GG Posted January 31, 2020 Posted January 31, 2020 6 minutes ago, Bob in Mich said: No, I don't want to go into that much effort giving you what you can find in the House charges. Reread those and if you have further questions, be specific. In other words, you have nothing because the entire argument in this thread is that the House's articles are not a valid reasoning for impeachment! You've offered nothing other than you don't like the actions of #orangemanbad. November will not be good to you. 3 1
Bob in Mich Posted January 31, 2020 Posted January 31, 2020 31 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said: I don't know why things would play out that way. You've already indicated that only the truth will be revealed should we set aside precedent , common sense, and basic litigation strategy for the first time in history. Regardless, I will sleep soundly knowing that you appealed for real compassion, understanding, trust and emotional balance in our system. T Rest well my friend. It may help your brain. lol
Deranged Rhino Posted January 31, 2020 Posted January 31, 2020 30 minutes ago, Bob in Mich said: Well, would it be fair to say that in this instance you don't want more evidence? This is political and more evidence may hurt Trump and he is on the verge of acquittal. OK, fair enough. If in court (different, yes) with your daughter's accused rapist. During the trial a witness comes out of the blue and pipes up in court and says, "I want to be called to the stand. I witnessed the whole thing." Would you want to hear that evidence even though obviously the police/prosecutor did not do a thorough job of investigating or lining up all witnesses. Or, let the guy walk ? In one post you admit a court of law is different than this impeachment trial, that this is a a political exercise, not a courtroom... Then in the next post you are making comparisons to a rape trial and asking others why they aren't treating this like a traditional trial. You're mind is broken. Completely beyond repair. 18 minutes ago, Bob in Mich said: No, I don't want to go into that much effort giving you what you can find in the House charges. Reread those and if you have further questions, be specific. "No, I didn't read the House Impeachment articles, or their evidence -- and you can't make me read other information either." /The @Bob in Mich way of assuring you're uninformed. 1
Bob in Mich Posted January 31, 2020 Posted January 31, 2020 20 minutes ago, snafu said: Bob, we are beating this horse to death. I'm not going to respond to you any more about these matters. Agreed and I will join you in dropping this conversation after one more point. Dont feel you need to respond. I appreciate the chat. The chief reason I was in favor of pursuing impeachment in spite of certain acquittal was to stop the election interference. The Repubs obviously though seem to think it is now OK. I disagree with that take but if everyone can now openly do it, I guess the field levels somewhat. The incumbents obviously though have greater advantage by using taxpayer funds as leverage. Thx again. 1
Deranged Rhino Posted January 31, 2020 Posted January 31, 2020 ******************************************** When you lose Wallace -- you've truly lost. Just now, Bob in Mich said: The chief reason I was in favor of pursuing impeachment in spite of certain acquittal was to stop the election interference. "The chief reason I was in favor of pursuing impeachment in spite of certain acquittal was to stop the non-existent election interference which has in no way been proven. But I believe it's real because proven liars like Schiff and Pelosi and MSNBC have told me that it's real and I don't step out of line with group think, because I'm a small man with a broken mind." 1 minute ago, Bob in Mich said: The Repubs obviously though seem to think it is now OK. Bob, have you said ONE word about the fraudulent FISAs, the dirty dossier, or any of the actual interference which went down at the hands of our own government in 2016? Nope. You haven't. That's why it's easy to highlight your posts as hypocrisy at its finest. You're a broken man. 5 1 1
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted January 31, 2020 Posted January 31, 2020 57 minutes ago, Bob in Mich said: Oh please! Keep it real. You know Trump stopped the plan only after being caught. The 'misdeed' was well in progress. It wasn't all just a thought crime. He is the bank robber that got caught before getting out of the bank with his money. No harm, no crime,, no punishment, eh? If that robber was Trump today, he would just say he was looking for Silver Certificates and y'all would buy it. You're escalating the rhetoric. You started out just looking for truth, you moved on to opining he's guilty though you haven't heard from the witnesses you long for, and now he's a bank robber caught in the lobby?* How could this be given you simply cannot know the full story??! You sounds suspiciously like one of those monotone Wonderbread professors on "American Landscape" on that damn NPR channel! You should throw Fox on once in a while. *this mindset is exactly why no political party/defense team would let the enemy define the rules of the game. People fib, and their true motives are usually hidden. And here I trusted you! ?
Bob in Mich Posted January 31, 2020 Posted January 31, 2020 25 minutes ago, Foxx said: Bob, is your real name Adam? i'm beginning to think so because you are making up story after story after story to show your insecurity. Stories? Not sure about stories but I can be accused of juggling a lot of analogies. I have football games and rapists and bank robbers to name a few I don't get your insecurity point as I am doing that to help simplify the arguments. Sometimes it helps to strip away unimportant information to help uncover the crux. If you'd like to explain how trying to use analogies demonstrates insecurity, that would be interesting.
Deranged Rhino Posted January 31, 2020 Posted January 31, 2020 (edited) From a Bush staffer too... 5 minutes ago, Bob in Mich said: Stories? Not sure about stories but I can be accused of juggling a lot of analogies. Not juggling analogies --butchering them, dismembering them, and then smearing them on the wall and calling it an honest argument. 5 minutes ago, Bob in Mich said: I don't get your insecurity point as I am doing that to help simplify the arguments. Sometimes it helps to strip away unimportant information to help uncover the crux. Those who can't think for themselves, which you've proven you cannot, should not then try to create "simplified" analogies in order to explain issues they do not fully understand. You have yet to make an original argument, or one that hasn't come from the mouths of the media/DNC complex. 5 minutes ago, Bob in Mich said: If you'd like to explain how trying to use analogies demonstrates insecurity, that would be interesting. You can't argue the facts, or the substance of this issue (because you do not know it, by your own admission). You refuse to read any relevant information given to you by others. And you proved, over and over again with each post, that you have nothing but emotion and mind reading as your central arguments, and wish to invert the entire system of jurisprudence in order to suit it to your desire -- rule of law be damned. You're not insecure. You're too stupid to be insecure. You think you're smart. You think you're right. Which is just more proof that your mind is indeed broken. Edited January 31, 2020 by Deranged Rhino 2
Bray Wyatt Posted January 31, 2020 Posted January 31, 2020 55 minutes ago, Bob in Mich said: Well, would it be fair to say that in this instance you don't want more evidence? This is political and more evidence may hurt Trump and he is on the verge of acquittal. OK, fair enough. If in court (different, yes) with your daughter's accused rapist. During the trial a witness comes out of the blue and pipes up in court and says, "I want to be called to the stand. I witnessed the whole thing." Would you want to hear that evidence even though obviously the police/prosecutor did not do a thorough job of investigating or lining up all witnesses. Or, let the guy walk ? Then the house should not have rushed the impeachment process, no one defined how long they can take to gather evidence. They decided to screw the pooch, the Senate is not there to do the house's job, otherwise why have the House involved at all? 2 2
Bob in Mich Posted January 31, 2020 Posted January 31, 2020 32 minutes ago, ScotSHO said: It's almost as if there is an unwritten rule book that they are told to follow. Or, they know the current political environment. They know too we have mental health and gun proliferation issues in our country. Maybe they think trying to push the guy further into the limelight unnecessarily endangers him and his family. Or, do you think he and his family should be attacked for being a whistle blower?
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted January 31, 2020 Posted January 31, 2020 1 hour ago, dubs said: Additional live look at House Managers: that driver, though. #wrecked 2 1
Deranged Rhino Posted January 31, 2020 Posted January 31, 2020 Just now, Bob in Mich said: Or, they know the current political environment. They know too we have mental health and gun proliferation issues in our country. Maybe they think trying to push the guy further into the limelight unnecessarily endangers him and his family. Or, do you think he and his family should be attacked for being a whistle blower? You never said a word when the same ire, threats of violence, and vitriol were pushed on a true whistleblower: Nunes. Why is that, Bob? Is it because you're playing sides? Or is it because you're uninformed? Both? 1 2
Nanker Posted January 31, 2020 Author Posted January 31, 2020 Best thing about today IMHO - Shifty Schiff kept Nads Nadler off the Senate floor after his stealing the spotlight last night! Worth thing about today IMHO - is so many of you engaging in post after post of fruitless dialog with Bob in Marijuana. 2 1 1
123719bwiqrb Posted January 31, 2020 Posted January 31, 2020 Just now, Bob in Mich said: Or, they know the current political environment. They know too we have mental health and gun proliferation issues in our country. Maybe they think trying to push the guy further into the limelight unnecessarily endangers him and his family. Or, do you think he and his family should be attacked for being a whistle blower? Good thing the journalist's save the day, just like Superman right? 1
Nanker Posted January 31, 2020 Author Posted January 31, 2020 1 minute ago, Joe in Winslow said: that driver, though. #wrecked His glasses went overboard too. 1
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted January 31, 2020 Posted January 31, 2020 Just now, Nanker said: Best thing about today IMHO - Shifty Schiff kept Nads Nadler off the Senate floor after his stealing the spotlight last night! Worth thing about today IMHO - is so many of you engaging in post after post of fruitless dialog with Bob in Marijuana. It's the American way. It's even in the song: "Above the fruitless plane..." 1
Bray Wyatt Posted January 31, 2020 Posted January 31, 2020 14 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: What I just posted, summed up perfectly 1
Recommended Posts