lmao this kid saw, “Russia if you’re listening,” the Mueller reporter (did not exonerate), numerous Trump cabinet members imprisoned for speaking to Russian spies, Krasnov and Steele dossier, Trump flying to Moscow in 80s only to within weeks upon return out a full page ad abolishing NATO in 3 major newspapers, saw the hand-delivered letter flown to Moscow by Rand Paul on behalf of Trump; saw numerous GOP Congressmen fly over to Moscow to have private meetings on 4th of July no less.
Stop bursting people’s bubbles. It’s their personal soap opera.
lmao this kid saw, “Russia if you’re listening,” the Mueller reporter (did not exonerate), numerous Trump cabinet members imprisoned for speaking to Russian spies, Krasnov and Steele dossier, Trump flying to Moscow in 80s only to within weeks upon return out a full page ad abolishing NATO in 3 major newspapers, saw the hand-delivered letter flown to Moscow by Rand Paul on behalf of Trump; saw numerous GOP Congressmen fly over to Moscow to have private meetings on 4th of July no less.
… And apparently cannot connect the dots lmao.
I see utterly selfish people taking advantage of each other. I see no “loyalty” beyond the immediate moment.
The Steele dossier was a fake.
Unverified? Yes. Corroborating some of what we already know? Also yes.
Proven fake? Definitely not. That is unless you are to believe the word of Republicans and Trump.
Thats not how the burden of proof works. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
Ad Ignorantiam fallacy states otherwise.
“Fake” is itself an assertion requiring evidence, independent from stating neutrality, e.g., “We don’t know whether it is true or not.”
Also, circular-reasoning fallacy: Who says they’re extraordinary claims within the context of what we already know?
What does this even mean?
Ah, and therein lies the problem ladies & gentlemen.
Removed by mod