leh-nerd skin-erd Posted October 19, 2019 Posted October 19, 2019 7 hours ago, Bob in Mich said: Just stop with the coup talk. It is incorrect as well as inflammatory and you know that. As I just pointed out, why would coup leaders be following any rules? They wouldn't. Power is taken without an impeachment process in a real coup. In addition, this current inquiry surrounds Trumps actions in 2019. There are some less stable folks around here, ahem TYTT, that could be convinced this is an actual takeover and so convinced that he needs to gun down his neighbors. one of the more interesting parts of this attempted coup, imo, is how the entrenched govt lifers have convinced the liberal left to kneel at the glory hole of a corrupt big govt. people who for years railed against law enforcement, the military and widespread systemic and institutionalized racism are literally falling over themselves to defend those once labeled the enemy. it’s like they have no sense of what they believe in. you have to give the plotters credit—they know their crowd. When one “scandal” blows up, they simply shine the laser pointer somewhere else and the generally dim-witted lefties follow like Alice The Goon. P***** leads to “the children are more caged than when Obama caged ‘em” leads to Russia No Russia leads to It was never about Russia it was about Obstruction that ain’t obstruction leads to Ukrainamania leads to mental gymnastics of how a liberal VP bragging about withholding aid because his self-destructive and supremely addicted kid can make a few mill to blow on hookers and meth is really the definition of crackerjack governing but a president investigating known corruption is the REAL problem. Bobby I M, I can’t speak for the public schools everywhere, but in WNY in the 70s, we learned there is more than one type of coup. Nixon didn’t send his henchmen to round up he’s enemies, but it sure seems like what he did do got his tit in a ringer. this is a coup. damn you for making me use run on sentences here, Bob. 1 2
Bob in Mich Posted October 19, 2019 Posted October 19, 2019 DR, don't try to squirm out of this after harassing me for pages. You stated that Mueller stated there was zero evidence of a conspiracy and I said there was insufficient evidence to charge. To prove you are exaggerating about this zero evidence of conspiracy claim, I copy the exact words from the Mueller report and then we see your apology....oh Bob, you were right? Nope, just slip sliding. You are the one being dishonest I am afraid pal. There was some evidence of interaction as well as strong evidence of obstruction. A serious person would not cling to a false narrative but we see that DR is not being honest or serious. I like you DR but you need to think for yourself and also be able to admit when you are wrong. Good night
Deranged Rhino Posted October 19, 2019 Posted October 19, 2019 2 minutes ago, Bob in Mich said: DR, don't try to squirm out of this after harassing me for pages. You stated that Mueller stated there was zero evidence of a conspiracy and I said there was insufficient evidence to charge. To prove you are exaggerating about this zero evidence of conspiracy claim, I copy the exact words from the Mueller report and then we see your apology....oh Bob, you were right? Nope, just slip sliding. Bob, I'm not squirming. You're 100% incorrect on this. The facts are with me, not you. I'm also not at all trying to be combative or disrespectful. "Links" between Russians (who aren't really Russians like Mifsud) to Trump's campaign is not evidence of collusion or conspiracy. It's certainly not proof. All it's evidence of is that the world of spooks and diplomats is tiny. Which it is. 3 minutes ago, Bob in Mich said: You are the one being dishonest I am afraid pal. There was some evidence of interaction -- There wasn't though. Not a single American was indicted or charged with anything resembling that. Instead, the evidence shows multiple attempts made by western intelligence officials posing as Russians to entrap team Trump members. Yet... you're silent on that. Why? 5 minutes ago, Bob in Mich said: A serious person would not cling to a false narrative but we see that DR is not being honest or serious. I like you DR but you need to think for yourself and also be able to admit when you are wrong. Good night All this and you still haven't answered the question... in your opinion did Trump collude with the Russians to steal the election? Forget if you can prove it, what do you believe happened?
