Intelligence Officials: Russians may have Compromising Information on Trump - Polidicks

[QUOTE=BlackMageMari;51656282]I'm assuming the fetish thing...?[/QUOTE] I think he's talking about the hypothetical blackmail sex tapes [U]and[/U] the fetish thing. [B]ALSO[/B] [QUOTE=Alice3173;51656165]Is that really the best you can muster? Because that's just someone being petty and somewhat satirical. They're literally saying "since Trump supporters have acted this way throughout his entire campaign there's no reason for me not to as well to give them a taste of their own medicine". I'd be quite surprised if the person you're quoting legitimately does believe all of this. Trump supporters can't act that way then turn around and go "wow, that's not okay when YOU do it!!!!!![/QUOTE] Found your hypothetical dude btw: [QUOTE=Mr. Scorpio;51656140]How the fuck can anyone expect me or anyone else to honestly give a shit about unverified claims against trump? He fucking rode into office on a wave of lies, propaganda, and half truths, and now I'm supposed to be some fucking vanguard of truth? I tried to advocate skepticism all throughout the election, and all I got was mocking laughter from the trumple peanut gallery. Them and daddy don can all get fucked.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=Tudd;51656151]Well I have posted already my thoughts on the matter quite a bit around 10ish pages in. I still think it's unverifiable bullshit like Pizzagate, but people can keep speculating if Trump really wears toddler-like PJs while watching Hentai with prostitutes in Russia and likes Golden Showers. For me personally I laugh at it and the people who buy it. Now for the rest of the content in the 35 page paper, it's all still flimsy as hell at the moment and it's not looking good if people have to seperate the retarded sex fetish shit from it already.[/QUOTE] You're the one focusing on potentially fabricated red herrings meant to discredit the report. I'm infinitely more curious about Trump's Russian connections than what fetishes he likes. That's the real meat of the story that you're burying under noise.

[QUOTE=BlackMageMari;51656276]Which Clinton stuff did you think had merit?[/QUOTE] War with Russia - Considering the technicalities of what No Fly zone entailed with Syria and a Four star general stating that it simply would call for it. DNC Collusion against Bernie - A number of emails that substantiate this and the actions of what happened with Debbie Wasserman Schulz (a previous Hillary campaigner in 08) to the Hillary 2016 Campaign after resigning is just ridiculous. Clinton Email Server - Should be reprimanded for it, could talk for hours on it. I still got quite a few more, but I feel this will turn into a huge derailing. So the gist is I am not a guy who is into pizzagate or assassinations kinda guy basically if that is what you were wondering. [editline]11th January 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=KillerJaguar;51656306]You're the one focusing on potentially fabricated red herrings meant to discredit the report. I'm infinitely more curious about Trump's Russian connections than what fetishes he likes. That's the real meat of the story that you're burying under noise.[/QUOTE] Hey, I am saying keep going guys, but it's not looking good overall for this report.

Even if these documents are falsified I would fully expect all or most of the stuff listed in there in regards to Russia is actually true anyway. I'm not going to advocate for his arrest or anything without solid proof, but I'd be completely unsurprised if similar information gets dug up anyway.

[QUOTE=BlackMageMari;51656282]I'm assuming the fetish thing...?[/QUOTE] The Prague thing previously mentioned. Unless that isn't confirmed yet. I actually don't even think the golden gate part is debunked yet technically, but seems people have already dropped it. [editline]11th January 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=Kirbunny431;51656325]Even if these documents are falsified I would fully expect all or most of the stuff listed in there in regards to Russia is actually true anyway. I'm not going to advocate for his arrest or anything without solid proof, but I'd be completely unsurprised if similar information gets dug up anyway.[/QUOTE] Well there is another post to add to my McCarthyism list I got going for Zuri.

[QUOTE=Tudd;51656319]Hey, I am saying keep going guys, but it's not looking good overall for this report.[/QUOTE] I'm talking about things that aren't even in the report that people made up to discredit the report.

[QUOTE=Tudd;51656319]War with Russia - Considering the technicalities of what No Fly zone entailed with Syria and a Four star general stating that it simply would call for it.[/QUOTE] I was hoping you'd bring that up again, because 1:00 is pretty funny considering. [media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9E4K70EnqV0[/media]

[QUOTE=Stroheim;51656301]Found your hypothetical dude btw:[/QUOTE] Yes, you found one other person who falls under what I was describing. People are obviously frustrated by the blatant hypocrisy Trump's supporters have consistently shown throughout the election and even after he won. Does this surprise anyone? The fact that some people have gotten so exasperated as to publicly give up and sink to their level just shows that the situation is not being dealt with adequately. This sort of thing is already fairly uncommon but wouldn't be as commonplace as it is if it weren't so infuriating to try and get solid answers out of Trump or his supporters.

