DC Tom Posted March 3, 2017 Share Posted March 3, 2017 I would say that 90% of posters here are oblivious to their own bias. Naming names would be an even bigger waste of time. Now that is irony. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted March 3, 2017 Share Posted March 3, 2017 Why do all you die hard Republicans pretend to be otherwise? And then call others intellectually dishonest? Crazy By now you of all people should have enough piss on your leg to know it's not actually raining. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Brown Posted March 3, 2017 Share Posted March 3, 2017 Now that the grammar police are out cruising in force. Holy smokes! We elected an internet troll to be POTUS! Trump also misspelled the word "hereby" two times in his tweets, which he then deleted. The first time he rendered it as "hear by." The second time he spelled it "hearby." The president finally got it right in his third tweet. "I hearby demand a second investigation, after Schumer, of Pelosi for her close ties to Russia, and lying about it." Hey Tibs... Great to be King! And have a proof reader! ;-) ;-) I can understand "hearby", but "hear by?" Whatever. If he got off of twitter it would be a good thing for this country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted March 3, 2017 Share Posted March 3, 2017 Now that is irony. I have no explanation. I'm very much aware of the irony. And I don't really care. It's Friday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted March 3, 2017 Share Posted March 3, 2017 I can understand "hearby", but "hear by?" Whatever. If he got off of twitter it would be a good thing for this country. If he got off Twitter it would be a disaster for this country. He'd have more time to spend trying to be President. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted March 3, 2017 Share Posted March 3, 2017 By now you of all people should have enough piss on your leg to know it's not actually raining. ummm, I have no idea what that means?? Lol, sorry. But I do admit I'm a partisan Democrat if that's what you are getting at Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted March 3, 2017 Share Posted March 3, 2017 (edited) They were also way too easy on Obama. Who was also a complete incompetent who surrounded himself with crooks, thieves and cronies. I must have missed your outrage the past eight years with all of that, as well as how upset you were to find out Obama's AG had a private meeting with Bill Clinton while 'investigating' Hillary and no one on the left asked her to resign or recuse herself. Maybe you were posting your outrage under a different name. Yeah. I'm sure that was it. Edited March 3, 2017 by LABillzFan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted March 3, 2017 Share Posted March 3, 2017 Completely agree. And the WaPo smear campaign is only serving to discredit them. Trump's a dick. He's incompetent and he's surrounded himself with crooks, thieves and cronies. But the media has already jumped the shark and they're losing any credibility they'd have on the stuff he should really be held up for. Even the liberal Chicago rag thinks so: http://www.chicagoreader.com/Bleader/archives/2017/03/02/donald-trump-has-become-a-meme-for-tyranny They were also way too easy on Obama. So they're doomed to lose the battle on both fronts. But when this is your retort to an AG being caught with his hand in the cookie jar having lied under oath, when your inclination is to skew the point toward something else unrelated, I question your ability to call balls and strikes against both teams with the kind of accuracy you claim to have. Here's the rub: Sessions wasn't caught "with his hand in the cookie jar", and he didn't lie under oath. He could have been more clear in his answer, but he didn't perjure himself. Sessions, acting in his capacity as chair of the Armed Services Committee, met with dozens of ambassadors and other leaders and envoys on a regular basis as do all other Senators. It's part of their job. I believe it very reasonable to assume that when Sessions was being questioned in his confirmation hearing that he presumed the questions being asked were in relationship to his involvement in the Trump campaign, rather than in his acting role as a Senator, given the questions were being asked be other Senators who clearly understand that meeting with ambassadors is a regular part of the job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted March 3, 2017 Share Posted March 3, 2017 Who was also a complete incompetent who surrounded himself with crooks, thieves and cronies. I must have missed your outrage the past eight years with all of that, as well as how upset you were to find out Obama's AG had a private meeting with Bill Clinton while 'investigating' Hillary and no one on the left asked her to resign or recuse herself. Maybe you were posting your outrage under a different name. Yeah. I'm sure that was it. You missed it because there was no need to spit into the PPP ocean. Nice try though. Totally not like you to respond with YEAH BUT THE DEMS! Were you pissed at them then? Are you pissed at the Repubs for doing the same **** now? Here's the rub: Sessions wasn't caught "with his hand in the cookie jar", and he didn't lie under oath. He could have been more clear in his answer, but he didn't perjure himself. Sessions, acting in his capacity as chair of the Armed Services Committee, met with dozens of ambassadors and other leaders and envoys on a regular basis as do all other Senators. It's part of their job. I believe it very reasonable to assume that when Sessions was being questioned in his confirmation hearing that he presumed the questions being asked were in relationship to his involvement in the Trump campaign, rather than in his acting role as a Senator, given the questions were being asked be other Senators who clearly understand that meeting with ambassadors is a regular part of the job. Right, and I think it's predictable that you're giving him the benefit of the doubt. And