ChiGoose
-
Posts
4,583 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by ChiGoose
-
-
3 hours ago, Orlando Tim said:
How was it possible we could do it within 24 hours 100 years ago but can't do it in under two weeks now? Pathetic
Well, we didn’t. That’s why. -
1 minute ago, BillStime said:
I love the idea that you can just decide not to participate in a criminal investigation into your activities. -
2 hours ago, BillsFanNC said:
You stated here on this forum, PPP, that the media simply just got the Hunter laptop story wrong.
Did you not?
But again nice deflection with your out of left field homosexual fantasies that involve me for some reason.
The media got the story wrong.
The talking points from the usual right wing bad faith actors will also likely turn out to be wrong.
The FBI is investigating Hunter and that’s good.
If the GOP House wants to do an actual investigation, that’s good.
If they want a show trial just to try to hurt the President, that’s bad.
Probably 99% of Americans don’t care about this and the fact that it’s even a big talking point is a symptom of the fact that the GOP leadership seems to have succumbed to terminal online brain. That’s likely bad for them when trying to go up against one of the least online people in Joe Biden because the Dem talking points won’t sound like foaming mouth conspiracies from the depths of the internet. That’s good.
I don’t randomly tag people in random threads but apparently you can’t keep me out of your mind. That’s weird. -
2 hours ago, BillsFanNC said:
You know what's also interesting about those 51 intelligence experts who signed the letter?
First, they explicitly state right in the letter that they have absolutely no evidence that the laptop is Russian disinformation. But of course that didn't stop a lying corrupt media from reporting the lie that it was.
Second, many of the letter signers are the very same actors who were on TV constantly promoting the Trump Russia collusion hoax, who then when asked questions under oath, @ChiGoose favorite end all truth pre-requisite, they stated that they had no evidence of Trump Russia collusion.
But don't worry...just mistakes that will be fixed!
Oh hey. You’re still tagging me in random threads because you have a huge crush on me. I get it, I’m pretty awesome. Basically the whole package. But I’m not interested.
No idea what you’re talking about, because just like 99% of Americans, I don’t give a crap about Hunter Biden.
-
1
-
-
9 minutes ago, Over 29 years of fanhood said:
Ok good so there is language specifically allowing religions to recognize, perform or support marriage constitution based on their intrinsic values without penalty or threat of discrimination lawsuits ?
I have not read through the entire bill yet, but my understanding is yes.
More than 40 religious institutions worked with Congress on the bill to ensure religious freedom and it ended up being endorsed by several faiths, including the Mormon Church.
-
1
-
-
14 minutes ago, Over 29 years of fanhood said:
Why can’t people accept that different institutions can have different definitions of marriage.
religious marriage can be defined as between a man and woman both of that religion and approved by whatever authority has domain. That institution should have every right to approve or not approve of unions within the context of their religious community. And it’s up to that religious community to decide how they want to evolve accept or hold rigid in their beliefs.
legal marriage can be defined as a state of partnership between two humans that relates to legal matters like survivorship, tax law that aligns with the majority specific to that topic.
hell a traditional leader of my wife’s family and my families religions would have refused to wed us.
That’s basically what the respect for marriage act does. -
Is the Babylon Bee going to post a joke at some point?
-
29 minutes ago, aristocrat said:
should porn be in schools? Cause those are the books you claim are being bannedFalse
-
55 minutes ago, JaCrispy said:
God bless Glenn Greenwald- A true American journalist, and not an activist masquerading as a journalist…👍
I really appreciate this joke. Had a great laugh, thank you.
-
3 hours ago, JaCrispy said:
2 different NBC reports disagree…because of body cam evidence…
I encourage you to actually read the DoJ filings.
In the meantime, all of this is pretty consistent with an attack on the Pelosi house when Nancy was away and security was probably lighter than usual. We have officers saying either they opened the door or the door was opened. We have DePape himself stating that Pelosi opened the door with one arm while fighting him for the hammer with the other. We have consistent testimony that both Pelosi and DePape were in the foyer (so right by the door) and that when the police entered the picture, thety were wrestling over the hammer and then there was a brief conversation before Pelosi was attacked.
I'm just going to take a second to point out that I nailed the Sussman trial prediction just by looking at the filings, and I can tell you that it is incredibly unlikely that DePape was someone known to the Pelosi's (and definitely not in a romantic relationship with either of them). The facts of this case support the simplest explanation: he was a crazy person who wanted to hurt Nancy Pelosi.
-
1
-
-
Oh look, ad buyers don’t like chaos and poor partnership. Who could have thunk it?
-
2 minutes ago, Chef Jim said:
Quite the leap from what you’ve said above to them wanting them gunned down. But you know that.
Carry on hyperbole boy.
Nah, it’s about the same. The increased violent rhetoric against the LGBT community is designed to drive violence and lone wolf attacks while providing cover for the talking heads.In the end, the goal is the same: to subjugate and even eliminate those who are different.
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, Chef Jim said:
That the GOP want them gunned down in the streets? 🙄You’re in Billy Boy territory. Not a good look.
