₦airaland Forum

Without the presidency of Donald Trump, SCOTUS would have just ruled that government can keep you from church or synagogue.Think about that.

I don’t care if you love or hate him, but what I just said is an absolute fact. His appointed SCOTUS justices are literally the only thing standing in the way of Citizens losing their God given constitutional rights to the whims of tyrannical governors.

Congrats to General Flynn, a great American and true American patriot

Happy Thanksgiving to President Donald Trump and all patriotic Americans!!

General Flynn devoted his life to the service of his nation, His innovations in the use of intelligence operational planning saved untold U.S. lives in Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere.

Flynn was targeted by evil people in the FBI for deliberate entrapment by means of an interview which they used to manufacture a case against him just because he couldn't recall certain events exactly the way they happened. They used that as a ruse to create a lie to rope him into a guilty plea hoping to break him down and make him turn against president Trump but the man stood like a rock so the corrupt and vindictive evil swamp operatives vowed to destroy him.

Even when the prosecution decided to drop all cases against him, a biased judge that was specially selected by the swamp decided to play prosecutor in a case he was sitting over. For the first time in American history, a judge decided to become both prosecutor and judge when prosecutors decided they are pulling out and dropping all charges.

Thanks to President Trump, this great American General Flynn is now a free man and Hopefully, Americans will never again witness this kind of shameful abuse of police and judicial powers shown by the FBI, members of the Mueller team and the disgraceful Judge Sullivan.

God bless General Flynn, God bless President Trump and God bless America.

Yesterday was a great day for the good guys especially Gen Michael Flynn, a great American hero. I'm really happy for him.

ZooOga:
Israeli military instructed to prepare for Trump strike on Iran: report

Israel's military is preparing for the possibility that the Trump administration will launch a military strike against Iran, Axios reported on Wednesday.

Senior Israeli officials told the outlet that the Israeli government instructed military commanders to prepare for a potential strike during the “very sensitive period” between now and when President-elect Joe Biden takes office on Jan. 20.

Israel is reportedly making preparations with the expectation that they would receive advance notice from the U.S. regarding any military action, but with concerns that such notification might come too close to the attack.

Israel is also preparing for the possibility of a retaliatory strike by Iran, either directly or through proxies in nearby countries.

The New York Times reported last week that President Trump was considering a military strike against Iran in an attempt to stop Tehran's growing nuclear program. The International Atomic Energy Agency a day earlier had reported that the country’s uranium stockpile was 12 times higher than allowed under the Obama-era nuclear deal that the Trump administration withdrew from in 2018.

Trump reportedly held a meeting Thursday in the Oval Office to discuss his options, but Vice President Pence, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, acting Secretary of Defense Christopher Miller and Gen. Mark Milley, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, dissuaded him against such actions.

Israeli Defense Minister Benny Gantz has spoken twice over the past two weeks with Miller to discuss Iran, Syria and defense cooperation.

On Sunday, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu met in Saudi Arabia with Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. The main topic of conversation was Iran, Israeli officials told Axios.

State Department officials, meanwhile, told reporters that “all options are on the table,” regarding Iran.

Tensions between Washington and Tehran have been high since January, when Trump ordered a drone strike in Baghdad that killed Gen. Qassem Soleimani, the commander of Iran’s elite Quds Force.

U.S. Central Command head Gen. Frank McKenzie said last week that destabilizing actions by Iran have continued and “increased in scope and severity” since 2019.

https://thehill.com/policy/defense/527542-israeli-military-instructed-to-prepare-for-trump-strike-on-iran-report

Fake news

vibre:
Does he want it to be other countries first or America last?

Under Biden it will be War and corrupt military contractors first, America Last. He has already chosen a well know war monger as his secretary of state and another war monger as his secretary of defense.

benalvino2:
Go and look how Obama won in 1996. He challenge the integrity of his opponents ballot and they grant him access to the ballot to check for irregularities. And the signatures in their ballots was a problem so he won the special election.

