UJ's Hamster Died. We're All That's Left...
https://ujrefugees.net/
I'm trying to give him the chance to stop looking like an idiot. Apparently, he refuses to help himself.
Your stated goal and execution are wildly out of sync.necronomous wrote: ↑Fri Oct 11, 2019 11:29 pm I'm trying to give him the chance to stop looking like an idiot. Apparently, he refuses to help himself.
At a certain point a man must help himself.dot wrote: ↑Sat Oct 12, 2019 12:04 amYour stated goal and execution are wildly out of sync.necronomous wrote: ↑Fri Oct 11, 2019 11:29 pm I'm trying to give him the chance to stop looking like an idiot. Apparently, he refuses to help himself.
So stop making yourself look bad. Take your own advice.
If you are rejecting reality from the outset, then what’s the point in answering your farce of a question?
When you refuse to answer a simple question, you look like an idiot. I enjoy making you look like an idiot.necronomous wrote: ↑Fri Oct 11, 2019 11:29 pmI'm trying to give him the chance to stop looking like an idiot. Apparently, he refuses to help himself.
I've asked you to prove Trumps involvement. You didn't. It wasn't a discussion. It was a question you refused to answer. You don't get to make pretend rules to control a narrative. If you can't answer the question, just man up and say that instead of beating around the endless bush.AnalHamster wrote: ↑Sat Oct 12, 2019 6:39 amWhen you refuse to answer a simple question, you look like an idiot. I enjoy making you look like an idiot.necronomous wrote: ↑Fri Oct 11, 2019 11:29 pmI'm trying to give him the chance to stop looking like an idiot. Apparently, he refuses to help himself.
Does meeting with a Russian representative offering help from the Russians constitute colluding with their interference? If you want to examine the collusion you'll have to acknowledge it happened. You dodging that question shows pretty clearly that you just won't consider this. I could type out the relevant parts of the mueller report for you in a long time consuming post, but you'll just say 'derrr no collusion' or 'lol'. If you want to discuss it participate in a discussion, I will walk you through it line by line establishing what you can admit did occur. If that's absolutely nothing, which is the case, then there's nothing I can say you will accept. So I'll just keep hitting you over the head with your denial that meeting a russian government rep offering their help with the election is colluding, because that's pretty retarded, and shows you'll deny anything ever could be.
If you can pull on your big boy pants and follow along, I'll do just that. Your pretense that getting you to admit collusion occurred at all is unrelated to getting you to admit who was involved in it isn't really working here buddy. You've simply proven that you will deny collusion no matter what is said. If at any point you would like to move forward, feel free.necronomous wrote: ↑Sat Oct 12, 2019 12:57 pmI've asked you to prove Trumps involvement. You didn't. It wasn't a discussion. It was a question you refused to answer. You don't get to make pretend rules to control a narrative. If you can't answer the question, just man up and say that instead of beating around the endless bush.AnalHamster wrote: ↑Sat Oct 12, 2019 6:39 amWhen you refuse to answer a simple question, you look like an idiot. I enjoy making you look like an idiot.necronomous wrote: ↑Fri Oct 11, 2019 11:29 pmI'm trying to give him the chance to stop looking like an idiot. Apparently, he refuses to help himself.
Does meeting with a Russian representative offering help from the Russians constitute colluding with their interference? If you want to examine the collusion you'll have to acknowledge it happened. You dodging that question shows pretty clearly that you just won't consider this. I could type out the relevant parts of the mueller report for you in a long time consuming post, but you'll just say 'derrr no collusion' or 'lol'. If you want to discuss it participate in a discussion, I will walk you through it line by line establishing what you can admit did occur. If that's absolutely nothing, which is the case, then there's nothing I can say you will accept. So I'll just keep hitting you over the head with your denial that meeting a russian government rep offering their help with the election is colluding, because that's pretty retarded, and shows you'll deny anything ever could be.
So I guess your new schtick is dodge the answer asked until the other person doesn't want to ask it anymore. Great strategy.
Keep shoving your fingers in your ears. And go forth with your whataboutism.AnalHamster wrote: ↑Sat Oct 12, 2019 1:03 pmIf you can pull on your big boy pants and follow along, I'll do just that. Your pretense that getting you to admit collusion occurred at all is unrelated to getting you to admit who was involved in it isn't really working here buddy. You've simply proven that you will deny collusion no matter what is said. If at any point you would like to move forward, feel free.necronomous wrote: ↑Sat Oct 12, 2019 12:57 pmI've asked you to prove Trumps involvement. You didn't. It wasn't a discussion. It was a question you refused to answer. You don't get to make pretend rules to control a narrative. If you can't answer the question, just man up and say that instead of beating around the endless bush.AnalHamster wrote: ↑Sat Oct 12, 2019 6:39 amWhen you refuse to answer a simple question, you look like an idiot. I enjoy making you look like an idiot.necronomous wrote: ↑Fri Oct 11, 2019 11:29 pmI'm trying to give him the chance to stop looking like an idiot. Apparently, he refuses to help himself.
Does meeting with a Russian representative offering help from the Russians constitute colluding with their interference? If you want to examine the collusion you'll have to acknowledge it happened. You dodging that question shows pretty clearly that you just won't consider this. I could type out the relevant parts of the mueller report for you in a long time consuming post, but you'll just say 'derrr no collusion' or 'lol'. If you want to discuss it participate in a discussion, I will walk you through it line by line establishing what you can admit did occur. If that's absolutely nothing, which is the case, then there's nothing I can say you will accept. So I'll just keep hitting you over the head with your denial that meeting a russian government rep offering their help with the election is colluding, because that's pretty retarded, and shows you'll deny anything ever could be.
So I guess your new schtick is dodge the answer asked until the other person doesn't want to ask it anymore. Great strategy.
So, does going to meet a russian government representative offering help from the russian government with the election constitute collusion with that interference? While you're pondering that one, what is 1+1?
You mean your position that you're going to stick your fingers in your ears and say 'la la la I can't hear you' until we get to the trump part?necronomous wrote: ↑Sat Oct 12, 2019 1:05 pmKeep shoving your fingers in your ears [edited while I was replying, something about not acknowledging your position]AnalHamster wrote: ↑Sat Oct 12, 2019 1:03 pmIf you can pull on your big boy pants and follow along, I'll do just that. Your pretense that getting you to admit collusion occurred at all is unrelated to getting you to admit who was involved in it isn't really working here buddy. You've simply proven that you will deny collusion no matter what is said. If at any point you would like to move forward, feel free.necronomous wrote: ↑Sat Oct 12, 2019 12:57 pmI've asked you to prove Trumps involvement. You didn't. It wasn't a discussion. It was a question you refused to answer. You don't get to make pretend rules to control a narrative. If you can't answer the question, just man up and say that instead of beating around the endless bush.AnalHamster wrote: ↑Sat Oct 12, 2019 6:39 amWhen you refuse to answer a simple question, you look like an idiot. I enjoy making you look like an idiot.necronomous wrote: ↑Fri Oct 11, 2019 11:29 pmI'm trying to give him the chance to stop looking like an idiot. Apparently, he refuses to help himself.
Does meeting with a Russian representative offering help from the Russians constitute colluding with their interference? If you want to examine the collusion you'll have to acknowledge it happened. You dodging that question shows pretty clearly that you just won't consider this. I could type out the relevant parts of the mueller report for you in a long time consuming post, but you'll just say 'derrr no collusion' or 'lol'. If you want to discuss it participate in a discussion, I will walk you through it line by line establishing what you can admit did occur. If that's absolutely nothing, which is the case, then there's nothing I can say you will accept. So I'll just keep hitting you over the head with your denial that meeting a russian government rep offering their help with the election is colluding, because that's pretty retarded, and shows you'll deny anything ever could be.
So I guess your new schtick is dodge the answer asked until the other person doesn't want to ask it anymore. Great strategy.
So, does going to meet a russian government representative offering help from the russian government with the election constitute collusion with that interference? While you're pondering that one, what is 1+1?
