Warren Zevon Posted January 29, 2020 Share Posted January 29, 2020 1 hour ago, keepthefaith said: Joe didn't just get his kid a job. He exerted his will and the will of our country on another nation for the benefit of his son and his son's employer. That's breaking the law. He exerted the will of our country at the direction of the official policy of the United States, European allies, and the International Monetary Fund, though. That it also benefited his son doesn't make it illegal. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted January 29, 2020 Share Posted January 29, 2020 2 minutes ago, Bob in Mich said: Simple question: If Trump acted exactly as accused and for the exact motivations proposed by the House Dems, are those actions OK with you and is it OK for all politicians now going forward? There has been no proof of anything, just how you and others "feel". Under our justice system the speculation by the dems would not have even made it to a grand jury. Don't expect paragraph after paragraph of response by me to your horseshit speculation and hidden rabbit holes. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted January 29, 2020 Share Posted January 29, 2020 19 minutes ago, Bob in Mich said: Perhaps you should wake up. Says the guy who still thinks Trump/Russia is real, doesn't know who the IC IG is and why he matters, yet wades in on his high horse proclaiming that everyone else is ignorant of reality or playing partisan politics. Foxx doesn't need to wake up... but someone does I write comedy... but I can't write this kind of comedy 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foxx Posted January 29, 2020 Share Posted January 29, 2020 3 minutes ago, snafu said: I know you didn't direct this at me, but here's a snarky answer: Don't worry, Trump is a one hit wonder. No other politician would ever do this. Bob is quickly approaching @Tiberius territory. he is talking people in circles because he can't/won't do any work of his own. and as we all know with demented liberals, there is not a thing in this universe we could point them to that would change their mind. they have to stub their own toe and come to the realization that it hurts them before they are even going to begin to broach the matter of having any understanding of reality of any kind. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted January 29, 2020 Share Posted January 29, 2020 17 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said: Your use of interregnum is wrong, but your reference to "money wrench" probably has some validity as it pertains to Nancy Politics. Oh no, I used the word correctly, but you will never be able to figure that out. And, again, good job Nancy! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bray Wyatt Posted January 29, 2020 Share Posted January 29, 2020 Just now, Deranged Rhino said: Says the guy who still thinks Trump/Russia is real, doesn't know who the IC IG is and why he matters, yet wades in on his high horse proclaiming that everyone else is ignorant of reality or playing partisan politics. Foxx doesn't need to wake up... but someone does I write comedy... but I can't write this kind of comedy You should be getting a lot of good ideas reading around here! 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted January 29, 2020 Share Posted January 29, 2020 Just now, Foxx said: Bob is quickly approaching @Tiberius territory. he is talking people in circles because he can't/won't do any work of his own. and as we all know with demented liberals, there is not a thing in this universe we could point them to that would change their mind. they have to stub their own toe and come to the realization that it hurts them before they are even going to begin to broach the matter of having any understanding of reality of any kind. Oh boy, Here goes Foxxy talking in wild generalities again! ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted January 29, 2020 Share Posted January 29, 2020 15 minutes ago, Bob in Mich said: If you know where the good info is and wish to discuss some point, tell me. Uh. Pass. You've shown over and over that your sources of information are suspect at best. Not "good" by any stretch. You're woefully underinformed. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foxx Posted January 29, 2020 Share Posted January 29, 2020 Just now, Tiberius said: Oh boy, Here goes Foxxy talking in wild generalities again! ? prove i'm wrong. have you stubbed your toe? did it hurt? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted January 29, 2020 Share Posted January 29, 2020 Oh ya, and Trump and Russia in a conspiracy is absolutely a real thing. The liars can deny all they want. I mean he holds secret meetings the bloody Putin. This is an American president? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snafu Posted January 29, 2020 Share Posted January 29, 2020 I thought I'd switch it up today. No Ethel Merman. A little early, too. Gotta run in a few minutes. Might not get back in time for the 1:00 curtain. 1 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RochesterRob Posted January 29, 2020 Share Posted January 29, 2020 3 minutes ago, Tiberius said: Oh ya, and Trump and Russia in a conspiracy is absolutely a real thing. The liars can deny all they want. I mean he holds secret meetings the bloody Putin. This is an American president? Liquid lunch today? Money wrenches? meetings the bloody? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted January 29, 2020 Share Posted January 29, 2020 (edited) How false narratives spread: The poll question was “should witnesses *be allowed* to testify” but it’s been twisted and spread so most people think the poll actually said “75% want new witnesses called” which was not the question. The Senate has heard from 17 witnesses.....via the House testimony Edited January 29, 2020 by B-Man 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob in Mich Posted January 29, 2020 Share Posted January 29, 2020 18 minutes ago, GG said: Because it's not how decisions for selecting corporate boards go. Each member is selected based on their potential contribution to the company. In Biden's case, given his zero experience in energy, his selection was based purely on potential political influence. The appointment in itself is rife with conflicts of interests, but when you add daddy bragging about firing a prosecutor who was looking into the business dealings of a company where his son is a director, that should set off so many alarms for breaking every ethical code that exists in advanced economies, not to mention standing laws on corrupt dealings by public and private officials. If Biden fired the guy that was investigating his son, which I dispute at this time, but if so and that firing aligned with our country's national policy, then it is not as shady as implied. Did it look bad? Yup. How did it differ from Trump's quid pro quo? The request of Trump was not aligned with national policy and appears to be simply about smearing Biden, his political opponent. As the WH lawyers pointed out, there were many news stories about this and how bad it looked. Did these stories build over time to eventually show all the shady dealings you guys are implying? It seems if a reporter had their teeth into this story they would not just drop it. Did they all drop the stories or is there now a mountain of evidence that Foxx is sitting on? 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoudyBills Posted January 29, 2020 Share Posted January 29, 2020 10 minutes ago, Gary Busey said: He exerted the will of our country at the direction of the official policy of the United States, European allies, and the International Monetary Fund, though. That it also benefited his son doesn't make it illegal. Who sets the official foreign policy of the United States? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted January 29, 2020 Share Posted January 29, 2020 7 minutes ago, Foxx said: prove i'm wrong. have you stubbed your toe? did it hurt? DEAR ABBY: After a long relationship, "Eric" and I plan on getting married very soon. My problem is, Eric is secretive. He keeps his phone right next to him, and before he walks into the house, he sits in his car, clearing his history. I know he looks at porn, and I'm not happy about it, but it's the other things I'm angry and confused about. He secretly has social media. I know he's been sending pictures of himself to women, and they send pictures to him. Isn't that cheating? I think secret phone and video calls to women is cheating. I saw an image of a woman's private parts on his phone, and he told me lies about it. When I have confronted him about chatting with the other women, he gets angry and withdraws. One woman even sent me their chat history, and he lied about that, too. Abby, I love my man, but I feel he's cheating. I don't know what else to do as there's a wedding soon. -- DESPERATE FOR ANSWERS 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foxx Posted January 29, 2020 Share Posted January 29, 2020 2 minutes ago, Bob in Mich said: If Biden fired the guy that was investigating his son, which I dispute at this time, but if so and that firing aligned with our country's national policy, then it is not as shady as implied. Did it look bad? Yup. How did it differ from Trump's quid pro quo? The request of Trump was not aligned with national policy and appears to be simply about smearing Biden, his political opponent. As the WH lawyers pointed out, there were many news stories about this and how bad it looked. Did these stories build over time to eventually show all the shady dealings you guys are implying? It seems if a reporter had their teeth into this story they would not just drop it. Did they all drop the stories or is there now a mountain of evidence that Foxx is sitting on? Bob, bob bob bob..... Trump sets national policy you unmitigated idiot. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted January 29, 2020 Share Posted January 29, 2020 30 minutes ago, snafu said: You mis-used interregnum. Then you went and typed "money wrench". You'd think when discussing Pelosi, Tibs would know is no 'r' in "money wench." 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoudyBills Posted January 29, 2020 Share Posted January 29, 2020 11 minutes ago, Tiberius said: Oh no, I used the word correctly, but you will never be able to figure that out. And, again, good job Nancy! Come on "Bro" that isn't very service oriented, "Bro". Educate the masses, serve the people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foxx Posted January 29, 2020 Share Posted January 29, 2020 1 minute ago, Tiberius said: DEAR ABBY: After a long relationship, "Eric" and I plan on getting married very soon. My problem is, Eric is secretive. He keeps his phone right next to him, and before he walks into the house, he sits in his car, clearing his history. I know he looks at porn, and I'm not happy about it, but it's the other things I'm angry and confused about. He secretly has social media. I know he's been sending pictures of himself to women, and they send pictures to him. Isn't that cheating? I think secret phone and video calls to women is cheating. I saw an image of a woman's private parts on his phone, and he told me lies about it. When I have confronted him about chatting with the other women, he gets angry and withdraws. One woman even sent me their chat history, and he lied about that, too. Abby, I love my man, but I feel he's cheating. I don't know what else to do as there's a wedding soon. -- DESPERATE FOR ANSWERS you're telling us that you sext and your mom's upset about it? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bray Wyatt Posted January 29, 2020 Share Posted January 29, 2020 2 minutes ago, Foxx said: Bob, bob bob bob..... Trump sets national policy you unmitigated idiot. I appreciate what you are trying to do here, but your work is futile unfortunately. 