Bob in Mich
-
Posts
1,749 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Bob in Mich
-
-
7 minutes ago, billsfan89 said:
Do you have any proof that their information was accurate? Judicial Watch has an awful track record, the article I linked literally has quotes from direct sources.
Trump's own commission could not find all this claimed voter fraud
From the article
(AP) — The now-disbanded voting integrity commission launched by the Trump administration uncovered no evidence to support claims of widespread voter fraud, according to an analysis of administration documents released Friday.
-
31 minutes ago, Foxx said:
however, what we are really talking about here is the wikileaks dump and the hack of the DNC (which has been proven to have been a hands on event). nothing within them was i don't think considered national security and they revealed a whole lot of corruption within the hierarchy of the DNC.
The DNC data was stolen through a hack by the Russians. They then used wikileaks to release portions to the public at opportune moments to assist Trump's campaign, right?
So, it was really stolen private (idk, is the DNC a corp) corp data. It may have revealed internal corruption at the DNC, but I don't think stealing and releasing corp information, even if revealing and interesting, should be sanctioned by us.
-
Wacka, some more information on terpenes and how they may interact with cannabinoids THC and CBD, among others.
https://www.leafly.com/news/science-tech/terpenes-in-the-entourage-effect
From the article
The interaction between the two main cannabinoids, THC and CBD, is relatively well understood through years of animal and human studies. However, CBD is unlikely to be responsible for the wide array of effects reported for cannabis. So what else could be responsible for the properties that people have attributed to different strains (e.g., uplifting, sedating, creative, or relaxing)?
The primary suspect for a strain’s reported effects is terpenes.
-
10 minutes ago, IDBillzFan said:
Here's the thing about the divisiveness, in my eyes: it's not going away.
The truth is, I never paid THAT much attention to politics and world affairs until 9/11. Two things happened then that opened my eyes.
First, I was embarrassed to realize it was the first I was hearing names like Bin Laden and al Qaeda. Many people around me knew who they were, and I was embarrassed to be standing in complete ignorance of this enemy; who they were, what they stood for, why they were attacking us, etc. That was Schwarzenegger movie stuff. Not real life. Very embarrassing personally.
Second, I remember watching Congress sing "God Bless America" that day and thinking our country had an "Aha" moment and would undoubtedly unite for years to come.
Unfortunately, they were no sooner done singing than I started hearing some Dems go after Bush. I remember hearing a little disdain for his megaphone moment, and then the criticisms seemed to creep in more and more each day. And it was then I realized that -- without question and proven often since that time -- that Democrats care more about being in power than they will ever care about this country, or its people.
They couldn't unite after 9/11. In fact, they found it necessary to quickly attack OUR leaders. It wrecked me.
So it's no wonder why, all these years laters, more Dems openly and unshamedly admit that America deserved what it gat, and that it was no big deal because "some people did some thing."
So yeah. Bring the divisiveness. I'm happy for it because it shows more people what I've learned from 9/11. That Democrats are the enemy and a giant pile of money-laudering schittbags.
I appreciate the reply. Thx. It seems you are saying that you came about your disdain of the Dems honestly. Ok, fair enough.
Just one point though, the Dems, like the Repubs, are not an organization with a lone spokesperson. I understand some Dems or lefties have said things that upset you and ruined you. We constantly hear from both sides, that the other side said something just awful.
You might want to consider, just like there can be thoughtless statements made by righties, statements made by some on the left should not be attributed to all on the left. Of course you may not like what Pelosi or Schumer says either, but at least they are spokespeople. Both sides, in order to cool the hatred, ought to stop attributing every 'bad' statement made by any member of that group to every member of said group. We should be able to converse without being painted by the stupidest claims by those in our camp
-
3 hours ago, Bob in Mich said:
Deek, I realize there is some humor in there but does the nepotism within the Trump family bother you at all? I mean, i know Ivanka is not paid, but are you at all opposed to her flying around with her Dad and being included in events she obviously has no place? She is clearly able to make business contacts, at the very least, with business deals almost a certainty? If she gets a great business deal, might it be a 'gift' to help influence her dad?
