Buffalo_Gal Posted October 19, 2019 Posted October 19, 2019 Just now, ExiledInIllinois said: What'd you expect? ? Good point. I will stop responding to you. 1 1
ExiledInIllinois Posted October 19, 2019 Posted October 19, 2019 1 minute ago, Buffalo_Gal said: Good point. I will stop responding to you. Come on... Don't "Snowflake out." It's unbecoming. I mean really... Are we ever going to agree on these issues. We are completely different people... Differ views, different outlook, different everything! LoL... Stop white knuckling people into your own world view. I will try the same. 1
OldTimeAFLGuy Posted October 19, 2019 Posted October 19, 2019 27 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. .....Kasich bears the SAME "scorned battle scars" as Smitten Mitt.......BOTH thought they had "it" and it never happened.......and neither can get past it....... 1
Bob in Mich Posted October 19, 2019 Posted October 19, 2019 Is it even possible for anyone credible to criticize Trump? If so, who? I ask because it seems anyone that does is then by definition, a lying loser with no credibility.
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted October 19, 2019 Posted October 19, 2019 1 hour ago, Bob in Mich said: 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? Questions first: I know of no recordings where Brennan, Comey, Obama and Clinton spoke to a guy with a camear/microphone in a lapel pin and stated "So we all agree this is a coup, right?". On the other hand I never actually saw Ted Bundy murder a co-ed but believe that he did. You might require that, I see life as a bit more complicated. As for who is "they", I would suggest it's the left leaning wing of the democratic party. In this category goes Barrack Obama, Clinton Inc, Brennan, Comey and the money that funds the effort behind the scenes. The behind the scenes folks are harder to identify, but I'd primarily look at wealthy families that benefit on the March toward globalism--people like Bill Gates, Eric Schmidt, George Soros and so on. I would also look at foreign governments, and I've never been quite up to date on why planeloads of cash were sent to the middle east. Unless I'm mistaken, when I deposit $10k in cash into my bank account, all sorts of red flags are raised but maybe that's just me. I believe that the reasons for participation range from idealistic thoughts of a global government, to those who fundamentally believe they are right and everyone else is misguided to people who just don't like Trump. I don't understand your theory about "going to so much trouble on Ukraine" so I can't answer that question. I will say, however that it seems like the libs are trying to squeeze a battleship through a keyhole on the political diff between Biden as VP and Trump acting as president, but the mantra is the same: Trump is betraying our country and doing things never done before. I think it's a least common denominator argument for simpletons, but it seems to work. As for members of Congress, I'll answer a question with a question. How satisfied have you been with the evidence that Trump colluded with the Russians and is acting in simpatico with Vlad The Cad Putin, evidence brought into the light of day that is clear and obvious to all who would have upon it? Let's go with Shiff, Castro, Swallowell, Harris, Schumer, Sanders and Pelosi. Let's also go with the evidence documented and scrutinized from Brennan in his role as former CIA director. We can include Mueller as director of the FBI-KGB division who opted, oddly, not to exonerate Trump after 3 years and 30m dollars worth of door kicking and leg breaking with no other directive than to "find something". I'd add the additional members of Congress on the IC are complicit in that have access to all the material and allow this travesty to continue. I thought Muellers testimony revealed him to be a disintereted and uncomfortable hack who showed signs of dementia. Then again, maybe it was just a big misunderstanding. Questions for you: Using the Kavanaugh nomination as a microcosm of the current political climate, what are your thoughts on: Since it seems clear you're not a Trump fan, what are your thoughts on the nomination proceedings of Brett Kavanaugh? My assumption here is you would have preferred another justice, and if so, how did the nature/to be and questioning strike you? Can we desire something more than what we got as Americans, given the nature of the questions aand the tone with which they were asked? Given the totality of evidence presented against Kavanaugh by the liberal wing of the dem party, would it be fair to say that the intent was to destroy him personally, politically and financially and brand him as a serial rapist? Two more: Do you believe people like Harris, Booker and Blumenthal would have been disappointed if a person with mental health issues resolved the need for further hearings by taking the justice out of the equation, or might that have justified the means with which they attacked him? Finally, was Kavanaugh wrong to defend himself in the manner that he did? Should he have been confirmed to the sC in light of everything you have seen? 1
Bob in Mich Posted October 19, 2019 Posted October 19, 2019 13 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said: Questions first: I know of no recordings where Brennan, Comey, Obama and Clinton spoke to a guy with a camear/microphone in a lapel pin and stated "So we all agree this is a coup, right?". No, I was talking about all the supposed spying done by the plotters on the Trump campaign. That was a big part of the coup narrative - Trump campaign was spied on. Where are those recordings? On the other hand I never actually saw Ted Bundy murder a co-ed but believe that he did. You might require that, I see life as a bit more complicated. As for who is "they", I would suggest it's the left leaning wing of the democratic party. In this category goes Barrack Obama, Clinton Inc, Brennan, Comey and the money that funds the effort behind the scenes. The behind the scenes folks are harder to identify, but I'd primarily look at wealthy families that benefit on the March toward globalism--people like Bill Gates, Eric Schmidt, George Soros and so on. I would also look at foreign governments, and I've never been quite up to date on why planeloads of cash were sent to the middle east. Unless I'm mistaken, when I deposit $10k in cash into my bank account, all sorts of red flags are raised but maybe that's just me. As you know, the Iran Nuclear deal included returning Iran's frozen funds from 1979. The idea, whether you think possible or not, was to try to reintegrate Iran into the world of normal countries. They were not tied into the banking system, I think due to sanctions, so the returned money had to be done in cash. So the 'they' are making Trump and Mulvaney do what they are doing? I believe that the reasons for participation range from idealistic thoughts of a global government, to those who fundamentally believe they are right and everyone else is misguided to people who just don't like Trump. I don't understand your theory about "going to so much trouble on Ukraine" so I can't answer that question. I will say, however that it seems like the libs are trying to squeeze a battleship through a keyhole on the political diff between Biden as VP and Trump acting as president, but the mantra is the same: Trump is betraying our country and doing things never done before. I think it's a least common denominator argument for simpletons, but it seems to work. All the lying, backpedaling on the cover story, whistleblower criticisms, text msgs, second server, etc. Why were so many people trying to work to hide the truth? As for members of Congress, I'll answer a question with a question. How satisfied have you been with the evidence that Trump colluded with the Russians and is acting in simpatico with Vlad The Cad Putin, evidence brought into the light of day that is clear and obvious to all who would have upon it? Let's go with Shiff, Castro, Swallowell, Harris, Schumer, Sanders and Pelosi. Let's also go with the evidence documented and scrutinized from Brennan in his role as former CIA director. I was satisfied with Mueller's conclusions that there were improper contacts and lies about those Russian contacts, but that the campaign did not orchestrate the theft of emails and there was insufficient evidence to bring any conspiracy charges. I think Barr protected Trump in the manner in which he summarized and released the Mueller report. A different presentation could have resulted in more focus on the obstruction and thus could have gone worse for Trump. He was fortunate that AG Barr seems to believe a sitting President is above the law. We can include Mueller as director of the FBI-KGB division who opted, oddly, not to exonerate Trump after 3 years and 30m dollars worth of door kicking and leg breaking with no other directive than to "find something". I'd add the additional members of Congress on the IC are complicit in that have access to all the material and allow this travesty to continue. I thought Muellers testimony revealed him to be a disintereted and uncomfortable hack who showed signs of dementia. The Mueller investigation did have side rails. Many issues were spun off. I hope those are still underway but I fear that Barr again may step in to protect Trump Then again, maybe it was just a big misunderstanding. Questions for you: Using the Kavanaugh nomination as a microcosm of the current political climate, what are your thoughts on: Look Sonny Liston, I appreciate you taking the time to engage on the Trump issues. I am far less familiar with the Kavanaugh tale and really don't wish to get into it in any depth. Sorry but this will be pretty brief. At the time I recall seeing a super partisan hearing. The Repubs were very angry that Brett was being smeared for what they said was no reason. I recall too that there were accusations that I thought should be investigated. Recall this hearing was for someone to sit in judgement over our societal issues and a lifetime appointment at that. I did not understand the need to have the investigations wrapped up because of time constraints. Why were time constraints for investigations put in place? It seems one investigates issues this serious until there are no further witnesses to interview. So, in summary a highly partisan affair with accusations flying on both sides and a bystander not really able to determine what was worth looking into and what wasn't. I personally thought some of Brett's answers were untruthful...under oath, but those were his college days so pretty hard to dispute or investigate. 13 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said: Since it seems clear you're not a Trump fan, what are your thoughts on the nomination proceedings of Brett Kavanaugh? My assumption here is you would have preferred another justice, and if so, how did the nature/to be and questioning strike you? Can we desire something more than what we got as Americans, given the nature of the questions aand the tone with which they were asked? Given the totality of evidence presented against Kavanaugh by the liberal wing of the dem party, would it be fair to say that the intent was to destroy him personally, politically and financially and brand him as a serial rapist? Two more: Do you believe people like Harris, Booker and Blumenthal would have been disappointed if a person with mental health issues resolved the need for further hearings by taking the justice out of the equation, or might that have justified the means with which they attacked him? Finally, was Kavanaugh wrong to defend himself in the manner that he did? Should he have been confirmed to the sC in light of everything you have seen?