Of course you will. You like looking like a complete moron. It's your thang. You have no idea how I'll take your "proof.". You keep making all the assumptions you want, state your whataboutism, and dodging the question. While you're at it throw in more strawmen and ad hominems.AnalHamster wrote: ↑Sat Oct 12, 2019 1:10 pmYou mean your position that you're going to stick your fingers in your ears and say 'la la la I can't hear you' until we get to the trump part?necronomous wrote: ↑Sat Oct 12, 2019 1:05 pmKeep shoving your fingers in your earsAnalHamster wrote: ↑Sat Oct 12, 2019 1:03 pmIf you can pull on your big boy pants and follow along, I'll do just that. Your pretense that getting you to admit collusion occurred at all is unrelated to getting you to admit who was involved in it isn't really working here buddy. You've simply proven that you will deny collusion no matter what is said. If at any point you would like to move forward, feel free.necronomous wrote: ↑Sat Oct 12, 2019 12:57 pmI've asked you to prove Trumps involvement. You didn't. It wasn't a discussion. It was a question you refused to answer. You don't get to make pretend rules to control a narrative. If you can't answer the question, just man up and say that instead of beating around the endless bush.AnalHamster wrote: ↑Sat Oct 12, 2019 6:39 amWhen you refuse to answer a simple question, you look like an idiot. I enjoy making you look like an idiot.necronomous wrote: ↑Fri Oct 11, 2019 11:29 pm I'm trying to give him the chance to stop looking like an idiot. Apparently, he refuses to help himself.
Does meeting with a Russian representative offering help from the Russians constitute colluding with their interference? If you want to examine the collusion you'll have to acknowledge it happened. You dodging that question shows pretty clearly that you just won't consider this. I could type out the relevant parts of the mueller report for you in a long time consuming post, but you'll just say 'derrr no collusion' or 'lol'. If you want to discuss it participate in a discussion, I will walk you through it line by line establishing what you can admit did occur. If that's absolutely nothing, which is the case, then there's nothing I can say you will accept. So I'll just keep hitting you over the head with your denial that meeting a russian government rep offering their help with the election is colluding, because that's pretty retarded, and shows you'll deny anything ever could be.
So I guess your new schtick is dodge the answer asked until the other person doesn't want to ask it anymore. Great strategy.
So, does going to meet a russian government representative offering help from the russian government with the election constitute collusion with that interference? While you're pondering that one, what is 1+1?
Yeah I hear you lil' buddy. You just aren't fooling anyone. You can't say whether going to meet a russian government representative offering help from the russian government with the election constitutes collusion with that interference, because you could only answer 'why yes it does', and you are unable to admit collusion occurred at all. You want to get to the trump part admit you can understand what collusion is in establishing the collusion part. You want to keep looking stupid for a few months, just keep on truckin'. You know I'll stick with it.
Uh huh. Does going to meet a russian government representative offering help from the russian government with the election constitute collusion with the russian interference? Or are you incapable of admitting collusion is possible no matter what the evidence is?necronomous wrote: ↑Sat Oct 12, 2019 1:15 pmOf course you will. You like looking like a complete moron. It's your thang. You have no idea how I'll take your "proof.". You keep making all the assumptions you want, state your whataboutism, and dodging the question. While you're at it throw in more strawmen and ad hominems.AnalHamster wrote: ↑Sat Oct 12, 2019 1:10 pmYou mean your position that you're going to stick your fingers in your ears and say 'la la la I can't hear you' until we get to the trump part?necronomous wrote: ↑Sat Oct 12, 2019 1:05 pmKeep shoving your fingers in your earsAnalHamster wrote: ↑Sat Oct 12, 2019 1:03 pmIf you can pull on your big boy pants and follow along, I'll do just that. Your pretense that getting you to admit collusion occurred at all is unrelated to getting you to admit who was involved in it isn't really working here buddy. You've simply proven that you will deny collusion no matter what is said. If at any point you would like to move forward, feel free.necronomous wrote: ↑Sat Oct 12, 2019 12:57 pmI've asked you to prove Trumps involvement. You didn't. It wasn't a discussion. It was a question you refused to answer. You don't get to make pretend rules to control a narrative. If you can't answer the question, just man up and say that instead of beating around the endless bush.AnalHamster wrote: ↑Sat Oct 12, 2019 6:39 am When you refuse to answer a simple question, you look like an idiot. I enjoy making you look like an idiot.
Does meeting with a Russian representative offering help from the Russians constitute colluding with their interference? If you want to examine the collusion you'll have to acknowledge it happened. You dodging that question shows pretty clearly that you just won't consider this. I could type out the relevant parts of the mueller report for you in a long time consuming post, but you'll just say 'derrr no collusion' or 'lol'. If you want to discuss it participate in a discussion, I will walk you through it line by line establishing what you can admit did occur. If that's absolutely nothing, which is the case, then there's nothing I can say you will accept. So I'll just keep hitting you over the head with your denial that meeting a russian government rep offering their help with the election is colluding, because that's pretty retarded, and shows you'll deny anything ever could be.
So I guess your new schtick is dodge the answer asked until the other person doesn't want to ask it anymore. Great strategy.