we can debate the space between, whether or not he willfully lied or not, that's fine. I won't profess to know what he did or didn't know he was saying, and I wouldn't be so willing to give him the benefit of the doubt you are. But if his memory is so shaky, perhaps he's not fit to hold higher office. If he couldn't have foreseen his interpretation of fact as being problematic, perhaps his judgement isn't the best. So if he's not a liar, then he's stupid. Either way, I'm not surprised to see you hesitate to critique him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted March 3, 2017 Share Posted March 3, 2017 You missed it because there was no need to spit into the PPP ocean. Nice try though. Totally not like you to respond with YEAH BUT THE DEMS! Were you pissed at them then? Are you pissed at the Repubs for doing the same **** now? Right, and I think it's predictable that you're giving him the benefit of the doubt. And we can debate the space between, whether or not he willfully lied or not, that's fine. I won't profess to know what he did or didn't know he was saying, and I wouldn't be so willing to give him the benefit of the doubt you are. But if his memory is so shaky, perhaps he's not fit to hold higher office. If he couldn't have foreseen his interpretation of fact as being problematic, perhaps his judgement isn't the best. So if he's not a liar, then he's stupid. Either way, I'm not surprised to see you hesitate to critique him. Most here has never hesitated to critique Trump. There's a handful of whack-jobs who think he's the greatest thing since candied yams, and another handful of whack-jobs on the other end of the spectrum who need him as the Great Satan in their morality play. But the majority here consider him a repulsive cheeto dust golem. Don't confuse laughing at the hypocrisy of the liberal left with defending the Yamchurian Candidate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted March 3, 2017 Share Posted March 3, 2017 Most here has never hesitated to critique Trump. There's a handful of whack-jobs who think he's the greatest thing since candied yams, and another handful of whack-jobs on the other end of the spectrum who need him as the Great Satan in their morality play. But the majority here consider him a repulsive cheeto dust golem. Don't confuse laughing at the hypocrisy of the liberal left with defending the Yamchurian Candidate. Yes, those hypocritical leftists!! ! Lol, so transparent. So hate him, just don't criticize hm too much or you are a hypocrite. Funny Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted March 3, 2017 Share Posted March 3, 2017 Most here has never hesitated to critique Trump. There's a handful of whack-jobs who think he's the greatest thing since candied yams, and another handful of whack-jobs on the other end of the spectrum who need him as the Great Satan in their morality play. But the majority here consider him a repulsive cheeto dust golem. Don't confuse laughing at the hypocrisy of the liberal left with defending the Yamchurian Candidate. Laugh at liberal hypocrisy all you like, they deserve it. But the toggle switch on the outrage flipped REAL fast around here. And that really can't be ignored. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dante Posted March 3, 2017 Share Posted March 3, 2017 This cracked me up. I have the "Great Again" cap I wonder if you can buy this one??? Good thing is it can apply to Amy as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted March 3, 2017 Share Posted March 3, 2017 You missed it because there was no need to spit into the PPP ocean. Nice try though. Totally not like you to respond with YEAH BUT THE DEMS! Were you pissed at them then? Are you pissed at the Repubs for doing the same **** now? Right, and I think it's predictable that you're giving him the benefit of the doubt. And we can debate the space between, whether or not he willfully lied or not, that's fine. I won't profess to know what he did or didn't know he was saying, and I wouldn't be so willing to give him the benefit of the doubt you are. But if his memory is so shaky, perhaps he's not fit to hold higher office. If he couldn't have foreseen his interpretation of fact as being problematic, perhaps his judgement isn't the best. So if he's not a liar, then he's stupid. Either way, I'm not surprised to see you hesitate to critique him. I'm not "giving him the benefit of the doubt". I'm reading the transcript to his confirmation, and telling you that given the question he was asked, which framed his discussions as working within the Trump campaign, he clearly did not perjure himself. He could have spoken more clearly, and in a way that he didn't expose himself to political hackery, but he absolutely did not perjure himself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted March 3, 2017 Share Posted March 3, 2017 Its normal, both liberals and conservatives on this board, on social media and real life politicians have shown their massive hypocrisy. It's been a real hoot to see Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted March 3, 2017 Share Posted March 3, 2017 Laugh at liberal hypocrisy all you like, they deserve it. But the toggle switch on the outrage flipped REAL fast around here. And that really can't be ignored. It did. And trust me, if I see someone honestly defending Trump for something they heavily criticized Obama for, I will be all up in their **** for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted March 3, 2017 Share Posted March 3, 2017 If this means "the Russians did not actively alter vote counts or hack voting apparatus" I agree. If this means that Russian actors had no impact on the election, I strongly and vehemently disagree. Whether they SWUNG the election is debatable. But they were clearly involved in the course of the election. This is an oversimplification and incorrect, bro-chacho. Most elections have a foreign policy component. The Russians "hacking" was media hysteria. There was no hacking. We've interfered in more foreign