SectionC3

Hoax. Your malaise actually is related to your status as the founding member of the Fluffer List.

I’ll reiterate the question to the Fluffer Listee: is today’s GAO report about the ineptitude of the Trump Administration with respect to its COVID-19 response a hoax?

You’re so confused. Your last question was about whether Trump wrote notes with respect to that meeting. Unfortunately this is a good example of why you’re on the Fluffer List.

Actually my goal is to learn from the purported intellectual standard bearer of this community what exactly a fluffer is. Perhaps without your input on this important subject I will be forced to assume that you are a fluffer. Along those lines, and until further notice, I have no choice but to put you on the Fluffer List. Congratulations, sir!

How could I have “bobbed and weaved” when this was the first time the question was posed? And, frankly, your question is poorly phrased (as usual, might I add) and unanswerable. I have no idea whether “Trump [wrote] the notes about the White House meeting on January 4, 2017.” I don’t know the “notes” to which you refer. Along those lines, it is possible that Trump subsequently wrote a note or notes about that meeting without having attended such gathering. I suppose that we may learn the answer to your poorly-presented question if and when Trump’s presidential materials are placed in a publicly-available archive.

Again, what’s a fluffer? You seem to have some knowledge, and possibly some expertise, in this area. Please enlighten us as to what you mean. *** Question. Is today’s GAO report about the ineptitude of the Trump Administration with respect to its COVID-19 response a hoax?

He’ll lie about it. Just like he lies about everything else. “It was a slippery ramp!” “I ran down the stairs!” “I didn’t order a slowdown of testing. Or maybe I did!” In the meantime, if he’d like to stop the guesswork about his Obamagate Hoax, perhaps he could enlighten all of his who wait breathlessly for information on this very important subject.

Self-reflection is a good thing.

Hoax. Trump’s probably lying about that, too. If it walks like a duck, and if it talks like a duck . . . .

That’s a bit of a long sentence. Try deleting “is being overshadowed by” and inserting “overshadows.” If I’m going to be insulted, I demand that it be done with proper grammar. Any time Trump feels like getting around to telling the truth is fine with me. What’s a fluffer?

And that's the point. It's just a guess. Another Trump Hoax, if you will.

Hoax. Also a bit ironic, given your penchant for name-calling and denigration. But your grammar has improved. That's a plus. It's Thursday, June 25, and as of yet nobody has specified what exactly #Obamagate is. Nope. This is my playground, too. And I don't consider the services I provide here pollution. Rather, I'm cleaning up the toxicity that abounded in this right-wing, alt-wrong echo chamber before I arrived.

Pardon?

Still didn’t answer the question about what you do for a living. I’ll take a whack at a response. You’re a moderately educated lower middle class white guy who blames somebody else for the fact that, despite your hard and honest work at your relatively menial job, you never quite reached the station in life you think you deserved. This is mostly due to the fact that you didn’t work quite as hard as you thought you did, you didn’t prioritize education early in life, and the hard work in which you engaged was directed toward the wrong things. Deep down, you know you’re a loser and you put others down to try to make yourself feel better. Basically the classic narrative of the white lowlife southerner who dumps on minorities and others not because he hates but because putting others down means he doesn’t have the shittiest life of the bunch. I’ll assume I nailed it until I hear otherwise.

Performed on my what? Hoax. It was your question. Your poorly phrased question, for what it’s worth.

cork deep I imagine.

Hoax. What is it that you do for a living?

Hoax. Sophistry is the perfect word for what happened today. It’s not about Flynn. It’s about the rule of law. https://news.google.com/articles/CAIiEI9uxhyk7W_Vpi7JlTakcWsqFQgEKg0IACoGCAowuLUIMNFnMLnhAg?hl=en-US&gl=US&ceid=US%3Aen

So, are you planning on joining Jacob Wohl in taking up arms? Maybe DJT can join you. He's good at shooting giraffes. He could be a helpful ally. Hoax.

Hoax. It was the question. You inserted the word "being" in today. But you didn't have it initially. Hoax. Except for the fact that he is still guilty. Try reading the dissent. Fake news. Hoax.

It’s a pretty stark split between majority and dissent. According to the dissent, there’s also a circuit split. That, coupled with the unique nature of the underlying legal issue, makes it a good candidate for an en banc. And let’s be clear here. This ruling is elevation of form over substance. Personally I don’t care whether Flynn is guilty, innocent, or somewhere in between. This decision invites prosecutorial abuse and favoritism. The vehicle by which Flynn now likely will escape further prosecution subjugates substance to prosecutorial caprice. The worm someday will turn and there will be a defendant who the pro-Flynn crowd doesn’t like who will benefit from this. It will be wrong then, too. Hoax. You’re the weasel. Do you still believe that Jews have an obligation to be racist? I haven’t heard much from you lately, which is surprising since you’re allegedly the intellectual standard bearer of the alt-wrong crowd around here.

Hoax. I simply repeated a freshly-uttered Trumpism. I’m sorry to learn that you think the trumpism is weak, at that its utterer by extension also is weak. This is a point on which we can agree: Trump is a low-energy, weak, sad loser. I’m glad that after all of our discourse we found common ground on this important point!

So now you think Trump is weak? Duly noted, Creepster. The worst instance of church tarnishment In this whole episode occurred when Trump visited St. John’s.

Hoax. You need to check Donald Trump’s twitter. He said it, not me. “Washed up Creepster” is such a great turn of phrase! Good point. It is after noon, meaning that it’s acceptable to be drunk by now.

The Washed up Creepster is back! Good afternoon, sir! Serious question: are you high? It’s OK if you are (as long as you’re not driving or operating construction equipment or mowing your law). This is pretty whacked stuff. You’re normally more . . . Normal than this.