OFFICIAL: Donald Trump thread.

[siablo14]

'Nuh-uh, you are.'

Pathetic.

Ok, I take it back. I should have said you cant be older than 15.

Whatever age you wanna make it but we all know that is an accurate description of you. You gotta have the gotcha moments and the zingers because then you feel like you are winning.

[1bad65]

Hmmmm... No.

I'm done.

You're playing Gotcha! and since I did make an error you can claim another e-victory.

When you want to discuss/debate issues in an intellectually honest manner in lieu of playing Gotcha!, you let me know.

[siablo14]

Thanks, you proved it for me. Much appreciated.

It said there was wiretapping (which your side, including said reporter now denies!!!), but it could not say who was OR WAS NOT the target of the taps.

Trump may have been wiretapped, according to the NY Times.

That's the proof right there. And you somehow found it!!

Next.

It is not clear because they have not been provided with any evidence to say so. Nowhere in that article did it say Trump may have been tapped. You are jumping to that conclusion because the article said: "It's not clear..."

You are jumping to conclusion because you can't grasp a single sentence.

[1bad65]

So you are working with conjecture now?

Um, no.

I went by the source citation provided that YOU quoted.

Again, keep up please. And as I've warned you before, dont use big words you dont understand. You're actually not keeping up with your own posts. (that's a first btw...)

Now, address the part where the NY Times said there was wiretapping, and it could have included Trump himself....

When you catch up, I'll consider answering your questions. But you gotta catch up first, and address my points. It's a two-way street, not keep asking questions of me til I make an error and.... Gotcha!

[siablo14]

Only if I made the assertion Schmidt did deny it.

If I did, cite me doing so.....

It said there was wiretapping (which your side, including said reporter now denies!!!), but it could not say who was OR WAS NOT the target of the taps.

Where did you see "said reporter" denying that Trump's associates being wiretapped?

[siablo14]

Yes.

YOU showed where the article said it was possible, and that there was wiretaps indeed going on. We just dont know who did OR DID NOT get tapped.

Jesus Christ!!! You can't even keep up with your own posts!!!

Jesus Christ!!! And because we don't know who and who were being monitored you just jump assume that Trump was being monitored?

[1bad65]

It is not clear because they have not been provided with any evidence to say so. Nowhere in that article did it say Trump may have been tapped. You are jumping to that conclusion because the article said: "It's not clear..."

You are jumping to conclusion because you can't grasp a single sentence.

LMFAO!!!!

Dude, there was wiretapping! This is beyond dispute.

And the article said they don't know who the targets were.

So it could have been Trump.

So calling him a liar, before the facts come out, is wrong.

Now he MAY be lying, but based on the evidence so far that is nowhere near being proved. Hell, parts of what he said are true, ie the wiretaps themselves. So he's looking good so far, and he's calling for an investigation.

[John Barron]

this high energy guy has been waging total war on obama for the past couple of days. he's been all over the news outlets.

[1bad65]

Jesus Christ!!! And because we don't know who and who were being monitored you just jump assume that Trump was being monitored?

If you mimic me again I'll consider the debate closed and that your concession.

I want a debate opponent, not a ******ed parrot.

[siablo14]

Um, no.

I went by the source citation provided that YOU quoted.

Again, keep up please. And as I've warned you before, dont use big words you dont understand. You're actually not keeping up with your own posts. (that's a first btw...)

Now, address the part where the NY Times said there was wiretapping, and it could have included Trump himself....

When you catch up, I'll consider answering your questions. But you gotta catch up first, and address my points. It's a two-way street, not keep asking questions of me til I make an error and.... Gotcha!

The article did not say Trump may have been wiretapped. Where did you see that? Your poor interpretation skills are showing.