elections and governments than just about anybody. How about this hot story: Ted Kennedy's Soviet Gambit "Picking his way through the Soviet archives that Boris Yeltsin had just thrown open, in 1991 Tim Sebastian, a reporter for the London Times, came across an arresting memorandum. Composed in 1983 by Victor Chebrikov, the top man at the KGB, the memorandum was addressed to Yuri Andropov, the top man in the entire USSR. The subject: Sen. Edward Kennedy. “On 9-10 May of this year,” the May 14 memorandum explained, “Sen. Edward Kennedy’s close friend and trusted confidant [John] Tunney was in Moscow.” (Tunney was Kennedy’s law school roommate and a former Democratic senator from California.) “The senator charged Tunney to convey the following message, through confidential contacts, to the General Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, Y. Andropov.” Kennedy’s message was simple. He proposed an unabashed quid pro quo. Kennedy would lend Andropov a hand in dealing with President Reagan. In return, the Soviet leader would lend the Democratic Party a hand in challenging Reagan in the 1984 presidential election. “The only real potential threats to Reagan are problems of war and peace and Soviet-American relations,” the memorandum stated. “These issues, according to the senator, will without a doubt become the most important of the election campaign.” Kennedy made Andropov a couple of specific offers." More at the link on what the specific offers by Kennedy were. Decide for yourself if those were worse than what's gone on this cycle. Maybe the Dems have this on their minds and think Trump did a similar thing. The Dems running around now like McCarthy did in the 50s. I look for their calls soon to reinstate the House Committee on UnAmerican Activities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strethor Posted March 3, 2017 Share Posted March 3, 2017 I have the "Great Again" cap I wonder if you can buy this one??? Good thing is it can apply to Amy as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dante Posted March 3, 2017 Share Posted March 3, 2017 Another Russian agent! Her and Schumer must resign! http://dailycaller.com/2017/03/03/nancy-pelosi-caught-with-her-pants-down/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted March 3, 2017 Share Posted March 3, 2017 I'm not "giving him the benefit of the doubt". I'm reading the transcript to his confirmation, and telling you that given the question he was asked, which framed his discussions as working within the Trump campaign, he clearly did not perjure himself. He could have spoken more clearly, and in a way that he didn't expose himself to political hackery, but he absolutely did not perjure himself. If you're reading the transcript, then you can see that he objectively said something that wasn't true. Your rationale for that = !@#$ery. Because I know for certain that when the shoe was on the other foot you didn't concern yourself with technicalities or what so and so meant to say. It did. And trust me, if I see someone honestly defending Trump for something they heavily criticized Obama for, I will be all up in their **** for it. Then you must be a busy man these days. Most elections have a foreign policy component. The Russians "hacking" was media hysteria. There was no hacking. We've interfered in more foreign elections and governments than just about anybody. How about this hot story: Ted Kennedy's Soviet Gambit "Picking his way through the Soviet archives that Boris Yeltsin had just thrown open, in 1991 Tim Sebastian, a reporter for the London Times, came across an arresting memorandum. Composed in 1983 by Victor Chebrikov, the top man at the KGB, the memorandum was addressed to Yuri Andropov, the top man in the entire USSR. The subject: Sen. Edward Kennedy. “On 9-10 May of this year,” the May 14 memorandum explained, “Sen. Edward Kennedy’s close friend and trusted confidant [John] Tunney was in Moscow.” (Tunney was Kennedy’s law school roommate and a former Democratic senator from California.) “The senator charged Tunney to convey the following message, through confidential contacts, to the General Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, Y. Andropov.” Kennedy’s message was simple. He proposed an unabashed quid pro quo. Kennedy would lend Andropov a hand in dealing with President Reagan. In return, the Soviet leader would lend the Democratic Party a hand in challenging Reagan in the 1984 presidential election. “The only real potential threats to Reagan are problems of war and peace and Soviet-American relations,” the memorandum stated. “These issues, according to the senator, will without a doubt become the most important of the election campaign.” Kennedy made Andropov a couple of specific offers." More at the link on what the specific offers by Kennedy were. Decide for yourself if those were worse than what's gone on this cycle. Maybe the Dems have this on their minds and think Trump did a similar thing. The Dems running around now like McCarthy did in the 50s. I look for their calls soon to reinstate the House Committee on UnAmerican Activities. https://theintercept.com/2017/02/28/the-new-yorkers-big-cover-story-reveals-five-uncomfortable-truths-about-u-s-and-russia/ The New Yorker’s Big Cover Story Reveals Five Uncomfortable Truths About U.S. and Russia Obama and Clinton have radically different views on Russia. The risk of a new Cold War is very real and very dangerous. The U.S. media refuses to say if the U.S. interferes in Russia’s domestic politics. The U.S. government still has provided no evidence of its theories about Russian hacking Fixating on Russia continues to be used to distract from systemic failures of U.S. elites. Follow link for details. Tough to refute a lot of this stuff. Another Russian agent! Her and Schumer must resign! http://dailycaller.com/2017/03/03/nancy-pelosi-caught-with-her-pants-down/ The GOP shouldn't want Pelosi and Schumer gone. They're rotting the party from the inside out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts