I have a serious question for the Trump haters on this board?

[oldmanfan]

3 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

And yet it was Obama, not Trump who: 

 

* Gutted the entire IG system, rewrote the law to hide his own crimes

* Used the IRS to target his political enemies

* Abused the surveillance tools to spy on Congress, the media, and the public without warrant or cause

* Actively tried to subvert the 2016 election because he disagreed with the people's choice... 

* Doubled the size of the secret courts

* Used drones to assassinate American citizens (in foreign lands) without consideration to their due process or civil rights

 

So, yeah, you're full of it. And you keep proving it. 

 

 

 

You have to have a basic understanding of the facts before you can call me out on anything. You've yet to do it. All you've done is excuse the biggest abuses of power in this country's history while pointing at Trump and screaming "MY FEELZ!"

 

And you keep parroting your same fake I know better than everyone else stuff like you are somehow more omniscient than everyone.  You’re not.  

[Deranged Rhino]

Just now, oldmanfan said:

And you keep parroting your same fake I know better than everyone else stuff like you are somehow more omniscient than everyone.  You’re not.  

 

You think that list is fake? 

 

Is that what you're saying?

[GG]

3 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

And you keep parroting your same fake I know better than everyone else stuff like you are somehow more omniscient than everyone.  You’re not.  

 

Then it should be very easy to prove him wrong, point by point.

 

Ready, set, go.

Edited May 21, 2020 by GG

[oldmanfan]

2 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

You think that list is fake? 

 

Is that what you're saying?

 

1 minute ago, GG said:

 

The it should be very easy to prove him wrong, point by point.

 

Ready, set, go.

I came into this thread to answer the OP, which I did.  What you all consider fact remains to be shown as so by proper investigation.  Some people are having a fit right now about Graham and Johnson having hearings.  Not me.  That is how the facts will actually come out. Assuming subpoenas to the appropriate individuals are answered as they were not during the Ukraine hearings.  

 

Rhino claims facts.  He confuses his opinion, based on his deep state bias, as fact.  But even paranoid people have enemies.

[Deranged Rhino]

1 minute ago, oldmanfan said:

Rhino claims facts.  He confuses his opinion, based on his deep state bias, as fact. 

So, are you saying that list is fake or not? You called me a liar. Back it up. Show me point by point where what I said was “opinion” rather than fact. 
 

[GG]

3 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

 

I came into this thread to answer the OP, which I did.  What you all consider fact remains to be shown as so by proper investigation.  Some people are having a fit right now about Graham and Johnson having hearings.  Not me.  That is how the facts will actually come out. Assuming subpoenas to the appropriate individuals are answered as they were not during the Ukraine hearings.  

 

Rhino claims facts.  He confuses his opinion, based on his deep state bias, as fact.  But even paranoid people have enemies.

 

I'll let Greggy argue the positions he laid out.   Would you agree that unilaterally tossing out bankruptcy law proceedings to achieve your desired outcome is a sign of dictatorship?

[oldmanfan]

1 minute ago, Deranged Rhino said:

So, are you saying that list is fake or not? You called me a liar. Back it up. Show me point by point where what I said was “opinion” rather than fact. 
 

Everything you have there such as using the IRS to get back at enemies is your opinion.  You have a view of the world, that somehow there is this deep state conspiracy that the former administration used, and you interpret all things to fit your narrative.   They are not fact.  Fact will or will not be ascertained by actual investigation.

[Buffalo_Gal]

1 hour ago, oldmanfan said:

And you keep parroting your same fake I know better than everyone else stuff like you are somehow more omniscient than everyone.  You’re not.  

That list is not "fake."   Those are only some of the low-lights of the Obama administration.  

You may want to pick a topic, any topic, that has to do with the improprieties of the Obama administration (don't even start with sedition, start small with oh, his  using the IRS to target political opposition (heck, just look at the tea party... that one is easy to see what he had the IRS do), or perhaps, spying on political  opponents) and do some deep diving into source documents on  that subject.   You should be appalled by what you find. 

 

Edited May 21, 2020 by Buffalo_Gal

[oldmanfan]

3 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said:

That list is not "fake."   Those are only some of the low-lights of the Obama administration.  