3rdnlng Posted October 19, 2019 Posted October 19, 2019 1 hour ago, Bob in Mich said: As you know, the Iran Nuclear deal included returning Iran's frozen funds from 1979. The idea, whether you think possible or not, was to try to reintegrate Iran into the world of normal countries. They were not tied into the banking system, I think due to sanctions, so the returned money had to be done in cash. So the 'they' are making Trump and Mulvaney do what they are doing? Not exactly correct. Cash, in foreign currency was bundled on pallets and put on planes and went somewhere (Iraq or wherever). That amount was approximately 1.8 billion dollars. Another 150 billion dollars was released from Iran's frozen funds from 1979. Understanding Iran's propensity for funding terrorism around the world and killing Americans it would seem like we made a pretty poor deal. Further understanding that the mechanisms put in place for inspecting Iran's nuclear facilities were nothing short of a farce, we got suckered into paying another country who has vowed to destroy Israel and the USA money to do just that.
Deranged Rhino Posted October 19, 2019 Posted October 19, 2019 5 hours 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. The investigation into Trump by the FBI was leaked and reported on by the NYT in October of 2016 -- before the election -- just FYI. https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/01/us/politics/fbi-russia-election-donald-trump.html 5 hours ago, Bob in Mich said: 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. Here's a FISA warrant on Carter Page, secured in October of 2016: https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/4614708/Carter-Page-FISA-Application.pdf You're under the assumption that surveillance means wiretapping solely. It does not. What a Title I FISA warrant allows the government to do is to not only wiretap and electronically eavesdrop on the target, but they can also go through every big of digital correspondence and phone calls ever made by the target, plus two hops out. Meaning they can do the exact same thing to anyone the target ever spoke to (even a cursory "hello" in passing), and then anyone that next tier of contacts talked to. From one FISA target, assuming that target has a contact list of 40 people, you're talking about spying on thousands of people -- the majority of whom have no connection to the original target or investigatory matter. That's from one FISA warrant. So, why then did the FBI leadership target Page in October of 2016 when he'd been off the campaign at that point for many weeks? Because it wasn't about getting Page under surveillance, it was about the two hops. Two hops from Page gave them surveillance on not only Trump, but every one of his team including a sitting Senator and soon to be AG in Sessions. That warrant was renewed four times, meaning they had the sitting US President under surveillance for a full year. The above warrant gave them unlimited surveillance power. Then the Mueller probe being opened right as the FISA lapsed (not a coincidence) doubled that scope with subpoena power. After nearly three years of renewals and surveillance, unlimited subpoena power and millions of dollars spent looking not just for Russia/Trump connections but ANY crime they could pin on him -- digging into not only Trump but his family, friends, and anyone he ever looked at before, what did they find? Not a damn thing. No crimes. No Russian collusion. Nothing to warrant this level of scrutiny. That's the point you're missing with the section of your quote I bolded above. Trump had a microscope put up his ass by the entire intelligence apparatus, they used the most powerful tools available and were TRYING to find dirt... but all they could muster besides sleeping with a porn star was: "obstructing a crime that did not happen". That's the best they could do. For all the talk of Trump being corrupt, this level of surveillance and scrutiny coming back empty proves that it's just not true. He's not a criminal. He's not corrupt. He's cleaner than anyone in DC who was doing the digging into him. How many DC politicians could withstand that level of scrutiny and come out clean? You think Hillary would have? Nope. You think Obama would have? Nope. The fact that no surveillance "truth bomb" was released, despite the proven fact they had him under direct surveillance for over a full calendar year with the FISA, and a year and a half more under Mueller's team, shows how desperate they were and how little they found. Because it was an improper investigation, launched not to find a crime but