Kemp Posted January 16, 2019 Share Posted January 16, 2019 23 hours ago, TakeYouToTasker said: You aren't understanding his question. Allow me to translate: "I'm not interested in doing the necessary work of wading through all of the relevant facts and information surrounding the case in order to form an educated position. I would instead prefer to outsource the work of doing so to a "news agency", who will tell me what to think. Which such "news agency" should I defer to?" Translation: I don't want to write 10 words to answer so I'll write 60 or so words to show that I won't waste my time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted January 16, 2019 Share Posted January 16, 2019 Just now, Kemp said: Translation: I don't want to write 10 words to answer so I'll write 60 or so words to show that I won't waste my time. What about my inference was wrong? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kemp Posted January 16, 2019 Share Posted January 16, 2019 37 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: It's been answered three times now. Your schtick is growing old. On the 4th try he comes up empty, again. It's like watching someone who can't hit a foul shot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted January 16, 2019 Share Posted January 16, 2019 6 minutes ago, Kemp said: Translation: I don't want to write 10 words to answer so I'll write 60 or so words to show that I won't waste my time. He's written thousands of words about it. You're just too lazy to read them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kemp Posted January 16, 2019 Share Posted January 16, 2019 38 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: You are just admitting you cannot read. You're purposefully ignoring the rest of those quotes... because you're being intentionally obtuse and an asshat. You should have learned by now that insulting me instead of answering gets you nowhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kemp Posted January 16, 2019 Share Posted January 16, 2019 32 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: Geez, was that so hard? Now you have finally answered the question as to who specifically is reporting the truth about all of this. "Many places" are reporting the truth. Ya can't get more specific than that. Deeply appreciated. It's clear as swamp water. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted January 16, 2019 Share Posted January 16, 2019 Just now, Kemp said: Geez, was that so hard? Now you have finally answered the question as to who specifically is reporting the truth about all of this. "Many places" are reporting the truth Asshat, I did not finally answer the question. I answered it several times and your purposefully obstuse ass didn't bother to read it. Wasted enough time on you. ***** off. 7 minutes ago, Kemp said: You should have learned by now that insulting me instead of answering gets you nowhere. I've never insulted you before today. Won't make that mistake again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kemp Posted January 16, 2019 Share Posted January 16, 2019 31 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: I thought you guys only liked facts, not opinions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted January 16, 2019 Share Posted January 16, 2019 Just now, Kemp said: I thought you guys only liked facts, not opinions. Considering you cannot read what I write, it's not shocking you're wrong. Like you're wrong on this subject, over and over and over again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kemp Posted January 16, 2019 Share Posted January 16, 2019 33 minutes ago, GG said: That's not what you asked in the follow up, because "truth" takes on very different meanings. If you want to know the "truth" about the Russia collusion accusations, then there's no satisfactory answer because the investigation isn't over. But you knew that. You're also being intentionally obtuse by lumping all reporters into the "everybody does it camp," when the issue is very specific to a very specific NYT article. Again, use your own brain to determine the truth that you seek. But take this to heart - which news outlets have continually changed their stories to fit an evolving narrative, and which have stayed fairly consistent to the original story line? You are woefully mistaken by Rhino's stated standards. He has never said this is specific to the NY Times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted January 16, 2019 Share Posted January 16, 2019 (edited) Edited January 16, 2019 by Deranged Rhino Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kemp Posted January 16, 2019 Share Posted January 16, 2019 22 minutes ago, TakeYouToTasker said: Do you believe holding foreign policy views which differ from those of unipolar globalist corporatists should be criminalized? Did I say that anywhere in that post or anywhere else? I asked very specific questions. It's okay to not answer but posing a nonsensical question in response is pretty puzzling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted January 16, 2019 Share Posted January 16, 2019 5 minutes ago, Kemp said: I thought you guys only liked facts, not opinions. We like facts, and opinions based on facts. Even if we disagree with those opinions...because at least we can discuss opinions based on facts. Opinions based on feelings, not so much. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted January 16, 2019 Share Posted January 16, 2019 (edited) 24 minutes ago, Kemp said: I thought you guys only liked facts, not opinions. No one, except Greg in his most recent post, which was deserved, has insulted you. You've demonstrated ample evidence that you are intellectually lazy, and have no desire to independently read through reported facts across multiple outlets, and publicly available primary source legal documents, to form educated positions; and instead prefer to defer to "oracle outlets" to do your duty as an informed and responsible citizen for you. The information is all available, and has been provided to you. You're only counter has been, "if this is true, then when aren't my preferred oracle outlets confirming this?" This is stupid, and is a complete abrogation of your responsibilities as a citizen. Edited January 16, 2019 by TakeYouToTasker 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted January 16, 2019 Share Posted January 16, 2019 1 minute ago, Kemp said: Did I say that anywhere in that post or anywhere else? I asked very specific questions. It's okay to not answer but posing a nonsensical question in response is pretty puzzling. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kemp Posted January 16, 2019 Share Posted January 16, 2019 20 minutes ago, TakeYouToTasker said: What about my inference was wrong? It avoided answering. I guess I should be used to it. What's particularly amusing that there is at least one source I know Rhino would like to cite that I respect. Perhaps the problem is that they write other things that also work against his narrative. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted January 16, 2019 Share Posted January 16, 2019 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted January 16, 2019 Share Posted January 16, 2019 27 minutes ago, Kemp said: What is the goal of the investigation of Trump, in your opinion? If it is to have him removed from office, do you believe Pence is part of the conspiracy against Trump or is he innocent in all this? Who or what is the driving force? This driving force would have to have someone or something pulling the strings. Something this big cannot happen organically. Your contentions remind me of the Bilderberger story. Is it connected? I am beginning to understand your point of view. However, even if you are right, it should seem readily apparent to you that on a separate track Trump has been acting as an ally towards Putin for no readily apparent reason, or do you dispute the existence of this separate track? If you do, it's most difficult to take you as a serious investigator and scholar in the political arena. Is all negative news reported regarding Trump in the MSM fabricated? Is the MSM part of the conspiracy or a useful idiot? Do you similarly believe that Trump's repeated attempts to lessen sanctions on Russia is his view of good policy for America? If you claim he has not attempted to lessen the sanctions, there is no point to going forward with the discussion, for obvious reasons. Sorry, but your stance on all of this leads me to these other related questions. Fusion GPS was originally hired by the Republicans. What happened afterwards is a direct result of Trump defeating his Republican rivals. They no longer had a desire to go after Trump because they preferred him to Hillary, so they dropped it. It is obvious that you have not kept up with things and still want to discuss or argue with one hand tied behind your back. The above, outlined in red has been undressed here many times. If you are worthy of an intelligent debate you should have known this. I don't blame DR for giving up on you. He's had a lot more patience with your moronic take on things than I would have had. Regardless, I second DR's motion. ***** off. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kemp Posted January 16, 2019 Share Posted January 16, 2019 42 minutes ago, GG said: That's not what you asked in the follow up, because "truth" takes on very different meanings. If you want to know the "truth" about the Russia collusion accusations, then there's no satisfactory answer because the investigation isn't over. But you knew that. You're also being intentionally obtuse by lumping all reporters into the "everybody does it camp," when the issue is very specific to a very specific NYT article. Again, use your own brain to determine the truth that you seek. But take this to heart - which news outlets have continually changed their stories to fit an evolving narrative, and which have stayed fairly consistent to the original story line? Are you talking about Fox? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted January 16, 2019 Share Posted January 16, 2019 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts