I did, and I still fail to see the significance in the slightest. I have no questions for the person you quoted, their post was clear and did include any information that seemed pointless or questionable.
What significance does the use of the term "czar" have to his post about the initial Russian Reset by Obama in attempt to improve relations, which itself was a response correcting a post claiming that nobody had tried to do that until Trump.
How exactly is it "defending" the PotUS? It is more calling CNN and NBC out on their antics.
Trump does foolish sh!t that's for sure. A lot of it in fact. The MSM just cherry picks his quotes out of context and sensationalized the hell out of it. And people take it for gospel. They gave other PotUSs a free ride on a lot of things for various reasons.
Obama invited a kid that created a fake bomb to the White House, then the kid high tailed it to the Middle East. Then his parents sued the government. Was the PotUS criticized in the MSM?
A gun, that on an operation that started under the Obama administration(Fast & Furious), found it's way to terrorist and was used in the Paris attack. Was the PotUS criticized in the MSM?
Obama invites BLM leaders to the White House. BLM chants kill cops, fry em like bacon. Was the PotUS criticized in the MSM?
Current PotUS gets two scoops of ice cream, guest get one. MSM criticizes him for it. Note the difference?
You also seem confused that I have defended him as well. I shall ask for a quote from you as well. Simply because I don't agree with you doesn't mean I am against you.
Have a wonderful day.
- - - Updated - - -
Yet you failed to answer any of the questions laid before you and went straight to personal attacks. With that I bid you adieu.
Naw. Not because I can't find one, but rather because you didn't acknowledge that defending someone is different than directly defending someone.
dafuq? I gave you a complement. Not everyone is good at propaganda.Yet you failed to answer any of the questions laid before you and went straight to personal attacks. With that I bid you adieu.
What a joke. No. Comey is a dirty bastard. He goes way back with the clintons. This latest Clinton fiasco was the 4th time that Comey has been involved in letting the clintons off the hook.
It seems that most people are at least capable of admitting which political party they prefer. While our resident independents may not explicitly defend Trump's actions or legislation, how they do love to declare that everything coming out of the FBI, CIA, NSA, and the white house is all fake. Meanwhile they loved to declare that all of the anti-Hillary stuff that came out of blogs and tabloids was real.
It's unfortunate, but our "independents" are being dishonest about their political affiliation and their own biases. It's become a running joke that "independent" just means "I'm too embarrassed to admit it, since he's such a ghastly piece of shit, but I love Trump."
2014 Gamergate: "If you want games without hyper sexualized female characters and representation, then learn to code!"
2023: "What's with all these massively successful games with ugly (realistic) women? How could this have happened?!"
Report today that Comey had a strong idea that the report was fake but acted on it anyways out of fear that if the Russians publicly disclosed it (insert Wikileaks) that it would further damage the investigation by giving law enforcement and DOJ no way to discredit it without burning sources and methods.
The mere possibility of Russia releasing information they (supposedly) planted themselves in the first place is apparently enough to drive FBI!
"We know it's fake but if we have to prove it's fake we'll lose more then by acting like we believe this fake!"
...despite fake alleging obstruction of justice on highest level...