Bob in Mich Posted October 19, 2019 Posted October 19, 2019 28 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said: one of the more interesting parts of this attempted coup, imo, is how the entrenched govt lifers have convinced the liberal left to kneel at the glory hole of a corrupt big govt. people who for years railed against law enforcement, the military and widespread systemic and institutionalized racism are literally falling over themselves to defend those once labeled the enemy. it’s like they have no sense of what they believe in. you have to give the plotters credit—they know their crowd. When one “scandal” blows up, they simply shine the laser pointer somewhere else and the generally dim-witted lefties follow like Alice The Goon. P***** leads to “the children are more caged than when Obama caged ‘em” leads to Russia No Russia leads to It was never about Russia it was about Obstruction that ain’t obstruction leads to Ukrainamania leads to mental gymnastics of how a liberal VP bragging about withholding aid because his self-destructive and supremely addicted kid can make a few mill to blow on hookers and meth is really the definition of crackerjack governing but a president investigating known corruption is the REAL problem. Bobby I M, I can’t speak for the public schools everywhere, but in WNY in the 70s, we learned there is more than one type of coup. Nixon didn’t send his henchmen to round up he’s enemies, but it sure seems like what he did do got his tit in a ringer. this is a coup. damn you for making me use run on sentences here, Bob. Stop it. You are brighter than this. A coup? That is just not what is happening. What is happening are investigations into Trump's 2019 actions. That is it. Congressional investigations would not be required in a coup. Stop with the exaggerations and the inflammatory words, please.
Bob in Mich Posted October 19, 2019 Posted October 19, 2019 4 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: All this and you still haven't answered the question... in your opinion did Trump collude with the Russians to steal the election? Forget if you can prove it, what do you believe happened? I warned you. bye bye Back to ignore so don't expect any more replies from me. I tried to give you another chance but you just badger and badger. I shouldn't have to answer questions 10 times because you are too dim to recognize a reply. Good Luck with all of your theories. out
Deranged Rhino Posted October 19, 2019 Posted October 19, 2019 (edited) 6 minutes ago, Bob in Mich said: I warned you. bye bye Back to ignore so don't expect any more replies from me. I tried to give you another chance but you just badger and badger. I shouldn't have to answer questions 10 times because you are too dim to recognize a reply. Good Luck with all of your theories. out You're free to do what you want, but you're misreading me if you think it's badgering. And if I missed your answer I apologize but I don't see it. I'm asking what your opinion is because I'm curious where you are now -- not what Mueller said or the BBC. And not what you can prove (I'm not trying to debate the point). I'm curious whether you think Trump worked knowingly with Russia to steal the election. That's not me trying to badger -- it's me trying to understand your position so we can communicate better. That's all. No intent to offend or badger. Edited October 19, 2019 by Deranged Rhino
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted October 19, 2019 Posted October 19, 2019 27 minutes ago, Bob in Mich said: Stop it. You are brighter than this. A coup? That is just not what is happening. What is happening are investigations into Trump's 2019 actions. That is it. Congressional investigations would not be required in a coup. Stop with the exaggerations and the inflammatory words, please. Bob, you go along for the ride if you want, and I take you at your word that you believe what you believe. In the simplest form Bob, the facts are pretty clear. The greatest intelligence gathering agency in the world simply does not miss as badly as it did on the Russia hoax. It defies logic that the opposition party would stumble into unmasking citizens, surveil members of the other party, selectively leak bad Intel through sources in the media, and start the ball rolling on the "Our President is Controlled By Russia!" Hill and have it end the way it did. If they come for the guy that 60m people believed in they better be right. When it was clear they were not, there are only two reasonable altentatives imo: 1. The IC, FBI and Obama admin was so grossly incompetent to have so totally misread the tea leaves and the players in the game that they missed spectacularly on front of the citizenry and is the laughingstock of the world; or 2. The goal was to undo the results of the election through leaks, intimidation, innuendo and a propaganda campaign that would impress Herr Goebels. In the meantime, the "investigation" would stall, impede or paralyze the administration and certainly impact the reputation of the president. 3 years in, the coup failed, though one can argue the damage done impacted the midterms and perhaps the next election. You simply do not imply a president is guilty or treason and "Ah, whoops no bigs" it when proven false. Screw that. 2 1 2
