BeginnersMind Posted July 28, 2019 Posted July 28, 2019 6 hours ago, Doc Brown said: These were a conglomerate of the national polls after Super Tuesday this year. Of course the sensible superdelegates were going to side with Obama considering how close that primary was. They saw the debates. They saw where the momentum was going. Agreed. The supers saw that the wind had changed and they had a much stronger candidate in the new and inspiring Obama. Did he and his people have to make a lot of calls to move the supers to see that? No doubt.
Wacka Posted July 28, 2019 Posted July 28, 2019 Remember how Obama "won" his Senate seat. He was running against Ryan and he got the divorce papers (which were supposed to be sealed) and used them against Ryan. Jeri Ryan (Seven o fNine) was furious at Obama for spreading their private lives over the airwaves. 1
BeginnersMind Posted July 28, 2019 Posted July 28, 2019 38 minutes ago, Wacka said: Remember how Obama "won" his Senate seat. He was running against Ryan and he got the divorce papers (which were supposed to be sealed) and used them against Ryan. Jeri Ryan (Seven o fNine) was furious at Obama for spreading their private lives over the airwaves. The media got the records unsealed. Obama didn’t get them through some other means. Way back in ought four when the Republicans cared about morality. Ryan wouldn’t have had to even hold a press conference in today’s amoral Republican climate.
DC Tom Posted July 28, 2019 Posted July 28, 2019 1 hour ago, BeginnersMind said: The media got the records unsealed. Obama didn’t get them through some other means. Way back in ought four when the Republicans cared about morality. Ryan wouldn’t have had to even hold a press conference in today’s amoral Republican climate. Yeah, the Chicago Tribune got the records of all Obama's opponents unsealed, but Obama's media consultant - David Axelrod - being an employee of The Trib was entirely coincidental and completely unrelated. Change the names to "Trump" and "Manafort," and that same set of associations is an impeachable offense. 3 1 1
Wacka Posted July 28, 2019 Posted July 28, 2019 Ryan was beating Obama until the divorce stuff came out. wether it was him or DNC dirty tricks, he got in because of typical dim slime tactics.
OldTimeAFLGuy Posted July 28, 2019 Posted July 28, 2019 3 hours ago, Wacka said: Remember how Obama "won" his Senate seat. He was running against Ryan and he got the divorce papers (which were supposed to be sealed) and used them against Ryan. Jeri Ryan (Seven o fNine) was furious at Obama for spreading their private lives over the airwaves. ...well Jr was nothing more than a cardboard cutout propped up by scurrilous ex-Clintonites......and the syndicate ironically adopted a chapter from Nixon's playbook...."always attack....never defend"......will have to find book written about Tricky Dick....
Foxx Posted July 28, 2019 Posted July 28, 2019 (edited) On 7/26/2019 at 6:48 PM, Deranged Rhino said: granted, i am way behind the curve here of the happenings on this last week, specifically the Mueller hearing but.... perhaps i have missed it but i didn't see anyone, anywhere mention what was so obvious to me. that being... Mueller didn't testify, the Democrat Reps on the Judicial and Intelligence committees did. they crafted a narrative by making statements and having Mueller say yes to them. that is not testifying, it is enabling a narrative. he put not one word out there in his own words on the subject of, 'The Mueller Report'. ***** #######s, they think you're stupid. Edited July 28, 2019 by Foxx 6 1
BeginnersMind Posted July 28, 2019 Posted July 28, 2019 34 minutes ago, Foxx said: granted, i am way behind the curve here of the happenings on this last week, specifically the Mueller hearing but.... perhaps i have missed it but i didn't see anyone, anywhere mention what was so obvious to me. that being... Mueller didn't testify, the Democrat Reps on the Judicial and Intelligence committees did. they crafted a narrative by making statements and having Mueller say yes to them. that is not testifying, it is enabling a narrative. he put not one word out there in his own words on the subject of, 'The Mueller Report'. ***** #######s, they think you're stupid. Both sides just used it to grandstand. Mueller didn’t need to be there.