So, does going to meet a russian government representative offering help from the russian government with the election constitute collusion with that interference? While you're pondering that one, what is 1+1?
Yeah I hear you lil' buddy. You just aren't fooling anyone. You can't say whether going to meet a russian government representative offering help from the russian government with the election constitutes collusion with that interference, because you could only answer 'why yes it does', and you are unable to admit collusion occurred at all. You want to get to the trump part admit you can understand what collusion is in establishing the collusion part. You want to keep looking stupid for a few months, just keep on truckin'. You know I'll stick with it.
What is the evidence of Trump's collusion?AnalHamster wrote: ↑Sat Oct 12, 2019 1:18 pmUh huh. Does going to meet a russian government representative offering help from the russian government with the election constitute collusion with the russian interference? Or are you incapable of admitting collusion is possible no matter what the evidence is?necronomous wrote: ↑Sat Oct 12, 2019 1:15 pmOf course you will. You like looking like a complete moron. It's your thang. You have no idea how I'll take your "proof.". You keep making all the assumptions you want, state your whataboutism, and dodging the question. While you're at it throw in more strawmen and ad hominems.AnalHamster wrote: ↑Sat Oct 12, 2019 1:10 pmYou mean your position that you're going to stick your fingers in your ears and say 'la la la I can't hear you' until we get to the trump part?necronomous wrote: ↑Sat Oct 12, 2019 1:05 pmKeep shoving your fingers in your earsAnalHamster wrote: ↑Sat Oct 12, 2019 1:03 pmIf you can pull on your big boy pants and follow along, I'll do just that. Your pretense that getting you to admit collusion occurred at all is unrelated to getting you to admit who was involved in it isn't really working here buddy. You've simply proven that you will deny collusion no matter what is said. If at any point you would like to move forward, feel free.necronomous wrote: ↑Sat Oct 12, 2019 12:57 pm I've asked you to prove Trumps involvement. You didn't. It wasn't a discussion. It was a question you refused to answer. You don't get to make pretend rules to control a narrative. If you can't answer the question, just man up and say that instead of beating around the endless bush.
So I guess your new schtick is dodge the answer asked until the other person doesn't want to ask it anymore. Great strategy.
So, does going to meet a russian government representative offering help from the russian government with the election constitute collusion with that interference? While you're pondering that one, what is 1+1?
Yeah I hear you lil' buddy. You just aren't fooling anyone. You can't say whether going to meet a russian government representative offering help from the russian government with the election constitutes collusion with that interference, because you could only answer 'why yes it does', and you are unable to admit collusion occurred at all. You want to get to the trump part admit you can understand what collusion is in establishing the collusion part. You want to keep looking stupid for a few months, just keep on truckin'. You know I'll stick with it.
Hint: Your answer is 'I am incapable of admitting collusion is possible. Prove collusion.'
Are you conceding the collusion occurred? Does going to meet a russian government representative offering help from the russian government with the election constitute collusion with the russian interference? Or are you incapable of admitting collusion is possible no matter what the evidence is? There just doesn't seem much point going over trump's invovlement in the meeting and the coverup if you are going to pretend the meeting wasn't collusion, is there?necronomous wrote: ↑Sat Oct 12, 2019 1:21 pmWhat is the evidence of Trump's collusion?AnalHamster wrote: ↑Sat Oct 12, 2019 1:18 pmUh huh. Does going to meet a russian government representative offering help from the russian government with the election constitute collusion with the russian interference? Or are you incapable of admitting collusion is possible no matter what the evidence is?necronomous wrote: ↑Sat Oct 12, 2019 1:15 pmOf course you will. You like looking like a complete moron. It's your thang. You have no idea how I'll take your "proof.". You keep making all the assumptions you want, state your whataboutism, and dodging the question. While you're at it throw in more strawmen and ad hominems.AnalHamster wrote: ↑Sat Oct 12, 2019 1:10 pmYou mean your position that you're going to stick your fingers in your ears and say 'la la la I can't hear you' until we get to the trump part?necronomous wrote: ↑Sat Oct 12, 2019 1:05 pmKeep shoving your fingers in your earsAnalHamster wrote: ↑Sat Oct 12, 2019 1:03 pm
If you can pull on your big boy pants and follow along, I'll do just that. Your pretense that getting you to admit collusion occurred at all is unrelated to getting you to admit who was involved in it isn't really working here buddy. You've simply proven that you will deny collusion no matter what is said. If at any point you would like to move forward, feel free.