You may want to pick a topic, any topic, that has to do with the improprieties of the Obama administration (don't even start with sedation, start small with oh, his  using the IRS to target political opposition (heck, just look at the tea party... that one is easy to see what he had the IRS do), or perhaps, spying on political  opponents) and do some deep diving into source documents on  that subject.   You should be appalled by what you find. 

 

From what I can tell on this side of the board, diving into source documents equates to finding sources that back your preconceived opinion.  I on the other hand will wait for actual congressional investigations if and when they take place.

[Buffalo_Gal]

7 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

Everything you have there such as using the IRS to get back at enemies is your opinion.  You have a view of the world, that somehow there is this deep state conspiracy that the former administration used, and you interpret all things to fit your narrative.   They are not fact.  Fact will or will not be ascertained by actual investigation.

Here, use these real conservative sites  to read about the IRS scandal:

treasury.gov report

Lois Learner pleads the 5th!!  and then they allowed her a soliloquy 
 

IRS Apologizes For Aggressive Scrutiny Of Conservative Groups<--- npr.org
 

IRS Scandal Fast Facts<--- cnn.com

 

 

3 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

From what I can tell on this side of the board, diving into source documents equates to finding sources that back your preconceived opinion.  I on the other hand will wait for actual congressional investigations if and when they take place.

Oh good! Then you will love the treasury document above. ?



 

Edited May 21, 2020 by Buffalo_Gal

[oldmanfan]

5 minutes ago, GG said:

 

I'll let Greggy argue the positions he laid out.   Would you agree that unilaterally tossing out bankruptcy law proceedings to achieve your desired outcome is a sign of dictatorship?

Did a little quick search on this.  Obama wanted the law changed to ease burden on consumers?  And did not make an executive order from what I could see.  If that is incorrect send along the info for me to look at.

 

And no, I would not say this would equate to dictator.  Presidents want what they want.  Trump takes it to extremes.  I believe he wants to operate without either the legislative ir judicial branch inhibiting him whatsoever.  My opinion of course, but that to me would destroy our country.

[GG]

2 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

From what I can tell on this side of the board, diving into source documents equates to finding sources that back your preconceived opinion.  I on the other hand will wait for actual congressional investigations if and when they take place.

 

You seem to be taking the position that if there were no criminal indictments, then the action did not take place.

[oldmanfan]

1 minute ago, GG said:

 

You seem to be taking the position that if there were no criminal indictments, then the action did not take place.

I am taking the point that if there are transgressions in the executive branch that you have both the legislative and judicial branches to execute proper oversight and if required legal action.

[GG]

Just now, oldmanfan said:

Did a little quick search on this.  Obama wanted the law changed to ease burden on consumers?  And did not make an executive order from what I could see.  If that is incorrect send along the info for me to look at.

 

And no, I would not say this would equate to dictator.  Presidents want what they want.  Trump takes it to extremes.  I believe he wants to operate without either the legislative ir judicial branch inhibiting him whatsoever.  My opinion of course, but that to me would destroy our country.

 

I was referring to Obama upendng the automakers' bankruptcy proceedings by turning bankruptcy law on its head.  Nobody in the press cared, because he did it for the "right" reasons.   But people who care about standing laws being upheld, cared a lot and lost any hope for the Presidency.  They were proven right by his blatant disregard for standing laws.

 

And therein is the difference between Obama & Trump.  People take Trump's words literally, even though he does not follow through on his verbal outbursts - case in point is the proclamation that he's the one who gets to decide when states open up.  It's the opposite of what Obama did, which was not say anything about subverting laws, and then do what he wanted to do, knowing there was almost no pushback from a supplicant press.

[oldmanfan]

6 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said:

Here, use these real conservative sites  to read about the IRS scandal:

treasury.gov report

Lois Learner pleads the 5th!!  and then they allowed her a soliloquy 
 

IRS Apologizes For Aggressive Scrutiny Of Conservative Groups<--- npr.org
 

IRS Scandal Fast Facts<--- cnn.com

 

 

Oh good! Then you will love the treasury document above. ?



 

An example of what I want done.  An abuse of power by an agency under the Executive branch, properly investigated by the legislative branch.

 

Let me remind you I did not vote for Obama.