Bob in Mich Posted October 19, 2019 Posted October 19, 2019 8 hours ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said: Bob, you go along for the ride if you want, and I take you at your word that you believe what you believe. In the simplest form Bob, the facts are pretty clear. The greatest intelligence gathering agency in the world simply does not miss as badly as it did on the Russia hoax. It defies logic that the opposition party would stumble into unmasking citizens, surveil members of the other party, selectively leak bad Intel through sources in the media, and start the ball rolling on the "Our President is Controlled By Russia!" Hill and have it end the way it did. If they come for the guy that 60m people believed in they better be right. When it was clear they were not, there are only two reasonable altentatives imo: 1. The IC, FBI and Obama admin was so grossly incompetent to have so totally misread the tea leaves and the players in the game that they missed spectacularly on front of the citizenry and is the laughingstock of the world; or 2. The goal was to undo the results of the election through leaks, intimidation, innuendo and a propaganda campaign that would impress Herr Goebels. In the meantime, the "investigation" would stall, impede or paralyze the administration and certainly impact the reputation of the president. 3 years in, the coup failed, though one can argue the damage done impacted the midterms and perhaps the next election. You simply do not imply a president is guilty or treason and "Ah, whoops no bigs" it when proven false. Screw that. You seemed brighter than this, Lemony Snicket. To me you are getting played by Trump's usual tactics. In addition, you are twisting recalled facts around to fit this coup narrative. For instance recall Comey actually hurt the Clinton campaign down the stretch. If working to get her elected in this super critical situation, why do that? It seems in most people minds that given there were investigations into both candidates at the time, that he might have either said that or said nothing to tilt it. Instead he tilted it in favor of Trump. Where are all these Trump campaign surveillance recordings? I would have thought during the Mueller testimony or really any of the investigations into his admin's wrongdoings, we would have some Congress person or prosecutor type play a surveillance recording. Did I miss that - did that happen ? If the conspirators went to all that trouble to allow them to spy on everybody 'legally', I would think they would have used some as evidence of something somewhere along in this coup attempt. The biggest issue I have is with the conspiracy theorist's ever present shadowy they or them. They seem to be the only one present the whole 3 years. Who are they by name? A 3 year coup is silly but ok, this theory would require continuity of plotters across time. All of the 'bad guys' that supposedly engineered this attempt to keep Trump from office are not in positions of power to engineer anything in 2019. Comey, Clapper, McCabe, Brennan, Strzok, Page, etc supposedly were the plotters. None of them are in any way involved with these 2019 Ukraine accusations or investigations. After the usual denials and required backpedaling, Trump himself and his Chief of Staff have admitted the whole story. It is clear he asked Ukraine and China for campaign help in smearing Biden and Mulvaney admitted the quid pro quo involving the aid. Why all the talking points about lying whistle blower or second hand or partisanship or treasonous informants or Schiff involvement, etc, etc? Why all the stories, the second computer server, changing positions and backpedaling if they weren't all trying to cover this up? Why does anyone go to this much trouble to cover up an action? You may be tired of accusations but these are not the actions of innocent players. The only persons I see involved in both investigations are Congressional players on both sides. If you want to say Schiff, Pelosi, Nadler, and the rest of the Dem politicians are political and don't always represent issues in a fair manner, fine. Obviously, the same goes for the Repubs. Nothing newsworthy there and I have seen no accusations of coup attempts by these folks but correct me if I am wrong. These players have all acted in a political fashion. If you see something coup-like here, please explain. The Trump tactic trio to get out of any accusation against him: 1) Everyone is picking on Donald. Trump always proclaims he is the victim. Hell in the era of 'Me too' he has 20 something women accusers and most here are convinced he is being wronged by every one of those *****. Yes, there has been one accusation after another but those were brought on by Trump, his lying, his associates, their lying, and Trump's often slightly shady ways. Those laser pointers looking for Trump scandals are there looking at every public figure for newsy misdeeds. The fact that they keep finding another scandal when looking at Trump should be the takeaway, not that they are all picking on poor lil Donny. His supporters will admit he lies way too much but inexplicably they will unquestioningly believe his denials to any accusation. 2)The people and the media have short attention spans and easily tire of a story. They can be easily distracted by another shiny object, like the Doral-G7 story for example. He easily moves the story along to the next controversy to protect himself when a story closes in on him. People tire of stories quickly and just want to move on. He uses that. 3) If he repeats a lie enough, the people will believe it. I believe this is Propaganda 101. As example, after the Barr summary Trump and his supporters were over the top with the repeating of 'No Collusion, No Obstruction. Totally Exonerated'. As all later read in the report, that was not truthful but it sure caught on. 1
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted October 19, 2019 Posted October 19, 2019 16 minutes ago, Bob in Mich said: You seemed brighter than this, Lemony Snicket. To me you are getting played by Trump's usual tactics. In addition, you are twisting recalled facts around to fit this coup narrative. For instance recall Comey actually hurt the Clinton campaign down the stretch. If working to get her elected in this super critical situation, why do that? It seems in most people minds that given there were investigations into both candidates at the time, that he might have either said that or said nothing to tilt it. Instead he tilted it in favor of Trump. Where are all these Trump campaign surveillance recordings? I would have thought during the Mueller testimony or really any of the investigations into his admin's wrongdoings, we would have some Congress person or prosecutor type play a surveillance recording. Did I miss that - did that happen ? If the conspirators went to all that trouble to allow them to spy on everybody 'legally', I would think they would have used some as evidence of something somewhere along in this coup attempt. The biggest issue I have is with the conspiracy theorist's ever present shadowy they or them. They seem to be the only one present the whole 3 years. Who are they by name? A 3 year coup is silly but ok, this theory would require continuity of plotters across time. All of the 'bad guys' that supposedly engineered this attempt to keep Trump from office are not in positions of power to engineer anything in 2019. Comey, Clapper, McCabe, Brennan, Strzok, Page, etc supposedly were the plotters. None of them are in any way involved with these 2019 Ukraine accusations or investigations. After the usual denials and required backpedaling, Trump himself and his Chief of Staff have admitted the whole story. It is clear he asked Ukraine and China for campaign help in smearing Biden and Mulvaney admitted the quid pro quo involving the aid. Why all the talking points about lying whistle blower or second hand or partisanship or treasonous informants or Schiff involvement, etc, etc? Why all the stories, the second computer server, changing positions and backpedaling if they weren't all trying to cover this up? Why does anyone go to this much trouble to cover up an action? You may be tired of accusations but these are not the actions of innocent players. The only persons I see involved in both investigations are Congressional players on both sides. If you want to say Schiff, Pelosi, Nadler, and the rest of the Dem politicians are political and don't always represent issues in a fair manner, fine. Obviously, the same goes for the Repubs. Nothing newsworthy there and I have seen no accusations of coup attempts by these folks but correct me if I am wrong. These players have all acted in a political fashion. If you see something coup-like here, please explain. The Trump tactic trio to get out of any accusation against him: 1) Everyone is picking on Donald. Trump always proclaims he is the victim. Hell in the era of 'Me too' he has 20 something women accusers and most here are convinced he is being wronged by every one of those *****. Yes, there has been one accusation after another but those were brought on by Trump, his lying, his associates, their lying, and Trump's often slightly shady ways. Those laser pointers looking for Trump scandals are there looking at every public figure for newsy misdeeds. The fact that they keep finding another scandal when looking at Trump should be the takeaway, not that they are all picking on poor lil Donny. His supporters will admit he lies way too much but inexplicably they will unquestioningly believe his denials to any accusation. 2)The people and the media have short attention spans and easily tire of a story. They can be easily distracted by another shiny object, like the Doral-G7 story for example. He easily moves the story along to the next controversy to protect himself when a story closes in on him. People tire of stories quickly and just want to move on. He uses that. 3) If he repeats a lie enough, the people will believe it. I believe this is Propaganda 101. As example, after the Barr summary Trump and his supporters were over the top with the repeating of 'No Collusion, No Obstruction. Totally Exonerated'. As all later read in the report, that was not truthful but it sure caught on. You’re projecting here Bobby Sherman, teenage heartthrob. Lot’s of words strung together with “well if...” and “why would...” and “comey helped...”