»
Topic: I'm curious about something.
Replies: 65   Last Post: Apr 1, 2019 3:55 PM by: EducationOnYourOwnTime®
[ General Boards - Politics & Religion ]
Start New Topic
Replies: 65  

I'm curious about something.

[2]
Posted: Mar 29, 2019 10:09 AM
    Reply

Some of us believe the Obama administration plotted to impeach then remove from office or otherwise torture Trump by accusing him of colluding with Russia to fix the 2016 POTUS election. A few of us believe that the FBI and AG are going to find proof positive that those who participated in that plot will face justice in the courts, that of public opinion and those with a judge.

Another group makes fun of us for considering that a valid and warranted. Are those of you who believe we are delusional as confident that we're wrong now as you were for the last two years that Trump was guilty and the evidence was obvious?

2019 orange level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

I dunno, but that first part seems kinda far fetched to me.

[1]
Posted: Mar 29, 2019 10:14 AM
    Reply

Obama was done at that point; he did what he wanted to do. Whats he care what happens to the next guy?If it was someone/a group from the Obama Administration, well..that still seems far fetched.

badge-donor-05yr.jpg

Trump's campaign was effectively all about undoing...


Posted: Mar 29, 2019 11:00 AM
    Reply

Obama's legacy. In fact the things which made Obama most notable are exactly what Trump attacks. Obama's legacy is just about destroyed. The biggest thing left is Obamacare which was challenged in the SCOTUS and found constitutional only because of the mandate which was determined to be a tax. Recently a federal judge ruled against the mandate and left the SCOTUS room to find Obamacare unconstitutional. Trump was the anti Obama candidate, blatantly hostile to Obama's policies and that's why, imo he was elected.

I'm also concerned about a two year investigation into a sitting POTUS turning out no evidence of collusion. Mueller, according to the Reader's Digest version published, 'Found no evidence of collusion.'

Who starts an investigation without knowing a crime was committed, how does one determine a crime committed without evidence that a crime was committed? Fantasy, delusion, wishful thinking, need and other evidence which doesn't stand up to legal scrutiny.

2019 orange level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

Wait, you're serious here?

[4]
Posted: Mar 29, 2019 11:15 AM
    Reply

"Who starts an investigation without knowing a crime was committed..."

Investigators for law enforcement in dang near every municipality, state, and federal organization every single day. That's one of the primary initial functions of investigating something... to determine if a crime was, in fact, committed, prior to (or in junction with) moving on to determining who did it.

And without actually reading the report we have no way of determining what actually was found. We only know the , as you put it, "reader's digest" version. To be clear I'm NOT advocating that I believe there was collusion. I don't know. You don't know. And to stay sane in this world sometimes you have to just accept that others will look into it and come to the appropriate legal conclusions so that you can go about the things you have to take care of in your life.

But to argue that you know something now or knew something then (without real near-firsthand insider knowledge) is fooling yourself.

But, back to the main point, investigating something is what we pay folks to do. It's not, necessarily, some part of some imagined partisan witch hunt. It wasn't with Clinton. It's not with Trump.

Stop believing either fringe must be true.

2019 white level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpg


You think Barr lied?


Posted: Mar 29, 2019 11:50 AM
    Reply

Do you think he's redact the evidence on Trump without Mueller telling congress that Barr is lying? That's faith man, serious faith. If you believe Barr, there was no evidence of collusion.

I don't know the man. I can't say he won't lie or certainly won't say he never lied. I hope you'll agree he isn't stupid. Mueller's team had nearly 20 people who donated to Hillary's campaign. Do you honestly think none of them would spill the beans on Barr if he lied? Congressional dems have said they will interview Mueller, what do you expect Mueller to say under oath?

2019 orange level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

Stop thinking in extremes

[1]
Posted: Mar 29, 2019 12:11 PM
    Reply

I'm not asserting anyone lied here.

I'm saying that we have only the reader's digest version (your words) and as such we lose all non-legalese nuance as to what was actually found. And, as I said before, I'm fine with that.