The GOP is happy with anti-LGBT language, especially anti trans and drag language because it activates people. It generates an emotional reaction and gets people to believe things that aren’t true and also fosters an anti-LGBT environment that may lead to stochastic terrorism.It’s all a big win for the Right. Paint anyone who seems different as “the other” and blame them for everything. Unfortunately, in this case, we are taking about people who are incredibly vulnerable. People will die because of this, but there will always be an excuse for those who pretend to be reasonable supporters of hate.
-
2 minutes ago, Chef Jim said:
You’re on a roll tonight man. Too many beers watching the games?
Nah, just telling it as it is. Some people just can’t understand simple reason and logic. -
“I don’t understand why gay people would support them Dems when decent people like us want them to be gunned down in the streets.”
-The GOP
-
10 minutes ago, Chef Jim said:
Ha! How would the person benefit them by being in drag vs not being in drag? If you don’t know and you blew it by saying it benefits them just say it. Nothing wrong with admitting you made a mistake.
Because it’s a costume. What’s better, some random weeb showing up to do a sing a long with your kid or Dafft Duck showing up to do it? -
1 minute ago, aristocrat said:
ok, so In a previous post you mentioned there was a difference between what the kids see in drag shows at school and what adults see at the clubs. Which is a wild conversation to have to begin with. Yes, any costume can be made sexy on a Halloween night but that’s different. Sexual drag shows happen daily/weekly in any city across the country. Why not the clown or spider man costumes you reference? You see the difference?
I think you are making my point for me. There is a difference between late night shows aimed at adults and daytime shows for kids.
If you have a bunch of people in animal costumes reading to kids, or doing sing a longs, or blowing balloons, do you think that’s the same as a furry convention?
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, Chef Jim said:
And that would beeeee………🤷🏻♂️Honestly? Probably entertaining the kids so that the parents could get a break. Having them read to is probably better than putting them in front of a TV or handing them a phone or tablet.
-
1 minute ago, aristocrat said:
you mentioned earlier about the sexual drag shows for adults which are commonplace. You’ve claimed the kids drag shows compare to clowns and Spider-Man…are there sexual shows featuring these two characters that are commonplace? As in happening on a daily basis?
I honestly do not understand what you are asking. If your asking if there are “sexy” versions of Spider-Man or clowns, I regret to inform you and my internet provider that yes, yes there are.The question I have is: when you see guy in a dress, do you immediately think sex?
-
6 minutes ago, Chef Jim said:
Awesome story bro. Now answer my question. How is it BENEFICIAL to have drag queens read to children?
It’s as beneficial as having anyone in costume read to kids. -
1 minute ago, Chef Jim said:
How is having a drag queen reading to children beneficial?
BTW clowns freaked me the ***** out.
It’s the same as having clowns read to them. It’s weird for some, fine for others.
I never liked clowns and I’m not the biggest fan of drag queens. But to say having a guy in a furry animal suit entertain kids is fine but a guy in a dress entertain kids is somehow pedophilia is just dumb.
-
Just now, aristocrat said:
so because those guys exist it makes it ok? That’s your argument? Hey these guys over there have done inappropriate ***** were allowed to do whatever we want! License to go after kids! What an argument lol. Maybe it’s you that needs to look inside yourself Jesus
Not my argument at all, but reading seems to be an issue for you, so I’ll try to keep this as simple as possible for your elementary school reading comprehension.Drag brunches, reading hours, and other kid-oriented shows are done for the benefit of the kids. They are the same as hiring clowns, Mickey Mouse, or Spider-Man to read to or entertain kids.
The only people making it sexual are the people who see a guy in a dress and immediately think of sexy things. If you see a drag performer and think of sex, that’s on you. It’s no different than seeing some guy in a Spider-Man costume and getting a *****. That’s fine! Love and let live! But don’t project your sexuality on the kids.
-
3 minutes ago, aristocrat said:
That is completely untrue. Go stroll the libs of ticktock feed and get back to me. Your statement is completely false. You cannot even begin to make a claim that what you said is in any way true.
Also, why have drag shows in schools in the first place? People in lingerie in front of kids is appropriate? Come on
“Go check out the account of someone who wants to incite violence and you’ll be convinced they are correct.”Yeah, not a great argument. Maybe go to a drag brunch sometime and see how it actually goes. It’s mostly sing a longs and balloons.
But is you’re really worried about grooming kids for sex, I can tell you all about Dennis Hastert, Jim Jordan, and Matt Gaetz.
-
4 minutes ago, aristocrat said:
See you’re proving the point. At this point in time according to you there is no saying no to that community. Just allowed to do as they please. Appropriate or inappropriate. Put drag shows paid by the government in schools..no problem and if you say that’s inappropriate you’re a bigot. At a certain point you have to have rules don’t you?
See, you’re making a strawman. I said I support the LGBT community and you made a bunch of random assumptions based on that. Maybe look inside yourself to figure out why.
As I’ve stated before, there is a difference between the drag show you would see late at night at a gay bar and a kid-friendly drag brunch. The letter is the same as having a Mickey Mouse brunch or other kids entertainment.
Garland names special counsel for Trump Mar-a-Lago, 2020 election inquiries
in Politics, Polls, and Pundits
Posted
I think it’s more likely than not that he’s indicted on the NARA-Lago case. It’s pretty clear cut. Not sure on the timing though.