You are not logged in. Please register or login.
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
Re: US Politics Thread
Son, if you knew half of what I know you'd be interesting. But you're not.
There's a lot to be learned by being an impartial observer. You guys quote all these liberal think tanks and in turn accuse anyone that disagrees of quoting conservative sites. Somehow you fail to see the irony in that. There are two sides to every truth you spew. Ignorance is the only tool you have and you utilize it often. Any time one side is always right and the other side is always wrong, you know immediately to dismiss the source. You were dismissed months ago. Carry on with your small band of merry men.
Zzzzzzzz....just more of the same. You simply don't get it.
Point out ONE THING of substance you've brought to this thread...ever.
You take up bandwidth to work through your insecurities and anger. That's it, and that's why everybody has told you that you suck.
Re: US Politics Thread
PaSnow wrote:buzzsaw wrote:There's a lot to be learned by being an impartial observer. You guys quote all these liberal think tanks and in turn accuse anyone that disagrees of quoting conservative sites.
Yes, the liberal news site known as "https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump" posting crazy rants & unfounded libelous accusations.
So if Trump is never found guilty of colluding with Russia, will you be ok with suing all the Democratic congressmen and women who skipped his inauguration saying he worked with Russia to cheat Clinton?
That depends...will you be calling for all the birthers (including Trump himself) for prison time as well?
No...of course you won't....because you were cool with all of this when it started.
- Randall Flagg
- Rep: 139
Re: US Politics Thread
Randall Flagg wrote:PaSnow wrote:Yes, the liberal news site known as "https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump" posting crazy rants & unfounded libelous accusations.
So if Trump is never found guilty of colluding with Russia, will you be ok with suing all the Democratic congressmen and women who skipped his inauguration saying he worked with Russia to cheat Clinton?
That depends...will you be calling for all the birthers (including Trump himself) for prison time as well?
No...of course you won't....because you were cool with all of this when it started.
Yea, because I wasn't a vocal critic of Trump's from the start for this very reason. You can't go back 5 years and find posts from me condemning both the birthers and tea party. That's why I have credibility. I call out the bullshit regardless of party.
Re: US Politics Thread
mitchejw wrote:Randall Flagg wrote:So if Trump is never found guilty of colluding with Russia, will you be ok with suing all the Democratic congressmen and women who skipped his inauguration saying he worked with Russia to cheat Clinton?
That depends...will you be calling for all the birthers (including Trump himself) for prison time as well?
No...of course you won't....because you were cool with all of this when it started.
Yea, because I wasn't a vocal critic of Trump's from the start for this very reason. You can't go back 5 years and find posts from me condemning both the birthers and tea party. That's why I have credibility. I call out the bullshit regardless of party.
That wasn't the question...
Does anyone else see how he does that? I don't know if it's intentional or he is unaware - but very consistently he uses this very subtle argument strategy where the frame of the conversation changes.
It's very subtle...that's why it's effective.
He asks very direct question.
One responds in kind.
Conversation topic shifts.
- Randall Flagg
- Rep: 139
Re: US Politics Thread
Randall Flagg wrote:mitchejw wrote:That depends...will you be calling for all the birthers (including Trump himself) for prison time as well?
No...of course you won't....because you were cool with all of this when it started.
Yea, because I wasn't a vocal critic of Trump's from the start for this very reason. You can't go back 5 years and find posts from me condemning both the birthers and tea party. That's why I have credibility. I call out the bullshit regardless of party.
That wasn't the question...
Does anyone else see how he does that? I don't know if it's intentional or he is unaware - but very consistently he uses this very subtle argument strategy where the frame of the conversation changes.
It's very subtle...that's why it's effective.
He asks very direct question.
One responds in kind.
Conversation topic shifts.
Are you off your meds? You said I was ok with the birther shit. I wasn't. Never have been, and it's the primary reason I didn't vote for Trump.
You repeatedly come in here and post nonsense and things that are demonstrably false. (Your most recent claim on free college costing us less than defense or accusing me with being ok or even supportive of the birther bullshit). Then when called on it, rather than acknowledge you were wrong, you continue on full speed.
If you knew anything about libel laws you'd know the gold standard is a reasonable person would have to believe it to be libelous. Since I linked a study months ago that showed something like 25% of Republicans ever believed it, that means at best 1/8 of the country thought there was merit to it. Probably more like 1/10. So no, obviously a reasonable person wouldn't buy that. But I don't think John (I had my skull cracked 50 years ago and haven't done shit since) Lewis should be penalized with libel. PASnow is the one who brought up libel. Try to keep up with the discussion.
Re: US Politics Thread
I guess my question is this: If there was nothing there. No evidence, no recorded phone calls, no emails, no texts etc... Don't you think the FBI would've just dropped the case? Just let it go, close the books, close the case, nothing there. Do you people honestly think the FBI is just sour over this and pushing and leaking these tidbits with no ultimate big story at the end? Just, 'Well, we did tap into him, he had a few meetings, so THAT looks bad. But no, there's nothing else. That was it."
Like, of course they were wiretapping him at this point. And, with that said, it's pretty certain there will be evidence of something nasty coming out of this. I mean, come on.
- Randall Flagg
- Rep: 139
Re: US Politics Thread
I guess my question is this: If there was nothing there. No evidence, no recorded phone calls, no emails, no texts etc... Don't you think the FBI would've just dropped the case? Just let it go, close the books, close the case, nothing there. Do you people honestly think the FBI is just sour over this and pushing and leaking these tidbits with no ultimate big story at the end? Just, 'Well, we did tap into him, he had a few meetings, so THAT looks bad. But no, there's nothing else. That was it."
Like, of course they were wiretapping him at this point. And, with that said, it's pretty certain there will be evidence of something nasty coming out of this. I mean, come on.
Do you have any evidence of an FBI investigation? Don't you think with all the "leaks" if there was anything of actual value or was damaging other than Session met in public with the Russian ambassador twice, the media would be all over it? Don't you think some Democrat on the Armed Services or Intelligence committees would have come forward?
Instead we get Democrats with no access to intel looking for their 5 minutes of camera time making claims they can't substantiate or are clearly just opinion.
All of your theories require Trump's cabinet and high ranking elected officials to be the worst of humanity. Willing to stick up for a man that they know worked with a foreign government to overturn the US election. And it also requires Democrats to be completely inept and incompetent dipshits so clueless as to what was occurring they were unable to document any of it.
