Trump and Russiagate - Page 202 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Political issues and parties in the USA and Canada.

Moderator: PoFo North America Mods

Forum rules: No one line posts please.
User avatar
By Hindsite
#14995126
The Trump-Russia collusion story was a joint invention of the Obama administration and the Clinton campaign. It enabled the Obama administration to make use of the nation’s security and intelligence services to spy on Trump and his associates and to use whatever information they thereby gleaned to try to get Hillary into the White House. The failure of the scheme didn’t stop either Obama or the Clintons. Following the election debacle, an enraged Obama administration sought vengeance by disseminating the Steele dossier as widely as possible with a view to undermining the incoming Trump administration and to ensuring that no rapprochement with Russia would be possible. In doing so, Obama and Clinton have thrown American politics into turmoil and have perhaps pushed the United States and Russia toward armed confrontation.

The Steele dossier, we have been told, started off as a piece of opposition research prepared by Fusion GPS and financed by a Republican rival of Trump’s or perhaps a GOP NeverTrumper. Following Trump’s victory in the GOP primaries, the Democrats took over its funding. Fusion hired Christopher Steele, a former head of the Russia desk at MI6 who now ran his own corporate intelligence firm, Orbis Business Intelligence.

Most of this story is pure fiction. Neither the GOP nor a primary rival of Trump’s had any involvement with the dossier. To be sure, in October 2015, the Washington Free Beacon, a neo-conservative Web site funded by hedge fund billionaire Paul Singer, did hire Fusion to undertake opposition research on Trump. However, money for this undertaking dried up by May 2016.

The Steele-crafted Trump-Russia collusion story was from start to finish a Democratic Party operation. Its origins can be traced back to April 2016 and the leak of the Democratic National Committee e-mails. The DNC announced that it had been “hacked.” However, instead of reporting the matter to the proper authorities, the DNC turned to attorney Michael Sussmann, a partner at the Perkins Coie law firm. Sussmann got in touch with cybersecurity firm CrowdStrike Inc. Now, CrowdStrike is no geeky, techno-gee-whiz firm. Its founder is Russian-born Dmitri Alperovitch, a senior fellow at the NATO-funded, intensely Russophobic Atlantic Council. “Within a day, CrowdStrike confirmed that the intrusion had originated in Russia,” the New York Times wrote. On June 14, CrowdStrike announced that the DNC hack perpetrators were two separate hacker groups employed by the Russian government.

Even though no one other than CrowdStrike had examined the DNC servers, U.S. intelligence agencies immediately declared that they were in agreement and that they had “high confidence” that the “Russian government was behind the theft of emails and documents” from the DNC.

Steele, who had many contacts at the FBI, understood what was required of him. On June 20, six days after CrowdStrike’s announcement, he filed his first report. It was exactly what the Clinton campaign was looking for: lurid, unsubstantiated but nonetheless juicy allegations.

Steele’s first memo enticed the Clinton people and they eagerly turned on the money spigots. Steele followed up with a memo revealing that the Russians were behind the DNC leak, that Putin “hated and feared” Hillary Clinton and that there existed a “well-developed conspiracy of co-operation” between Trump and the Russians. The recently-indicted Paul Manafort, Trump’s campaign chairman at the time, managed this co-operation on behalf of Trump by using “foreign policy advisor” Carter Page as an intermediary. “In return the Trump team had agreed to sideline Russian intervention in Ukraine as a campaign issue and to raise U.S./NATO defense commitments in the Baltics and eastern Europe to deflect attention away from Ukraine.”

Carter Page, whom no one had ever heard of and who had never even met Trump, featured prominently in the Steele memos and in subsequent U.S. media coverage of the campaign. A memo from Steele had Page holding a “secret meeting” with Igor Sechin, executive chairman of Rosneft, the Russian state oil company, in which the two men discussed future bilateral energy cooperation and “an associated move to lift Ukraine-related” sanctions against Russia.

The FBI went to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) court and obtained an order to “monitor the communications” of Carter Page, as “part of an investigation into possible links between Russia and the campaign.”

According to the Guardian, the FISA court turned down its first application (an unusual event, if true), asking the agency to narrow its focus. Eventually, the FBI managed to convince the court that “there was probable cause to believe Page was acting as an agent of a foreign power.” What was the basis of this probable cause? CNN reported that the FBI based its application on the claims made in the Steele dossier.