This is the truth, you are very correct

Let me get this out there;

Donald Trump is free to pursue every legal options to it's logical conclusion if he believes the elections were rigged. There's nothing illegal about what he is doing.

BraniacX:
the horse definitely isn't dead as you and trump will find out after he is booted out of office and loses the protection of his office, Mueller wouldn't have manufactured collusion out of thin air if it didn't exist even if he was witch hunting trump like you claimed so an innocent trump never had any reason to be on the defensive and as such no bloody logical reason to obstruct the investigations! After Mueller's report is unredacted we will know not if there was collusion but how deep the collusion was so on that day I pray I care enough to remember you and call you out so I can repeat my question again, are you logically challenged?

Feel free to indulge in your liberal dreams but first get the facts, Mueller was very clear in his report that he didn't find any evidence of collusion so if you are still having that pipe dream, good luck to you and secondly, like I told your other liberal colleagues, if you guys can keep promoting these ridiculous lies and keep challenging the legitimacy of Trump's election for four years based on these lies then Trump also has the same right to challenge what he believes to be electoral fraud by the democrats and you guys need to stop whining about it.

Timiofak:
This is what you could come up with?

Lmao, Mueller said it that if trump is out of office, he could be charged, but yeah it's a hoax

Let him go to court.

Mueller made a simple statement of fact that presidents have immunity so they can't be charged with a criminal offense, he was then asked if that means that the president can be charged when he steps down and he said yes. That's just a statement of fact like me saying Obama can be charged or Bill Clinton can be charged. Of course they can be charged with criminal offenses. And he was asked that when talking about obstruction not collusion. Do all other members of the Trump team have immunity? What prevented Mueller from indicting them for collusion if there was any? Your Russian collusion nonsense is a hoax and if you can indulge yourself in that for four years then I don't see why you are complaining about Trump challenging Biden's election in court for a few weeks.

Trump is free to pursue every legal options to it's logical conclusion, there's nothing illegal about what he is doing.

Ibime:
And also permanent ban of Ted Cruz from politics. That guy just pïsses me off every time I hear him talk.

And these are the ones that say they are anti fascism? Is there anything more fascist than this?

BraniacX:
are you logically challenged? Yes or no? An innocent person fears no accusations or witch hunting as you put it because even with extreme bias you can't manufacture crimes that don't exist as the Republican senate's Benghazi trials of Hillary has shown or should Obama have screamed executive privilege and witch hunting too? Committee after committee, time after time she submitted herself for scrutiny, if trump and his campaign did absolutely no wrong, no amount of witch hunting will uncover any wrongdoing especially since you want us to believe he was innocent, that the investigations cut corners in going after his organisation is typical of American law enforcement in general from the county police departments and precincts to the much vaulted FBI, interesting that you defend and make excuses for the police when the victims are minorities and/or poor and when trump is the target here you scream procedural irregularities should invalidate the whole investigations! so i ask you again, given trumps squeaky clean innocence which I believe is what you're trying to claim, should a few procedural irregularities which were revealed after the fact justify the trump administration's refusal to cooperate with the special counsel's investigations given their obvious innocence or are you without an atom of doubt logically challenged?

I also ask you again, are you logically challenged? Yes or no? If after two years of a special counsel investigation with unlimited resources at his disposal in addition to the FBI investigation on the same issue, they couldn't turn up a single shred of evidence of collusion with Russia to steal the elections then should you still be flogging that dead horse or are you without an atom of a doubt logically challenged?

Obrigardo:
I just heard a big earthquake outside my window

pls wait let me check.
.
.
.
Oh they said it was basilico, bluebyrd and olaadegbus combined heartattack
There's nothing to worry about

In your dreams

Timiofak:
Lying to Congress, obviously.

And I have said it here that Russia didn't rig the election but they colluded with the Trump campaign in helping to stain his opponent simple.

If you believe you are free to keep promoting that lie after four years despite all the investigations proving it not to be true then you don't have any moral rights to condemn Trump for challenging what he believes to be electoral fraud in the courts for a few weeks.