What happened too with Don and Eric being political players full time these days. Weren't they the ones running Trump business and weren't they supposed to be removed from government so as to prevent government actions being seen as possible conflicts of interest with the Trump organization? What happened to that division? Does that bother you? It appears to be similar to your claims of Biden impropriety.
No actual comments or defense of the Trump nepotism? Color me surprised that the Trump supporters are just fine with wrongdoing as long as it is their team.
Do you guys ever see legitimacy in holding or pass interference calls against the Bills? Likely just the other team is always cheating and the refs are always picking on us, eh?
-
1 minute ago, Foxx said:
serious question, Bob.
regardless of where information comes from, should not the truth see the light of day?
Well, on the surface, most would likely say yes. I think we might agree though that in some more complex situations, that is not always the case.
It seems there could be circumstances such as personal privacy for instance, where not all truth should necessarily be made public. I am sure too that there are probably other cases where the method used to obtain said truth may not be appropriate.
A perfect example is the Trump/Ukraine issue where we just saw Trump trying to push the Biden investigation. On the one hand, he innocently claims he is just trying to investigate corruption and learn the truth, while simultaneously he is attempting an illegal political smear.
-
28 minutes ago, IDBillzFan said:
Even you can recognize the extent to which the left has gone after this president.
For three years the left has done nothing -- literally NOTHING -- but attack this president from every position possible. From the embarrassment of the Kavanaugh hearings to the 3-year-time-wasting impeachment, from RUSSIARUSSIARUSSIA to calling everyone who voted for Trump a hillbilly racist, it's been Bash Trump 24/7 with literally no let up from the Dems and the media that serves them.
So first understand where the divisiveness originates. Unfortunately for the Dems, they're using their usual tried-and-true tactics against a man who, finally, isn't afraid to fight back.
Finally.
So since there is literally no indication that the left will stop...as is evidenced by them now planning to go after Impeachment V2,...I am happy to admit I'm fine with the divisiveness in our country because in the process, the right is winning and the left is losing SO badly that they're blowing up their own party.
Not surprised you are happy with the divisiveness. I appreciate the honesty to admit that.
I see that Trump has been under investigation pretty much what was it, Jul/Aug 2016? The difference between us appears to be whether or not he deserved to be investigated or not.
If you want to claim that Mueller uncovered absolutely nothing, as Trump repeats, then it will sure appear Don is the victim. If you recall, the Russians and wikileaks were interfering at the time. If you agree that there were several suspicious 2016 campaign contacts and lies about those contacts, he appears much more deserving of the original Russia investigation, and so not really a victim at all.
If you think he is the victim of an unjustified Ukraine investigation, then I disagree again. Again though, his supporters claim they have sufficient reason to believe Donny did nothing wrong. They believe, even in the face of Repub Senators allowing the House proved the accusations, everyone is just picking on him for his skin color....orange..
-
1
-
-
12 minutes ago, IDBillzFan said:
One thing I've come to appreciate about Trump; he trolls the left so hard they don't have time to stop, breathe, and realize how relentlessly stupid they can sound at times.
In your opinion, is the division in our country a thing to be celebrated and enjoyed or would you like to see less divisiveness? I ask because you seem to just love the Presidential trolling.
If one sees the country's division as a problem, they probably should admire his trolling a lot less. Imo, the President should look to help fix the nation's problems. Imo, the divisiveness is a big and worsening problem. Imo, the president should take the lead and change the tone. Of course if you like the division, it appears that Trump's actions will keep you entertained.
-
Just now, SoCal Deek said:
Hilarious lack of self awareness Bob. We all know Joe Biden already holds the world record for corrupt family enrichment!
Deek, I realize there is some humor in there but does the nepotism within the Trump family bother you at all? I mean, i know Ivanka is not paid, but are you at all opposed to her flying around with her Dad and being included in events she obviously has no place? She is clearly able to make business contacts, at the very least, with business deals almost a certainty? If she gets a great business deal, might it be a 'gift' to help influence her dad?
What happened too with Don and Eric being political players full time these days. Weren't they the ones running Trump business and weren't they supposed to be removed from government so as to prevent government actions being seen as possible conflicts of interest with the Trump organization? What happened to that division? Does that bother you? It appears to be similar to your claims of Biden impropriety.
-
https://www.leafly.com/news/health/finding-perfect-balance-how-cannabis-affects-homeostasis
From the article
Each cannabis strain contains a unique concoction of cannabinoids and terpenes that when consumed together, as a whole plant medicine, can deliver a wide range of effects. A patient may experience symptom relief from one or more of their symptoms, but they may also feel sleepy, high, or get the munchies.
Cannabis can provide significant relief for those whose conditions have a constellation of symptoms, as may be the case with migraines, fibromyalgia, and irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), but the protocol doesn’t fit seamlessly with current Western medical practice.
Physicians are typically trained to prescribe one drug per symptom. This can result in a layering of prescriptions, starting with drugs to manage specific symptoms followed by others to mitigate adverse effects of the first drug. This, too, might be thought of as an artificially managed form of homeostasis.
-
7 minutes ago, RochesterRob said:
That's only the half of it. He has arranged with the grays (aliens) to submit to life extending treatments. Once that is done then they will transfer his brain into an android.
Amazing! Micro-surgery, needed to work with Don's brain, is really incredible. Hopefully the aliens will then take that stable genius brain back to their home planet for study.
-
I am almost as afraid of Trump as a lame duck president. Lord knows what favors he will bestow to his family and pals on his way out.
The election fears are heightened by Trump's coziness with Bill Barr. Every reasonable Repub now says that this fear of Trump staying is ridiculous. No one will stand for that. It is over the top. What happens if Barr comes out and agrees with Trump when he states that there were irregularities with the election? Just as ridiculous?
-
2 hours ago, Gavin in Va Beach said:
Proof that the Republicans need to play to win, because the Democrats have no qualms about digging up all the dirt they can find to try and derail Trump and Republicans. Corruption needs to be rooted out and the players need to be ARRESTED, no matter where they are found or what letter is beside their name. If no one faces justice from the FISA/Dossier/Spying and all the other crimes we know have been committed, if Comey and Brennan (to name a few) walk because too many people are afraid of what would happen if they were charged with their crimes, then this country is truly *****.
We agree there (bolded). Find out what was at the root of the FISA/Dossier/Spying issues, party affiliation is immaterial. I am not aware what specific evidence possibly incriminates those you are pointing at, but if there is more than accusations, make the case, charge them, and take them to trial.
Sometimes I think accusers point to something that is suspicious but then have little proof of any actual misdeed. They just keep implying it looks corrupt without actual proof. Keeping the suspicion afloat can be enough if the accusation was done for political purposes.
Half the country thinks that Trump just acted corruptly with the Ukraine saga. It seems many Congressional Repubs were willing to overlook Trump's corruption essentially (for hundreds) out of fear of political repercussions. That is why about half the country thinks we are well on our way to being truly ***** already.
-
1
-
-
17 hours ago, Foxx said:
seems i am not the only one to have the thoughts here.
https://twitter.com/ChadPergram/status/1225446693614899201
it is going nowhere but, all the same....
Foxx, it is an interesting topic. Thx. Maybe it should be changed. I posed the question 'if you were OK with the ability of the minority to keep from even bringing charges'. If the House process is similar to bringing charges while the Senate holds the trial, should there be a lower bar to formally accuse versus to convict? Again, in question form.
I think sometimes people want to fix the 'bad thing' that they perceive happened to them, so they propose a solution that will not allow that particular bad thing to recur. Often I have found that those rapid response solutions may not have thought the possibilities through from every angle. In other words, the fix may address the bad thing that just happened but if not well thought out, can create situations that could be unforeseen.
-
21 hours ago, Foxx said:
i disagree with the statement, "... the worst any coup claimant should make, was that many were duped ...". please explain your rational behind this statement. i would argue that they are complicit. unwittingly, but all the same, complicit. because you and your ilk have chosen to swallow the propaganda narrative, hook, line and sinker without asking simple questions that would have easily exposed the false narrative. you have put this nation in the position it finds itself today. i understand that that is a huge statement, but i stand by it. as citizens of this great nation, we have an obligation to keep it. the only way one is going to keep it, is by informing themselves. period.
your argument against obstruction of justice has a hole as large as a Mack truck in it. you can posit any argument you like on what may have been being looked into and that Trump been guilty of, the inevitable, inescapable conclusion here is.... he wasn't guilty of anything.
you still believe that the propaganda presstitutes have been telling you the truth for the last 3 + years? there is no response from me if you still believe this other than my main argument, you have swallowed the narrative, hook, line and sinker. i believe, from reading your posts, that you do not, nor will you seek out information sources outside of the main stream narrative. having this in mind, i understand why you think as you do. you'll have to understand my position with regard to your position. that being, you only have one source of information and refuse to look deeper so there is nothing i, nor anyone else is going to say that will get you to change your MSM fed understanding. where you, i and a good many others here differ, is that those of us who believe that there was an attempted coup on a duly elected President of the United States, seek information from a great many sources. included in that information seek, we consider MSM narratives because there is always information wrapped in disinformation. having become adept at seeking out various news sources, we have learned to sift the wheat from the chaff. there are ways to read MSM articles and omit the narratives many of them attempt to paint.
just to delve a bit further into this... logic should dictate that not all news sources would come to the same conclusion if objectivity ruled the day. when you tune into many different MSM news sources and they all, and i mean all parrot the same talking points, doesn't that strike you as someone having an agenda?
additionally, let's say for the sake of argument that Mueller was justified in his investigation (which he wasn't) the fact that it dragged on for the length of time it did was a sham. they knew there was no there there not long after the investigation was opened. a reasonable argument can be made that they dragged it out to benefit the Dems in the '18 election.
the main reason many people hate Trump is because of the narrative from the Dems and the propaganda presstitutes. again, be honest with yourself here.... do you seriusly think that if Trump was a Democrat they wouldn't be singing his praises to the high heavens? one thing the Democrats can't escape is Trump's record of accomplishments. hate him all you like but if you take a look at what he has done, he has done more with less support than any lifelong politician. why do you think that is?
ETA: please read my post again. i did not say you, specifically were ignoring Ominstration possible misconduct. it was a generality. if the shoe fits, then wear it. if not, don't.
Thanks for the discussion. I just wanted to be a decent poster and reply to your efforts. Since the issue I was posting on has concluded with Trump's acquittal, I will likely post less. But, we all post for a variety of reasons so we will see what happens. I am sure we will discuss something sometime.
Certainly we disagree and I think your reasoning is quite suspect, but I will not go point by point addressing this time. I wanted to say that I appreciate that the insult level has come down. I think that helped the conversation a lot.