FBI Director James Comey admitted to Congress that the dossier had been “one of the sources of information the bureau has used to bolster its investigation.” Then, on Jan. 11, 2017, following Director of National Intelligence James Clapper’s meeting with Trump during which he and Comey presented the president-elect a summary of the dossier, Clapper issued a strange statement: The intelligence community “has not made any judgment that the information in this document is reliable, and we did not rely upon it in any way for our conclusions. However, part of our obligation is to ensure that policymakers are provided with the fullest possible picture of any matters that might affect national security.” This was a classic non-denial denial. That he and his friends did not “rely” on the dossier doesn’t mean that they didn’t make full use of it.

Mueller’s charges involve activities that took place long before Manafort joined the Trump campaign. What the FBI was looking for was evidence that Manafort was a conduit between the Kremlin and Trump.

Former Trump National Security Adviser Michael Flynn also featured prominently in the dossier. He too came under Obama administration surveillance. Indeed, Obama’s people used the wiretaps in order to get him ousted from his newly-appointed position. Obama administration holdover, Acting Attorney General Sally Yates, listened in on a conversation Flynn had had with Russia’s ambassador to the United States, Sergei Kislyak, on Dec. 29, 2016, and decided that the incoming national security adviser was susceptible to blackmail from the Russians. She never really explained on what grounds the Russians could or would blackmail Flynn. Her argument seemed to be that because Flynn had discussed the possible lifting of sanctions—a policy that would run contrary to that of the Obama administration that was still in office at the time this conversation had supposedly taken place—he had violated the Logan Act, which prohibits private individuals conducting U.S. foreign policy.

We now know that the Obama administration’s surveillance of Trump’s people reached pathological levels following the election. It is almost certain that the FBI did pay Steele to continue his work. The Washington Post reported that the bureau had “reached an agreement with [Steele] a few weeks before the election for the bureau to pay him to continue his work.”

Obama people such as Samantha Power, Susan Rice and Ben Rhodes went on an unmasking rampage during the election and after. House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) has claimed that the Obama administration made “hundreds of requests during the 2016 presidential race to unmask the names of Americans in intelligence reports, including Trump transition officials.” The requests were made without specific justifications on why the information was needed.

The full extent of the Obama administration’s campaign of surveillance, espionage and sabotage has yet to be revealed.
User avatar
By jimjam
#14995218
Hindsite wrote:The Trump-Russia collusion story was a joint invention of the Obama administration and the Clinton campaign. It enabled the Obama administration to make use of the nation’s security and intelligence services to spy on Trump and his associates and to use whatever information they thereby gleaned to try to get Hillary into the White House. The failure of the scheme didn’t stop either Obama or the Clintons. Following the election debacle, an enraged Obama administration sought vengeance by disseminating the Steele dossier as widely as possible with a view to undermining the incoming Trump administration and to ensuring that no rapprochement with Russia would be possible. In doing so, Obama and Clinton have thrown American politics into turmoil and have perhaps pushed the United States and Russia toward armed confrontation.

The Steele dossier, we have been told, started off as a piece of opposition research prepared by Fusion GPS and financed by a Republican rival of Trump’s or perhaps a GOP NeverTrumper. Following Trump’s victory in the GOP primaries, the Democrats took over its funding. Fusion hired Christopher Steele, a former head of the Russia desk at MI6 who now ran his own corporate intelligence firm, Orbis Business Intelligence.

Most of this story is pure fiction. Neither the GOP nor a primary rival of Trump’s had any involvement with the dossier. To be sure, in October 2015, the Washington Free Beacon, a neo-conservative Web site funded by hedge fund billionaire Paul Singer, did hire Fusion to undertake opposition research on Trump. However, money for this undertaking dried up by May 2016.

The Steele-crafted Trump-Russia collusion story was from start to finish a Democratic Party operation. Its origins can be traced back to April 2016 and the leak of the Democratic National Committee e-mails. The DNC announced that it had been “hacked.” However, instead of reporting the matter to the proper authorities, the DNC turned to attorney Michael Sussmann, a partner at the Perkins Coie law firm. Sussmann got in touch with cybersecurity firm CrowdStrike Inc. Now, CrowdStrike is no geeky, techno-gee-whiz firm. Its founder is Russian-born Dmitri Alperovitch, a senior fellow at the NATO-funded, intensely Russophobic Atlantic Council. “Within a day, CrowdStrike confirmed that the intrusion had originated in Russia,” the New York Times wrote. On June 14, CrowdStrike announced that the DNC hack perpetrators were two separate hacker groups employed by the Russian government.

Even though no one other than CrowdStrike had examined the DNC servers, U.S. intelligence agencies immediately declared that they were in agreement and that they had “high confidence” that the “Russian government was behind the theft of emails and documents” from the DNC.

Steele, who had many contacts at the FBI, understood what was required of him. On June 20, six days after CrowdStrike’s announcement, he filed his first report. It was exactly what the Clinton campaign was looking for: lurid, unsubstantiated but nonetheless juicy allegations.

Steele’s first memo enticed the Clinton people and they eagerly turned on the money spigots. Steele followed up with a memo revealing that the Russians were behind the DNC leak, that Putin “hated and feared” Hillary Clinton and that there existed a “well-developed conspiracy of co-operation” between Trump and the Russians. The recently-indicted Paul Manafort, Trump’s campaign chairman at the time, managed this co-operation on behalf of Trump by using “foreign policy advisor” Carter Page as an intermediary. “In return the Trump team had agreed to sideline Russian intervention in Ukraine as a campaign issue and to raise U.S./NATO defense commitments in the Baltics and eastern Europe to deflect attention away from Ukraine.”

Carter Page, whom no one had ever heard of and who had never even met Trump, featured prominently in the Steele memos and in subsequent U.S. media coverage of the campaign. A memo from Steele had Page holding a “secret meeting” with Igor Sechin, executive chairman of Rosneft, the Russian state oil company, in which the two men discussed future bilateral energy cooperation and “an associated move to lift Ukraine-related” sanctions against Russia.

The FBI went to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) court and obtained an order to “monitor the communications” of Carter Page, as “part of an investigation into possible links between Russia and the campaign.”

According to the Guardian, the FISA court turned down its first application (an unusual event, if true), asking the agency to narrow its focus. Eventually, the FBI managed to convince the court that “there was probable cause to believe Page was acting as an agent of a foreign power.” What was the basis of this probable cause? CNN reported that the FBI based its application on the claims made in the Steele dossier.

FBI Director James Comey admitted to Congress that the dossier had been “one of the sources of information the bureau has used to bolster its investigation.” Then, on Jan. 11, 2017, following Director of National Intelligence James Clapper’s meeting with Trump during which he and Comey presented the president-elect a summary of the dossier, Clapper issued a strange statement: The intelligence community “has not made any judgment that the information in this document is reliable, and we did not rely upon it in any way for our conclusions. However, part of our obligation is to ensure that policymakers are provided with the fullest possible picture of any matters that might affect national security.” This was a classic non-denial denial. That he and his friends did not “rely” on the dossier doesn’t mean that they didn’t make full use of it.

Mueller’s charges involve activities that took place long before Manafort joined the Trump campaign. What the FBI was looking for was evidence that Manafort was a conduit between the Kremlin and Trump.

Former Trump National Security Adviser Michael Flynn also featured prominently in the dossier. He too came under Obama administration surveillance. Indeed, Obama’s people used the wiretaps in order to get him ousted from his newly-appointed position. Obama administration holdover, Acting Attorney General Sally Yates, listened in on a conversation Flynn had had with Russia’s ambassador to the United States, Sergei Kislyak, on Dec. 29, 2016, and decided that the incoming national security adviser was susceptible to blackmail from the Russians. She never really explained on what grounds the Russians could or would blackmail Flynn. Her argument seemed to be that because Flynn had discussed the possible lifting of sanctions—a policy that would run contrary to that of the Obama administration that was still in office at the time this conversation had supposedly taken place—he had violated the Logan Act, which prohibits private individuals conducting U.S. foreign policy.

We now know that the Obama administration’s surveillance of Trump’s people reached pathological levels following the election. It is almost certain that the FBI did pay Steele to continue his work. The Washington Post reported that the bureau had “reached an agreement with [Steele] a few weeks before the election for the bureau to pay him to continue his work.”

Obama people such as Samantha Power, Susan Rice and Ben Rhodes went on an unmasking rampage during the election and after. House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) has claimed that the Obama administration made “hundreds of requests during the 2016 presidential race to unmask the names of Americans in intelligence reports, including Trump transition officials.” The requests were made without specific justifications on why the information was needed.