[QUOTE=Vlevs;51656338]I was hoping you'd bring that up again, because 1:00 is pretty funny considering. [media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9E4K70EnqV0[/media][/QUOTE] Well it wasn't a matter of who would be tougher. I think she really thought it was a good idea and an easy solution to people's demands to do something about Syria, but she didn't really think it through and the generals, politicians, and intelligence officers seemed to point that out. [editline]11th January 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=KillerJaguar;51656336]I'm talking about things that aren't even in the report that people made up to discredit the report.[/QUOTE] And I have already tackled and quite a few others already why it's not looking good for those parts still.

[QUOTE=Stroheim;51656301]I think he's talking about the hypothetical blackmail sex tapes [U]and[/U] the fetish thing. ALSO Found your hypothetical dude btw:[/QUOTE] hey, here's a hot tip I don't care if people believe this thing =/= I believe this thing

[QUOTE=Tudd;51656328]Well there is another post to add to my McCarthyism list I got going for Zuri.[/QUOTE] All right, I can't wait to be an asset to another flawless Tudd argument!

[QUOTE=Tudd;51656328] Well there is another post to add to my McCarthyism list I got going for Zuri.[/QUOTE] You should rename it the "Tudd has bad reading comprehension and takes quotes wildly out of context list".

[QUOTE=archangel125;51656247]Tudd, no offense, but you're living in a bit of an alternate reality here by claiming that people are focusing on the parts of the second, obviously fake document, and taking them seriously. As much as you'd like to believe the people you're arguing with are idiots, you making such things up isn't helping your case, especially when absolutely nobody here but you is buying it. This isn't how one makes a compelling argument. It's called a straw man. It's what certain shitposters, like Monkah, were notorious for doing. I'm not denying that Trump supporters on this forum get shit on by everyone - the semi-reasonable ones always get lumped in with the idiots. But the only way to change that is to argue properly, without bringing up irrelevant red herrings and making things up. To earn respect, one must be intellectually honest, and it is the intellectual dishonesty of most, if not all, Trump supporters on this forum, that people despise.[/QUOTE] I think I am being pretty honest in here. I am not telling people that they can't keep looking into this report, but just clearly pointing out how this could be a huge backfire of uncredible schlock. Now if people think I am hypocritical because I like to get into skeptic mode on here, that's fine and doesn't bother me, but I think what I am saying is fair and has been echoed by others already.

[QUOTE=Tudd;51656353]Well it wasn't a matter of who would be tougher. I think she really thought it was a good idea and an easy solution to people's demands to do something about Syria, but she didn't really think it through and the generals, politicians, and intelligence officer seemed to point that out.[/QUOTE] This runs on the wild assumption that she wouldn't have been talked out of once actually faced with the decision. Are you really giving her a the benefit of doubt given that you seem to have no worries about Donald "Why can't we use more nukes" Trump's restraint in office?

[QUOTE=Tudd;51656385]I think I am being pretty honest in here. I am not telling people that they can't keep looking into this report, but just clearly pointing out how this could be a huge backfire of uncredible schlock. Now if people think I am hypocritical because I like to get into skeptic mode on here, that's fine and doesn't bother me, but I think what I am saying is fair and has been echoed by others already.[/QUOTE] There you go again, being intellectually dishonest. No, I'm calling you out because you're straw-manning, hard. You're pretending that people in this thread are focusing on the obviously-fake stuff in the second report, the whole fetish thing, when in fact almost everyone here is focusing exclusively on the more serious allegations about Trump's connections with Russia in the first. Now you're carefully ignoring the point I was making, and acting like you're the only one here skeptical about the validity of the whole thing, and pretending that I'm taking issue with your skepticism. Again, this isn't how one argues compellingly, and doesn't make anyone here respect you any more. Almost everyone here is a skeptic. When faced with an argument that is difficult to address, it's a bad idea to pretend your opponent is arguing something else entirely, and then address that made-up argument. Nobody - or almost nobody - here denied that it could turn out to be false information. We're talking about Trump's questionable connections to Russia that have already been established, and what it could mean for the legitimacy of his presidency if this new information turned out to be true. You [I]know[/I] this. Quit pretending otherwise.

