- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- 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
re: If He Needs to, Can Obama Successfully Claim "Presidential Immunity" For His Crimes?
Posted on 7/21/25 at 5:29 pm to DeathByTossDive225
Posted on 7/21/25 at 5:29 pm to DeathByTossDive225
quote:
Indicting guilty parties other than former presidents isn’t politically expedient?
quote:
Thread is about a former president
quote:
I’m not qualifying it.
1
Posted on 7/21/25 at 5:33 pm to BBONDS25
quote:
Link your source and let’s see who is out of their depth.
Senate intelligence full review
Ratcliffe’s “bombshell”
How’s this work for you
This post was edited on 7/21/25 at 6:26 pm
Posted on 7/21/25 at 5:36 pm to DeathByTossDive225
quote:
How’s this work for you
Give me the link that you pulled those exact quotes from. I’ve already read the reports. I want to know who editorialized them for you. You are the moron claiming that Facebook posts were interference…when not a single person on either side is still claiming Russia actually altered the results of 2016. Show your work. Don’t appeal to authority. Tbh ata a losing fallacy for you.
This post was edited on 7/21/25 at 5:37 pm
Posted on 7/21/25 at 5:36 pm to TrueTiger
Lawsuit him into the poor house like the Democrats tried to do to Trump.
Posted on 7/21/25 at 5:38 pm to BBONDS25
quote:
You’re responding to me & I said no one will be indicted.
You’ve abandoned substance entirely & are now quoting posts out of context and order to fabricate arguments.
You’ve ignored mounds of evidence piled at your feet, named sources & years, links to official reports that exclude Mueller’s original report.
And you are just yelling “$2k Facebook” & “go find even more evidence” at this point. How about no, you can be willfully ignorant. I’ve put forth my fair share of effort here, way outsized.
I feel pretty good about where I’m standing on this particular debate with you lol.
This post was edited on 7/21/25 at 5:44 pm
Posted on 7/21/25 at 5:39 pm to BBONDS25
quote:
I’ve already read the reports.
quote:
You have fricking not
This post was edited on 7/21/25 at 5:45 pm
Posted on 7/21/25 at 5:44 pm to DeathByTossDive225
Where did the Senate get its classified information.
This post was edited on 7/21/25 at 5:45 pm
Posted on 7/21/25 at 5:48 pm to DeathByTossDive225
quote:
You’ve abandoned substance entirely & are now quoting posts out of context and order to fabricate arguments.
Wrong. I feel like I’m playing chess against a pigeon.
quote:
You’ve ignored mounds of evidence piled at your feet, named sources & years, links to official reports that exclude Mueller’s original report.
Mounds, you say? You have any cite that speaks to something other than social media posts?
quote:
And you are just yelling “$2k Facebook” & “go find even more evidence” at this point. How about no, you can be willfully ignorant. I’ve put forth my fair share of effort here, way outsized. I feel pretty good about where I’m standing on this particular debate with you lol.
That’s because ignorance is bliss.
Posted on 7/21/25 at 5:49 pm to DeathByTossDive225
quote:
You have fricking not
Cite the precise page and paragraph of the report you think I missed. Not an editorialized copy and paste. Show me your smoking gun with specific citations.
Posted on 7/21/25 at 5:50 pm to DeathByTossDive225
quote:
There’s no new info here & believing Russia didn’t aggressively target the US in 2016 at this point requires one to exist in an alternate reality.
Trump had nothing to do with Russia’s actions. I’ve seen YT stuff today practically confirming Russia worked to elect DJT. So Tulsi’s suggestion that Obama changed the intelligence briefing 180 degrees will fall on deaf ears for much of America.
Posted on 7/21/25 at 5:52 pm to Houag80
I'm no expert, but he's not going to prison. Not that he doesn't deserve it.
However, I do believe there will be some litigation.
However, I do believe there will be some litigation.
Posted on 7/21/25 at 5:58 pm to aTmTexas Dillo
quote:
Trump had nothing to do with Russia’s actions. I’ve seen YT stuff today practically confirming Russia worked to elect DJT. So Tulsi’s suggestion that Obama changed the intelligence briefing 180 degrees will fall on deaf ears for much of America.
Correct, though they didn’t work to “elect” him.
They worked to sew chaos & propagate ideas sympathetic to Kremlin interests. Some of this benefitted the Trump campaign, but I it’s unlikely it affected the outcome. Some campaign officials knew & were in contact with Russian agents.
The distinction is important because it accurately frames the issue as one of national security rather than partisan politics.
Although… Democratic media & HRC certainly tried to leverage this to their favor, but that’s not a legal matter.
This post was edited on 7/21/25 at 6:00 pm
Posted on 7/21/25 at 6:01 pm to DeathByTossDive225
quote:
Some campaign officials knew & were in contact with Russian agents.
Which ones, specifically? Please list their
convictions for collusion here. TIA.
Still waiting on Those cites. Seems when you are pressed for specifics, you fail to provide any. Almost like You’re a useful idiot being manipulated. More simply said….youre a dumb idiot.
This post was edited on 7/21/25 at 6:03 pm
Posted on 7/21/25 at 6:28 pm to BBONDS25
It is five volumes, and the last is 1000 pages.
There’s a table of contents in each one.
Have at it
Campaign officials are in volume 5
Infrastructure stuff is in volume 4 (Manafort and others)
Disinfo stuff is in volume 2
Volume 1 Table of contents item VI states “no evidence of changed vote tallies” — what a novel bombshell revelation!!!
There’s a table of contents in each one.
Have at it
Campaign officials are in volume 5
Infrastructure stuff is in volume 4 (Manafort and others)
Disinfo stuff is in volume 2
Volume 1 Table of contents item VI states “no evidence of changed vote tallies” — what a novel bombshell revelation!!!
This post was edited on 7/21/25 at 6:38 pm
Posted on 7/21/25 at 6:32 pm to DeathByTossDive225
quote:
It is five 1000 page volumes. There’s a table of contents in each one.
Perfect. As I’m positive you didn’t just believe the editorialized quotes you posted…please direct me to the page and paragraph you base your opinions upon. Don’t be scared to be specific.
Or admit, you are a useful idiot relying upon an editorialized version. You know what? No need. We already know.
Posted on 7/21/25 at 6:34 pm to BBONDS25
quote:
Campaign officials are in volume 5 (Manafort and others)
Infrastructure stuff is in volume 4
Disinfo stuff is in volume 2
Volume 1 Table of contents item VI states “no evidence of changed vote tallies” — what a novel bombshell revelation!!!
This post was edited on 7/21/25 at 6:38 pm
Posted on 7/21/25 at 6:35 pm to KCT
All he needs is the law offices of SFP, Boosie and Cwill and nothing will happen when youbhave that power team on yourside
Posted on 7/21/25 at 6:36 pm to DeathByTossDive225
That’s what I thought. Thank you for admitting you believed the editorialized version you read.
Posted on 7/21/25 at 6:36 pm to BBONDS25
Guy said the NYT was a credible paper up until like a few years ago.
Posted on 7/21/25 at 6:36 pm to DeathByTossDive225
he’s not going to read that. No one here will 
Page 5 of 10
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News