BraniacX:
I am sorry, you seem to be confusing me for yourself in terms of smartness, I asked you then, since you brought that to our attention trying to pretend the rest of us didn't see it and dismiss it as the ravings of lunatics which it was, did you espouse those views or did you espouse the opposing views of the majority of us here even other conservative leaning contributors? The allegations were so phony and loony that it wasn't worth mentioning except for comedy value but you didn't mention it in those terms, you mentioned it the terms that as phony as it was, you were giving it the benefit of the doubt because no matter how outlandish an accusation was, you didn't put it past we "the radical left" to orchestrate! Even in the world of political opposition, some common sense which seems to actually be uncommon in the true sense of things must be allowed to prevail but it seems the minimum requirement of being a trumpette is to shelve common sense and throw logic out of the window! As far as those phony accusations were concerned, there was never a fence or middle ground or benefit of the doubt, there was either the outright scorn and ridicule from those who applied logic to it like us and the desperation to hold on to anything or grasping at straws from the logically deficient q-annon believing trumpettes like you, trying to insulate yourself from that foolishness in terms of those allegations weren't yours to prove doesn't fly in this case, you only further detach yourself from logic and reality in the eyes of everyone else, well, almost everyone else, not appear smart or savvy as you might be thinking you are! Because even back then the allegations were so phony i called you out immediately and told you to take a stand! That was logic speaking and today logic has been validated because it would seem even the trump campaign had a threshold for batshit crazy

I didn't mistake anybody for another, it's very clear that you guys weren't smart enough to differentiate between reporting an event and being a participant in it and you are still proving me right on that. FYI, you don't decide what is newsworthy or not on this thread, everyone has a right to post whatever they feel is newsworthy as that press conference certainly was in my opinion so long as they are not making it up. You can either comment on it and give your opinion on the news or ignore it if you want but you can't censor anyone here.

BraniacX:
you didn't report them, you were making an assumption that the rest of us weren't aware and you were enlightening us and you were wrong, we were aware and didn't rate it worth anything except to laugh about, but you gave it "the benefit of the doubt" which shouldn't and doesn't exist so yes you espoused it and when I called you out on your espousal foreshadowing the debunking that was to come there was no response from you! So don't come and tell us after the fact today that you were just reporting you espoused batshit crazy phony conspiracy theories because for all your being clever by half, you are just another Sydney Powell or one in the making

That's your business, I only reported what was said at the press conference as I made very clear on that same day. If you decide to start making up things from thin air, then that's none of my business, it's your own cup of tea.

Obrigardo:
Go and sleep fool
Biden's pick for Cabinet is wonderful, i'm hoping for a brighter future
not debating with a loser like you and your father trump

How can you have a brighter future when you refuse to get informed and insist on remaining ignorant ? The facts have been presented to you and you can't dispute it but you want to continue deceiving yourself. You are the one that is the fool and loser here.

wirinet:
I don't expect any Trump supporter to be intelligent enough to interpret the Mueller Report. Your brain can only accommodate whatever Trump tells you.

The whole Trump report systematically listed the numerous ways the Trump campaign colluded with Russian agents and officials to help Trump win the election.

Mueller never said he couldn't find any evidence of collusion, that's a lie being sold by Trump and his cult worshippers. What Mueller said was that "the evidence was not sufficient to support criminal charges. Among other things, the
evidence was not sufficient to charge any Campaign official as an unregistered agent of
the Russian government or other Russian principal.
And our evidence about the June 9, 2016 meeting and WikiLeaks s releases
of hacked materials was not sufficient to charge a criminal campaign-finance violation. Further, the evidence was not sufficient to charge that any member of the Trump Campaign conspired with representatives of the Russian government to interfere in the 2016 election"

Saying you don't have sufficient evidence for a criminal charge is not the same as not having any evidence. The evidence might not be sufficient for a criminal charges but sufficient for a civil charge.

Besides Mueller complained of lies and non cooperation from Trump and his campaign.