[QUOTE=Tudd;51656213]People only take the Golden Showers by multiple prostitutes on a bed that Obama once slept in part seriously.[/QUOTE] "only" ok maybe if you hung out with partisan trash that tells you what the left think then maybe?

[QUOTE=ROFLBURGER;51656441]"only" ok maybe if you hung out with partisan trash that tells you what the left think then maybe?[/QUOTE] Precisely the sort of straw manning and calling attention to tangential red herrings I was accusing him of.

[QUOTE=Gwoodman;51656204]aren't you the guy that made a thread about apple jobs in the US and tried to make seem like it was Trump's good thing even though the article itself was about how it was a bad thing and had nothing to do with Trump your obsession with Trump is weird and you trying to be the bastion of truth after that is pathetic[/QUOTE] We need to get rid of him already. Nothing of value would be lost on this forum.

[QUOTE=Govna;51656461]We need to get rid of him already. Nothing of value would be lost on this forum.[/QUOTE] Let's not go that far.

[QUOTE=BlackMageMari;51656471]Let's not go that far.[/QUOTE] You don't think a perma would be in order? It's the same shit again and again with him.

[QUOTE=Govna;51656474]You don't think a perma would be in order? It's the same shit again and again with him.[/QUOTE] To my knowledge Tudd hasn't broken any rules. He's just infuriating to debate with because he keeps on relying on straw men. We don't ban people on this forum for political ideology - unless they're proven to be straight-up Neo Nazis, anyway. Anyway, banning people because the majority of users disagree with them would not be the Facepunch I want. A person's understanding of the world is enriched by opposing viewpoints, imo.

[QUOTE=Govna;51656474]You don't think a perma would be in order? It's the same shit again and again with him.[/QUOTE] As far as I can tell he hasn't openly flamed people and the biggest thing I hold against him is him being dishonest in some arguments and some of the things he's said to me. The mods decide who get banned and who does not. Not us. This is off-topic and derailing, by the way. why the fuck am i defending tudd ANYWAY Does anyone have any news to post or has everything gone silent as the media works in the background?

[QUOTE=BlackMageMari;51656486]As far as I can tell he hasn't openly flamed people and the biggest thing I hold against him is him being dishonest in some arguments and some of the things he's said to me. The mods decide who get banned and who does not. Not us. This is off-topic and derailing, by the way. why the fuck am i defending tudd ANYWAY Does anyone have any news to post or has everything gone silent as the media works in the background?[/QUOTE] I think at this point we're waiting for more information to come out. You can be damn sure that these other sources the BBC correspondent mentioned are being followed up right now. It could be a few days before we know for sure whether there's any truth to these allegations, but part of me would rather they turn out to be false, or the US is going to have some [I]serious[/I] social and political unrest moving forward.

[QUOTE=archangel125;51656415]There you go again, being intellectually dishonest. No, I'm calling you out because you're straw-manning, hard. You're pretending that people in this thread are focusing on the obviously-fake stuff in the second report, the whole fetish thing, when in fact almost everyone here is focusing exclusively on the more serious allegations about Trump's connections with Russia in the first. Now you're carefully ignoring the point I was making, and acting like you're the only one here skeptical about the validity of the whole thing, and pretending that I'm taking issue with your skepticism.[/quote] First: I don't think the majority of people in this thread take this very seriously. Which is kudos to those people. I can tell this is just a fun piece to throw around for most and more interest on Russian collusion. Of which I am fine with people investigating more into. It doesn't bother me that people want to make sure our government isn't in collusion with Putin somehow. Second: As far as I know the Russian stuff and golden showers is the main report. The reason I mentioned the Hentai PJ part was because I forgot that was part of some weird second part around 12 pages ago, so my bad. And for the red herring stuff. I think I have shown atleast two good examples of people basically being fine this could be fake and bring damage. Sorry I used the word several, but I redact that to the only a tiny amount of people. I just honestly hope this isn't an attitude that people continue to adopt cause it does have ramifications for both sides.

[QUOTE=archangel125;51656477]To my knowledge Tudd hasn't broken any rules. [b]He's just infuriating to debate with because he keeps on relying on straw men.[/b] We don't ban people on this forum for political ideology - unless they're proven to be straight-up Neo Nazis, anyway. Anyway, banning people because the majority of users disagree with them would not be the Facepunch I want, anyway. A person's understanding of the world is enriched by opposing viewpoints, imo.[/QUOTE] That's the point: he's not actually debating, he's just trolling. Logical fallacy after logical fallacy, a selective memory for details, etc. I mean, it's not my call at the end of the day. But it does get tiresome to the point of being infuriating, as you said. There's no reason for it at all.