. Your faith in the governmental industrial machine is admirable. Suggesting “Comey helped Trump” in the Clinton unforced error(s) where a former Secretary of State was described by her allies as having played fast and loose with national security issues is akin to suggesting Comey helped Trump by investigating Whitey Bulger. She created her mess, she was dismissive of concerns about national security, and exposed her throat to her enemies. I’m in the camp that thinks children of a lesser god, guilty of far lesser crimes, do time and are financially ruined while the heiress apparent walks with a few hurtful words thrown her way. Comey had no choice but to opine here, not to help Trump, but to deal with a very messy situation. In a sense, he was a reluctant ******* here. The players here have access to the most sensitive information in the world. Brennan, Comey et al did not sit back and allow justice to take its course, they advanced a narrative that served the purpose of undermining the results of the election. In a sense, we were promised that the details would follow vindicating these American hero’s just looking out for our democracy. Grossly incompetent or fabricated and death by a thousand paper cuts. If they are the hero’s of your story, so be it. I don’t disagree with some of your characterizations of 45, but everybody has something to critique. 2
Buffalo_Gal Posted October 19, 2019 Posted October 19, 2019 7 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said: You’re projecting here Bobby Sherman, teenage heartthrob. Mmmmm Bobby Sherman ? ? Er, Bob in Mich? Not-so-much. 4
Bob in Mich Posted October 19, 2019 Posted October 19, 2019 (edited) 44 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said: You’re projecting here Bobby Sherman, teenage heartthrob. Lot’s of words strung together with “well if...” and “why would...” and “comey helped...”. Your faith in the governmental industrial machine is admirable. Suggesting “Comey helped Trump” in the Clinton unforced error(s) where a former Secretary of State was described by her allies as having played fast and loose with national security issues is akin to suggesting Comey helped Trump by investigating Whitey Bulger. She created her mess, she was dismissive of concerns about national security, and exposed her throat to her enemies. I’m in the camp that thinks children of a lesser god, guilty of far lesser crimes, do time and are financially ruined while the heiress apparent walks with a few hurtful words thrown her way. Comey had no choice but to opine here, not to help Trump, but to deal with a very messy situation. In a sense, he was a reluctant ******* here. The players here have access to the most sensitive information in the world. Brennan, Comey et al did not sit back and allow justice to take its course, they advanced a narrative that served the purpose of undermining the results of the election. In a sense, we were promised that the details would follow vindicating these American hero’s just looking out for our democracy. Grossly incompetent or fabricated and death by a thousand paper cuts. If they are the hero’s of your story, so be it. I don’t disagree with some of your characterizations of 45, but everybody has something to critique. I think you apparently passed my point in the night. I should have reiterated but was closing in on short story length as it was. The current investigation into the Ukraine issue is not tied to the 2016 players and is no way a coup. I didn't mean to imply Comey wanted to help Trump before the election. I agree he was reluctant in saying anything. Disagreeing with you though in that he certainly did have a choice as whether to publicly raise the Clinton email issue again just before the election. He was pretty much in a damned if you do and damned if you don't situation at that point but he could have just sat on it. I know if I was going to ensure Trump did not get elected, as is needed in the coup tale, I would have sat on it. Finally my point regarding Comey, Clapper and Brennan, etc, wasn't that they are heroes but that they were the, if you believe it, the plotters in the coup. The point is these are no longer players. Perhaps the perceived '3 year long coup' is a series of investigations into a series of questionable actions by this admin. Edit: You didn't really answer my questions. Can you do that please? Where are the surveillance recordings? Who is the 'they' in this coup tale? Why go to so much trouble to cover the Ukraine saga if nothing wrong? Which Congress folks are coup plotters? Edited October 19, 2019 by Bob in Mich
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted October 19, 2019 Posted October 19, 2019 54 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said: Mmmmm Bobby Sherman ? ? Er, Bob in Mich? Not-so-much. You're killing me here. You'd think there would be a lot of Bobisms to use but I've gone through em rather quickly with my friend from Michigan. I almost recycled Bob-Babaran. Where is the honor in that? I'm not bragging here but I used to be compared to Bobby Sherman back in the day, were Bobby Sherman a bit more homely and with literally no talent whatsoever. 3
snafu Posted October 19, 2019 Posted October 19, 2019 6 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said: You're killing me here. You'd think there would be a lot of Bobisms to use but I've gone through em rather quickly with my friend from Michigan. I almost recycled Bob-Babaran. Where is the honor in that? I'm not bragging here but I used to be compared to Bobby Sherman back in the day, were Bobby Sherman a bit more homely and with literally no talent whatsoever. Baby steps, Dr. Marvin. 2
ExiledInIllinois Posted October 19, 2019 Posted October 19, 2019 The Board's darling in 2016: https://q13fox.com/2019/10/18/final-straw-gop-ex-ohio-gov-kasich-supports-impeachment/ Where there is smoke, there's usually fire....
