B-Man Posted March 2, 2018 Posted March 2, 2018 2 minutes ago, Nanker said: We've heard so much about the FISA court judges were all Republicans... The only Republican on the FISA court was Robert B. Kugler who was appointed by Trump in May of 2017 and he replaced the Republican appointed Marty Feldman, whom I've always thought looked a little strange. It's pronounced "Moor-tee".......................... . 2
3rdnlng Posted March 2, 2018 Posted March 2, 2018 6 minutes ago, Nanker said: We've heard so much about the FISA court judges were all Republicans... The only Republican on the FISA court was Robert B. Kugler who was appointed by Trump in May of 2017 and he replaced the Republican appointed Marty Feldman, whom I've always thought looked a little strange. Dr. Frederick Frankenstein: [to Igor] Now that brain that you gave me. Was it Hans Delbruck's? Igor: [pause, then] No. Dr. Frederick Frankenstein: Ah! Very good. Would you mind telling me whose brain I DID put in? Igor: Then you won't be angry? Dr. Frederick Frankenstein: I will NOT be angry. Igor: Gator someone. Dr. Frederick Frankenstein: [pause, then] Gator someone. Gator who? Igor: Gator Abby... Normal. Dr. Frederick Frankenstein: [pause, then] Gator Abby Normal? Igor: I'm almost sure that was the name. Dr. Frederick Frankenstein: [chuckles, then] Are you saying that I put an abnormal brain into a seven and a half foot long, fifty-four inch wide GORILLA? [grabs Igor and starts throttling him] Dr. Frederick Frankenstein: Is that what you're telling me? 2
B-Man Posted March 2, 2018 Posted March 2, 2018 "Mueller is either nuts, or desperate to get Trump" Report: Mueller’s investigation takes a bizarre turn by Paul Mirengoff Original Article The Washington Post reports that Robert Mueller is investigating President Trump’s “private comments and state of mind” during the period when he issued a series of tweets belittling Attorney General Jeff Sessions. According to the Post, the thrust of Mueller’s inquiry is to determine whether the president’s goal was to oust Sessions in order to pick a replacement who would exercise control over Mueller’s investigation. If this story is true, it demonstrates why the nation needs someone in the Justice Department to exercise control over Mueller’s investigation. .
Nanker Posted March 2, 2018 Posted March 2, 2018 So, you're placing me under arrest for the future firings of Rex Tillerson, Jeff Sessions, and Robert Mueller? 1
DC Tom Posted March 2, 2018 Posted March 2, 2018 24 minutes ago, B-Man said: "Mueller is either nuts, or desperate to get Trump" Report: Mueller’s investigation takes a bizarre turn by Paul Mirengoff Original Article The Washington Post reports that Robert Mueller is investigating President Trump’s “private comments and state of mind” during the period when he issued a series of tweets belittling Attorney General Jeff Sessions. According to the Post, the thrust of Mueller’s inquiry is to determine whether the president’s goal was to oust Sessions in order to pick a replacement who would exercise control over Mueller’s investigation. If this story is true, it demonstrates why the nation needs someone in the Justice Department to exercise control over Mueller’s investigation. . "We don't have a criminal activity...but we might have mens rea, so..." Literally investigating a thought crime. 1
Nanker Posted March 2, 2018 Posted March 2, 2018 If thoughts are outlawed, only criminals will have thoughts.
Azalin Posted March 2, 2018 Posted March 2, 2018 3 minutes ago, Nanker said: If thoughts are outlawed, only criminals will have thoughts. Well, if that ever happens I know a few around here that will never be criminals. 2
Warren Zevon Posted March 2, 2018 Posted March 2, 2018 1 minute ago, Azalin said: Well, if that ever happens I know a few around here that will never be criminals. Right - just like Boy Man here. I've never seen him post on here without a link attached. 46 minutes ago, B-Man said: "Mueller is either nuts, or desperate to get Trump" Report: Mueller’s investigation takes a bizarre turn by Paul Mirengoff Original Article The Washington Post reports that Robert Mueller is investigating President Trump’s “private comments and state of mind” during the period when he issued a series of tweets belittling Attorney General Jeff Sessions. According to the Post, the thrust of Mueller’s inquiry is to determine whether the president’s goal was to oust Sessions in order to pick a replacement who would exercise control over Mueller’s investigation. If this story is true, it demonstrates why the nation needs someone in the Justice Department to exercise control over Mueller’s investigation. .
Doc Posted March 2, 2018 Posted March 2, 2018 2 hours ago, B-Man said: No.........................don't you understand ? In the small (and closed) minds of lemmings like Gator and others, The Donald's routine blowhard remarks to the press, at the height of the Clinton e-mail scandal, somehow proves that he was "colluding". While to anyone with a greater than 100 IQ, it was just another example of his campaign bluster. No, I know what he was saying. And it's dumb to think that The Donald would be colluding with them in private and then imploring them in public. I just want to know what was on those emails. I suspect even Dems know that they were incriminating.
Azalin Posted March 2, 2018 Posted March 2, 2018 1 minute ago, garybusey said: Right - just like Boy Man here. I've never seen him post on here without a link attached. B-Man posts links to articles relevant to the discussion. He keeps any follow-up opinion short & to the point. Why is that worthy of ridicule?
