SectionC3

Cool. So you admit that Trump encouraged the insurrection. Now, tell me what democrats encouraged looting, etc., last year. I don’t dispute that someone along the way probably did such a thing. I just would like to know who it was and and what encouragement was given. also, your logic on the Capitol is akin to saying that “the girl deserved to be raped because of what she wore.” Good stuff, DoQ.

I think you meant the Capitol. You also might want to brush up on that thing called circumstantial evidence. Or not. Either way it’s fine with me. A pleasant afternoon to you as well. It’s sad that Chef Jim Crow, DoQ, and that Deek guy hate America so much that they don’t see a problem with an attempt to defeat the will of the voters and to overthrow the government. Maybe you guys could try Myanmar for awhile and see how it goes.

“Walk down Pennsylvania Avenue!” “Show strength!” “Fight like hell!” Have a nice day, Chef Jim Crow. Let us know if you have any new ideas on how to suppress minority votes. Or, better yet, call your Q pals and bring them up to speed.

Good point. The pepper spray used against Sicknick didn’t kill him. That makes the whole thing better. And I totally understand not backing the blue here. Capitol Police totally should have anticipated that persons gathered for that “rally” would be encouraged to storm the Capitol by the fat ####### who happened to be POTUS at that moment. Happens all the time. Who could forget the time Antifa overran the Capitol during the GWB presidency? Or that scene from Independence Day, which totally happened in real life? If Antifa and aliens have taken over the Capitol and the WH, then the Capitol Police are definitely in the wrong for not anticipating that POTUS would encourage an insurrection. All their fault, all day long. Solid points as usual, DoQ. Of course, had we not had an insurrection by Trump supporters in the first place, then we wouldn’t have that problem. Excellent job at passing the buck and blaming someone else by B-Man. Well done, sir.

Whataboutism. Nice. Looks like you’re cool with overrunning the Capitol in support of the Trump election hoax. Unto each her own, I guess.

Mike Pence disagrees. So does the guy running around the Capitol with zip ties. The family of the fallen officer probably feels differently, too. Blue lives matter, until they don’t or it gets a little inconvenient for them to matter, right DoQ? Nah, it’s prudent to call it what it’s shown to be on video. An insurrection. Nothing more, nothing less. If you’re cool with the Capitol being overrun, that’s on you. I’m not, and I guess we just have to agree to disagree on our view of what’s acceptable in that respect. Except for the fact that Trump was formally charged. Twice. So, not really a sham after all.

Hard to say because many of the records are still sealed. But your analogy to federal criminal law is inapt. The absence of a charge of rebellion or insurrection doesn't mean that such an event didn't occur. And, if you want to play the hyperbole game, I suppose you'll agree that abortion is a procedure to remove a parasite from a woman's body, not the "murder" or the "killing" of a "baby."

Any W on this one is a fake one for the Crow. Maybe he can brag about his Internet victory to his crowy pals when they next get together and complain about how it's too easy for black folks to vote.

Actually I suspect that any destruction of that drug was occasioned by the fact that it had no resale value and that it was cheaper to destroy it than it was to store it. One of those not throwing good money after bad/hoax things.

I’d be less worried about a “farce” and more worried about the insurrection. That is, unless you supported the insurrection. So, did you support the insurrection?

Good points. Alleged dishonesty is way worse than ransacking the Capitol in an attempt to override the results of a presidential election.

Bottom line: You asked/demanded that I "[e]xplain how they are trying to take away right to vote." I asked you to clarify the "they" in your question. You now say that you can't provide that clarification because you don't know who the they is. Makes perfect sense, only to those who use Crow logic. And you want to be my financial adviser. Not happening, sir. There's no misunderstanding. The Crow has to clarify his question/demand. Because, as he knows, as he himself phrased the question/demand, he has acknowledged that he has crowy pals. It's sad, I know, but there's a reason why this guy has earned the nickname Chef Jim Crow.

You're a confusing guy. All I wanted to know was how you defined "they" for the purpose of your question. Is the "they" the "your crowy pals" to whom I referred? Because if it is, you have acknowledged having crowy pals. So let's just start there. Do you or do you not have crowy pals?

I'm still a little confused by your crowy "logic." Are the people to whom you refer not your pals? Or are they pals of yours who are not crowy? Please advise.

These posts clarify the issue, Chef Jim Crow. I posted: "When some of your crowy pals try to take it away, these people fight to retain the right. It should be simple to understand, even for you." You responded: "Awesome. Explain how they are trying to take away right to vote. I’ll give you one shot." I then asked: “ 'They' being your crowy pals?" So, this is simple, even for you. Is the "they" to whom you referred your crowy pals? Please don't make this any harder than it needs to be. TwoBillsDrive turns its lonely eyes to you on this issue, Chef Jim Crow.

I'm sorry. I'm just trying to make sure that I comprehend your question. The "they" to whom you refer is your crowy pals, is that correct? I can't possibly begin to answer your question if I don't know the identity of the "they" to which or whom you refer.

“They” being your crowy pals?

When some of your crowy pals try to take it away, these people fight to retain the right. It should be simple to understand, even for you.

Call Oklahoma. I hear that state has a lot of HCQ to get rid of. Something about falling for the Trump HCQ hoax …

Crow logic at its finest.

You’ll probably try to treat that with HCQ, too.

Good point. Let’s get the Antifa Air Force on this guy. The AAF is not nonsense at all.

That is a guy with good judicial temperament. Hoax. Trump probably is pissed he wasn’t invited to the kegger with Squigg. Thanks for the update. I’m sure you posted that out of concern, and in no way intended your post to sound the dog whistle.

Idle time, right? Time for them to get busy.

Thank you on Jerry Sullivan. Unreadable and unlistenable. Like a friggin dark cloud all of the time.