RUSSIAN COLLUSION

[Packerman]

If in doubt say Russian collusion, saves defending your argument or answering a question, unfortunately its boring and sad but its Glueys only sniff at any sort of victory in 6 years and the word victory is very loose in this context

[SLUDGE FACTORY]

Re: RUSSIAN COLLUSION

If in doubt say Russian collusion, saves defending your argument or answering a question, unfortunately its boring and sad but its Glueys only sniff at any sort of victory in 6 years and the word victory is very loose in this context

Lost

Can you fill me in ?

If you will pardon the expression

[Wales-Bales]

Re: RUSSIAN COLLUSION

What's up with the caps? :hehe:

[life on mars]

Re: RUSSIAN COLLUSION

Russian Collusion there I said it, what happens next ?

[Wales-Bales]

Re: RUSSIAN COLLUSION

Russian Collusion there I said it, what happens next ?

Nothing, so don't expect any apologies from Lardy & Cyril for leading everybody astray :hehe:

[jon1959]

Re: RUSSIAN COLLUSION

If in doubt say Russian collusion, saves defending your argument or answering a question, unfortunately its boring and sad but its Glueys only sniff at any sort of victory in 6 years and the word victory is very loose in this context

What victory?

Gluey and his small band of followers shout ‘Russian collusion’ as if it was some modern form of abracadabra!

I can’t remember what Cyril and Gluey posted on this over 6 years of more. I don’t think I ever commented until Gluey started hyperventilating. But my take is that there is a shedload of evidence of collaboration and shared interest between the Trump gang and Putin’s Russia - just not enough evidence of the right type to justify the specific US legal definition of criminal collusion. In its non-legal usage the term collusion seems to be totally appropriate to me.

I don’t know if I’m in a minority of one on that - but if so I’m happy to carry that torch!

[the other bob wilson]

Re: RUSSIAN COLLUSION

What victory?

Gluey and his small band of followers shout ‘Russian collusion’ as if it was some modern form of abracadabra!

I can’t remember what Cyril and Gluey posted on this over 6 years of more. I don’t think I ever commented until Gluey started hyperventilating. But my take is that there is a shedload of evidence of collaboration and shared interest between the Trump gang and Putin’s Russia - just not enough evidence of the right type to justify the specific US legal definition of criminal collusion. In its non-legal usage the term collusion seems to be totally appropriate to me.

I don’t know if I’m in a minority of one on that - but if so I’m happy to carry that torch!

I’ll give you a hand Jon, perfectly summed up I’d say.

[life on mars]

Re: RUSSIAN COLLUSION

I’ll give you a hand Jon, perfectly summed up I’d say.

Due you play and sing the red flag whilst your posting these days https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sHoyoKgRq5U

[life on mars]

Re: RUSSIAN COLLUSION

Nothing, so don't expect any apologies from Lardy & Cyril for leading everybody astray :hehe:

Bugger , I have to say the Cyril / Lardy caring axis is critical for free speech and exchange of views ... they will be telling us next that the Labour Party can run a country ..