Neither do I expect any liberal to be intelligent enough to read the passage fully to understand what it was really talking about. That was the part of the report where Mueller was making a case of obstruction against certain Trump officials, In the very next paragraphs, he explains what he is talking about and goes on to list the exact lies they told that they were charged for, confirming what I was telling some of your friends earlier. Mueller never at anytime said that those infractions were what made him not to be able to prove any collusion. They found out the truth about each of those so called lies he listed long before they rounded up the investigation and he still couldn't find any collusion after two years. In the first part of that report is where he dealt with collusion and he gave definite report that he didn't find any collusion and he didn't say he didn't find any because he was obstructed. The so called obstruction were people not recalling things exactly how they happened or lying about how they happened. Mueller found out the true version of events eventually and still couldn't find any evidence of collusion and that's why the likes of Stone, Papadopoulos and Flynn were only charged with process crimes.

Obrigardo:
Dumb bitch
Manafort supplied polling data and voter information to Russian hackers
Dumb bitch

Stop being a fool, here's every fact about the trial of Paul Manafort,

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trials_of_Paul_Manafort

Read it and stop being such a dumb bitch!!

BraniacX:
do you espouse or disavow their views? That was the crux of the matter! I disavow their views and view them as dingbats! You obviously don't disavow them so do you espouse them or not? Mind you there is no fence to sit on or middle ground here

I neither espouse nor disavow them, I reported on what they said and now I am waiting for them to present the evidence they have before making my conclusions.

Obrigardo:
Dumb bitch
Manafort supplied polling data and voter information to Russian hackers
Dumb bitch

You are the one that is a dumb bitch!!
Liberal propaganda doesn't equal to facts and the only fact here is that Manafort was convicted for his political activities in Ukraine before he joined the Trump campaign and which had nothing to do with the colluding with Russia to steal the 2016 election. Any other story you are manufacturing and telling is a figment of the imagination of you and your fake news media puppets.

BraniacX:
you can quote technicalities all day long but the bottom line is on this thread and on this particular topic we are all partisan, you posted what they said because you espouse their views not disavow them outright! If they had pulled through with their spurious claims you wouldn't have hesitated to rub it in our faces now that they turned out to be the tripe the rest of us knew it to be in the very beginning we, sorry i don't care to rub it in your face, just your admission that you were wrong once again is all that is required

You can't put words in my mouth and force me to accept the them as mine. if I come here to say I saw someone addressing the press and he or she said he saw aliens invading the earth, it doesn't make it my opinion. I even made it clear on the day I posted those reports that it's up to them to present their evidence for what they were saying before the courts. If you guys were not smart enough to know the difference between reporting what someone else said and endorsing them then you have yourself to blame for that and I don't owe you any apologies for that.

Obrigardo:
Paul Manafort you dumb bitch
can debase myself or waste my time to name others

Look at this ignorant liberal making an utter fool of himself. You are the one that is obviously a dumb bitch here because you keep showing that you know nothing. Manafort was convicted for his political activities in Ukraine before he even joined the Trump campaign. What he was convicted of was completely unrelated to the Russian collusion hoax.

wirinet:
Big lie.
Mueller never concluded that there was NO COLLUSION between the Trump campaign and Russia. What Mueller concluded was that he could not prove collusion Trump campaign and Russia because Trump was OBSTRUCTING JUSTICE. He refused to testify, he refused to released documents Mueller asked for and refused to allow his people to testify. Mueller also concluded he could be prosecuted once he leaves office.

You are a ridiculous liar, Mueller never said he couldn't prove collusion because of obstruction. His report was in two parts,in the first part he focused on collusion and said he couldn't find any evidence of collusion, in the second part, he spoke of obstruction and simply said that the terms of guidelines given to him did not allow him to make any determination on obstruction.

