Azalin

With all due respect, I don't believe anything of consequence will happen to CNN. Much of their audience is invested in the same hatred toward the president that CNN has displayed for the last two years. Most viewers that would be turned off by CNN's antics have already tuned them out anyway. I suspect we'll see a heavy dose of continued accusations of Russian collusion designed to assuage their apoplectic viewers.

Tune in early enough to catch Donald Trump jr too.

I'm listening to Glenn Greenwald on Tucker Carlson's show right now, going on about Schiff, Brennan, etc and I would swear that it sounds like he's been following your posts over the last two years.

I was planning to back Cthulhu in 2020, but I realized that's pretty much the same thing.

Fair enough, that's pretty well reasoned out. I've been giving Mueller the benefit of the doubt that he was playing it straight down the middle, but hey - I'm a simple man with simple thoughts.

Okay, I'll give you that.

I was referring to Mueller, but I'll include Barr too. I don't see any advantage for Mueller in releasing the report today at all, let alone if he did so yesterday. With regard to Barr, it would seem to me that it would just be good sense to release the findings as early as possible provided there is no evidence against the president. I don't see how a Friday afternoon release of the findings helps anyone except to buy a little time for the hardcore TDSers to concoct a little more bullsh!t.

You're a narcissistic troll who needs to be the center of attention at all times, but lack the intellectual fortitude to be anything other than a sh!tstain on a message board?

I don't understand what he would have to gain in doing that, especially since he appears to have been both thorough and fair.

This was Mueller who released his findings today; the media at large is just reporting it. Are we to think that Mueller picked today to release his report because it's the Friday afternoon news cycle?

I didn't think you had anything.

Link?

A singular talent and a major influence on many that followed. Rest in peace Mr Dale.

Go ahead and tell him. He's the one that built this page, and he'll tell you the same thing that we are.

The_Dude was not a long-time poster. He came here relatively recently when the BBMB shut down. He said a lot of ignorant $%#^, and he was sent away for it. That said, shut up with the "salt-water-cleansing" bull&%$#. This place is not a sanitized cloister for delicate conversation, but rather a place where one can speak their mind openly, subject only to the TOS regulating the entire site. Of course we're going to get the occasional horse's ass posting here. It's not PPP's fault if hateful idiots post here from time to time, and it's not up to the mods to keep the conversation free of friction. If you see something you dislike or that offends you, engage the person who said it. Do not presume to condescend to the rest of us over things of which you do not approve, especially when the majority of posters have already called out the offending party.

Is that what the kids are calling it nowadays?

You were not warned by a mod for simply stating that humans can not coexist.

Way to miss the point, oh perceptive one. I'm not hung up on you using the word "Haj" to refer to all Muslims (although that's still pretty ignorant). What I am pointing out is how you can somehow turn a thread about the cold-blooded murder of innocent people into yet another critique of all things Muslim.

I'll tell you why you're wrong. You're once again going off on "Haj" like you always do, but this time you're doing so in a discussion about 49 innocent Muslims being murdered simply because they're Muslims. If you can't understand why people might take offense at that, then you're beyond ignorant.

He beat me by seconds. That one never gets old.

It doesn't matter when the constitution was drafted or that the founders believed in a free market economy. Economic principles do not change over time. Your call for greater regulation to fight corporate greed is nothing but a common slogan repeated by people who steadfastly refuse to recognize that the root of much of what plagues corporate America today is found in the already excessive amount of regulation placed upon industry and corporations. There is not a single country now or at any other time that adopted socialist principles over capitalist principles that even comes close to generating the amount of wealth that the United States does, not to mention our status as world leaders in industry and innovation in any field you can think of, while also having the highest standard of living word-wide for our working class and those below the poverty level. No system, no matter how well intended, can provide for everyone in an equal fashion, but free market capitalism has historically generated a higher standard of living across the board than any other economic system ever tried. It's honestly not even debatable.

Let's be realer: no form of socialism will ever have greater representation of the will of the people than will that of a free market, representative republic. If the government hasn't represented the will of the people for a long time, why would you ever want to empower them to the point where they could impose their idea of fairness upon the public in whatever manner they see fit. Contrary to what appears to be a growing opinion among some in the the electorate, the authority required to establish most socialist reforms is not permitted constitutionally in a representative republic.

Absolutely. If you feel badly for them, you don't actually have to do anything to help them. Just empathize and blame republicans.

I suspect they'll react in typical "Chicken Little" fashion, saying that we wouldn't have to resort to such drastic measures if it weren't for big oil and greedy corporate capitalists.

This phenomenon has been recorded before: