Jump to content

The Sham Impeachment Inquiry & Whistleblower Saga: A Race to Get Ahead of the OIG


Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

i am tired of the'narrative'  from both sides.

 

if this was a true hearing to understand what constitutes what 'high crimes and misdomeanors' are, these, 'constitutional scholars' would not venture their, 'opinions' on whether or not Trumps actions constitute as such. it is a severe conflict of interest to state their opinions in this setting.  instead it is just more of the same from the Intelligence Committee's hearings.

 

they think we are stupid. my question is... are you?

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, dubs said:

If there is a positive to come out of this entire fiasco, it really shows how worthless and unnecessary the the majority of the federal elected official and government really is. 
 

At what point do the NPCs start to realize they don’t need most of government in their lives?  But in reality, government needs The citizenry to fall in line and continue to pay for their useless existence   

Yes, let's just get rid of the government 

 

:doh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, RoyBatty is alive said:

 

 

How sad, cant discuss the actual content  of the message, attack the messenger.  When all else fails character assassination, and based off of unverified accusations.  What is next, name calling?

Usually the gay innuendos are next with Gary

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, 3rdnlng said:

My profile says 2008 but I was here much before that. In fact I was here when you were crusading for gay marriage.

 

My 2016 reference was the approximate time when Tweets started being embed-able into this board, and the re-Tweet crowd thought the board would benefit from turning this into PPP-Twitter. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

Yes, let's just get rid of the government 

 

:doh:


thanks for demonstrating your lack of perspective. 
 

being critical of the size, scope, bloat, and corruption of the current federal government doesn’t mean that you’re advocating for no government. 
 

the choice isn’t between a federal government that is increasingly encroaching on liberty, funds the excessive lifestyles of unaccountable bureaucrats, breeds corruption because of the power and money that flows through it, and has shown time and time again how ineffective and unnecessary it is or anarchy. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, dubs said:


thanks for demonstrating your lack of perspective. 
 

being critical of the size, scope, bloat, and corruption of the current federal government doesn’t mean that you’re advocating for no government. 
 

the choice isn’t between a federal government that is increasingly encroaching on liberty, funds the excessive lifestyles of unaccountable bureaucrats, breeds corruption because of the power and money that flows through it, and has shown time and time again how ineffective and unnecessary it is or anarchy. 

 

you'll learn the Return on Investment you get from interacting with Tibs

 

 

[multiplier of -1,000]

 

  • Thank you (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, John Adams said:

 

My 2016 reference was the approximate time when Tweets started being embed-able into this board, and the re-Tweet crowd thought the board would benefit from turning this into PPP-Twitter. 

Hmmmmn. Maybe as a self proclaimed lawyer you could be a little more precise with your comments? It's possible that is why you have such criticism here and you are just misunderstood.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...