I didn't know if there was collusion before, and nor did I pretend to. I don't know, now, if there was collusion (and nor do I pretend to). What I know is that reportedly there was no legally actionable proof of it, and again, that's fine with me. I'm FAR from a Trump fan, but that part doesn't play into my opinion of him (his actual words and deeds are enough for me).

But again, your assertion was that it was somehow lunatic fringe lunacy to investigate at all. That's laughable and reeks, itself, of partisan lunacy.

2019 white level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpg


For everyone's information,


Posted: Mar 29, 2019 5:29 PM
    Reply

I wondered if Trump colluded to fix the election until Obama proclaimed that the Russian dallying didn't change the outcome. I also remember hearing testimony of FBI folks who repeated that statement.

I freely admit a couple things. It didn't take me long to decide that their was a great preponderance of evidence that Loretta Lynch talks with Bill on the tarmac were on Hillary's behalf. Even Lisa Page and Strzok testified that they knew LL influenced the decision to not charge Hillary with the unsecured server being used for classified data and obstruction of justice for destroying all the physical evidence.

I agree that the investigation playing out was the only true solution to this issue, however, Trump's investigation seem to be motivated with much more passion than the candidate running for the party in power, those who controlled that investigation.

I also believe Sara Carter's report but not the first few. She claimed a FISA warrant was granted to electronically spy on Carter Page. That was unjust. The man claims to have been working for the intelligence folks. With no charges brought against him a reasonable person would believe that he was a dunce and a patsy who had delusions of being a double naught spy.

If it's all a delusion I'll be the first to pull a CSO and confess to being a 'delusional ####### with who needs medication for his mental issues.'

2019 orange level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

Nothing will ever tarnish Obama or his "legacy".

[1]
Posted: Mar 29, 2019 11:20 AM
    Reply

He was the first black president, was generally well liked (obviously not by most republicans), and didn't have any major scandals during his two terms. Even if Obamacare is completely repealed, something will take its place, and Obama will always be the one that started that movement.

Obama knows that; he isn't stupid. IMO he wouldn't waste his time on Trump.

badge-donor-05yr.jpg

Being black wasn't my consideration.


Posted: Mar 29, 2019 11:38 AM
    Reply

Imo, that was long overdue but I'd rather have a conservative in office than a progressive liberal no matter what shade the pigment of his skin. No, I'm going to take the blame for failing to address Obama's race. That's typical when a man sees the content of the heart and not the color of the skin.

My bad, now I'll address everything in terms of race so I really fit in here.

My contention was that Trump (super effective at executing conservative policy) was the anti Obama (the political figurehead of a growingly progressive wing of the dem party) not the black man vs the white man. Misconstruing that was quite a sensitive perspective. I can respect that but it's an inaccurate assessment of my statement.

That wasn't my focus, why in the world would it be spun in such a manner?

2019 orange level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

Re: Being black wasn't my consideration.


Posted: Mar 29, 2019 11:47 AM
    Reply

> I'd rather have a conservative in office than a progressive liberal no matter what shade the pigment of his skin.

Well you're in luck, because the only serious candidates for office running as conservatives are white.

Because it's basically the old white guy party now, you can safely avoid voting for a P.O.C. by only voting for conservatives.

2019 white level member

What do you think the democratic party is?


Posted: Mar 29, 2019 11:53 AM
    Reply

The two leading 2020 presidential candidates are Bernie Sanders, and a yet to be decided if he's even Running, maybe he will maybe he won't- Joe Biden.

badge-donor-05yr.jpg

You think I'm a conservative because I'm white?


Posted: Mar 29, 2019 11:54 AM
    Reply

Dood, I plainly said I want a conservative no matter the color. I told my 5 daughters (no pigs) to find and marry a Christian. I failed to follow your directions and specify race. Would you?

2019 orange level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

Re: You think I'm a conservative because I'm white?


Posted: Apr 1, 2019 1:56 PM
    Reply

I'm saying that you don't need that caveat. It's literally impossible to vote for POC if you vote conservative. Because the only conservatives left are white men. The rest of the country is moving on to a new era where all citizens are equal.

