Foxx

a rare moment of clarity from the propagandists. https://twitter.com/SteveGuest/status/1203011598329270272

one does not comport with the other.

it's only a matter of time before defenses catch up with Lamar and the Ravens offense. would be nice to see the beginnings of it come this Sunday. that type of offense has never worked in the NFL for long.

ummm.... because they're honest and want simple facts out there for $.02, Alex?

just how dense are you? it was a presumption. presumptions are not fact, they are opinions.

no. never said Sondland was a liar. you have to take what he said in context and what he said in context was that it was his presumption. presumptions are not, in any way, shape or form, evidence of fact.

glad you agree that neither the Russian collusion happened and that Sondland made up the quid pro quo.

whether she's morally correct is debatable.

:facepalm: https://twitter.com/FineWineDrinker/status/1202770783212314624

just wait till drones begin delivering begin delivering these packages in earnest. you'll be lucky to find them in your front lawn.

https://twitter.com/ChadPergram/status/1202711661305647104

we are doomed. what is this basket i'm in and why is it getting so hot?

well, at least this news is only, 'DEVELOPING'... https://twitter.com/paulsperry_/status/1202690714494259215

https://twitter.com/RealSaavedra/status/1202696969551921152

my fault TYTT. i should have let it slide but i couldn't let his attempt to smear me with his pedophilia obsession go by without some sort of defense.

right, two thirds of the complete Senate are needed to convict. however.... there is a little known loophole here that not too many are aware of. only two thirds of senators in attendance at the vote is required to convict. thus, 67 is not the immovable object everyone might think. if only 75 Senators show up to vote, a mere 50 votes are required to convict. not that i think that will/would happen but, i do have a severe distrust of all things elite so....

so, knowing that you understand this... why are you so ***** in the head about it? not one iota of incorrectness in my summary, not one. piss off.

apparently you need every little thing spelled out for you. my gosh, you are obtuse. the very first sentence of my post in question was thus; "here, i'll show you what being jerky looks like... you know, just so you can get a 'shoe on the other foot perspective'." you were the one being a douche so i turned it around on you to show you how you were being a douche and i'm one at fault here.....mmmmkay, whatever you say, your obtuseness.

again, i know this will be lost upon you but on the off chance that it will register one little iota.... it is not DR's responsibility to rid this community of anyone and, unfortunately... this includes you. you seem to have a severe disconnect between what one is entitled to do and what one is required to do. if you truly are a lawyer, universe help your clients.

reading. comprehension. you do understand what a question mark at the end of a sentence infers, right? again, piss off you worthless feck.

reading comprehension is your friend, you feck. now piss off.

thanks. was it before my time that he was outed as being a pedo? because i certainly do not remember any postings of his that would have lent any validity to that. regardless, JA is just being a complete feck here.

you really are that obtuse, aren't you.

i still have no idea who the ***** you are referring to here, hence why i asked you to link to it back when i did. i have no desire to make your PM to me public. you apparently missed the point i was making there as well. are you really that obtuse? oh, but it is essentially what i said.

good gosh man, open your eyes. under what pretense do you think our standing is being undermined on the world stage? it wouldn't be because the Dems are shouting from the roof tops that, 'just wait till we remove him from office, then we can put things back to where they were ...' would it?