UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
and still beat old man rape fantasy.
DNC Email Leak
- Thread starter Padawanbater2
- Start date
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
You don't have to admit the DNC tipped the scales for Clinton, the damage has already been done; she lost, after all
Like I said, keep running your establishment picks and we'll run qualified progressive alternatives and we'll see who wins in the political arena when it comes to primary elections. We'll let the numbers speak for themselves
Good luck
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
4 million votes? 12%?
funny, you used to believe in facts and evidence, rather than childish conspiracy theories borne out of absolute asshurt.
fucking cult member.
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
You think Russia hacked the DNC, stole the emails that incriminated them and the Clinton campaign, gave them to Wikileaks, which damaged Clinton's chances at beating Donald Trump in the general election
While simultaneously believing there was nothing incriminating from the DNC or the Clinton campaign revealed in the emails
Except we know you don't actually believe that. You know, just like everyone else, what the DNC leaks actually revealed. You simply push the establishment narrative about Russia in an attempt to obfuscate the issue. That's why you won't acknowledge or address anything said in this post. You do it in dialogue in almost every post. Ignore the main points, push your own talking points. Watch, you'll do it in the next post replying to me even after I've explained it. No substance, all personal attacks.
Like earlier, about the bylaws becoming real laws. "But they're not laws", "right, they should be laws to ensure a fair election", "Bernie Bernie Bernie!!!", "OK, but what about the bylaws becoming laws?", "cult leader", "so no, then? You don't support it to protect elections?", "rape"...
Like I said before; good luck with that strategy. You won't get far without progressive support, and progressives won't support establishment candidates that don't support universal healthcare and commit to not accepting corporate or PAC financing
While simultaneously believing there was nothing incriminating from the DNC or the Clinton campaign revealed in the emails
Except we know you don't actually believe that. You know, just like everyone else, what the DNC leaks actually revealed. You simply push the establishment narrative about Russia in an attempt to obfuscate the issue. That's why you won't acknowledge or address anything said in this post. You do it in dialogue in almost every post. Ignore the main points, push your own talking points. Watch, you'll do it in the next post replying to me even after I've explained it. No substance, all personal attacks.
Like earlier, about the bylaws becoming real laws. "But they're not laws", "right, they should be laws to ensure a fair election", "Bernie Bernie Bernie!!!", "OK, but what about the bylaws becoming laws?", "cult leader", "so no, then? You don't support it to protect elections?", "rape"...
Like I said before; good luck with that strategy. You won't get far without progressive support, and progressives won't support establishment candidates that don't support universal healthcare and commit to not accepting corporate or PAC financing
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
the stolen emails which were leaked by a hostile foreign power in an attempt to subvert a democratic election are unverifiable by their very nature, so no conclusions about the DNC or clinton can be drawn from them whatsoever.
oh, and you are not a progressive.
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
How did you conclude the emails were leaked by a hostile foreign power in an attempt to subvert a democratic election if they're unverifiable?
Why did Debbie Wasserman Schultz and Donna Brazile resign in shame once emails were leaked?
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
are you literally retarded?
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
it was a serious question though. do you not understand how we can know exactly who did the hacking, and who did the leaking, and why that makes the leaked material unverifiable whatsoever?
or are you literally retarded?
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
Show me. Show me how you know exactly who hacked the DNC and who leaked it to Wikileaks
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
It's predictable at this point..
I guess it's just completely unreasonable to ask to see the evidence of your claim..
It's not, you just know whatever you post will not be construed as legitimate evidence by any reasonable person, so, better not to post it and just continue to obfuscate the issue
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
stop crying.
you're so far gone by now that you're questioning the conclusion of our 17 intelligence agencies as well as multiple other foreign ICs.
you're in a cult now, like flaming pie. it's sad. i feel bad for you.
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
Right, I'm questioning the same intelligence agencies that got us into Iraq
Are you claiming we should automatically accept everything our intelligence agencies report as fact?
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
Are you claiming we should automatically accept everything our intelligence agencies report as fact?
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
17 intelligence agencies did not say that iraq had WMDs. that was a lie peddled by the bush administration based on cherrypicking and plainly false reports.
you are an idiot for repeating trump lies, kid.
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
I asked a general question that requires a 'yes' or 'no' response from you. I'll ask it again..
'Are you claiming we should automatically accept everything our intelligence agencies report as fact?'
Yes, or no?
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
sorry for pointing out your lie.
we should accept our ICs' conclusions as fact if they match observable facts, like trump accidentally reading off a wikileak to his klan rally 20 minutes before it also dropped on sputnik and RT.
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
So why didn't Hillary Clinton vote against the Iraq war if it was "based on cherrypicking by the Bush administration" and "plainly false reports" published by the intelligence community?