to manufacture one. You know... like a coup. Now put that in context of the Biden/Ukraine scandal. With that FISA above you had the White House under 44 abusing its power to illegally surveil a political opponent -- tasking foreign governments like Italy, Britain, France, Canada, and Australia to help get around the constitution to continue said surveillance -- and they found nothing. Yet you're not outraged by that... ... because you're laboring under the delusion (and that's what it is, Bob) that there was some "there there" just not enough to charge Trump. There's just no evidence to support your position. None. Other than the narrative pushed on you by proven liars and manipulators who think you're too stupid to know the difference. Stop proving them right and start thinking for yourself. You'll be so glad you did. 6 hours ago, Bob in Mich said: 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? And yet I've named over two dozen of them, many, many times. Here is a good list: White House: Obama, Rice CIA: Brennan, Halper, Mifsud. DNI: Clapper FBI: Comey (fired), McCabe (fired), Rybicki (resigned), Baker (resigned), Kortan (resigned), Campbell (resigned), Turgal (resigned), Bower (resigned), Steinbach (resigned), Giacone (resigned), Page (resigned) FBI-CID: Strzok (fired) DOJ: Yates (Fired), Bruce Ohr (twice demoted), Brand (resigned), Anderson (reassigned), Kadzik (resigned), McCord (resigned), Axlerod (resigned), Bharara (fired along with 45 other US attorneys), McGowan (resigned), Dianna Flynn (resigned) DOJ-NSD: Carlin (resigned), Laufmann (resigned) State: Kerry, Weiner, Nuland. Congress: Ryan, McCain, Kizinger, Reid, Pelosi, Schumer Foreign assets: MI6: Richard Dearlove (retired) GCHQ: Robert Hannigan (resigned on Trump's inauguration) Australia IC: Downer Italy: Mifsud (perhaps), + names I can't list + More 6 hours ago, Bob in Mich said: 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. They were involved in the Ukraine in 2014-2017. Directly. That's the Black Ledger... https://www.theepochtimes.com/joe-biden-obama-officials-influenced-ukraine-to-advance-own-interests_2896259.html That's what Trump is digging into -- it has nothing to do with 2020 and everything to do with the coup. The above coup plotters aren't engineering anything at this point, they're managing the continuing operation which they began back in 2016 when Admiral Mike Rogers discovered a trove of illegal spying activity originating out of the DOJ-NSD and FBI-CID aimed at American citizens who... just happened to be political rivals to 44. They manage it today from their positions as media consultants -- and controlling the media cut outs who have fed you lie after lie and you've done nothing but say, "feed me more bull####". It really helps to understand how things work before you opine on why the analysis of those things is wrong. You're badly underinformed, Bob. Not said as an attack, stated as a fact in order to help you wake up. 5 hours ago, Bob in Mich said: 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. Incorrect: https://www.theepochtimes.com/joe-biden-obama-officials-influenced-ukraine-to-advance-own-interests_2896259.html 5 hours ago, Bob in Mich said: 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? Answered in detail. 3 hours ago, Bob in Mich said: Judge Napolitano anyone? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cs5FkaWbI8s He's a poor source and has been a proven liar throughout this entire ordeal. He got every bit of Trump/Russia wrong. He's gotten every bit of Trump/Ukraine wrong. He's got an axe to grind against Trump. You need better sources. Stop looking for what confirms your position and start looking at what counters it. That's the only way to test its mettle. 3 1 2
OldTimeAFLGuy Posted October 19, 2019 Posted October 19, 2019 54 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said: Not exactly correct. Cash, in foreign currency was bundled on pallets and put on planes and went somewhere (Iraq or wherever). That amount was approximately 1.8 billion dollars. Another 150 billion dollars was released from Iran's frozen funds from 1979. Understanding Iran's propensity for funding terrorism around the world and killing Americans it would seem like we made a pretty poor deal. Further understanding that the mechanisms put in place for inspecting Iran's nuclear facilities were nothing short of a farce, we got suckered into paying another country who has vowed to destroy Israel and the USA money to do just that. ...isn't "Bob" from Accountemps??.....Nurelman's temp replacement?.......they do not screen well IMO.....
