Capitol in lockdown
- Thread starter Circlejoe
- Start date
Nobody's giving a belly rub to Ranger. He does as he pleases.
What your posts tell me is that you're pissed he's not trying to get one from you. Which is interesting, because you're the one who dances to other's tunes.
Gibberish, as are most of your posts.
Libs are condescending. Serves as a defensive mechanism out in front of deep sense of inadequacy.
Always overreaching.
Always!
A
anon_mlxxvlbug9dpa
Guest
One might even say that vets are Americans just like everybody else!
My post was in defense of all veterans. Most veterans, like most people, have their own opinions and thoughts.
Axios poll shows Hawley
24-68 overall favorable
46-49 among Republicans
The poll shows that a strong majority of Republicans continue to support Trump. But Hawley is underwater within his own party.
Maybe Blunt isn't the Senator from Missouri who has to worry about a primary
Probably the same one that pops out Swalwell, Emanuel, and Madigan. They just use different rooms
Yeah but at least Sawlwell never threatened our national security through his actions.
No doubt. The funny thing is he is one of the House managers impeaching Trump. One of the reasons for impeaching Trump is he gravely endangered the security of the United States. Swalwell was engaged in an inappropriate relationship with a Chinese spy while serving on the House Intelligence Committee. Couldn't they choose someone besides he and Raskin.
You make it sound so dramatic! Like he was banging her and giving up secrets.
She raised money for one of his campaigns, among dozens of other campaigns. He was alerted by the FBI and severed ties.
Here’s What We Know About Rep. Swalwell’s Connection To A Suspected Chinese Spy
Authorities haven’t accused Swalwell of wrongdoing.
www.forbes.com
But go with your story. It makes a better made-for-Fox movie.
Who knows what information Fang did or didn't get her hands when that slightly autistic loser was passed out. The guy is clearly a moron, so I'm not as confident as you guys that no valuable information was obtained. I agree though we do tend to dramatize situations like these. Even Soviet operatives stateside during the Cold War obtained mostly useless information in the grand scheme of things.
Not any more speculative than reconnaissance missions through the halls of congress though.
So to the best of your knowledge and evidence, the answer is no . . . got it.
My original post wasn't claiming that his actions lead to the leaking of valuable information to China. It was simply stating that his actions put our national security at risk, which they undoubtedly did.
Just like when I drive without a seat belt I'm putting myself at risk, but that isn't necessarily the same thing as getting in a car crash and having myself be thrown through the windshield.
Understand better now?
HDG, Did they ever meet face-to-face and alone, or is your fantasy about him being passed out and whispering state secrets part of the Fox TV movie? i don't honestly know. The Forbes article would indicate that she was a generous donor and a fund-raiser for many progressive candidates, so it is more likely that he had her served some rubbery chicken with rice at a paid table event, as opposed to personally delivering steamy salami at a Motel 6. But... you do you, it's your dream sequence!
Uhm. I don't know if you're deliberately downplaying their relationship because it suits your politics or if you're actually misinformed.
Swalwell's refusal to deny that they had a sexual relationship pretty much tells you everything you need to know.
Kind of like when the NYP first released the Hunter Biden story and all the lemmings claimed falsehood even though the Biden's denial was conspicuously absent. Who knew vindication for the NYP would come so soon? Hopefully there is no such vindication for detractors of Swalwell because I'd prefer we limit China' access to classified information.
It's interesting that denials from democrats or lack of means guilty but denials from GOP can be believed
Not saying all dems are innocent and all gop are guilty but appears to me that both sides give their own side the benefit of the doubt and are quick to assume the other is guilty.
Last edited:
I would only say that if she had access to the money and how it was raised it's possible she had access to other information as well. We don't know but it's possible.You make it sound so dramatic! Like he was banging her and giving up secrets.
She raised money for one of his campaigns, among dozens of other campaigns. He was alerted by the FBI and severed ties.
Here’s What We Know About Rep. Swalwell’s Connection To A Suspected Chinese Spy
Authorities haven’t accused Swalwell of wrongdoing.
But go with your story. It makes a better made-for-Fox movie.
If Trump or folks within his campaign can be useful idiots the same logic has to apply to some Dems as well. Even if used unwittingly.
I clearly stated that "I honestly don't know" anything about their "relationship" other than the non-liberal / non-conservative accounts, suc as Forbes, that I read
LINK?
In just eight lines, you wrote:
"if"
"it's possible"
"We don't know"
"If"
"if"
It's not possible you can write a persuasive post without eliminating these words and phrases.
but it's possibly maybe could have happened. we just never know but you can't prove it couldn't so there. it's all about false equivalency.
It was like the other day when someone said if pelosi said to kill a republican, then dems would do it. It's like how many assumptions can one make and still claim it's equal to something that actually did happen?
I don't believe I was trying to be persuasive in any way. I was only responding to OS in the sense we likely do not have the full story as it relates to Rep Swalwell. In fact, I highly doubt we will ever be provided any detail.
Swalwell, based on what's available, is guilty now of only being a pretty easy mark for a foreign agent. If all she got were details on his donors and how money is raised/spent by Democratic campaigns I can sleep easy at night. But, be sure, that information went somewhere.
Speaking of the inability to think for yourself... There are numerous fact-checks on this claim, which discuss the Clinton's confusion over the large amount of gifts sent to them personally and the smaller number of gifts intended for the White House in general. All of the fact checks note the relatively smaller value of the latter (around 28,000), the fact that the Clintons returned them voluntarily (depending on the wishes of the person or group who made the donation), and that they paid for everything they took that wasn't returned...
It seems the matter was resolved to everyone's satisfaction in 2001. So why would you bring any of that up in a discussion of theft of Government Property that occurred in 2021. Again, it appears the only items the Clintons erroneously removed were items that were acquired by them personally or donated to the WH during their 8 yr Admin. Nothing they removed was part of the WH inventory prior to 1992...
False headline claim: The Clintons admit to stealing from the White House
A post and article by “Printly” titled “Clintons Admitted To Stealing Rugs, Silverware, Dishsets, Couches & Art From White House” https://prntly.com/2020/01/26/clintons-admitted-to-stealing-rugs-silverware-dishsets-couches-art-from-white-house/ was shared 3,000 times on...
www.reuters.com
Fact Check: Was Hillary and Bill Clinton forced to return furniture they took from the White House?
Times-Union readers want to know: I read that Hillary Clinton was forced to return $28,000 worth of furniture and art after she and her husband left the
The Clinton Furniture Flap - FactCheck.org
Q: Did Bill and Hillary Clinton return furniture they took from the White House in 2001? A: Yes. The Clintons returned more than $28,000 worth of items, which, they said, they thought were personal gifts given to them and not to the White House. FULL QUESTION Was Hillary Clinton forced to...
www.factcheck.org
Jeez, I'm a lefty. I'm only pointing out that putting on blinders to anything happening in the Democrat's house is naive.
General Jack D. Ripper does not agree.
"I can no longer sit back and allow communist infiltration, communist indoctrination, communist subversion, and the international communist conspiracy to sap and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids."
@DrHoops come here and regale us of the greatness of Steve Schmidt once again. We tried to warn you about going along with this grift, now come eat your crow.