-
1
-
1
-
-
19 minutes ago, Foxx said:
again, the many who concluded there was enough smoke to warrant an investigation were played by the propaganda presstitutes. and those people who swallowed it whole, did so without question. as more and more information becomes available, daily at this point it seems, we are beginning to understand that it goes much deeper than just the propaganda wing of the establishment. that, at a minimum, it went into the upper echelons of the FBI, if not the CIA, other alphabet agencies and quite possibly, even the Ominstration. there is certainly enough circumstantial evidence that points to it originating in the Ominstration. to deny this while simultaneously stating that there was enough smoke to investigate Trump, is simply displaying a bias and quite possibly an ignorance of the facts on the ground.
your argument regarding 'attempted obstruction', i reject out of hand. there is a valid legal argument that goes to the idea that in order to obstruct something, one first needs to be guilty. of which, i happen to agree with for a multitude of reasons.
with the knowledge of hindsight that you now have, i have to ask you, why are you not outraged that they lied to you for well over three years? additionally, if one looks at the Democrats actions, it is very hard to come away from them and not understand that, 'they hate him'. when you have multitudes of Democrats as being on record stating that they were going to impeach him before he even took office, along with the subsequent refrain echoed throughout the Democrats narrative for the last 3 + years. again to say that they don't is, imo displaying a bias that is devoid of factual evidence.
Sort of agreeing with my initial point that the worst any coup claimant should make, was that many were duped. Tough to understand how I am ignoring possible Oministration misconduct, when I keep repeating they should look into the alleged FISA abuse and to punish any wrongdoing.
That obstruction point of yours has a sort of logical hole too. It seems people want to ignore the possibility that Trump may have assumed that Mueller was investigating things that he did not investigate, or that he would discover some wrongdoing that he did not. He may have thought Mueller was going to discover some, say past tax fraud, when Mueller did not go there. If he wanted to stop the investigation because he feared, say tax fraud charges, he may have wanted to obstruct the investigation even though in the end, Mueller did not investigate that issue. That is an explanation of how obstruction could happen without Trump later being charged with conspiracy.
As far as those lying to me for three years.....First, let me repeat, I don't agree that news outlets were lying for three years. The Dems in Congress, the reporters, the people, and Mueller should have been suspicious, and investigating Trumps actions were justified so, no, I am not outraged at them. I guess as I just described, reporters work with traditional sources and were told there was something to it..... there was some smoke there. Recall too that the whole Russia story broke before Trump was inaugurated. Why wouldn't Dem politicians push to impeach him at that time if they believed the assertions? If there was a deep state conspiracy to manufacture evidence, and those allegations are proved in a trial, I would sure be angry with those folks.
Many people now hate Trump. I didn't mean to imply they don't hate him. I meant to point out that the continued suspicion of the guy and continued investigations are not simply based on hate. There have been and continue to be valid reasons to investigate his actions.
-
53 minutes ago, Foxx said:
the only way one could even possibly come away with the impression that Trump colluded with the Russians is because they took what the propaganda press stuffed down their throats everyday. had one had the temerity to do even just a small dive into the facts that were readily available, they would have understood that it was a false narrative.
many were reading and watching and concluded there was plenty enough smoke there to look into. I maintain there was. Include Trump's words and attempted obstruction, and it looked even more likely that he was hiding something Russia related. The negative views of Trump are not simply due to 'orangemanbad' or simply hate or refusal to accept Hillary lost or laziness, as is the refrain here. Suspicion was well warranted.
I think it is asking a lot to expect people were going to discard their traditional news and intelligence sources in favor of online douchebags, like DR. In fact I did not have DR on ignore back then as I had yet to realize what an a-hole he would become. I was trying to understand his 'reasoning'. His theories were full of logical leaps and logical errors and he actually began his descent into online stalking and harassment over this issue, when I pointed out the logic problems.
To remind, the point I was trying to discuss with Len was that if one totally buys into the deep state /coup theory, the worst they should be allowed to claim is that Trump detractors were duped. Instead there is this narrative he pushes that 'they' have just hate him and wanted to get him all along and for no good reason.
To be honest it was something I should have asked him in a PM. I don't really wish to rehash with those I view as less reasonable and highly combative. It was just a hypothetical to pass the time.....yesterday. Today I am less interested in posting. So, reply or not. Up to you
-
21 hours ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:
We've reached the end here sir.