Deranged Rhino Posted October 19, 2019 Posted October 19, 2019 Oh... I forgot Schiff in my list of congressmen involved in the coup. 2
3rdnlng Posted October 19, 2019 Posted October 19, 2019 18 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: The investigation into Trump by the FBI was leaked and reported on by the NYT in October of 2016 -- before the election -- just FYI. https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/01/us/politics/fbi-russia-election-donald-trump.html Here's a FISA warrant on Carter Page, secured in October of 2016: https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/4614708/Carter-Page-FISA-Application.pdf You're under the assumption that surveillance means wiretapping solely. It does not. What a Title I FISA warrant allows the government to do is to not only wiretap and electronically eavesdrop on the target, but they can also go through every big of digital correspondence and phone calls ever made by the target, plus two hops out. Meaning they can do the exact same thing to anyone the target ever spoke to (even a cursory "hello" in passing), and then anyone that next tier of contacts talked to. From one FISA target, assuming that target has a contact list of 40 people, you're talking about spying on thousands of people -- the majority of whom have no connection to the original target or investigatory matter. That's from one FISA warrant. So, why then did the FBI leadership target Page in October of 2016 when he'd been off the campaign at that point for many weeks? Because it wasn't about getting Page under surveillance, it was about the two hops. Two hops from Page gave them surveillance on not only Trump, but every one of his team including a sitting Senator and soon to be AG in Sessions. That warrant was renewed four times, meaning they had the sitting US President under surveillance for a full year. The above warrant gave them unlimited surveillance power. Then the Mueller probe being opened right as the FISA lapsed (not a coincidence) doubled that scope with subpoena power. After nearly three years of renewals and surveillance, unlimited subpoena power and millions of dollars spent looking not just for Russia/Trump connections but ANY crime they could pin on him -- digging into not only Trump but his family, friends, and anyone he ever looked at before, what did they find? Not a damn thing. No crimes. No Russian collusion. Nothing to warrant this level of scrutiny. That's the point you're missing with the section of your quote I bolded above. Trump had a microscope put up his ass by the entire intelligence apparatus, they used the most powerful tools available and were TRYING to find dirt... but all they could muster besides sleeping with a porn star was: "obstructing a crime that did not happen". That's the best they could do. For all the talk of Trump being corrupt, this level of surveillance and scrutiny coming back empty proves that it's just not true. He's not a criminal. He's not corrupt. He's cleaner than anyone in DC who was doing the digging into him. How many DC politicians could withstand that level of scrutiny and come out clean? You think Hillary would have? Nope. You think Obama would have? Nope. The fact that no surveillance "truth bomb" was released, despite the proven fact they had him under direct surveillance for over a full calendar year with the FISA, and a year and a half more under Mueller's team, shows how desperate they were and how little they found. Because it was an improper investigation, launched not to find a crime but to manufacture one. You know... like a coup. Now put that in context of the Biden/Ukraine scandal. With that FISA above you had the White House under 44 abusing its power to illegally surveil a political opponent -- tasking foreign governments like Italy, Britain, France, Canada, and Australia to help get around the constitution to continue said surveillance -- and they found nothing. Yet you're not outraged by that... ... because you're laboring under the delusion (and that's what it is, Bob) that there was some "there there" just not enough to charge Trump. There's just no evidence to support your position. None. Other than the narrative pushed on you by proven liars and manipulators who think you're too stupid to know the difference. Stop proving them right and start thinking for yourself. You'll be so glad you did. And yet I've named over two dozen of them, many, many times. Here is a good list: White House: Obama, Rice CIA: Brennan, Halper, Mifsud. DNI: Clapper FBI: Comey (fired), McCabe (fired), Rybicki (resigned), Baker (resigned), Kortan (resigned), Campbell (resigned), Turgal (resigned), Bower (resigned), Steinbach (resigned), Giacone (resigned), Page (resigned) FBI-CID: Strzok (fired) DOJ: Yates (Fired), Bruce Ohr (twice demoted), Brand (resigned), Anderson (reassigned), Kadzik (resigned), McCord (resigned), Axlerod (resigned), Bharara (fired along with 45 other US attorneys), McGowan (resigned), Dianna Flynn (resigned) DOJ-NSD: Carlin (resigned), Laufmann (resigned) State: Kerry, Weiner, Nuland. Congress: Ryan, McCain, Kizinger, Reid, Pelosi, Schumer Foreign assets: MI6: Richard Dearlove (retired) GCHQ: Robert Hannigan (resigned on Trump's inauguration) Australia IC: Downer Italy: Mifsud (perhaps), + names I can't list + More They were