OFFICIAL: Donald Trump thread.

[jaded]

Neither of the two NYT links that we are discussing denied that there was wiretapps? But you keep saying that, so prove that claim that you keep making.

Well they (NY Times) said on March 4th there is 'no evidence' implying that it is unfounded after having already reported...

...in the January 20th edition that 'Wire tap used in inquiry of Trump aides'.

[BM dnobagaV]

[siablo14]

Well they (NY Times) said on March 4th there is 'no evidence' implying that it is unfounded after having already reported...

...in the January 20th edition that 'Wire tap used in inquiry of Trump aides'.

No read it again. Trump, offering no evidence,...
That is factual. Trump has offered no evidence. I don't know why they ignored "offering" but when you ignore offering you are changing the mean of that title.

[jaded]

No read it again. Trump, offering no evidence,...
That is factual. Trump has offered no evidence. I don't know why they ignored "offering" but when you ignore offering you are changing the mean of that title.

You are missing the point here or purposely ignoring it...they are making a story out of Trump not offering evidence when in fact they already made a story of the evidence...and so your argument is as moot...as was the NY Times for doing so.

[1bad65]

That's conjecture.

Yes, but it wasn't me doing the conjecture!!!

It was the NYT doing the conjecture you idiot.

THEY speculated that Trump was a POSSIBLE target, then they said there was no proof he was targeted. That's the CONTRADICTION that I pointed out ****ing days ago that you won't accept.

There, I'm done.

Claim your e-win and move the **** on.

[1bad65]

You are missing the point here or purposely ignoring it...they are making a story out of Trump not offering evidence when in fact they already made a story of the evidence...and so your argument is as moot...as was the NY Times for doing so.

Bingo!!!!

That's it exactly!

As I said before, either he's ******ed and he cant get it, or he's being obtuse because hes a superfan and cant accept fault from the press outlet on his team.

[1bad65]

Thank God a third party gets it. As I said, my goal was to debate SafeSpace and then those on the fence could watch our debate and decide for themselves. The first 3rd party to chime in saw my point.

Like I said, you'll never get certain folks like SafeSpace to ever concede a point. It's impossible and I accept that. I'm here so those independent minded folks can see an open debate and decide for themselves who presented the better case. In this instance, the 3rd party sided with my argument and he even cited more sources buttressing my point!!

Mission accomplished.

[BERNIE'S CORNER]

[Left Hook Tua]

[Left Hook Tua]