So, does going to meet a russian government representative offering help from the russian government with the election constitute collusion with that interference? While you're pondering that one, what is 1+1?
Yeah I hear you lil' buddy. You just aren't fooling anyone. You can't say whether going to meet a russian government representative offering help from the russian government with the election constitutes collusion with that interference, because you could only answer 'why yes it does', and you are unable to admit collusion occurred at all. You want to get to the trump part admit you can understand what collusion is in establishing the collusion part. You want to keep looking stupid for a few months, just keep on truckin'. You know I'll stick with it.
Hint: Your answer is 'I am incapable of admitting collusion is possible. Prove collusion.'
Hint: your answer is a whataboutism and not answering the question asked.
LolAnalHamster wrote: ↑Sat Oct 12, 2019 1:37 pmAre you conceding the collusion occurred? Does going to meet a russian government representative offering help from the russian government with the election constitute collusion with the russian interference? Or are you incapable of admitting collusion is possible no matter what the evidence is? There just doesn't seem much point going over trump's invovlement in the meeting and the coverup if you are going to pretend the meeting wasn't collusion, is there?necronomous wrote: ↑Sat Oct 12, 2019 1:21 pmWhat is the evidence of Trump's collusion?AnalHamster wrote: ↑Sat Oct 12, 2019 1:18 pmUh huh. Does going to meet a russian government representative offering help from the russian government with the election constitute collusion with the russian interference? Or are you incapable of admitting collusion is possible no matter what the evidence is?necronomous wrote: ↑Sat Oct 12, 2019 1:15 pmOf course you will. You like looking like a complete moron. It's your thang. You have no idea how I'll take your "proof.". You keep making all the assumptions you want, state your whataboutism, and dodging the question. While you're at it throw in more strawmen and ad hominems.AnalHamster wrote: ↑Sat Oct 12, 2019 1:10 pmYou mean your position that you're going to stick your fingers in your ears and say 'la la la I can't hear you' until we get to the trump part?
Yeah I hear you lil' buddy. You just aren't fooling anyone. You can't say whether going to meet a russian government representative offering help from the russian government with the election constitutes collusion with that interference, because you could only answer 'why yes it does', and you are unable to admit collusion occurred at all. You want to get to the trump part admit you can understand what collusion is in establishing the collusion part. You want to keep looking stupid for a few months, just keep on truckin'. You know I'll stick with it.
Hint: Your answer is 'I am incapable of admitting collusion is possible. Prove collusion.'
Hint: your answer is a whataboutism and not answering the question asked.
I'm going to break you. I have infinite patience with these things, you're backed into a corner pretending you can't see what I've just asked you for the hundredth time, and sooner or later you will tire of pulling out your hair, pounding on your keyboard and weeping.
Within the campaign collusion you can't admit happened. Does going to meet a russian government representative offering help from the russian government with the election constitute collusion with the russian interference? Or are you incapable of admitting collusion is possible no matter what the evidence is?necronomous wrote: ↑Sat Oct 12, 2019 2:09 pmLolAnalHamster wrote: ↑Sat Oct 12, 2019 1:37 pmAre you conceding the collusion occurred? Does going to meet a russian government representative offering help from the russian government with the election constitute collusion with the russian interference? Or are you incapable of admitting collusion is possible no matter what the evidence is? There just doesn't seem much point going over trump's invovlement in the meeting and the coverup if you are going to pretend the meeting wasn't collusion, is there?necronomous wrote: ↑Sat Oct 12, 2019 1:21 pmWhat is the evidence of Trump's collusion?AnalHamster wrote: ↑Sat Oct 12, 2019 1:18 pmUh huh. Does going to meet a russian government representative offering help from the russian government with the election constitute collusion with the russian interference? Or are you incapable of admitting collusion is possible no matter what the evidence is?necronomous wrote: ↑Sat Oct 12, 2019 1:15 pmOf course you will. You like looking like a complete moron. It's your thang. You have no idea how I'll take your "proof.". You keep making all the assumptions you want, state your whataboutism, and dodging the question. While you're at it throw in more strawmen and ad hominems.AnalHamster wrote: ↑Sat Oct 12, 2019 1:10 pm
You mean your position that you're going to stick your fingers in your ears and say 'la la la I can't hear you' until we get to the trump part?