involved in the Ukraine in 2014-2017. Directly. That's the Black Ledger... https://www.theepochtimes.com/joe-biden-obama-officials-influenced-ukraine-to-advance-own-interests_2896259.html That's what Trump is digging into -- it has nothing to do with 2020 and everything to do with the coup. The above coup plotters aren't engineering anything at this point, they're managing the continuing operation which they began back in 2016 when Admiral Mike Rogers discovered a trove of illegal spying activity originating out of the DOJ-NSD and FBI-CID aimed at American citizens who... just happened to be political rivals to 44. They manage it today from their positions as media consultants -- and controlling the media cut outs who have fed you lie after lie and you've done nothing but say, "feed me more bull####". It really helps to understand how things work before you opine on why the analysis of those things is wrong. You're badly underinformed, Bob. Not said as an attack, stated as a fact in order to help you wake up. Incorrect: https://www.theepochtimes.com/joe-biden-obama-officials-influenced-ukraine-to-advance-own-interests_2896259.html Answered in detail. He's a poor source and has been a proven liar throughout this entire ordeal. He got every bit of Trump/Russia wrong. He's gotten every bit of Trump/Ukraine wrong. He's got an axe to grind against Trump. You need better sources. Stop looking for what confirms your position and start looking at what counters it. That's the only way to test its mettle. Did you forget that Bob is a pothead and you are trying to convince him of anything?
OldTimeAFLGuy Posted October 19, 2019 Posted October 19, 2019 (edited) 6 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: Oh... I forgot Schiff in my list of congressmen involved in the coup. ....elected in 2018 with 78% of the vote.......bet 2020 is >80%.......California has spoken...SMH......even Motel 6 can't "leave the light on for ya"...... Edited October 19, 2019 by OldTimeAFLGuy
3rdnlng Posted October 19, 2019 Posted October 19, 2019 42 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: The more she talks the better she looks.
Deranged Rhino Posted October 19, 2019 Posted October 19, 2019 2 hours ago, 3rdnlng said: Did you forget that Bob is a pothead and you are trying to convince him of anything? I have been giving Bob the benefit of the doubt more and more for the sake of positivity. He’s not a bad guy, just under informed. He raises questions and parrots talking points which I am certain others have heard or wonder about. So the answer is more for the rest of the board than Bob since he thinks anyone who tries to have a real conversation is badgering. 2
Bob in Mich Posted October 20, 2019 Posted October 20, 2019 16 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said: I have been giving Bob the benefit of the doubt more and more for the sake of positivity. He’s not a bad guy, just under informed. He raises questions and parrots talking points which I am certain others have heard or wonder about. So the answer is more for the rest of the board than Bob since he thinks anyone who tries to have a real conversation is badgering. DR, why can't you control yourself? I have told you several times that discussions with you always seem to devolve into you, the crazy eyed guy at the bar, being way too close in my face screaming about lizard people! Yet, here we are again. Over the last 4-5 pages in this thread you asked me the exact same question approximately 10 times. I answered it at least 7 times, pointed out that I had already answered it repeatedly, gave you a link to more detail, and warned you to stop the repetition or you would go back on ignore. That happened....go back and look if you doubt. You then quickly asked the same question twice more and then got put on ignore. You claim to be innocently just asking but when THE SAME QUESTION IS ASKED AND ANSWERED 10 TIMES YOU ARE HARASSING, NOT CONVERSING. That is you being the crazy eyed guy at the bar AGAIN. Recognize that please! As I have told you, I would rather not engage with you. I have literally begged you many times to stop replying to me unless you are quoted. YOU WILL NOT ABIDE BY THAT VERY REASONABLE REQUEST. That is a little twisted and certainly not right, imo. I should be allowed to carry on conversations with other posters without you interjecting yourself but your butting in regularly takes over the conversation. YOUR REPLIES STIFLE THE REPLIES FROM THE OTHERS THAT I WISH TO CONVERSE WITH. When I wish to interact with you, I will quote you. Otherwise, assume I do not wish to hear from you. You butt in and claim you know everything and no one else knows the real story. That may or may not be the case but when adults are conversing and they have repeatedly asked you to stay out of their conversation, please do so. While not public, the board is designed to allow posters to interact and have discussions. Stop taking over every discussion on this topic.. You love to give advice. Try listening to some for a change. Stop acting like a know-it-all. Stop butting in, even when you think you know more. Others should be allowed to converse without your interjections. Stop harassing those that disagree with you. Please take that advice to heart. I think it could help you to become a better poster.
