These need to be done,' and we still hope that they will be," Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., said last week after the committee interviewed former Trump campaign manager Corey Lewandowski. Schiff, according to CNN, had not been told as of mid-Monday that Republicans planned to end the witness portion of the Russia investigation.

                  Conaway said the committee conducted 73 interviews, reviewed over 300,000 documents and held nine hearings and briefings.

                  "We are confident that we have thoroughly investigated the agreed-upon parameters, and developed reliable initial findings and recommendations," he said.

                  The Senate Intelligence Committee and Senate Judiciary Committee are still investigating any ties.


                  https://www.newsmax.com/headline/hou.../12/id/848244/

                  מה מכילות החדשות?


                  • Originally posted by Captain Trips View Post
                    The mainstream idiots - er, ah uh, I mean democrat propaganda machine AKA "media" has been breathlessly pushing this stupidity at us for over a year...

                    ... and ....

                    Guess what ?

                    There's nothing there. We have Adam squif desperately making a fool of himself . . still.... fools will be fools. Keep yapping & making yourself and your party look like imbeciles adam.

                    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                    Mike Conaway, the Texas Republican leading the Russia investigation on the House Intelligence Committee, on Monday told Fox News the panel has concluded its interviews and that it found no evidence of collusion.

                    “We found no evidence of collusion, and so we found perhaps some bad judgment, inappropriate meetings,” Conaway said. “
                    We found no evidence of any collusion of anything people were actually doing, other than taking a meeting they shouldn’t have taken or just inadvertently being in the same building.”


                    "We will now be moving into the next phase of this investigation, working with the minority on a report to give the American people answers to the questions they've been asking for over a year," said Conaway. "With the 2018 primary elections already underway, and just 238 days until the mid-term elections in November, it's important that we give the American people the information they need to arm themselves against Russian attempts to influence our elections."

                    [ The American people weren't asking this for over a year, democrats and the democrat propaganda machine AKA "media" have been pushing this garbage at us for over a year !! Only because they're mad that hilary didn't win the Whitehouse. Foolish, sore losers. So ridiculous. ]

                    Democrats were reportedly not consulted on the findings, and some have said there are still witnesses to be interviewed, according to CNN.

                    "There are a number of steps that I think any credible investigator would say, 'These need to be done,' and we still hope that they will be," Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., said last week after the committee interviewed former Trump campaign manager Corey Lewandowski. Schiff, according to CNN, had not been told as of mid-Monday that Republicans planned to end the witness portion of the Russia investigation.

                    Conaway said the committee conducted 73 interviews, reviewed over 300,000 documents and held nine hearings and briefings.

                    "We are confident that we have thoroughly investigated the agreed-upon parameters, and developed reliable initial findings and recommendations," he said.

                    The Senate Intelligence Committee and Senate Judiciary Committee are still investigating any ties.


                    https://www.newsmax.com/headline/hou.../12/id/848244/
                    The House investigation has been a sham the start. It's no surprise they didn't find anything. They never had any intention in finding. anything. Mueller he be de man.

                    מה מכילות החדשות?


                    • Originally posted by redrover View Post
                      The House investigation has been a sham the start.
                      Oh absolutely !

                      Originally posted by redrover View Post
                      It's no surprise they didn't find anything.
                      No, of course not.

                      Originally posted by redrover View Post
                      They never had any intention in finding. anything.
                      Right !

                      Originally posted by redrover View Post
                      Mueller he be de man.
                      You betcha !

                      מה מכילות החדשות?


                      • Originally posted by Captain Trips View Post

                        Oh absolutely !



                        No, of course not.



                        Right !



                        You betcha !
                        I agree whole heartedly with the people are saying about the republican members of the Intel committee did is a violation of the public trust. We all know treason is what republicans do best. Don't we?

                        מה מכילות החדשות?


                        • Originally posted by redrover View Post
                          I agree whole heartedly with the people are saying about the republican members of the Intel committee did is a violation of the public trust. We all know treason is what republicans do best. Don't we?
                          Of course !

                          As long as we wear blinders to the even more outrageous treasons committed daily by demonrats LOL

                          מה מכילות החדשות?


                          • Originally posted by Captain Trips View Post

                            Of course !

                            As long as we wear blinders to the even more outrageous treasons committed daily by demonrats LOL
                            I just heard of a poll that shows that 72% wnt to see the witch hunt to continue while only 11% want to see Mueller fired.

                            מה מכילות החדשות?


                            • Trump is a russian puppet story dying out.

                              Sorry..

                              Better get back to the porn star show LOL

                              ---------------------------------------------------------------

                              Donald Trump has made it clear that the United States will impose sanctions and other punishments on Russia when it's in its interest to do so, but "when it's in our interest to work with Russia, we will do that too," deputy press secretary Hogan Gidley said Monday, shortly before an announcement was made that several Russian diplomats would be sent home.

                              "This president has not softened or weakened any position that [former President] Barack Obama had on Russia and, in fact, he has gone much further," Gidley told Fox News' "Fox & Friends."

                              "You will remember we gave lethal aid to the Ukraine. We sent troops into Poland. . . Syria. We even expanded oil exports into eastern Europe. Something Barack Obama didn't do."

                              Trump knows what's right when it comes to dealing with Russia, and also when the United States needs the country as an ally to defeat ISIS or terrorism, Gidley continued.

                              "When they do things like they did in England with the poisoning of that individual, we sanction them," said Gidley. "We stand up against them when we need to."

                              ...the media is focusing on Russia, but "we don't hear there is no collusion."

                              "We don't hear the facts that after a year-and-a-half of spending money, us sending over all of our documents and making witnesses available," he said. "There is no collusion there all we hear is Russia is a huge problem for this administration. And it's just simply not. "

                              .....


                              https://www.newsmax.com/politics/hog.../26/id/850793/


                              מה מכילות החדשות?


                              • Originally posted by Captain Trips View Post
                                Trump is a russian puppet story dying out.

                                Sorry..

                                Better get back to the porn star show LOL

                                ---------------------------------------------------------------

                                Donald Trump has made it clear that the United States will impose sanctions and other punishments on Russia when it's in its interest to do so, but "when it's in our interest to work with Russia, we will do that too," deputy press secretary Hogan Gidley said Monday, shortly before an announcement was made that several Russian diplomats would be sent home.

                                "This president has not softened or weakened any position that [former President] Barack Obama had on Russia and, in fact, he has gone much further," Gidley told Fox News' "Fox & Friends."

                                "You will remember we gave lethal aid to the Ukraine. We sent troops into Poland. . . Syria. We even expanded oil exports into eastern Europe. Something Barack Obama didn't do."

                                Trump knows what's right when it comes to dealing with Russia, and also when the United States needs the country as an ally to defeat ISIS or terrorism, Gidley continued.

                                "When they do things like they did in England with the poisoning of that individual, we sanction them," said Gidley. "We stand up against them when we need to."

                                ...the media is focusing on Russia, but "we don't hear there is no collusion."

                                "We don't hear the facts that after a year-and-a-half of spending money, us sending over all of our documents and making witnesses available," he said. "There is no collusion there all we hear is Russia is a huge problem for this administration. And it's just simply not. "

                                .....


                                https://www.newsmax.com/politics/hog.../26/id/850793/

                                I was getting ready to give Trump some credit for finally doing something well and then you had to cut my legs out from under me with your Russia didn't do anything nonsense. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2018/...130541717.html

                                מה מכילות החדשות?

                                Working...
                                X