2019 white level member

Are all of us babymakers?


Posted: Apr 1, 2019 3:44 PM
    Reply

So you're saying 62,979,636 votes, or 46.1% of the total vote are nothing but white men? If I've told you once, I've told you a million times, quit exaggerating!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Pjs7uoOkag




2019 orange level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

The CANDIDATES are all white men***


Posted: Apr 1, 2019 3:53 PM
    Reply

Not the voters. Jesus.

2019 white level member

Like it or not, that's his legacy.


Posted: Mar 29, 2019 11:55 AM
    Reply

That above all else gives him a type of legacy that no one else can ever have.

And I'd tread real lightly about Trumps "conservative policy".

badge-donor-05yr.jpg

Why 'Like it or not?'


Posted: Mar 29, 2019 12:11 PM
    Reply

I respect that we had a black POTUS. It didn't help with racial divides but still.

2019 orange level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

I never said what it accomplished, postive or negative.

[1]
Posted: Mar 29, 2019 12:15 PM
    Reply

That's probably up to the individual person.

And you seemed offended that I would mention that as part of his legacy; hence "like it or not". It is relevant to how he will be remembered, regardless of what else occurred during his time in office.

badge-donor-05yr.jpg

No, I plainly said I didn't take that into consideration.


Posted: Mar 31, 2019 3:04 PM
    Reply

When I said Trump has done away with most of his legacy I was talking about political accomplishments. I got defensive when you said 'like it or not,' due to being a little embarrassed and have a distraction set before me which contradicted my statement. I'm a little sensitive and I apologize and admit I came back at you a little more strongly than is polite.

My issues with Obama had nothing to do with his race. That's my statement, if anyone can find another lie I've told and not taken corrections from anyone and everyone here please convict me of being a liar and likewise a racist. Those two faults can't be separated in consideration of my statement.

In consideration of your statement from spending more than an instant thinking, I'll say this. I now believe that Obama was socialist candidate and he's one of the factors of having AOC and the other two new nutjobs in the house.

To further that line of thinking I believe the American people will lash out in 2020 which will much impede the dems' move toward the radical left.

We good?

2019 orange level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

Remember that time Benghazi was investigated without any

[1]
Posted: Mar 29, 2019 2:58 PM
    Reply

evidence of a crime?

And then investigated again?

And again?

And again?

And again?

And again?

And again?

And again?

And again?

And again?

Yeah, 10 investigations, 6 of which were by Republican-controlled House committees.

Remind me again what they found.

2019 purple level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpgbadge-ringofhonor-19b.jpg

The big difference here is that Hillary wasn't president***


Posted: Mar 29, 2019 4:26 PM
    Reply



badge-donor-05yr.jpg

I'm not following what your point is.

[1]
Posted: Mar 29, 2019 4:59 PM
    Reply

The President shouldn't be investigated? It's ok to investigate non-Presidents 10 times?

2019 purple level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpgbadge-ringofhonor-19b.jpg

So how many years of special counsel does she merit?***


Posted: Apr 1, 2019 3:40 PM
    Reply



2019 orange level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

Yes.***


Posted: Mar 29, 2019 10:15 AM
    Reply




I can respect consistency.


Posted: Mar 29, 2019 11:03 AM
    Reply

Being consistently wrong is at least consistent.

2019 orange level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

Just the same as consitently consuming

[1]
Posted: Mar 29, 2019 11:13 AM
    Reply

conservative media. You're tangled in the left vs right, us vs them mentality.


Why did you ever believe Trump colluded with Russia? ***

[1]
Posted: Mar 29, 2019 11:26 AM
    Reply



2019 orange level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

Because he did?***


Posted: Mar 29, 2019 11:49 AM
    Reply



2019 white level member

He did?***


Posted: Mar 29, 2019 11:57 AM
    Reply



badge-donor-05yr.jpg

Dood, you're full of it.


Posted: Mar 29, 2019 12:04 PM
    Reply

I remember a couple years ago using the term UGAy and you being offended. I wrote a long heartfelt apology to you for being that offensive to Clemson folks. I apologized, said I'm sorry and you didn't even read it. I told the story of learning God's lesson that none of us are better or worse than anyone else. I was the adult Sunday school teach at a small Baptist church.

Some short time after that I learned one of my daughters was a lesbian and realized why that lesson was more important to the teacher than the class. The mange stopped calling gays 'gay,' and started calling them baptist to honor you and avoid being offensive.

You never accepted my apology not even address me in respond. Screw you and your victim mentality.

2019 orange level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

Re: Dood, you're full of it.


Posted: Apr 1, 2019 2:01 PM
    Reply

> Some short time after that I learned one of my daughters was a lesbian and realized why that lesson was more important to the teacher than the class.

I want to laugh at the coincidence, but I really just feel awful for your daughter that she grew up with a bigoted father. Her childhood must have been much more difficult than it had to be.

> I wrote a long heartfelt apology to you for being that offensive to Clemson folks. I apologized, said I'm sorry and you didn't even read it. I told the story of learning God's lesson that none of us are better or worse than anyone else. I was the adult Sunday school teach at a small Baptist church.

If by heartfelt apology you mean 'backhanded, holier-than-thou attempt at reconciliation after belittling me', sure. I'm not obligated to accept an apology because you felt obligated to make one. Instead of apologizing to me, why don't you instead just take some time to audit the rest of your belief systems that are inevitably intertwined with your previous views on LGBTQs - it's very likely there are other areas of your beliefs that deserve an equally important lesson in acceptance. That would be a much more heartfelt apology.

2019 white level member

Why would Jr. even take a meeting with


Posted: Mar 29, 2019 12:23 PM
    Reply

a Russian who says they have dirt on their opponent? You know what bells go off for an honest person who gets this proposal?...Hmmmm, this is illegal and I should let the FBI know about this.

I've never stated my conclusion on whether there was a conspiracy between Trump's campaign and Russia, but there is plenty of real evidence produced by Mueller's team in Manafort's case to suggest it. If there was a conspiracy, Mueller would've found it. He didn't and thats good for America.

\That, however, doesn't excuse all the dumb shid he does and says on a daily basis. It is very clear, to anyone, that he is not fit for office. This is a man you would be loathe to have over to your house for dinner, you certainly wouldn't want your daughter dating somebody like him, and most conservative folks wouldn't even do business with the man due to his questionable character.

Yet, why in the world do you worship him? Why does the GOP I grew up with support this abomination of a man?


Do all jurors worship the people they find not guilty.


Posted: Mar 29, 2019 1:03 PM
    Reply

That's outrageous. You're incapable of being unbiased on this and most of Trump issues because you hate the man. You'd never admit that he created 5.5 million jobs by resending Obama instituted regulations. You take no pleasure in knowing the unemployment rate for black and Latino is at an all time low. History is being made and you can ignore it because Trump is a crook, liar and cad. That's SOP for DC.

The bottom line is the bottom line, "ITS ABOUT THE ECONOMY, STUPID." -Slick D1CK WILLIE Turns out Clinton was right.

The Russia was a lawyer who didn't speak English. The meeting was about promoting the adoption of Russian children and the Trump family rejected Russian's ulterior motive for the appointment. Turns out the lawyer did contract work for Fusion GPS. Does that ring a bell? Fusion was the company hired to dig up dirt on Trump.

That's my suspicion but it comes from investigative reporters who claim it's true. Why are you not curious about seeing this investigation exhausted?

2019 orange level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

Gosh, you've got all of the


Posted: Mar 29, 2019 1:48 PM
    Reply

conservative entertainment media mantras down pat, so I'm not even going to touch the question of bias.

I have no hate for Trump, don't have a reason to. I find him absurd, especially in the his current office, for which he is entirely incapable. His set of values are exactly opposite of any that I hold dear. So hate? Nah, hate only hurts its keeper.