The full extent of the Obama administration’s campaign of surveillance, espionage and sabotage has yet to be revealed.

You gotta love the faux indignation from the red beanie wearing Pizzagate crowd :lol: .
User avatar
By Hindsite
#14995230
jimjam wrote:You gotta love the faux indignation from the red beanie wearing Pizzagate crowd :lol: .

Just waiting for real justice to be done.
User avatar
By jimjam
#14995257
Hindsite wrote:Just waiting for real justice to be done.

I assume you are referring to your Pizzagate expose :lol: ………..

BTW did you know that the pizza joint where you and your Red Beanied Buddies thought Hillary was chopping up babies in the basement ………… does not have a basement :eek: ?
User avatar
By Hindsite
#14995260
jimjam wrote:I assume you are referring to your Pizzagate expose :lol: ………..

BTW did you know that the pizza joint where you and your Red Beanied Buddies thought Hillary was chopping up babies in the basement ………… does not have a basement :eek: ?

Oh, I am not concerned about the fake news. It is the truth I want to know. Like when is she going to jail for obstructing justice and lying to Congress.
User avatar
By jimjam
#14995301
Hindsite wrote:Oh, I am not concerned about the fake news. It is the truth I want to know. Like when is she going to jail for obstructing justice and lying to Congress.


Try to forget Hillary. You may have noticed that she is not in fact the president and, consequently, of little interest/importance. Right now more people are interested in when Donald is going to prison.

Fake news? I agree with your boy Donald. Fake news is everywhere. But, tell me H.S., how do you determine what is fake and what is true? Do you wait for Donald or his Minister Of Propaganda Sean Hannity to make this decision for you? Many considered and, i'm sure, still consider pizzagate to be real news ……. An Economist/YouGov poll in late December 2016 found that 46 percent of Trump voters and 17 percent of Clinton voters thought Pizzagate was real.

Fake news is used to fill the media (Donald is a master at this) while the real news takes place quietly out of the public eye and we are supposed to give a shit what Donald thinks of a dead senator.
User avatar
By Hindsite
#14995319
jimjam wrote:Try to forget Hillary. You may have noticed that she is not in fact the president and, consequently, of little interest/importance. Right now more people are interested in when Donald is going to prison.

Fake news? I agree with your boy Donald. Fake news is everywhere. But, tell me H.S., how do you determine what is fake and what is true? Do you wait for Donald or his Minister Of Propaganda Sean Hannity to make this decision for you? Many considered and, i'm sure, still consider pizzagate to be real news ……. An Economist/YouGov poll in late December 2016 found that 46 percent of Trump voters and 17 percent of Clinton voters thought Pizzagate was real.

Fake news is used to fill the media (Donald is a master at this) while the real news takes place quietly out of the public eye and we are supposed to give a shit what Donald thinks of a dead senator.

Pizzagate was stupid from the beginning. It was crazier that the Steele dossier. If it is on CNN as political news, it is more than likely fake news, like the Covington kids. Other times you just have to wait and see. I don't like McCain either, so I am fine with that.
User avatar
By Godstud
#14995350
@Hindsite You don't like McCain because he was a war hero, and that makes Trump look like a war ZERO. :lol:

You're a Trump fan-boy. He'd piss on you and you'd think it was rain. :lol: :lol: :lol:
#14995356
Hindsite wrote:The Steele dossier, we have been told, started off as a piece of opposition research prepared by Fusion GPS and financed by a Republican rival of Trump’s or perhaps a GOP NeverTrumper.

It was Jeb Bush. Why the handover from Jeb to Hillary? They are both part of the neoconservative cabal--two sides of the same coin.

Hindsite wrote:Neither the GOP nor a primary rival of Trump’s had any involvement with the dossier.

As far as developing the dossier... John McCain was part of the dissemination of it, however. John McCain, of course, was a neocon warhawk.

Hindsite wrote:The Steele-crafted Trump-Russia collusion story was from start to finish a Democratic Party operation.

I think that Steele's involvement points to the British equivalent of neoconservatives in the British establishment--which is also a cross party endeavor.