[QUOTE=Tudd;51656503]First: I don't think the majority of people in this thread take this very seriously. Which is kudos to those people. I can tell this is just a fun piece to throw around for most and more interest on Russian collusion. Of which I am fine with people investigating more into. It doesn't bother me that people want to make sure our government isn't in collusion with Putin somehow. Second: As far as I know the Russian stuff and golden showers is the main report. The reason I mentioned the Hentai PJ part was because I forgot that was part of some weird second part around 12 pages ago, so my bad. And for the red herring stuff. I think I have shown atleast two good examples of people basically being fine this could be fake and bring damage. Sorry I used the word several, but I redact that to the only a tiny amount of people. I just honestly hope this isn't an attitude that people continue to adopt cause it does have ramifications for both sides.[/QUOTE] Well, as someone suspicious about Trump's connections to President Putin, and as someone alarmed by the fact that the non-partisan Central Intelligence Agency is openly accusing Russia of having influenced the election (Which BTW is internationally considered an act of war) I think that even if this report turns out to be false, the attention of the American public will shift at least for a while to Trump's financial connections to Russia - which - as he refused to disclose his tax records - are all the more suspect. Ergo, false or not, the effect this will have on the public consciousness will be beneficial to Americans, because they will be more interested in knowing what Mr. Trump is hiding.

[QUOTE=archangel125;51656477]To my knowledge Tudd hasn't broken any rules. He's just infuriating to debate with because he keeps on relying on straw men.[/QUOTE] Hey, everyone has their strong debates and weak ones on here I notice.

[QUOTE=archangel125;51656415]There you go again, being intellectually dishonest. No, I'm calling you out because you're straw-manning, hard. You're pretending that people in this thread are focusing on the obviously-fake stuff in the second report, the whole fetish thing, when in fact almost everyone here is focusing exclusively on the more serious allegations about Trump's connections with Russia in the first. Now you're carefully ignoring the point I was making, and acting like you're the only one here skeptical about the validity of the whole thing, and pretending that I'm taking issue with your skepticism. You [I]know[/I] this. Quit pretending otherwise.[/QUOTE] That's not the impression I was getting from the first few pages in this thread, I see people going borderline /r9k/ mode and people pretending that Buzzfeed is a valid source at all. Not the first time in the election I've seen people saying that Buzzfeed is a reliable media source, but then again, I am fairly sure they ran articles saying that the Democrats would win everything in a landslide and even take Texas. Guess what didn't happen a few months ago? Or more alleged Trump scandals from around then that suddenly ended up going nowhere after 9 November? Anyway, it doesn't help either, in the event of there being a serious case behind this, that Buzzfeed and CNN cocked it up by jumping the gun all of a sudden while apparently knowing that more media cooperations were trying to verify it. According to Dutch news companies, some of them knew of this for weeks, yet apart from several leads or herrings, no solid proof has been found yet. And then there is the case of another Michael Cohen who is not Trump's lawyer. There are things that simply don't add up yet, and by bringing this out with lacking verification, Buzzfeed and CNN have pretty much discredited possibly most of the case and certainly their reputation as well. Personally spoken, I think CNN should be grateful if they even get a press pass after the 20th. They fucked up inexcusably badly, simple as that.

[QUOTE=archangel125;51656520]Well, as someone suspicious about Trump's connections to President Putin, and as someone alarmed by the fact that the non-partisan Central Intelligence Agency is openly accusing Russia of having influenced the election (Which BTW is internationally considered an act of war) I think that even if this report turns out to be false, the attention of the American public will shift at least for a while to Trump's financial connections to Russia - which - as he refused to disclose his tax records - are all the more suspect. Ergo, false or not, the effect this will have on the public consciousness will be beneficial to Americans, because they will be more interested in knowing what Mr. Trump is hiding.[/QUOTE] And I am fine with that. I think Putin has to be taken seriously, but I am more predisposed to want to work with him on some foreign issues, so that is why I ain't excitedly into every Russian collusion piece. But I can say, it is only to the benefit of America and it's citizens to have as much transparency focused on that relationship.

[QUOTE=Tudd;51656556]And I am fine with that. I think Putin has to be taken seriously, but I am more predisposed to want to work with him on some foreign issues, so that is why I ain't excitedly into every Russian collusion piece. But I can say, it is only to the benefit of America and it's citizens to have as much transparency focused on that relationship.[/QUOTE] I want transparency about trumps piss fetish