Warren Zevon Posted March 2, 2018 Posted March 2, 2018 23 minutes ago, Nanker said: If thoughts are outlawed, only criminals will have thoughts. 19 minutes ago, Azalin said: Well, if that ever happens I know a few around here that will never be criminals.
LA Grant Posted March 2, 2018 Posted March 2, 2018 14 minutes ago, Azalin said: B-Man posts links to articles relevant to the discussion. He keeps any follow-up opinion short & to the point. Why is that worthy of ridicule? Because the links are almost always to memes and incredibly dubious sources? That's worth ridiculing. 1
DC Tom Posted March 2, 2018 Posted March 2, 2018 28 minutes ago, garybusey said: Right - just like Boy Man here. I've never seen him post on here without a link attached. B-Man is a conservative news aggregator, and doesn't pretend otherwise. You may not like it, but he's honest and above-board about it.
Doc Brown Posted March 2, 2018 Posted March 2, 2018 7 hours ago, LA Grant said: Hi! 100% of what you just babbled is tribal lunacy. You even managed to end on "Hillary." Tribal. Lunacy. Don't know you at all but I can tell you with certainty that you are a sucker to defend the NRA. They're not defending you and they're not defending our rights. You're kidding yourself if you think it's about anything other than money. Since you put the !!! for "mental health," let's be clear that it's not some impossible problem with no solution. Universal health care. Single payer. Higher taxes. Easy. Done. The reason it's an impossible solution is, oh right, you don't like that either, do you? So then I guess it's... nothing? Yeah. Nothing. We have laws against drunk driving. Specifically because of those laws, drunk driving rates have gone down. Regulation works. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/12/30/drunken-driving-rate-falls-to-new-low-federal-data-show/?utm_term=.1ac37c81c7b9 I voted for Hillary so your tribalism argument wouldn't apply in this situation. UHC and single payer are pretty much the same thing. The right to drink alcohol isn't in the bill of rights. It's just not worth arguing with you as you seem to be fixated on the NRA and Russia and nothing I say will change your mind.
3rdnlng Posted March 2, 2018 Posted March 2, 2018 5 minutes ago, Doc Brown said: I voted for Hillary so your tribalism argument wouldn't apply in this situation. UHC and single payer are pretty much the same thing. The right to drink alcohol isn't in the bill of rights. It's just not worth arguing with you as you seem to be fixated on the NRA and Russia and nothing I say will change your mind. Doc, would you vote for Hillary now, knowing what you do?
Doc Brown Posted March 2, 2018 Posted March 2, 2018 4 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said: Doc, would you vote for Hillary now, knowing what you do? No. I would have voted for an Independent and then Democrat on the down ticket. I was too worried about health care at the time and I thought the first thing the Republicans would do would repeal the ACA like they said they would over and over again. Hillary losing may actually be a good thing for the Democratic Party long term if these politicians can get over their Trump Derangement Syndrome and regain their critical thinking skills. I'll admit that it was funny to me seeing people cry on election night when Hillary lost.
row_33 Posted March 2, 2018 Posted March 2, 2018 18 minutes ago, Doc Brown said: No. I would have voted for an Independent and then Democrat on the down ticket. I was too worried about health care at the time and I thought the first thing the Republicans would do would repeal the ACA like they said they would over and over again. Hillary losing may actually be a good thing for the Democratic Party long term if these politicians can get over their Trump Derangement Syndrome and regain their critical thinking skills. I'll admit that it was funny to me seeing people cry on election night when Hillary lost. Can you get "the others" to show even 1% of your common sense and practicality on here? 1
LA Grant Posted March 2, 2018 Posted March 2, 2018 30 minutes ago, Doc Brown said: No. I would have voted for an Independent and then Democrat on the down ticket. I was too worried about health care at the time and I thought the first thing the Republicans would do would repeal the ACA like they said they would over and over again. Hillary losing may actually be a good thing for the Democratic Party long term if these politicians can get over their Trump Derangement Syndrome and regain their critical thinking skills. I'll admit that it was funny to me seeing people cry on election night when Hillary lost. A lot of the centrist establishment Democrats aren't learning anything from Hillary losing, unfortunately. They see the loss as solely the fault of the Russian interference, rather than her being a flawed candidate running a flawed campaign. Of course, all of these can be true, there's more than one factor at play. To the left, Hillary's main offense is that she is politically more of a Republican except for one or two issues (or rather, what a Republican used to be). Her main offense to the reactionary right (ever since she was merely a First Lady w/ ambition) was in being a mouthy woman they don't want to f***
Azalin Posted March 2, 2018 Posted March 2, 2018 1 hour ago, LA Grant said: Because the links are almost always to memes and incredibly dubious sources? That's worth ridiculing. They're links to decidedly right-leaning sources, and he makes no bones about that. If you think that's worth ridicule, then you're too juvenile to waste time with.
Prickly Pete Posted March 2, 2018 Posted March 2, 2018 14 minutes ago, LA Grant said: A lot of the centrist establishment Democrats aren't learning anything from Hillary losing, unfortunately. They see the loss as solely the fault of the Russian interference, rather than her being a flawed candidate running a flawed campaign. Of course, all of these can be true, there's more than one factor at play. To the left, Hillary's main offense is that she is politically more of a Republican except for one or two issues (or rather, what a Republican used to be). Her main offense to the reactionary right (ever since she was merely a First Lady w/ ambition) was in being a mouthy woman they don't want to f*** Snap! You go girl!
Recommended Posts