Hindsite wrote:However, instead of reporting the matter to the proper authorities, the DNC turned to attorney Michael Sussmann, a partner at the Perkins Coie law firm. Sussmann got in touch with cybersecurity firm CrowdStrike Inc. Now, CrowdStrike is no geeky, techno-gee-whiz firm. Its founder is Russian-born Dmitri Alperovitch, a senior fellow at the NATO-funded, intensely Russophobic Atlantic Council. “Within a day, CrowdStrike confirmed that the intrusion had originated in Russia,” the New York Times wrote. On June 14, CrowdStrike announced that the DNC hack perpetrators were two separate hacker groups employed by the Russian government.

Even though no one other than CrowdStrike had examined the DNC servers, U.S. intelligence agencies immediately declared that they were in agreement and that they had “high confidence” that the “Russian government was behind the theft of emails and documents” from the DNC.

That is why I never bought the story. The DNC refused to turn the server over to the FBI. So without any evidence, the story would never have any serious legal standing--which is why Mueller never prosecuted anyone on this.

Hindsite wrote:According to the Guardian, the FISA court turned down its first application (an unusual event, if true), asking the agency to narrow its focus. Eventually, the FBI managed to convince the court that “there was probable cause to believe Page was acting as an agent of a foreign power.” What was the basis of this probable cause? CNN reported that the FBI based its application on the claims made in the Steele dossier.

Additionally, Steele corroborated his own story by manufacturing a story in YahooNews with himself as the anonymous source. That was also used in the FISA application. Again, we were never supposed to have figured this stuff out. Criminal masterminds on cocaine are not as clever as cocaine makes them think they are.

Hindsite wrote:Mueller’s charges involve activities that took place long before Manafort joined the Trump campaign.

Right. Additionally, the idea that the IRS and FBI are totally incompetent only to have this revelation sprung on us by Mueller is ridiculous. Manafort was an unindicted informant who likely had a non-prosecution agreement with the FBI/DoJ in exchange for intelligence. However, the scope of that agreement did not apply to the special counsel. I had already figured Manafort was guilty on the tax charges and the bank fraud was just window dressing. He was dead to rights from the beginning, but I think they intended us to believe he would flip and testify against Trump. Jimjam was certainly licking his chops in anticipation, but it never happened.

Hindsite wrote:Former Trump National Security Adviser Michael Flynn also featured prominently in the dossier. He too came under Obama administration surveillance. Indeed, Obama’s people used the wiretaps in order to get him ousted from his newly-appointed position. Obama administration holdover, Acting Attorney General Sally Yates, listened in on a conversation Flynn had had with Russia’s ambassador to the United States, Sergei Kislyak, on Dec. 29, 2016, and decided that the incoming national security adviser was susceptible to blackmail from the Russians. She never really explained on what grounds the Russians could or would blackmail Flynn. Her argument seemed to be that because Flynn had discussed the possible lifting of sanctions—a policy that would run contrary to that of the Obama administration that was still in office at the time this conversation had supposedly taken place—he had violated the Logan Act, which prohibits private individuals conducting U.S. foreign policy.

It was all bullshit. However, Flynn wasn't straight up with Mike Pence, so Trump fired him on the spot--again, thwarting the deep state's expectation that Trump would defend people like Nixon did and then they could push forward on a flawed "obstruction of justice" theory.

Hindsite wrote:It is almost certain that the FBI did pay Steele to continue his work. The Washington Post reported that the bureau had “reached an agreement with [Steele] a few weeks before the election for the bureau to pay him to continue his work.”

They did until it was clear that he was the anonymous source for the YahooNews story corroborating his own dossier to the FISA court. That's when it became clear that they committed a crime on the FISA court--intentionally or inadvertantly--as a result of Steele violating the terms of the agreement, for which he was terminated.

Hindsite wrote:Just waiting for real justice to be done.

I wouldn't hold your breath. Until you see a whole lot of accidental or untimely deaths like those that happen to people close to the Clintons, yankee white will not have done his job.

jimjam wrote:Try to forget Hillary. You may have noticed that she is not in fact the president and, consequently, of little interest/importance. Right now more people are interested in when Donald is going to prison.

She masterminded the entire Russiagate story, so she is a person of interest. In fact, the Special Counsel is staffed with her acolytes and donors. It is a failed coup.

Anyway, it looks like Barr has ordered Mueller to wrap it up as the investigation has gone on 4 times longer than the events in question and come up with nothing.
User avatar
By Hong Wu
#14995360
The latest talking point seems to be "I don't care if Mueller doesn't find collusion."

This was stated by James Comey and repeated by at least one MSM personality although I forget who.