snafu Posted October 19, 2019 Posted October 19, 2019 Just now, ExiledInIllinois said: The Board's darling in 2016: https://q13fox.com/2019/10/18/final-straw-gop-ex-ohio-gov-kasich-supports-impeachment/ Where there is smoke, there's usually fire.... Who set the fire? The way Pelosi and Schiff are running this “investigation” is a burning dumpster. The smoke you see is coming from that. This impeachment imbroglio is a political stunt, nothing more. There’s zero bipartisan support in the House, not because they’re all towing the line but because it is transparently political. The only two people of note that have called for impeachment are R Presidential hopefuls who despise Trump. That’s political, too. John Kasich is a phony butthurt loser. Mitt Romney is a phony spurned once and future neverTrumper. There’s no crime, high or low, there’s no misdemeanor. The blow up is over allegations of Trump getting political dirt on Biden — and in typical hypocritical fashion the impeachment “investigation” is to get political dirt on Trump. The R’s on the house intelligence committee are absolutely right to complain about the way Shiff is handling things, and every Dem should be completely embarrassed, but they’re not because of their hatred for the President and their disdain for anyone who supports him. Trump haters like to put the cart before the horse. It’s happened before (Russia) and it’s happening now. It is obvious. If what Trump did was so Godawful, then why investigate? Put the impeachment to a vote right now. D’s in the house can’t and won’t do that because it doesn’t serve their purpose. I’m no Trump lover, so don’t bother going there. I just see a load of crap going on. I also see that the way this “investigation” is being handled completely erodes our government now and especially in the future. I don’t put it past Republicans to point to these last three years next time there’s a Democrat in the White House. Does nobody see the future when they act today? 1
Buffalo_Gal Posted October 19, 2019 Posted October 19, 2019 14 minutes ago, ExiledInIllinois said: The Board's darling in 2016: https://q13fox.com/2019/10/18/final-straw-gop-ex-ohio-gov-kasich-supports-impeachment/ Where there is smoke, there's usually fire.... Jebus, I cannot imagine that son-of-a-mailman being anyone's favorite. I know the NeverTrumpers love him, but after he smacked Newt around and took his Congressional ball home, I thought everyone knew Kasich was all about Kasich!? On the other hand, the good people of Ohio did elect him governor, so, apparently not. 1
Bob in Mich Posted October 19, 2019 Posted October 19, 2019 Judge Napolitano anyone? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cs5FkaWbI8s 1
ExiledInIllinois Posted October 19, 2019 Posted October 19, 2019 2 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said: Jebus, I cannot imagine that son-of-a-mailman being anyone's favorite. I know the NeverTrumpers love him, but after he smacked Newt around and took his Congressional ball home, I thought everyone knew Kasich was all about Kasich!? On the other hand, the good people of Ohio did elect him governor, so, apparently not. The son of a slum lord is more appealing? Kinda shows where the righteous one's in this country's moral compass is. And yes... I realize David Berkowitz worked with the USPS. Don't all the crazies? Ut oh... Gotta go... I hear @Howard 's walker coming down the hall. I keep telling him: "Use tennis balls!" 1 minute ago, Bob in Mich said: Judge Napolitano anyone? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cs5FkaWbI8s It's what businessman bring to the game. Illinois prisons have been littered with businessman turned "politician."
Buffalo_Gal Posted October 19, 2019 Posted October 19, 2019 11 minutes ago, ExiledInIllinois said: The son of a slum lord is more appealing? Kinda shows where the righteous one's in this country's moral compass is. And yes... I realize David Berkowitz worked with the USPS. Don't all the crazies? Ut oh... Gotta go... I hear @Howard 's walker coming down the hall. I keep telling him: "Use tennis balls!" Well, that quickly escalated to . 1
ExiledInIllinois Posted October 19, 2019 Posted October 19, 2019 1 minute ago, Buffalo_Gal said: Well, that quickly escalated to . What'd you expect? ?
Recommended Posts