Yeah I hear you lil' buddy. You just aren't fooling anyone. You can't say whether going to meet a russian government representative offering help from the russian government with the election constitutes collusion with that interference, because you could only answer 'why yes it does', and you are unable to admit collusion occurred at all. You want to get to the trump part admit you can understand what collusion is in establishing the collusion part. You want to keep looking stupid for a few months, just keep on truckin'. You know I'll stick with it.
Hint: Your answer is 'I am incapable of admitting collusion is possible. Prove collusion.'
Hint: your answer is a whataboutism and not answering the question asked.
I'm going to break you. I have infinite patience with these things, you're backed into a corner pretending you can't see what I've just asked you for the hundredth time, and sooner or later you will tire of pulling out your hair, pounding on your keyboard and weeping.
Ok
Wheres Trump's collusion?
LolAnalHamster wrote: ↑Sat Oct 12, 2019 2:21 pmWithin the campaign collusion you can't admit happened. Does going to meet a russian government representative offering help from the russian government with the election constitute collusion with the russian interference? Or are you incapable of admitting collusion is possible no matter what the evidence is?necronomous wrote: ↑Sat Oct 12, 2019 2:09 pmLolAnalHamster wrote: ↑Sat Oct 12, 2019 1:37 pmAre you conceding the collusion occurred? Does going to meet a russian government representative offering help from the russian government with the election constitute collusion with the russian interference? Or are you incapable of admitting collusion is possible no matter what the evidence is? There just doesn't seem much point going over trump's invovlement in the meeting and the coverup if you are going to pretend the meeting wasn't collusion, is there?necronomous wrote: ↑Sat Oct 12, 2019 1:21 pmWhat is the evidence of Trump's collusion?AnalHamster wrote: ↑Sat Oct 12, 2019 1:18 pmUh huh. Does going to meet a russian government representative offering help from the russian government with the election constitute collusion with the russian interference? Or are you incapable of admitting collusion is possible no matter what the evidence is?necronomous wrote: ↑Sat Oct 12, 2019 1:15 pm
Of course you will. You like looking like a complete moron. It's your thang. You have no idea how I'll take your "proof.". You keep making all the assumptions you want, state your whataboutism, and dodging the question. While you're at it throw in more strawmen and ad hominems.
Hint: Your answer is 'I am incapable of admitting collusion is possible. Prove collusion.'
Hint: your answer is a whataboutism and not answering the question asked.
I'm going to break you. I have infinite patience with these things, you're backed into a corner pretending you can't see what I've just asked you for the hundredth time, and sooner or later you will tire of pulling out your hair, pounding on your keyboard and weeping.
Ok
Wheres Trump's collusion?
Within the campaign collusion you can't admit happened. Does going to meet a russian government representative offering help from the russian government with the election constitute collusion with the russian interference? Or are you incapable of admitting collusion is possible no matter what the evidence is?necronomous wrote: ↑Sat Oct 12, 2019 2:40 pmLolAnalHamster wrote: ↑Sat Oct 12, 2019 2:21 pmWithin the campaign collusion you can't admit happened. Does going to meet a russian government representative offering help from the russian government with the election constitute collusion with the russian interference? Or are you incapable of admitting collusion is possible no matter what the evidence is?necronomous wrote: ↑Sat Oct 12, 2019 2:09 pmLolAnalHamster wrote: ↑Sat Oct 12, 2019 1:37 pmAre you conceding the collusion occurred? Does going to meet a russian government representative offering help from the russian government with the election constitute collusion with the russian interference? Or are you incapable of admitting collusion is possible no matter what the evidence is? There just doesn't seem much point going over trump's invovlement in the meeting and the coverup if you are going to pretend the meeting wasn't collusion, is there?necronomous wrote: ↑Sat Oct 12, 2019 1:21 pmWhat is the evidence of Trump's collusion?AnalHamster wrote: ↑Sat Oct 12, 2019 1:18 pm
Uh huh. Does going to meet a russian government representative offering help from the russian government with the election constitute collusion with the russian interference? Or are you incapable of admitting collusion is possible no matter what the evidence is?
Hint: Your answer is 'I am incapable of admitting collusion is possible. Prove collusion.'
Hint: your answer is a whataboutism and not answering the question asked.
I'm going to break you. I have infinite patience with these things, you're backed into a corner pretending you can't see what I've just asked you for the hundredth time, and sooner or later you will tire of pulling out your hair, pounding on your keyboard and weeping.
Ok
Wheres Trump's collusion?
Ok
Wheres Trump's collusion?