Deranged Rhino Posted July 28, 2019 Posted July 28, 2019 He did need to be there to expose his own shortcomings and that of the probe we were promised by everyone would illuminate all of Trump’s “crimes”. That you want to run from the truth is par for the course for your account(s), BM. 2
Foxx Posted July 28, 2019 Posted July 28, 2019 (edited) 3 minutes ago, BeginnersMind said: ***** off, pissant. Edited July 28, 2019 by Foxx 1
BeginnersMind Posted July 28, 2019 Posted July 28, 2019 Just now, Deranged Rhino said: He did need to be there to expose his own shortcomings and that of the probe we were promised by everyone would illuminate all of Trump’s “crimes”. That you want to run from the truth is par for the course for your account(s), BM. He didn’t say a single thing outside of his report, as he promised. The questioners, and I use that loosely, mostly just made self/serving statements. Ergo, his appearance was bound to be and thankfully was, a nothingburger and not necessary. 2 minutes ago, Foxx said: ***** off, pissant. Day of rest Foxxy. Rest on.
Deranged Rhino Posted July 28, 2019 Posted July 28, 2019 Wrong. His body language, dottering, and lack of understanding of “his” own report were important to see. 3
Foxx Posted July 28, 2019 Posted July 28, 2019 (edited) 7 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: ... His body language, dottering, and lack of understanding of “his” own report were important to see. it would seem rather obvious now that Mueller was nothing more than a useless idiot. one utilized to cover the reality that it really was Weismann's council and the rather obvious fact that it was an excursion to entrap Trump and provide cover for Clinton/Obama. Edited July 28, 2019 by Foxx 3
IDBillzFan Posted July 28, 2019 Posted July 28, 2019 16 hours ago, B-Man said: It must be a ...................................................................................................conspiracy ? He essentially led with the race card. 19 hours ago, Buffalo_Gal said: The guy who won the Senate seat in Illinois and immediately started running for President? Not to mention, HOW he won his Senate seat. Nothing like some unsealed divorce docs to clear the field. When you step back, no one should be surprised how bad a President Obama was. His single accomplishment was giving a good speech. 2
Buffalo_Gal Posted July 28, 2019 Posted July 28, 2019 5 minutes ago, IDBillzFan said: He essentially led with the race card. Not to mention, HOW he won his Senate seat. Nothing like some unsealed divorce docs to clear the field. When you step back, no one should be surprised how bad a President Obama was. His single accomplishment was giving a good speech. From a teleprompter...
SoCal Deek Posted July 28, 2019 Posted July 28, 2019 1 hour ago, Foxx said: it would seem rather obvious now that Mueller was nothing more than a useless idiot. one utilized to cover the reality that it really was Weismann's council and the rather obvious fact that it was an excursion to entrap Trump and provide cover for Clinton/Obama. Clearly correct, but what I don’t get is why then did they come out with No Collusion in Volume One? 1
Deranged Rhino Posted July 28, 2019 Posted July 28, 2019 Just now, SoCal Deek said: Clearly correct, but what I don’t get is why then did they come out with No Collusion in Volume One? Because the evidence wasn’t there to support it, and with the clean out of DOJ and FBI and the USIC during Trumps first two years, there was no one left to cook the books. 2 1
SoCal Deek Posted July 28, 2019 Posted July 28, 2019 1 minute ago, Deranged Rhino said: Because the evidence wasn’t there to support it, and with the clean out of DOJ and FBI and the USIC during Trumps first two years, there was no one left to cook the books. So it all starts unraveling when Struck is fires? And from then on its ‘what can we do to keep this thing going after we’re done’?
Foxx Posted July 28, 2019 Posted July 28, 2019 (edited) 7 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said: Clearly correct, but what I don’t get is why then did they come out with No Collusion in Volume One? more than likely, the dog and pony show is what is important here. in order to find him guilty of conspiracy, as DR pointed out, there would need to be actual evidence and not manufactured hearsay. additionally, if he was found guilty of conspiracy, they would have to actually impeach Trump on the collusion grounds and then that opens that whole ***** show to cross which they can not afford as it would raise questions to the public that they would rather not have put in the forefront. Edited July 28, 2019 by Foxx
SoCal Deek Posted July 28, 2019 Posted July 28, 2019 What a mess! I saw Papadapolis on TV this morning. This all reads like a spy novel! A set up from the beginning orchestrated by guys like Comey who believed they have a ‘higher calling’...as his book is titled.
Recommended Posts