I'm truly sorry to hear about the medical issues and health care coverage. I think you know that already. What I can offer in that regard is only that everything that happened there was part of the over-managed, over-regulated system set in place by the politicians in the state where you receive care. Everything--everything starts with the state and its requirements.it always has been that way. There are obvious problems with our health care system, but at the end of the day the total disregard for actuarial science is where it all starts. You can't solve a problem that involves both people AND mathematics by creating a new system that ignores the math totally.
I acknowledge health care seems to be a non-issue at this point. Could focus on proving he's not a traitor for 3 years be part of the challenge? Could that be part or the dem strategy? You've seen the House and Senate and where there attentions have been focused.
You are correct--the last part was tough to follow. Impossible in fact. It belies virtually everything we know now about the Russia investigation. Could people believe that it was a big innocent misunderstanding and Trump is guilty in spite of what came out, or that Comey and Brennan are the true heroes of the take, and that the FISA "mistakes" actually represent the truth?
Diabetics skip insulin shots. People with heart conditions allow themselves to become obese. Pat's fans think the cheaters don't cheat. Of course people will think that way.
I'm not one of those people.
Len, I agree with your take that most of this has been discussed but in the spirit of the last word......
Healthcare - just seems that the Dems and Repubs differ on the availability of healthcare to poor people. Even for those people that cannot afford it, Dems have been aspiring to provide some level of care before the sick/poor drop over on their way to an emergency room. Repubs seem content with the current employer based care. The ACA had several big issues but it appeared the plan was taking a first swipe at covering all....and personally, the pre-existing condition coverage was important to me.
Any legislated program of that size is going to need fixes as we see the problems in practice. If I recall, the Repubs have blocked improvement attempts and are well on the way to undoing it. I have no problem with anyone that wants to point out the flaws with the ACA. Philosophically, I disagree with those that are content with the pre-ACA med insurance practices.
Funny how you so vehemently opposed my description of what happened with Trump/Russia. As most know, I think there was enough actual smoke there to investigate but that is not my point here. I was trying to lay out your side of what happened and somehow you saw something totally different in my question. For discussion, I was allowing that there was a deep state plot and that they totally framed a saintly Trump. BRB, gotta go puke....lol
So, bearing in mind that I am attempting, for discussion purposes, to agree that some deep state FBI/CIA types manufactured the evidence to produce the above mentioned smoke, how can you blame the average person for believing the story the deep state put together?
This is the original text from above:
Now, this is tougher to follow.....If there was a subset of FBI and/or CIA officials that were behind the supposed 'coup plot' in 2016, they manipulated/manufactured the whole tale that Trump was involved with Russians to get himself elected. They made him look like a possible traitor, is that basically correct?
If that is what happened, how can you blame people, posters, politicians, or even media outlets for seeing the publicly available evidence and concluding that he might, in fact, be involved with the Russians. If what we saw on the surface was true, not investigating would be irresponsible. I don't agree that Mueller produced nothing. I don't agree that every bit of Trump-Russia evidence was innocent or manufactured but if that is the story you believe, concluding that everyone that bought the story was hateful or unreasonably out to get Donnie, is not really logical.
I won't be hurt if you are talked out on these issues. Reply or not, I will manage.
-
20 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:
Great point, although not on topic.
The politics of life come into play here. If we look at the current narrative, one individual who acknowledged wrongdoing when accused of rape/assault, settled a civil suit and is celebrated as being an incredible human being. Another was accused of wrongdoing on an unknown day at an unknown time 30 years prior, with the accuser being discredited almost immediately upon making the allegation. Both parties have/had lead apparently expemlary lives after the alleged/actual event. One has lived under a cloud of suspicion and derision, the other not so much. Politics are a strange thing, aren't they?
As for your scenario, if I thought the allegations were true, I'd support overlooking every civil liberty we hold dear and support having the perp drawn and quartered and his limbs sent to the farthest reaches of the earth. I don't know how to draw but I'd bet I'd be ok at the quartering. Of course, that's one of the reasons they don't put the relatives of a victim on a jury, and why checks and balances are necessary even when the outcome is painful for you.
