Call the cops and send 'em to jail for rioting or whatever charge you can get, and stick 'em in the same cell. Or call...

https://ecp.yusercontent.com/mail?ur...Fakvw.PPjA--~C

Talaniman: Good idea about the same cell! Tulsi….I think she could pull it off! Man, she is EASY ON THE EYES! Especially when she is angry!

I doubt Tulsi would run a third party candidacy nor have a hope of winning, but any third party candidate would only help the dufus get re elected, including Jill Stein who no doubt drew votes from HC in '16 in key states. I can see and it has been reported that Ruskies are at it again for the '20 elections with a cyber disinformation campaign to help the dufus AGAIN, as the impeachment inquiry moves forward.

Quote:

---

I doubt Tulsi would run a third party candidacy nor have a hope of winning, but any third party candidate would only help the dufus get re elected, including Jill Stein who no doubt drew votes from HC in '16 in key states. I can see and it has been reported that Ruskies are at it again for the '20 elections with a cyber disinformation campaign to help the dufus AGAIN, as the impeachment inquiry moves forward.

---

I thought TG was a "Russian asset" who was being "groomed" by the Russkies to run a third party effort and thus, so the theory goes, ensure the election of Trump. Are you saying that HC has it wrong?

I think HC issued a warning to dems using TG, as there has been cyber activity pushing her and other dems by online bots from the same cast of characters from 2016. Did she get it wrong? Only if you dismiss Vlad and his minions for what they have done and trying to do.

Quote:

---

I think HC issued a warning to dems using TG, as there has been cyber activity pushing her and other dems by online bots from the same cast of characters from 2016. Did she get it wrong?

---

No, she was not issuing "a warning". She very specifically accused both TG and Stein of being Russian "assets" and said that TG was being "groomed" by the Russians to run a third party effort. And you wonder why I voted for Trump???

You think Vlad cannot target someone as an asset and use nefarious means to groom them without there knowledge or cooperation?

Quote:

---

You think Vlad cannot target someone as an asset and use nefarious means to groom them without there knowledge or cooperation?

---

Without their knowledge or cooperation? Well of course not!! He can get someone to run as a third party candidate without their knowledge??? That's laughable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

Without their knowledge or cooperation? Well of course not!! He can get someone to run as a third party candidate without their knowledge??? That's laughable.

---

Here you go again.

The question is NOT can Vlad get someone to run as a third party candidate without their knowledge. As been patiently explained to you already, the grooming is done WITHOUT the candidate's knowledge. This ain't rocket science.

The dufus seems a willing Russian asset. Wonder if he owes Vlad momey, or maybe Vlad co signed for him to get money since American banks shun this idiot. Or he has a deal in place with Vlad we know nothing about. There are those phone calls and meeting unchaperoned, and those laughing boy White House encounters with Russian officials that our press was barred from. If Vlad hadn't told us we would never know.

We all know how those dufus phone calls to foreign leaders always screw things up.

Quote:

---

The question is NOT can Vlad get someone to run as a third party candidate without their knowledge. As been patiently explained to you already, the grooming is done WITHOUT the candidate's knowledge. This ain't rocket science.

---

And that is strictly, 100% your opinion. You don't have the slightest idea what HC meant when she said that, you only have an opinion. TG did not take it that way at all, and interestingly enough, HC has not walked back her comments or explained that she meant something similar to what you said. Like you said, it's not rocket science.

Quote:

---

The dufus seems a willing Russian asset. Wonder if he owes Vlad momey, or maybe Vlad co signed for him to get money since American banks shun this idiot. Or he has a deal in place with Vlad we know nothing about. There are those phone calls and meeting unchaperoned, and those laughing boy White House encounters with Russian officials that our press was barred from. If Vlad hadn't told us we would never know.

---

I wonder if maybe all those millions of dollars BC was paid for making speeches came with strings attached. I wonder if the millions of dollars given to the Clinton Foundation by Russians while HC was Sec. of State came with strings attached? If wonder what Lynch and BC agreed to in that secret meeting? Maybe they were Russian "assets".

You see how that blade cuts both ways? It's just all pure conjecture.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

And that is strictly, 100% your opinion. You don't have the slightest idea what HC meant when she said that, you only have an opinion. TG did not take it that way at all, and interestingly enough, HC has not walked back her comments or explained that she meant something similar to what you said. Like you said, it's not rocket science.

---

With Jill Stein as a third-party candidate in 2016, the Russian strategy worked, didn't it. Those Russian bots were all over Facebook, dumping out promos for her.

Quote:

---

With Jill Stein as a third-party candidate in 2016, the Russian strategy worked, didn't it. Those Russian bots were all over Facebook, dumping out promos for her.

---

I could only agree with that if I was silly enough to believe this nonsense about a "Russian strategy", none of which has been proven. If the Russkies were so wild about getting Trump elected, then why did they donate tens of millions of dollars to the Clinton Foundation? Why did they pay Bill Clinton to make speeches to the tune of 500 thousand per? Did they pay Trump to make speeches? No, but they did pay BC.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

And that is strictly, 100% your opinion. You don't have the slightest idea what HC meant when she said that, you only have an opinion.

---

It is NOT my opinion. IT IS WHAT THE WORDS MEAN!!

Quote:

---

TG did not take it that way at all

---

You are correct. TG MISQUOTED HC saying she was called a "Russian AGENT"! HC NEVER called her an agent. She called TG an asset". I won't explain the difference again here.