As a conservative, I find it baffling that real Republicans rush to stumble all over themselves in support of this cult of personality, willingly embracing the man's ignorance along the way, while he displays his obsequiousness to Putin in front of the entire world. How do you think the rest of the world's view of the US has changed since Trump took office?


First, who gives a rat's petutie..

[1]
Posted: Mar 29, 2019 5:15 PM
    Reply

what the rest of the world thinks about Trump? Mexico, Canada and the EU are getting their butts kicked with the new trade talks. The entire rest of NATO countries have been called on the carpet over the US providing more resources for their defense than they supply for themselves. The bill has come due but they don't seem to want to pay for their own defense much less pay back the previous charity our nation has extended to them. Of course they aren't happy that someone is openly telling them to pay up.

BTW, the conservative media was right about Trump's collusion with Russia to fix the election. I don't know what your sources are but I'd bet a buck that the folks you get your news from were wrong about that. What gives you so much confidence that those who were so wrong before are right now? Obviously they have an anti Trump bias.

2019 orange level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

I don't think most people are delusional...

[2]
Posted: Mar 29, 2019 10:36 AM
    Reply

But we all make choices to use the information we see to jump a certain distance. I don't care for, and I hope I never adopt, the "conspiracy" mindset, where we actually make an effort to think of more outlandish reasons for things, that go outside the bounds of what we actually know.

I feel like I can stay more sane by staying close to the facts as we know them and not to extrapolate too far. Why can't it be that law enforcement received information about the potential for Russian influence in the election, and they decided it needed to be looked into? And they did.
Why does it have to be that it was some grand scheme? Maybe it was, but I'd certainly rather it not be, and I'm not going to jump to that conclusion unless that conclusion is clad in fact.

Same thing the other way. I'm not going to jump to the conclusion that there was a collusion scheme. I'm going to deal with the facts as I know them.

If law enforcement feels there is enough evidence to look into the possibility of bad actors knowingly pushing a false collusion scheme, then I will support that investigation, and wait for the results of that one to form conclusions about it.


Thinking in this way does require

[1]
Posted: Mar 29, 2019 11:01 AM
    Reply

a measure of trust in institutions, particularly law enforcement. Not blind loyalty, of course, but some trust based on what you can observe.


Are you thinking about respect for the...

[1]
Posted: Mar 29, 2019 11:25 AM
    Reply

current administration's credibility in investigating the previous administration or the previous administration's credibility in investigating Trump?

If both then you're looking forward to seeing the FBI's and AG's evidence that the FISA warrants were procured by deceiving the FISA court judges. You should also be enthused to see justice served when the people who investigated Trump will be prosecuted for lying to congress and the FISA courts.

Those are crimes, not fabricated or dreamed but real crime by those you felt confident were pursuing justice and the American way.

2019 orange level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

It is both...and yes I will be interested to

[1]
Posted: Mar 29, 2019 11:36 AM
    Reply

see if any wrongdoing is uncovered about how the investigation happened.

But until such time as that is borne out by facts, I will let the theory rest away from my mind. It's essentially a presumption of innocence.


And this is why you see the wild theorizing...


Posted: Mar 29, 2019 1:03 PM
    Reply

from the people who are most cynical about politics, whether they're on the left, the right, or somewhere in between (looking at you, libertarians).


Message was edited by: camcgee®


2019 white level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg

I think the current level of trust for mainstream is delusional.


Posted: Mar 31, 2019 2:09 PM
    Reply

Operation Northwoods was a real thing.

Iran-Contra was a real thing.

TonkinGulf was a real thing.

Tuskegee experiments were a real thing.

Holocaust was a real thing.

People need to stop dismissing ANYTHING. Do your own research or stop having opinions.

2019 white level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

How can you be confident in anything

[1]
Posted: Mar 29, 2019 11:01 AM
    Reply

when you don't have the facts yet?

We are still the same uninformed electorate we were two years ago, with only the usual rumors and innuendo to guide us. As long as we are properly medicated with TV, sports, and usual side dramas, this whole thing can go away pretty easily.