You don't have enough to reply to and have to butt in here too? lol
I guess it wasn't on topic if you want to change the topic to Kavanaugh....again with the Kavanaugh. I will have to find that last discussion. Rape itself was not my point either, just a circumstance where it would be apparent to most that, motivations for witnesses would be 180 degrees from today's Repubs in Senate trial.
When I wrote it, we were discussing wanting to pursue more witnesses, like Bolton, versus claiming we shouldn't because the House didn't get his testimony. So, on topic? Yes, spot on my topic, not on the Kavanaugh topic of yours though.
-
2
-
-
55 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:
So one lie, one “some saw it as lie-ish” and one issue of previously undiagnosed color-blindness? Not bad for 8 years. And yes, I can now see why you suggested DJT lies substantially more than past presidents.
You’ll have to forgive me if I discount rallies at plants, photo ops, generalized political word tracks because every presidential candidate can be knocked on those. The repeal of ACA seemed within reach until McCain changed his vote when all eyes were on him, and from what I have seen and read, the approach to sh$tcanning it has transitioned to death by paper cut v torching it with a flamethrower. You seem to be knocking him for lawfully re-appropriating $$$ to keep a promise on an issue he and his supporters feel is a National Emergency—-that constitutes a lie?
We can keep going here but as I have already acknowledged that politicians lie, and that President Trump has lied as well, why bother?
I’m much more interested in the truth(s) he has told and the agenda he is following.
On surveillance, no, my assertion is nit that some Tom Cruise-looking mo’fo dressed up like a Verizon tech and breached the data room at Trump Towers. Surveillance and spycraft occurred, that’s undeniable. You questions imply you desire exacting specifity on surveillance while rounding up (or down) on “lies” like Trump and appropriations made under presidential powers or the absolute ability to withhold foreign aide to corrupt nations, That seems a more political standard than one borne of the ethical standard that all lies matter. For me, it’s much less complicated. When one administration accuses an individual of treasonous activity, broadly and publicly, using the incredible power of the US government to investigate/coordinate/manipulate/and crush anyone in it’s path in pursuit of national security, they should absolutely be correct and revealed to have righteousness on their side. To be clear—-had the dems established a causal and treasonous connection between Trump and Russia, I’d have stood next to you at the “Trump 4 Prison” rally in Detroit. I can’t imagine why you’re not calling for the heads of those who lied to you, and in fact doubling down in Ukraine and whatever fantasy they are cooking up now.
When it turns out the entire premise turned out to be fabricated, and in spite of arms twisted and doors broken down, absolutely nothing comes of it, the corrupt officials in charge of the scheme should be called out on it and prosecuted. Whether that happens or not I cannot say. Honestly Bob, I don’t see why you would approve of the actions of Obama on down, even in light of your feelings on Trump, given all that took place, all that was promised and a big fat goose egg offered to you at the end of the investigation.
Nice spin on FISA ‘mistakes’ though. I’m hearing from the libs that all that happened was the US Govt misspelled “Febuary” 14 times, and in the other 3 spelled his last name “Paige”. ?
Certainly we are not going to agree . As I said, if you believe what Trump tells you, you are going to come away with a much different impression than if you don't believe the guy or his cabinet. Many of these upbeat statements or assertions or accusations of his are unknowns at this point. Time will tell if what he has been telling us is true. Hopefully one of us will see it more clearly later and we can back slap and mock someone together.
You are right, I don't know a lot of the OBAMA lies that pissed you off. If you care to discuss further go ahead.
I don't see killing the ACA as a positive goal. Several years back my wife and I fell right into the circumstances that bankrupted many - expensive treatments, pre-existing conditions, followed by job loss. Candidate Trump promised us better, cheaper health care with coverage for pre-existing conditions. His plan today is to kill the ACA...and replace that coverage with? He has stated no real replacement plan but....what, maybe after the next election he will reveal the plan?