TG is not stupid. She is spinning it to her advantage.

Jl - You really don't seem to be up on the cyber-spying - for lack of a better word. There have been tons of words written about it, and how successful the Russians have been. Are you aware that the US Intelligence Community has unanimously said the Russians interfered in 2016? What they successfully did in 2016, they are, as we speak, doing the same thing again. Why not? It worked then, it will surely work again.

Quote:

---

interestingly enough, HC has not walked back her comments or explained that she meant something similar to what you said.

---

There is nothing to walk back.

As far as explaining, she expects those who heard what she said to understand what she said. The thing was all over the cable TV News today and while she took a lot of criticism for dissing her own party, nobody commenting made the mistake of saying HC called TG an agent. Several of them keyed on what "grooming" means, which was as I indicated.

Quote:

---

You see how that blade cuts both ways?

---

Only in your mind does it cut both ways. Didn't you say you were a teacher? Why not ask some of your teacher friends what Hillary meant?

Quote:

---

It is NOT my opinion. IT IS WHAT THE WORDS MEAN!!

---

She said TG was an "agent" and was being "groomed" by the Russians. You claim that HC meant the Russians were doing that without TG's knowledge. She did not say that. That is strictly your opinion. I realize you highly value your opinion. I don't quite have that high view of it.

Quote:

---

You are correct. TG MISQUOTED HC saying she was called a "Russian AGENT"! HC NEVER called her an agent. She called TG an asset". I won't explain the difference again here.

TG is not stupid. She is spinning it to her advantage.

---

That might be true, but you don't know that for sure either. As to the asset/agent disparity, the word "asset" can very easily mean something very similar to agent, and at the least mean a person who is knowingly an ally of a particular government.

Quote:

---

Jl - You really don't seem to be up on the cyber-spying - for lack of a better word. There have been tons of words written about it, and how successful the Russians have been. Are you aware that the US Intelligence Community has unanimously said the Russians interfered in 2016? What they successfully did in 2016, they are, as we speak, doing the same thing again. Why not? It worked then, it will surely work again.

---

I am aware of it. It is also largely agreed that they interfered in 2018. So are we to conclude that they favored the democrat party takeover of the House?

But all of that is irrelevant to HC's crazy Russian accusations. Even if she only meant what you suggest, how would she know that both Stein and TG, whether wittingly or unwittingly, were Russian assets? If she know for sure, then how did she know? And if she could not be sure, then wouldn't it be the height of irresponsibility to allege it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

She said TG was an "agent" and was being "groomed" by the Russians

---

WRONG, WRONG, WRONG, WRONG, WRONG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

She said "asset", NOT agent. Go watch the video - it's around somewhere.

Interesting how Trump has the power to influence his followers - fascinating example right here where the truth means nothing, facts don't count, yet the false comments - the same ones, to boot - continue unabated.

For the rest, get somebody else to do your explaining for you.

I swear, if I were a candidate, particularly a POTUS candidate, I would hire these damned RUSSIAN BOTS! From what I am reading here, they seem to be very, very effective at getting the votes for whomever they are trying to get elected! And, with the Exchange Rate the way it is, they are probably a whole heck of a lot cheaper than traditional campaign agencies!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

She said TG was an "agent" and was being "groomed" by the Russians. You claim that HC meant the Russians were doing that without TG's knowledge. She did not say that. That is strictly your opinion. I realize you highly value your opinion. I don't quite have that high view of it.

---

Hillary Clinton:
“I’m not making any predictions, but I think they’ve got their eye on someone who’s currently in the Democratic primary and are grooming her [Gabbard] to be the third-party candidate. She’s the favorite of the Russians. They have a bunch of sites and bots and other ways of supporting her so far. That’s assuming Jill Stein will give it up, which she might not because she’s also a Russian asset. Yeah, she’s a Russian asset — I mean, totally. They know they can’t win without a third-party candidate. So I don’t know who it’s going to be, but I will guarantee you they will have a vigorous third-party challenge in the key states that they most needed.”

Quote:

---

She said "asset", NOT agent. Go watch the video - it's around somewhere.

---

You are absolutely correct. That was a typo on my part which can be clearly seen from my previous posts such as 184 where I posted, "I thought TG was a "Russian asset" who was being "groomed" by the Russkies to run a third party effort and thus, so the theory goes, ensure the election of Trump."

Still, that does not change the fact that her words do not say that the "assets" were unknowing, and the "grooming" was done without their knowledge. That is 100% speculation on your part. You claimed that was what her words said (the part about them being unwitting assets) and that is a false statement.

Quote:

---

but I will guarantee you they will have a vigorous third-party challenge in the key states that they most needed.”

---

I wonder how HC could make that "guarantee"?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

You are absolutely correct. That was a typo on my part which can be clearly seen from my previous posts such as 184 where I posted, "I thought TG was a "Russian asset" who was being "groomed" by the Russkies to run a third party effort and thus, so the theory goes, ensure the election of Trump."

Still, that does not change the fact that her words do not say that the "assets" were unknowing, and the "grooming" was done without their knowledge. That is 100% speculation on your part. You claimed that was what her words said (the part about them being unwitting assets) and that is a false statement.

---

People don't realize they're being groomed. That's the whole point in the grooming, e.g., pedophiles grooming children toward perversive activity.

Quote:

---

I wonder how HC could make that "guarantee"?

---

It was done during the 2016 campaign.