FAKE NEWS EXPOSED: A Service of PoliticalChat.com

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by nailer

How is it traitorous?

By saying that the victims of illegal hacks by Russia had it coming to them (e.g., they deserved it, karma, etc.). I interpret that as applauding the illegal actions of a our primary geopolitical foe (something Trump himself did when he said “I will tell you this, Russia: If you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing,” a statement former CIA chief Leon Panetta reacted to as follows: “I find those kinds of statements to be totally outrageous because you’ve got now a presidential candidate who is, in fact, asking the Russians to engage in American politics. I just think that’s beyond the pale.”). I agree with Panetta regarding Trump's support (and Whell's from my POV) for Russian hacking. YMMV.

[nailer]

Originally Posted by finnbow

By saying that the victims of illegal hacks by Russia had it coming to them (e.g., they deserved it, karma, etc.). I interpret that as supporting the illegal actions of a our primary geopolitical foe (something Trump himself did when he said “I will tell you this, Russia: If you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing,” a statement former CIA chief Leon Panetta reacted to as follows: “I find those kinds of statements to be totally outrageous because you’ve got now a presidential candidate who is, in fact, asking the Russians to engage in American politics. I just think that’s beyond the pale.”). I agree with Panetta regarding Trump's support (and Whell's from my POV) for Russian hacking. YMMV.

Based on your argument, mine does.

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by nailer

Based on your argument, mine does.

Fine, but I just happen to object to encouraging or supporting Russian hacks of our electoral process. I'm funny like that.

[whell]

Originally Posted by finnbow

By saying that the victims of illegal hacks by Russia had it coming to them (e.g., they deserved it, karma, etc.). I interpret that as applauding the illegal actions of a our primary geopolitical foe ....

I'm sure you would interpret it that way. Most of your "interpretations" of my posts have been pretty self-serving.

[donquixote99]

Originally Posted by whell

I'm sure you would interpret it that way. Most of your "interpretations" of my posts have been pretty self-serving.

Most of your interpretations have been defense of treason.

[whell]

Originally Posted by donquixote99

Most of your interpretations have been defense of treason.

I suppose from your perspective - loopy as it is - that's a true statement.

[donquixote99]

Originally Posted by whell

I suppose from your perspective - loopy as it is - that's a true statement.

My statement proceeds, by short and obvious steps, directly from the constitution. It is practically self-evident.

[whell]

Originally Posted by finnbow

I interpret that as applauding the illegal actions of a our primary geopolitical foe (something Trump himself did when he said “I will tell you this, Russia: If you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing,” a statement former CIA chief Leon Panetta reacted to as follows: “I find those kinds of statements to be totally outrageous because you’ve got now a presidential candidate who is, in fact, asking the Russians to engage in American politics. I just think that’s beyond the pale.”). I agree with Panetta regarding Trump's support (and Whell's from my POV) for Russian hacking. YMMV.

I found that statement hilarious. Your mileage may vary.

[donquixote99]

Originally Posted by whell

I found that statement hilarious. Your mileage may vary.

As arguments go, mockery is crap.

[bobabode]

Originally Posted by whell

I found that statement hilarious. Your mileage may vary.

What's hilarious is watching punch yourself in the face over and over again, Mike.
Please continue.