BraniacX:
I am accused of stealing stuff and stuffing my pockets with it and I deny, my accuser says I should empty my pocket for all to see and prove my innocence and him a liar, naturally I refuse because it is just a witch hunt and I have absolutely nothing to hide in my pockets seeing as I stole nothing and my bulging pockets are filled with rocks, me being the avid rock collector that i am and since the man accusing me is an employee of my dad, I slice my thumb across my throat while looking directly at him as a reminder of my great friendship with him, naturally, he backs down and doesn't accuse me as aggressively anymore while my dad is in one corner looking daggers at him so, naturally, all this is because i am definitely innocent right? I ask again, are you logically challenged?

Let me also ask you, are you logically challenged? You are making a very absurd comparison of two scenarios that are not even remotely the same. If you see a group of people who are desperately trying to pin something on you to the extent that the used a fake dossier manufactured by your political opponent to start harrasing your campaign staff even when they already knew the dossier was fake, They went and lied to the Fisa Court, presented fake documents and used it to get a warrant to interrogate your campaign staff and try to force them to testify against you on something they know that didn't happen, will you still have confidence in the impartiality of such a group of people? People that were caught changing witnesses statements to change their meaning to something incriminating and discussing how to wear a recorder and get Trump to say something incriminating on tape. All these things are on record in declassified materials or confessed to by the FBI themselves so Trump was very right to distrust such a group of people. Again, that is in no way any evidence of collusion with Russia. You are just beating about the bush because you know the only truth here is that after all the relentless investigations, not a single shred of evidence was found about the Trump campaign colluding with Russia.

BraniacX:
obstruction goes to show that the investigations into the claims was impeded by the presidency at every turn which circumstantially validates the claim that there was collusion in the first place, this is simple logic or are you logically challenged?

Obstruction doesn't validate anything. Trump believed the Mueller probe was a witch hunt and therefore he didn't want his people cooperating with them. It's not any evidence of anything, the FBI have investigated this, A special counsel has also investigated it and all found no evidence of collusion.

BraniacX:
clown, your lawyer and her kraken have both proven to be duds! When are you apologising?

Who is my lawyer and why should I apologize to you for reporting what someone else said?

Kophschmerzen:
What a stupid brainless son of perdition. Barr intervened in the Mueller report, intervened in Flynn, Stones and all the Trump - Russia stuff. You are head up far in Drumpf asss loser.

You are the fool that is a stupid brainless son of perdition. Did Barr prevent Mueller from indicting any of the people you mentioned? If Mueller could indict them on process crimes and unrelated matters then why couldn't he indict them if he had evidence of collusion which was the main thing he was commissioned to investigate?

BraniacX:
my apologies, it was some character bluebyrd or something like that, all you pro trumpets are blending into one singular nameless moniker in my head now

How many times will I make it clear that I was only reporting on what the Trump campaign lawyers said at their press conference and that it was up to them to bring the evidence they have to the courts? So if I say that a Mr X held a press conference today and this is what he said, does that mean that I am now endorsing everything Mr X said? Some of you were even asking me to provide evidence for the things Giuliani said as if I was the one that said it. The Sidney Powell in question has even been cut off by the Trump campaign lawyers as of now. I repeat again, the people that held the press conference are Giuliani, Jenna Ellis and Sidney Powell, I only reported what they said and now it's up to them to provide their evidence before the courts.

Kophschmerzen:
Morron!!! How do you indict folks that gat protection from Barr's DOJ? It's obvious your brain is only a solo voyage.

Stop making a fool of yourself, what protection from Barr's DOJ? The same Barr's DOJ that couldn't protect them from being charged with process crimes? Some people like Flynn were even charged because they didn't couldn't recall some events exactly the way it happened. Mueller had two years without constraints and with unlimited resources available to him to find one shred of evidence of collusion and he didn't find anything. Barr's DOJ may interfer with the prosecution process but there's no way they could prevent Mueller from indicting them if they actually found any collusion. Mueller didn't spare anyone, he indicted people for even unrelated offenses just to please those that brought him in e.g manafort was charged for things he did in Ukraine before he even joined the Trump campaign and you are now telling me that Mueller could have seen evidence of collusion but couldn't even indict the people involved because of Barr? The same Barr that couldn't prevent him from charging the same people with process crimes and things that were even unrelated to what he was asked to investigate.