- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Would Trump (2 years ago) really turn down an opportunity to "stick it to" Clinton/Obama?
Posted on 6/15/17 at 8:04 am
Posted on 6/15/17 at 8:04 am
I understand typical partisan bickering, but I don't understand the refusal of some of you to even consider the idea that the Trump campaign may have cooperated with Wikileaks. Let's try to be civil.
-----------------------------------------
- Trump is a businessman; an expert promoter. Getting headlines and creating outrageous tweets have been a part of his business model. It has kept him in the spotlight for decades.
- He has been heavily involved in mass media. The Apprentice, WWE, beauty pageants, etc. His "brand" is in part being a tough guy and a "heel"...a thumb in the eye of the "establishment". He loves it. The more news, the better.
- He deeply resented Obama roasting him at the White House Press dinner several years ago.
- Trump always "punches back"
- 2 years ago, nobody (including Trump) thought he had a shot at winning.
- The GOP changed their platform position on Ukraine the day after the Republican convention - a "softening" on Russia for the first time ever.
The question:
Is it really that hard to believe Trump would accept a deal that would hurt Obama/Clinton? A deal that might involve leaking Clinton emails in exchange for foreign policy concessions if he won?
The odds of him actually having to follow through on this deal would seem minuscule at the time (again, even he though he had no chance at winning) - the risk would have been incredibly low. If you don't win the presidency, you don't have to make any concessions.
-----------------------------------------
- Trump is a businessman; an expert promoter. Getting headlines and creating outrageous tweets have been a part of his business model. It has kept him in the spotlight for decades.
- He has been heavily involved in mass media. The Apprentice, WWE, beauty pageants, etc. His "brand" is in part being a tough guy and a "heel"...a thumb in the eye of the "establishment". He loves it. The more news, the better.
- He deeply resented Obama roasting him at the White House Press dinner several years ago.
- Trump always "punches back"
- 2 years ago, nobody (including Trump) thought he had a shot at winning.
- The GOP changed their platform position on Ukraine the day after the Republican convention - a "softening" on Russia for the first time ever.
The question:
Is it really that hard to believe Trump would accept a deal that would hurt Obama/Clinton? A deal that might involve leaking Clinton emails in exchange for foreign policy concessions if he won?
The odds of him actually having to follow through on this deal would seem minuscule at the time (again, even he though he had no chance at winning) - the risk would have been incredibly low. If you don't win the presidency, you don't have to make any concessions.
21
Posted on 6/15/17 at 8:06 am to a want
I don't think even Trump knew how corrupt DC is....nor do we honestly
Posted on 6/15/17 at 8:07 am to a want
quote:
I don't understand the refusal of some of you to even consider the idea that the Trump campaign may have cooperated with Wikileaks.
Running out of WAPO links to post on here? Sorry, provide proof of "cooperation" with wikileaks and what that means. It's funny, you demand us to consider something that has been proven false time and time again. It has been shown that it is false. So now you revert to "Please just consider my hypothetical" so you can say, "Ha, see, you admitted that it's possible, therefore, Trump is "muh Russians".
You're a joke.
Posted on 6/15/17 at 8:07 am to a want
You really need help. He won get over it
Posted on 6/15/17 at 8:08 am to a want
Its time to accept Trump. Its June 2017.
Posted on 6/15/17 at 8:08 am to a want
His name was Ted Kennedy, he actually did it.
Posted on 6/15/17 at 8:09 am to Circus Child
quote:
The GOP changed their platform position on Ukraine the day after the Republican convention - a "softening" on Russia for the first time ever.
OK if you say so
Posted on 6/15/17 at 8:09 am to a want
I think the bar for making such serious accusations needs to be higher than, "Is it possible?"
Posted on 6/15/17 at 8:12 am to a want
I'll bite. Post any evidence you have to support your speculation.
Posted on 6/15/17 at 8:14 am to a want
If Trump had been knowledgeable and savvy enough to strike a deal with Wikileaks, he'd have been savvy enough to start with infrastructure and to have fired Comey on Day 1.
Posted on 6/15/17 at 8:16 am to a want
Y'all are fricking insane. Get help!
Posted on 6/15/17 at 8:18 am to BBONDS25
quote:
Post any evidence you have to support your speculation.
Ask Bob Mueller. Just because they haven't released the evidenced doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Did Mueller expand the obstruction investigation to Trump based on the absence of evidence?
I'm simply asking why some of you can't even entertain the idea that he might.
Posted on 6/15/17 at 8:26 am to a want
quote:
Ask Bob Mueller. Just because they haven't released the evidenced doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Did Mueller expand the obstruction investigation to Trump based on the absence of evidence?
Just like the WAPO articles too, huh? How colossally fricking wrong were you and your precious WAPO articles about Muh Russians?
Give it up man, you are straight up pathetic and desperate.
quote:
I'm simply asking why some of you can't even entertain the idea that he might.
Why can't you entertain the idea that Trump hasn't done anything wrong? You will be proven wrong again and you will come out looking like an arse once again. Just give it up, already.
Posted on 6/15/17 at 8:56 am to a want
So ..... is 0 responses to the OP the best we can do? Nobody can answer the question?
"Yes. But It's unlikely because...."
"No. Because xyz...."
"Yes. But It's unlikely because...."
"No. Because xyz...."
Posted on 6/15/17 at 8:58 am to a want
We aren't dealing in fairy tales, only facts. When you can prove what you claim, come back.
Posted on 6/15/17 at 8:59 am to a want
quote:Desperation on daily display.
So ..... is 0 responses to the OP the best we can do? Nobody can answer the question?
Posted on 6/15/17 at 9:01 am to Circus Child
quote:
Its time to accept Trump. Its June 2017.
I read this as a warning to the want brigade to slow down and let the soles of their feet heal up. All that stamping of feet...it's just not good for your joints over time.
Posted on 6/15/17 at 9:02 am to a want
Capt a want, have you considered the possibility that no one takes you seriously any longer because of your nearly year long temper tantrum?
Your shtick, it's old and tired. Try something new.
Your shtick, it's old and tired. Try something new.
Posted on 6/15/17 at 9:03 am to a want
quote:
Just because they haven't released the evidenced doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
compelling. Mueller expanding to obstruction tells us more about mueller than it does Trump. The law is clear. 18 usca 1505 does not apply to FBI investigations.
Now...I'll ask you again...post ANY evidence you have to support your speculation.
Your inability to do so will be an admission you have zero evidence and this thread is pointless....like all of your threads.
Posted on 6/15/17 at 9:05 am to a want
Wish you had been so persistent in the Russia US uranium deal during the BHO/Clinton admin.
There are facts around on that one.
There are facts around on that one.
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News