Cue the bread and circuses.


Evidence.

[1]
Posted: Mar 29, 2019 11:30 AM
    Reply

Something which Mueller didn't find in the Trump campaign. Submitting a fake dossier to a FISA court, or any court for that matter, isn't a crime? Creating the delusion that Trump colluded with Russia is fine with you? and I'm the political hack? Right.

2019 orange level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

Two years is a long time to investigate without a single

[1]
Posted: Mar 29, 2019 11:37 AM
    Reply

piece of evidence.

I think you confuse the word evidence and proof.

2019 white level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpg


Evidently, so did Mueller.


Posted: Mar 29, 2019 12:08 PM
    Reply

Barr reported Mueller found no evidence of collusion. Surely you don't think he's lying.

2019 orange level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

Ah, I understand now

[1]
Posted: Mar 29, 2019 12:13 PM
    Reply

You are confusing evidence of a crime that can be used to form legally actionable proof, and evidence that warrants further investigation.

2019 white level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpg


Obviously in an investigation there is a lot of evidence.


Posted: Mar 29, 2019 12:54 PM
    Reply

Mueller stated that the evidence did not support criminal charges.

2019 white level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpg


According to Barr's letter he said the Mueller report...


Posted: Mar 29, 2019 5:41 PM
    Reply

contained the phrase 'No evidence of collusion.' What I read reflected that Barr reported that the Mueller team could not decide whether or not Trump obstructed justice. According the Alan Dershowitz motivation must be proven to convict on obstruction without a crime.

Most folks don't read Dershowitz because he doesn't always say what they want to hear. He wrote the book on Trump's impeachment. He's some super law Professor who taught at Harvard and remains on some esteemed commit there. He said the MSM quit inviting him to their networks because they no longer liked what he said.

I'll say this about the man. The lunge lawyers respect his opinion and he hurts my feelings because he doesn't mince words or pull punches. He's brutally honest no matter who he's talking to and Fox News is about the only place he shows up anymore. That man is why I watch Fox and read articles from Dershowitz.

I only follow links to MSM articles because they are supplied here. I've heard, read and considered both sides of this up to now. The anti Trump folks here quit posting links to their sources after last weekend. I'm not sure why. Can you say?

Tdrake, take none of my post personally. I might argue with anyone, everyone and then some here but if you ever have to go to war I'm on your side, ok?

2019 orange level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

Maybe I missed that phrase?

[1]
Posted: Apr 1, 2019 2:09 PM
    Reply

What I saw was this: "The Special Counsel’s investigation did not find that the Trump campaign or anyone associated with it conspired or coordinated with Russia in its efforts to influence the 2016 U.S. presidential election. As the report states: “[T]he investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.""

The quote from the actual report is "[T]he investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities." So where does the report say there was no evidence of collusion?

2019 white level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpg


Easy,


Posted: Apr 1, 2019 3:47 PM
    Reply

you'll be called a white conservative.

2019 orange level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

I am white.


Posted: Apr 1, 2019 3:53 PM
    Reply

Neither liberal or conservative.

Still wanting to know where it said there was no evidence of collusion.

2019 white level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpg


So you believe in a Deep State?


Posted: Mar 29, 2019 11:31 AM
    Reply

Seems like the most logical observation was that there was evidence (at least circumstantial) of collusion but nothing to raise to the level of conspiracy. There were a lot of contacts and ties with Russians that were lied about, or at least not reported.

But conspiracies are more fun.

2019 white level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpg


Some of us believe the earth is flat


Posted: Mar 29, 2019 11:43 AM
    Reply

But generally, unhinged conspiracy theorists are best ignored. They don't live in reality, so using logic doesn't work.

2019 white level member

Re: Some of us believe the earth is flat

[1]
Posted: Mar 29, 2019 12:02 PM
    Reply

wait a minute now. if there Earth's not flat, how come all the water in the ocean don't just roll off of it?

2019 white level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg


That makes as much sense as the rest of this thread.