I don't think it bodes too well for the situation...

https://abc7news.com/5211461/

ABC News reports that no more indictments are expected to happen in the Mueller probe...
User avatar
By jimjam
#14995365
Godstud wrote:@Hindsite You don't like McCain because he was a war hero, and that makes Trump look like a war ZERO. :lol:


Two daughters of a New York podiatrist say that 50 years ago their father diagnosed President Donald Trump with bone spurs in his heels as a favor to the doctor's landlord, Fred Trump.

Trump said that a doctor wrote him a letter for the draft board about the bone spurs – which Trump said were "temporary" and "minor" – but he could not recall the doctor's name.

"I had a doctor that gave me a letter – a very strong letter on the heels," Trump told the Times.

"A very strong letter on the heels." :lol: :lol: Boy can this guy get creative with his endless stream of lies.

The "bone spur" war hero was asked last year how his "bone spurs" were doing and he responded that "They just went away." :lol:

It is really amazing that anybody believes anything at all that this phony says.
User avatar
By Hindsite
#14995387
Godstud wrote:@Hindsite You don't like McCain because he was a war hero, and that makes Trump look like a war ZERO.

Actually, McCain was a war prisoner and a dumb prisoner at that. I agree with Trump that just being a war prisoner is not my kind of hero.

Now that the Mueller report has ended, we need another investigation into Obama and the Democrats and make some of them accountable for disrupting the Presidency for over two years.
User avatar
By Lightman
#14995402
Like most of Glenn's points, this is technically true but heavily misleading. E.g. Paul Manafort wasn't charged with conspiracy, but his plea deal was voided on the basis that he had lied about meetings with a Russian asset while he was Trump's campaign manager.
#14995410
Lightman wrote:Like most of Glenn's points, this is technically true but heavily misleading. E.g. Paul Manafort wasn't charged with conspiracy, but his plea deal was voided on the basis that he had lied about meetings with a Russian asset while he was Trump's campaign manager.


Trump's 'collusion' involved straightforward money laundering for Russian oligarchs to get around sanctions. It is certainly illegal as fuck and dishonest, but not connected (so far as we know) with any realistic attempt at manipulating US elections. The whole Russian election operation was peanuts compared to AIPAC. The Democrats (at least for a time) were heavily pushing the Russian interference narrative. They will pay heavily for it now, and in 2020.

The decks are now cleared for a landslide Trump win in the electoral college, and probable retrenchment of the Democratic majority in the House. All because Democrats couldn't be bothered to address things that affect people every day - like healthcare and jobs that pay enough to actually survive.
By Finfinder
#14995420
The good thing that will come out of this massive scandal is uncovering the most corrupt administration in the history of the United States. The Obama administration, a perfect storm of Chicago politics and the Clinton's. Stay tuned for the next leg to begin, accountability. Also stay tuned for the next scandal , the Ukraine and creepy uncle Joe Biden.
User avatar
By Hong Wu
#14995431
There's surprisingly little salt coming from the left. Contrary to how they acted in 2016, we can tell from this that most of them never really believed in the Russian collusion thing. Otherwise they'd act surprised, angry etc. I think the loss of respect from this will be tangible, sometimes silence says the most.

The diehards I'm reading in other places are pretty low energy. The best argument seems to be that Trump himself wasn't indicted and this means that Mueller didn't go far enough but it's a weak argument; did Trump plan and execute Russian collusion without involving any other Americans? That seems to be a necessary presumption there.

The most interesting thing will be the weird void left behind I guess. On late night shows etc., since they are mostly ignoring this, it'll be like a gaping hole as they avoid discussing the thing they've been on about for years. Sad!
By Rich
#14995443
Rugoz wrote:Where's your deep state now, Trumpanzees? :lol:

I'm not quite sure why you are using the term Trumpanzees. Chimpanzees are just totally incapable of organising in groups any where near the size of what you see at a Trump rally. But are you saying that its surprising that the Deep State should stand down against Donald Trump a few hours after he supports the recognition of the Golan?
  • 1
  • 200
  • 201
  • 202
  • 203
  • 204
  • 266

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o4e4fI_r3b0 huma[…]

Israel-Palestinian War 2023

... rape ... You have mentionned "rape&quo[…]

The importance of out-breeding

DOG BREEDING https://external-content.[…]

Who needs a wall? We have all those land mines ju[…]