nc

You Lib-Tard-O-Rats voted for the Socialist Hit-Ler-Ry, so that proves that there are no sane Demo-Craps left in this world.

it makes no difference who won or lost this election ... as it pertains to this intrusion on our elections

Step away from the KoolAid LOL.

The real story is written here. Hillary would have lost no matter how much money she threw away trying to win.
Trump... A WINNER used to winning, expects to WIN, and MAKES it happen. That's what America voted for.
Trump... once again, finished on time and under budget.

Hillary Clinton and her supporters spent a record $1.2 billion for her losing presidential campaign � twice as much as the winner, Donald Trump, according to the latest records.

The president-elect, who confounded critics during the campaign by saying there was no need to raise or spend $1 billion or more, ended up making do with $600 million.

Clinton's expensive machine tore through $131.8 million in just the final weeks, finishing with about $839,000 on hand as of Nov. 28.

Team Trump spent $94.5 million in the home stretch � from Oct. 20 to Nov. 28 � and had $7.6 million left.

The figures include all spending by the campaigns, PACs and party committees.

At this time What Difference Does it Make.A quote that will last a long time!!

I read it. The real truth is, you NEED it to be true. You need something, anything, to divert from the fact that Hillary was a loser from the get go. The dems should have demanded a better candidate. Instead, they went along with the 'she deserves it' plan and thought sure she had it locked up. She is corrupt, and criminal, and the voters knew it, and said no.

What has also been said about it, is that Russia is ALWAYS involved in our elections. And that's just expected. Not a good thing, but just one more problem to be fixed.
So far, there's no proof about Russia and you know that, but you NEED this, no matter how stupid it makes you look. But hey, there's nothing new about that.

And the voting machines is where it counts, and they are not hooked up to the net.

Believe what you must. The die is cast, and you must live with the results that Americans are just sick to death of the likes of you, and you are finished.

Anyway, Trump is going to be a very, very good, perhaps even GREAT President.
You keep underestimating Trump at your own, and your party's peril.

And the dems are putting Ellison up is another big mistake
And bringing back Pelosie?
You've lost Gov's, Senate, Congress, State legislators by the hundreds, and the White House, and you're making excuses about Russia?

ALL of that is not Russia. All of that is what's wrong with what liberals have done to the DEMOCRAT PARTY.

You and your party are looking in the wrong direction, you should look inward.

https://www.conserva...en-and-now
Commies love The Donald, he is more liberal than Hillary

TNT, better try reading the WAPO article I posted last night, nothing fake about it. The CIA has Trumps number.

https://www.washingt...story.html

Osmosis	Posted 8:26 am, 12/10/2016
Why would the Russians help Trump? It doesn't make sense. Trump will make our military stronger while Hillary would have ruined it.

Good question, simple answer....THEY KNOW THEY CAN MANIPULATE HIM

Why would the Russians help Trump? It doesn't make sense. Trump will make our military stronger while Hillary would have ruined it.

Fake news or not; it still sounds like Mitch the rich's speed; Bandit: Nice idea; unfortunately, bullets are too-good for McConnell & Comey; treat 'em to a slow hanging, instead.

Waste of time, Bill, people like t n t are the reason this country is in grave danger.

Here is the complete article from Washington Post. Note the Post doesn't say there is NO CLEAR EVIDENCE. A republican congressman who is also a member of Trump's transition team does. Somehow, she interprets that to mean the article contradicts itself. And, yeah, she is stupid, and, thinks everybody else is, also.

https://www.washingt...story&

this n that (view profile)	Posted 6:57 am, 12/10/2016
There you go pushing fake news again

That's why it was written that way, to grab the minds of simpleton's like you.
In the post article, what it really says is, "NO CLEAR EVIDENCE'.

"I'll be the first one to come out and point at Russia if there's clear evidence, but there is no clear evidence � even now," said Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.), the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee and a member of the Trump transition team. "There's a lot of innuendo, lots of circumstantial evidence, that's it."

Is that the "NO CLEAR EVIDENCE" part, This n That? What a Repuglican congressman said about it? You're so stupid.

BOO HOO

There you go pushing fake news again.

I know you're down to the bottom of the barrel of excuses of why Hillary lost.
And I know you're brainwashed and easily led, but the article's headline is a farce that you grabbed onto.

That's why it was written that way, to grab the minds of simpleton's like you.
In the post article, what it really says is, "NO CLEAR EVIDENCE'.
Truthfully, it's just more evidence of how gullible you are, or your hope that the ones you want to influence with this will be fooled. Not likely. That level of gullible brainwashing belongs exclusively to you brainwashed liberals.

And as wikileaks exposed a Clinton aids asking Podesta for new ideas on how to "keep you uninformed and compliant".
That's just another way of telling you the Clinton's think their supporters are idiots.

They're right about that.

Can the firing squad still be used for committing treason? It sounds like McConnell and Comey would be good candidates.

http://crooksandliars.com/2...disclosure