Posted: Mar 29, 2019 5:43 PM
    Reply

I was bored, excited and afraid of the cardio visit this afternoon so I trolled a bit to take my mind off dying. It was a pretty fair troll post, wasn't it?

2019 orange level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

I'm old enough to remember people laughing at

[1]
Posted: Mar 29, 2019 11:55 AM
    Reply

Trump when he said his campaign was spied upon. Even the head of the FBI went before Congress and said this was not true. Of course, it was a complete lie by the head of the FBI but nothing has come of it.

If she's a hollerer, she'll be a screamer.
If she's a screamer, she'll get you arrested.


Yes.

[1]
Posted: Mar 29, 2019 12:28 PM
    Reply

Flip your post. You thought it was crazy that people believed Trump worked with Russia, but you believe that conspiracy.

badge-donor-05yr.jpg

Yeah, if you want to risk being twice wrong go for it, Cat.


Posted: Mar 29, 2019 5:47 PM
    Reply

Obviously, I should make my sentences shorter and more simple. Want me to draw illustrations to expose the meaning in simple form?

2019 orange level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

Threadjack: I think you are the best poster on here lately.

[2]
Posted: Mar 29, 2019 3:18 PM
    Reply

Obviously not because we agree on everything, but I think you come from a good place in your posts. You have a perspective you want to share, yet you are inquisitive too. You seem to be grounded in your own independent standards but honestly open to considering other perspectives. Most of us have our egos dripping all over the place or we are unconsciously compensating for our personal flaws/shortcomings, but you do it better than that. You have diplomatic tact. You must be really old.

Kudos to you.

2019 white level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

lulz.."kudos, kudos, nice, kudos, well done...

[1]
Posted: Mar 29, 2019 4:31 PM
    Reply

But..."



badge-donor-05yr.jpg

Sarcasm does not become you two.


Posted: Mar 29, 2019 5:53 PM
    Reply

I'm a lot older than my birthday indicates. My BP is 96/60 w/58 pulse today. If I got an erection I'd have a my 12th heart attack. I lost 15 lbs and my medication is too strong for my diet and activity level. So I trolled all day waiting on the cardio appointment.

2019 orange level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

Either you're a liar, kind and gentle to an old man or...

[1]
Posted: Mar 29, 2019 5:49 PM
    Reply

you're smoked up on pot today, CSO. I seriously doubt I do as well to cover up my ego as you perceive but I'm flattered you are high enough to say it. You might be my only Tnet P&R friend and your agreeing with me is lacking.

2019 orange level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

HEY!

[2]
Posted: Mar 29, 2019 6:04 PM
    Reply

What am I, chopped liver?

Who else is going to listen to you ramble on about NLA trim piece circlips?

2019 orange level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpg


Yeah, but I'm the junge racist and they'll say I have one...


Posted: Mar 29, 2019 10:02 PM
    Reply

black friend. Not true, son, DNL (no pigs) and I took the single next door mother's kids to the Spring game two years ago. She hooked up with a man who dominates her, and the children's social lives. I feel bad for her but she seems to be ok.

I appreciate someone, anyone, entertaining my rants about details which many here won't do. Thanks, man.

2019 orange level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

Re: I'm curious about something.


Posted: Mar 31, 2019 3:15 PM
    Reply

for those of you do believe that deep state nonsense, do you understand how crazy that makes you look?

2019 orange level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

You should never chalk up to conspiracy what you can reliably attribute to stupidity. Because stupidity is a much more powerful force in the course of human events.


Re: I'm curious about something. Me too.


Posted: Apr 1, 2019 3:51 PM
    Reply

I've curious how it feels to be the craziest looking people on the planet for believing Trump colluded with Russia.

No matter how this turns out I won't look as crazy as the left does in the aftermath of a two year investigation which contradicted everything you believed about Trump colluding with Russia. Day after day after day after day after day.

2019 orange level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

Replies: 65  
[ General Boards - Politics & Religion ]
Start New Topic
425 people have read this post