You have told me how upsetting that surveillance on the Trump campaign by the FBI under Obama was to you. Understood. What you have yet to tell me is, if that was such a widespread spying operation, as is implied by you and Trump both, where are the fruits of the investigations? What all was done with this evidence, specifically?
I put FISA 'mistakes' in quotes as they may not be mistakes. I approve of the investigations. Find out what happened. Hold those accountable for misdeeds. Clear?
Now, this is tougher to follow.....If there was a subset of FBI and/or CIA officials that were behind the supposed 'coup plot' in 2016, they manipulated/manufactured the whole tale that Trump was involved with Russians to get himself elected. They made him look like a possible traitor, is that basically correct?
If that is what happened, how can you blame people, posters, politicians, or even media outlets for seeing the publicly available evidence and concluding that he might, in fact, be involved with the Russians. If what we saw on the surface was true, not investigating would be irresponsible. I don't agree that Mueller produced nothing. I don't agree that every bit of Trump-Russia evidence was innocent or manufactured but if that is the story you believe, concluding that everyone that bought the story was hateful or unreasonably out to get Donnie, is not really logical.
-
1
-
-
19 minutes ago, Rob's House said:
The list is a bunch of ***** intended to snow the rubes who don't know any better. Half of those quotes are tongue in cheek, satirical, or taken completely out of context. Others (like the Michael J Fox bit) are factually accurate statements. Over 30 years of speaking without a script for 3 hours a day and THAT is the best they got. Says it all, really.
It is good of you to weigh in with your opinions of a man who you admittedly haven't attempted to familiarize yourself with. It's impressive that despite that lack of familiarity, and apparent inability to distinguish him from Alex Jones, you've been able to form your own independent opinion that totally wasn't spoonfed to you by left-wing media.
Rob, you are right, that was more of Alex's take that I was recalling. I was wrong.
Haven't listened yet to the left wing talking points. Can't help you with those.
-
On a human level, any empathetic person has to feel bad for any lung cancer victim and their friends and families,imo. It is a horrible disease. I wish him the best possible outcome on his treatment plans. I don't wish pain and suffering on anyone.....well, maybe just one poster here, but aside from that, no other creature.
That long list of Rush quotes has to lead one to see that the guy, or at least his persona, certainly had a hateful side. Is he hateful or, like that Stephen Colbert character, was that his act? I never attempted to know him or his persona and heard his show on very few occasions, so I surely don't know. Unexpectedly I don't admire the guy one bit and that opinion didn't come from any of that list of quotes. I don't dislike him for his politics either while disagreeing nearly completely with him.
I thought that Rush's treatment of the Sandy Hook tragedy/aftermath was despicable. Without getting into the weeds on the gun issue, how any person could put those parents/families through even more pain in order to .....to what? Stir up controversy, add viewers....make more money?
-
18 hours ago, Gavin in Va Beach said:
But I thought the coronavirus wasn't much worse than the influenza virus? Does China know something we don't? Are we not being told everything?
Agreed. Yeah, something doesn't seem quite right, does it? From the supposed facts about the dangers and death rate, it seems the containment measures being undertaken worldwide, are over the top. Those measures are expensive and disruptive too. Nations don't spend money on this level for no reason. Seems like governments are acting parental and trying not to worry the kids (us).
-
1
-
-
Alrighty then Good night folks. Out.
Know anyone with a disease? Read this
in Politics, Polls, and Pundits
Posted
True. It is not an apple or an elephant either. It is a pretty good source of cannabis information though that will often provide a link to the underlying study, if that study exists.
If you don't read anything other than journals, you are going to miss a lot given the restrictions on cannabis research. If your personal rules however prohibit you from reading it, please don't. I post cannabis info that I think some may find worthwhile. If you don't see the source that way, then don't read it. I will be fine with that.