1 minute ago, GG said:

 

I was referring to Obama upendng the automakers' bankruptcy proceedings by turning bankruptcy law on its head.  Nobody in the press cared, because he did it for the "right" reasons.   But people who care about standing laws being upheld, cared a lot and lost any hope for the Presidency.  They were proven right by his blatant disregard for standing laws.

 

And therein is the difference between Obama & Trump.  People take Trump's words literally, even though he does not follow through on his verbal outbursts - case in point is the proclamation that he's the one who gets to decide when states open up.  It's the opposite of what Obama did, which was not say anything about subverting laws, and then do what he wanted to do, knowing there was almost no pushback from a supplicant press.

I’ll have to check this out.

1 minute ago, GG said:

 

I was referring to Obama upendng the automakers' bankruptcy proceedings by turning bankruptcy law on its head.  Nobody in the press cared, because he did it for the "right" reasons.   But people who care about standing laws being upheld, cared a lot and lost any hope for the Presidency.  They were proven right by his blatant disregard for standing laws.

 

And therein is the difference between Obama & Trump.  People take Trump's words literally, even though he does not follow through on his verbal outbursts - case in point is the proclamation that he's the one who gets to decide when states open up.  It's the opposite of what Obama did, which was not say anything about subverting laws, and then do what he wanted to do, knowing there was almost no pushback from a supplicant press.

Maybe it’s time the current president realize his words have meaning.

[Buffalo_Gal]

Just now, oldmanfan said:

An example of what I want done.  An abuse of power by an agency under the Executive branch, properly investigated by the legislative branch.

 

Let me remind you I did not vote for Obama.

Clearly, I am wasting my time. You do not want to see the facts. You do not care about the facts. The only question I still have is if you are trolling, or if you enjoy being willfully ignorant? 

 

[GG]

3 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

 

Maybe it’s time the current president realize his words have meaning.

 

That ship sailed 50 years ago, and got more potent after that style won the highest job in the world.

[oldmanfan]

Just now, Buffalo_Gal said:

Clearly, I am wasting my time. You do not want to see the facts. You do not care about the facts. The only question I still have is if you are trolling, or if you enjoy being willfully ignorant? 

 

Well this is brilliant on your part.  I looked at it and agreed with you.  The IRS did something wrong here, the legislative branch examined it and brought it to light, and folks got fired.

 

You are apparently so locked into your preconceived views on things you can’t see the forest for the trees so I will say it again.

 

1.  I did not vote for Obama therefore I have no specific allegiance to him

2.  I am for our constitution and 3 co-equal branches of government each overseeing the other.

 

2 minutes ago, GG said:

 

That ship sailed 50 years ago, and got more potent after that style won the highest job in the world.

Sadly

[Buffalo_Gal]

1 minute ago, oldmanfan said:

Well this is brilliant on your part.  I looked at it and agreed with you.  The IRS did something wrong here, the legislative branch examined it and brought it to light, and folks got fired.

 

You are apparently so locked into your preconceived views on things you can’t see the forest for the trees so I will say it again.

 

1.  I did not vote for Obama therefore I have no specific allegiance to him

2.  I am for our constitution and 3 co-equal branches of government each overseeing the other.

 

Sadly

You agreed with me? M'kay. If that was what that was supposed to be. 

1. Like Nixon, I know no one who voted for Obama. ?
2. Agreed
 

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

1 hour ago, SectionC3 said:

 

“Ballsy Ford?”  Not cool, and also not funny.

 

And no, I don’t recall either your question or its context. 

 

FYI - Clarence Thomas was a Coke can.  That had a ***** hair on it.  Allegedly. 

 

And Bork was spiked for professional reasons.  

 

Sorry, "Ms."  Ballsy Ford.  

 

You believed her, and feel no empathy for Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh.  I take no issue with that, though I think you're wrong.  I think she fabricated a story, played the system for political gain, and when Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh drew a line in the sand, she went away back to Scumbagville.  Thankfully, Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh was confirmed, and in some small way my voice was heard and my vote mattered.  Ms. Ballsy Ford is my enemy, not unlike the Iranian government,  Bernie Sanders and the Shamwow guy from days past. 

 

Thanks for the update on the soda choice of nefarious accusers.  I find them interchangeable, and as such I'm not much of a brand loyalist. 

 

 

 

 

Edited May 21, 2020 by leh-nerd skin-erd