B-Man Posted September 26, 2019 Share Posted September 26, 2019 All this arguing is ruining #NationalPancakeDay. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Numark3 Posted September 26, 2019 Share Posted September 26, 2019 3 minutes ago, whatdrought said: What gain is that unless they are going to testify that the transcript is deceptive/wrong? (which is a whole other ball of wax) someone asked if they could. DR is wrong again and said no one else was present that can be called. Im just pointing out someone being wrong. Why is that such an issue? Do you think he is right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted September 26, 2019 Share Posted September 26, 2019 1 hour ago, Crayola64 said: So he shouldn’t report stuff because he doesn’t have direct knowledge...and no one should investigate it. good logic You seem to be implying that the complaint is reason enough to investigate. Even the simplest of minds would agree that step one in that investigation would be to release the transcripts of the call and talk to the Zelensky. Oh, wait. Both of those have been done. Oh, wait. Both show the whistle-blower was wrong. But let's not let facts get in the way of a good left-wing clusterphck. One day the left will understand that it's worth a few extra seconds to, y'know, think things through. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted September 26, 2019 Share Posted September 26, 2019 2 minutes ago, Crayola64 said: Um the complaint says approximately a dozen White House officials listened to the call (including policy officials, whitehouse personnel, and Brechbuhl). And that participation in the call was not restricted... are you sure you read the complaint? Keep digging lol. You just ignored my point about privilege. But keep thinking you understand how these things work. You do not. You're not a serious person, and kindergarten is done now. Bye! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gavin in Va Beach Posted September 26, 2019 Share Posted September 26, 2019 12 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: THIS is the head of the committee... (In best Jim Mora voice) PARODY?! PARODY?!?! He's such an asshat. He knew the media wouldn't hold him accountable, and would likely parrot his comments as real news (which the Today show did this morning. Hey the wife watches it. I admit I find it amusing when that Samantha Guthrie chick tries to pretend she is a legitimate journalist.) 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted September 26, 2019 Share Posted September 26, 2019 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whatdrought Posted September 26, 2019 Share Posted September 26, 2019 3 minutes ago, Crayola64 said: Im backtracking? You just posted all day yesterday about the complaint being suspect because it conflicts with the transcript. Now it’s a new dumb reason. It’s not even worth quitting your posts to show that you did say it was suspect because it is secondhand 2 things: 1- Don't step to me and then claim it's not worth it to actually quote what you're accusing me of. It makes you look like a schmuck. 2- What i said, consistently throughout this whole damn dialogue, to you and to others, is that in the absence of additional, as of yet unreleased evidence, his complaint is suspect because there's no evidence supporting it. The media was reporting one thing about the report, the transcript showed something entirely different. Now we've seen both and in the absence of additional evidence, his/her complaint is worthless. 2b. Here are the two quotes of mine that I could find that seem somewhat relevant to what you're accusing me of. Please note that I am consistent throughout that in order for his complaint to be deemed credible, there needs to be evidence, or else he is a boy crying wolf and doing so only because someone else told him that there might be a wolf... maybe. 20 hours ago, whatdrought said: How can they be credible without direct knowledge if no evidence can be provided? I get your premise- If I work at company x and they're doing some shady stuff and I've heard it through the grape vine, I might not have first hand knowledge about it, but I go report it to SEC or whoever. That's gonna drive an investigation. But if the investigation produces jackshit, I am no longer credible. I have been proven to be a false witness, or at least to have misunderstood what I thought I know. That's what (seemingly so far at least) is happening here. 20 hours ago, whatdrought said: That's fine, but It has to be proven eventually, or else it is just rumor mongering (whatever the motives are don't really matter) 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Numark3 Posted September 26, 2019 Share Posted September 26, 2019 Just now, Deranged Rhino said: You just ignored my point about privilege. But keep thinking you understand how these things work. You do not. You're not a serious person, and kindergarten is done now. Bye! You have to know I just correctly called you out for being wrong. you just said no one was present besides the two. Wrong. then you said besides CIS transcribers. Wrong now EVERYONE is privileged. Wrong you did not read read the complaint. It’s embarrassing. Does no one care how DR just said posts factually incorrect stuff and won’t own it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted September 26, 2019 Share Posted September 26, 2019 And they're distorting the facts to fit the narrative. Blatantly. And some people are okay with that because calling them out for it is "conspiracy!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted September 26, 2019 Share Posted September 26, 2019 9 minutes ago, Rob's House said: Has anyone noticed that it appears Biden is guilty of actual corruption, but the scandal is Trump finding out about it? Yes, it is a U.S. criminal matter not a U.S. political matter, no matter how hard the Left tries to make it so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted September 26, 2019 Share Posted September 26, 2019 7 minutes ago, ALF said: How about testify behind closed doors ? Sure -- but that won't be applicable to any impeachment inquiry. They want them public, for the show. But they won't be able to get that with anyone they would want. 3 minutes ago, Crayola64 said: You have to know I just correctly called you out for being wrong. you just said no one was present besides the two. Wrong. then you said besides CIS transcribers. Wrong now EVERYONE is privileged. Wrong you did not read read the complaint. It’s embarrassing. Does no one care how DR just said posts factually incorrect stuff and won’t own it? I own mistakes all the time. When I make them. This isn't one of those times, no matter how dishonest your "recap" is You're a fool. And you keep proving it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whatdrought Posted September 26, 2019 Share Posted September 26, 2019 7 minutes ago, Crayola64 said: someone asked if they could. DR is wrong again and said no one else was present that can be called. Im just pointing out someone being wrong. Why is that such an issue? Do you think he is right? I haven't been following y'all's B word fight, just wondering what gain there is from the call witnesses if the transcript is accurate - which I suppose we assume it is until something else comes out about it, or unless the "we" we're referring to is Tibs. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted September 26, 2019 Share Posted September 26, 2019 *************** Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted September 26, 2019 Share Posted September 26, 2019 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted September 26, 2019 Share Posted September 26, 2019 But Hunter is a child! Think of the children! 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whatdrought Posted September 26, 2019 Share Posted September 26, 2019 1 minute ago, Deranged Rhino said: Sure -- but that won't be applicable to any impeachment inquiry. They want them public, for the show. But they won't be able to get that with anyone they would want. More to the point, it's actually a bad move by the dems as the witnesses verifying the authenticity of the transcript would be another sinking mark on this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Numark3 Posted September 26, 2019 Share Posted September 26, 2019 2 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: Sure -- but that won't be applicable to any impeachment inquiry. They want them public, for the show. But they won't be able to get that with anyone they would want. I own mistakes all the time. When I make them. This isn't one of those times, no matter how dishonest your "recap" is You're a fool. And you keep proving it. You just said no one else was present in the call. You were wrong. People can see it. moving on Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted September 26, 2019 Share Posted September 26, 2019 (edited) The thing I find most disturbing is that I can feel myself getting pulled back into this *****. Now I know how Al Pacino felt. Edited September 26, 2019 by Rob's House 2 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whatdrought Posted September 26, 2019 Share Posted September 26, 2019 Just now, Deranged Rhino said: But Hunter is a child! Think of the children! Oh my gosh. This might be the best thing I've ever seen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted September 26, 2019 Share Posted September 26, 2019 10 minutes ago, ALF said: How about testify behind closed doors ? Then it wouldn't be a meaningful hearing for the dems to grandstand to the public. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts