TakeYouToTasker

Good for her for taking time out of her day to harass, and talk down to a blue collar, hourly worker, while he performed manual labor. I’m sure the fact that there were no women on the crew had nothing to do with a lack of upper body strength, or stamina to perform tasks demanding of core strength for sustained intravels, outdoors in the elements in all seasons, for long shifts; and has everything to do with a safety sign placed on the roadway telling drivers to slow down. Was there not a Chic-fil-A drivethough workers she could abuse in the vicinity?

Some people just aren’t worth trying to save. You’re one of them. People are going to die in the streets because of people with your mindset, whether or not you’re one of them doesn’t matter much. You’re in your 60’s and will be gone soon enough anyway. I wish you could have been better, Bob; but I won’t mourn you when you’re gone.

If this is true, then it’s a complete indictment of your understanding of the subject matter. You’d have probably been better off begging mea culpa. The President has complete discretion over who he’s vests with clearances. He has full authority to name his advisors, and to then equip them with the prescribed tools they need to advise him. This is the standard and accepted practice, and is not a national security risk. What Secretary Clinton did was a violation of the law, which will be shown to have been committed for the purpose of circumventing oversight in order to commit even more egregious violations of the law; the entire point of which was to intentionally compromise national security in exchange for personal profit. These two things are entirely dissimilar, and you’re an abject moron if you think they are not.

And with that I’m quite sure you don’t understand what libertarianism is, or what freedom means.

My characterization of your posts is accurate. The fact that you disagree means you dont understand the law or it’s intent. The President has complete discretion in choosing his own advisors, and assigning them the security clearances necessary to best advise him. There is absolutely nothing scandalous about his choices or actions here. Full stop. He’s not harassing you. He’s mocking your steadfast belief in a baseless conspiracy, which has been debunked at every level.

The President has complete discretion as to whom receives security clearances in his service. Full stop. The prior President exercised the exact same prerogative when Ben Rhodes obtained his clearance against advice. Your argument boils down to “the President exercised his justly prescribed authority in a manner completely compliant with the letter and intent of the law, but I don’t like him.” Stop listening to people who are lying to you, and trying to distract you, playing on your confirmation biases in order to do so.

I’m betting $50 she blames the Jews. Anyone feel like giving me some money?

She also tells lies about the things she’s being dumb about. Croissants go for $3.49 at La Guardia, and the food service workers there make between $15 and $19 an hour. Think about that.

Nothing at all, as has already been pointed out to you. What I’ll add are the following: 1) Barr’s summary unambiguously quoted Mueller’s report directly, stating zero evidence of collusion, and no finding on obstruction (I would offer that making a case for obstruction in an investigation into collusion which was determined didn’t happen would be an empty charge. What crime would he have obstructed an investigation into if it was determined no crime was committed?) 2) The President has already stated his desire to see the report released, and has directed his DOJ to do exactly that. Which they are in the process of doing in accordance with the law.

Actually, your questions were answered in the most comprehensive way an honest inquirer could have possibly desired: With respect, completeness, and with hundreds of pages of primary source documents as evidence. It appears you simply came here to troll, or to have your biases validated, sans evidence. If it’s the former, you’re neither unique nor appreciated. If it’s the latter, we don’t allow that here.

This is absolutely wild. https://womenesya.blogspot.com/2018/10/people-living-on-remote-island-near.html

How can anyone read this, and not think to themselves “Why are they trying to put a positive spin on human trafficking, casting the traffickers as heroic?” As Greg is wont to say, the information war is real. What/who do you think they are trying to protect?

I‘m going bacon cheeseburger topped with a fried egg.

This is naive. The President and his negotiating counterparts are both well aware of circumstances which grant them the upper hand in the negotiating process, and play the game on those terms. The President negotiated extremely well, not taking less than he knew he could get, knowing that the real pressure is on the Chinese economy, the illusion of which the Chinese power structure rests upon; while he waited for the tides to turn to place him in full strength. This President has negotiated better across the board than any other US President in memory. I’m not sure how you’re comming to your conclusions.

I'm glad Bo got a mention. He is, to this day, the most dominate running back I've ever seen play the game; not a long enough career to call him the greatest, but certainly the most imposing. The man just did whatever he wanted.

September 8th can't get here fast enough.

With that slogan I can only assume Stormy Daniels will be your running mate?

Yup. Let’s talk about Stormy’s brand again, and discuss where the steady stream of attacks on the President originate, and why.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/2017/01/08/university-students-demand-philosophers-including-plato-kant/amp/ And there you have it.

Yep. That’s the problem I have.

Ya know, I really don’t mind this in principal; but I’d feel better about this individual instance if he bothered to show a drop of contrition.

Ya know, if this keeps up, I may just actually get tired of winning. More promises kept.