Deranged Rhino Posted October 20, 2019 Posted October 20, 2019 (edited) 1 hour ago, Bob in Mich said: DR, why can't you control yourself? Only you could take all that from what I wrote about trying to treat you more positively, Bob. You might want to consider that you're projecting now... It's okay. You believe in a conspiracy theory without evidence. When someone points that out, you get upset because part of your brain knows it's bull####. You think Trump/Russia worked together to steal the election despite multiple year long investigations into that event proving it did not happen. You've been had. Lied to so much in your 60+ years on this planet you can't figure out up from down... not because you're not smart enough, you are, but because you're too afraid to think for yourself. That's a shame, but it's entirely on you -- not me. I've tried to communicate. I've tried kindness. I've tried patience. Whether you continue to engage with me or not is irrelevant because you keep proving that you're not capable of holding a rational, adult conversation. When you post erroneous information, which you do quite often, I'm going to continue to point it out and respond. That's not because I'm trying to fight with you, but because others who read my posts might benefit from the discussion. (And for the record, you still haven't answered the question despite (lying) and saying you have. I asked for your opinion, not the BBC's. Not Mueller's. Just yours. And you won't give it. Instead you couch it in half answers ... because you know, deep down, your opinion on this matter is laughably incorrect. Based on what you've posted you still believe Trump worked with Russia to steal the election, Mueller just didn't find enough evidence to convict... that's what you believe, and it's 100% incorrect according to the evidence.) Enjoy your day, Bob. Edited October 20, 2019 by Deranged Rhino
DC Tom Posted October 20, 2019 Posted October 20, 2019 1 minute ago, Deranged Rhino said: Only you could take all that from what I wrote about trying to treat you more positively, Bob. You might want to consider that you're projecting now... It's okay. You believe in a conspiracy theory without evidence. When someone points that out, you get upset because part of your brain knows it's bull####. You think Trump/Russia worked together to steal the election despite multiple year long investigations into that event proving it did not happen. You've been had. Lied to so much in your 60+ years on this planet you can't figure out up from down... not because you're not smart enough, you are, but because you're too afraid to think for yourself. That's a shame, but it's entirely on you -- not me. I've tried to communicate. I've tried kindness. I've tried patience. Whether you continue to engage with me or not is irrelevant because you keep proving that you're not capable of holding a rational, adult conversation. When you post erroneous information, which you do quite often, I'm going to continue to point it out and respond. That's not because I'm trying to fight with you, but because others who read my posts might benefit from the discussion. Enjoy your day, Bob. Why are you engaging him? You're not pitching a script, you know...he's not a producer, you don't have to engage him. You've been doing your job far too long. 1
Deranged Rhino Posted October 20, 2019 Posted October 20, 2019 Just now, DC Tom said: Why are you engaging him? You're not pitching a script, you know...he's not a producer, you don't have to engage him. You've been doing your job far too long. It's only because he parrots talking points and long debunked theories which I'm positive others have heard/share/might believe/are curious about. So diving into the weeds can help others since Bob has clearly made up his mind that he'd rather believe (without evidence) the words of proven liars and manipulators than stopping and reexamining the issues for himself.
DC Tom Posted October 20, 2019 Posted October 20, 2019 2 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: It's only because he parrots talking points and long debunked theories which I'm positive others have heard/share/might believe/are curious about. So diving into the weeds can help others since Bob has clearly made up his mind that he'd rather believe (without evidence) the words of proven liars and manipulators than stopping and reexamining the issues for himself. It's not that Bob's made up his mind, it's that he's got far weightier issues to dwell on than your pathetic meanderings... 1
Recommended Posts