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted January 29, 2020 Share Posted January 29, 2020 8 minutes ago, CoudyBills said: Do we as Americans really not know how foreign policy negotiations work? Has anyone in this sub actually negotiated anything of consequence? I spent decades negotiating commercial real estate deals of all sizes. While that may not sound on par with foreign policy negotiations it's not all that different. It's all about finding a way to give each party the least that they can accept. Some deals are relatively simple and are centered mainly around money. Most deals have a few or many issues that have to be worked through. The key though is to get to the bottom line of each party without tripping over your dick and actually creating additional roadblocks. ? It's what we call a Quid Pro Quo". 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foxx Posted January 29, 2020 Share Posted January 29, 2020 3 minutes ago, Bray Wyatt said: I appreciate what you are trying to do here, but your work is futile unfortunately. first you take the liberals hand and walk them through the garden of evil. then you eventually understand that doesn't work so you try other tacts. empathy takes many shapes and forms. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted January 29, 2020 Share Posted January 29, 2020 3 minutes ago, Bob in Mich said: If Biden fired the guy that was investigating his son, which I dispute at this time, but if so and that firing aligned with our country's national policy, then it is not as shady as implied. Did it look bad? Yup. How did it differ from Trump's quid pro quo? The request of Trump was not aligned with national policy and appears to be simply about smearing Biden, his political opponent. As the WH lawyers pointed out, there were many news stories about this and how bad it looked. Did these stories build over time to eventually show all the shady dealings you guys are implying? It seems if a reporter had their teeth into this story they would not just drop it. Did they all drop the stories or is there now a mountain of evidence that Foxx is sitting on? And then you wonder why insults are thrown back at you? This episode is precisely why bribery and corruption laws exist. There are no parallels between the two. In one, you're dealing with an executive who sets the policy and has a wide latitude to set that policy. In the other, you have a guy who tries to influence policy, is in charge of implementing his boss's policy in a country where his son is a direct financial beneficiary, and exerted his influence to prevent a criminal investigation where his son could be implicated? You really don't see the difference? In one, there's a real illegal offense that may have been committed. In the other, there's a dispute in how foreign policy should be conducted. 2 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoudyBills Posted January 29, 2020 Share Posted January 29, 2020 9 minutes ago, Bob in Mich said: If Biden fired the guy that was investigating his son, which I dispute at this time, but if so and that firing aligned with our country's national policy, then it is not as shady as implied. Did it look bad? Yup. How did it differ from Trump's quid pro quo? The request of Trump was not aligned with national policy and appears to be simply about smearing Biden, his political opponent. As the WH lawyers pointed out, there were many news stories about this and how bad it looked. Did these stories build over time to eventually show all the shady dealings you guys are implying? It seems if a reporter had their teeth into this story they would not just drop it. Did they all drop the stories or is there now a mountain of evidence that Foxx is sitting on? Bob. 1. President sets foreign policy. 2. You dispute a video bragging about it? You assured me you are a man of integrity. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted January 29, 2020 Share Posted January 29, 2020 2 minutes ago, Bob in Mich said: If Biden fired the guy that was investigating his son, which I dispute at this time, You're literally disputing an uncontested fact. 3 minutes ago, Bob in Mich said: ... but if so and that firing aligned with our country's national policy, then it is not as shady as implied. It's not the firing in itself that's problematic. It's the hiring in the first place. Details are hard to keep track of when you don't know the basic facts -- which you admit you do not. 4 minutes ago, Bob in Mich said: The request of Trump was not aligned with national policy and appears to be simply about smearing Biden, his political opponent. "Appears" -- notice how you have to qualify the sequence of events in order to "prove" your case? That's problematic. And someone who wasn't a blind partisan would recognize that and try, just try, to think for himself. 5 minutes ago, Bob in Mich said: As the WH lawyers pointed out, there were many news stories about this and how bad it looked. Did these stories build over time to eventually show all the shady dealings you guys are implying? It seems if a reporter had their teeth into this story they would not just drop it. Did they all drop the stories or is there now a mountain of evidence that Foxx is sitting on? This just shows how asleep you still are. You think the media plays fair? They literally ignored the biggest political scandal in US history (the fake Russia narrative) in order to lie to the American people for the benefit of their political "side". How many "reporters" have asked Obama a single question about his FBI's illegal spying (now proven)? Zero. You're SOUND asleep. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoudyBills Posted January 29, 2020 Share Posted January 29, 2020 2 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said: I spent decades negotiating commercial real estate deals of all sizes. While that may not sound on par with foreign policy negotiations it's not all that different. It's all about finding a way to give each party the least that they can accept. Some deals are relatively simple and are centered mainly around money. Most deals have a few or many issues that have to be worked through. The key though is to get to the bottom line of each party without tripping over your dick and actually creating additional roadblocks. ? It's what we call a Quid Pro Quo". Nailed it 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Posted January 29, 2020 Share Posted January 29, 2020 20 minutes ago, Tiberius said: Oh no, I used the word correctly, but you will never be able to figure that out. And, again, good job Nancy! You should stick to laundromat lingo. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cinga Posted January 29, 2020 Share Posted January 29, 2020 13 minutes ago, B-Man said: The Senate has heard from 17 witnesses.....via the House testimony There were actually 18, but Schiff won't allow that last one's testimony..... It was the intelligence IG 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bray Wyatt Posted January 29, 2020 Share Posted January 29, 2020 2 minutes ago, Foxx said: first you take the liberals hand and walk them through the garden of evil. then you eventually understand that doesn't work so you try other tacts. empathy takes many shapes and forms. You are a much more patient man than I 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RochesterRob Posted January 29, 2020 Share Posted January 29, 2020 9 minutes ago, Tiberius said: DEAR ABBY: After a long relationship, "Eric" and I plan on getting married very soon. My problem is, Eric is secretive. He keeps his phone right next to him, and before he walks into the house, he sits in his car, clearing his history. I know he looks at porn, and I'm not happy about it, but it's the other things I'm angry and confused about. He secretly has social media. I know he's been sending pictures of himself to women, and they send pictures to him. Isn't that cheating? I think secret phone and video calls to women is cheating. I saw an image of a woman's private parts on his phone, and he told me lies about it. When I have confronted him about chatting with the other women, he gets angry and withdraws. One woman even sent me their chat history, and he lied about that, too. Abby, I love my man, but I feel he's cheating. I don't know what else to do as there's a wedding soon. -- DESPERATE FOR ANSWERS We will assume the "I" in this is you and that Eric is through with experimentation so to speak. Tell your friends so they can send back/cancel any gifts they may have bought for you. For every person there is a match so get back on the horse and keep looking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted January 29, 2020 Share Posted January 29, 2020 3 minutes ago, Foxx said: first you take the liberals hand and walk them through the garden of evil. then you eventually understand that doesn't work so you try other tacts. empathy takes many shapes and forms. Oh brother Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foxx Posted January 29, 2020 Share Posted January 29, 2020 2 minutes ago, GG said: And then you wonder why insults are thrown back at you? This episode is precisely why bribery and corruption laws exist. There are no parallels between the two. In one, you're dealing with an executive who sets the policy and has a wide latitude to set that policy. In the other, you have a guy who tries to influence policy, is in charge of implementing his boss's policy in a country where his son is a direct financial beneficiary, and exerted his influence to prevent a criminal investigation where his son could be implicated? You really don't see the difference? In one, there's a real illegal offense that may have been committed. In the other, there's a dispute in how foreign policy should be conducted. quick, short, concise and above all cogent. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted January 29, 2020 Share Posted January 29, 2020 Just now, Bray Wyatt said: You are a much more patient man than I I tried to be patient with Bob for years -- then he snapped because the cognitive dissonance in his brain broke him. He became hostile, and agitated. But I still humor him only because exposing his particular partisan brand of idiocy can be illuminating for others/lurkers. He's like one of these things: 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob in Mich Posted January 29, 2020 Share Posted January 29, 2020 (edited) 1 hour ago, Foxx said: talk about moving the goal posts, holy schifft batman. stick to one tangent at a time, Bob. That is the second poster that won't address the OJ analogy. It's just ridiculous? I agree that it is ridiculous logic but it mirrors pretty well what you are claiming should be done in treating Trump. So, what do you think? No further oversight of OJ? Trump? 1 hour ago, Bray Wyatt said: You got to the crux of his issue though, he is okay with all of this because he thinks trump is a terrible person. I don't like Trump. Never have. Believe it or don't, on the day after the election I was talking to my sis, who would fit in with the Trump supports here. She called to gloat but I told her that he is my President now too. If he does a good job I told her that I would vote for him in 2020. I don't think he has done that. None of that though is why he should be impeached. He should be impeached and removed for exactly what the House accuses him of doing. None of us should be OK with illegal foreign election interference, imo. You may feel it should be OK. Edited January 29, 2020 by Bob in Mich 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted January 29, 2020 Share Posted January 29, 2020 1 minute ago, Bob in Mich said: He should be impeached and removed for exactly what the House accuses him of doing. Evidence be damned, am I right? 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted January 29, 2020 Share Posted January 29, 2020 2 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: Evidence be damned, am I right? Election: We need a new president, the one we have is a bum Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted January 29, 2020 Share Posted January 29, 2020 1 3 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted January 29, 2020 Share Posted January 29, 2020 1 minute ago, Bob in Mich said: That is the second poster that won't address the OJ analogy. It's just ridiculous? I agree that it is ridiculous logic but it mirrors pretty well what you are claiming should be done in treating Trump. So, what do you think? No further oversight of OJ? Trump? I don't like Trump. Never have. Believe it or don't, on the day after the election I was talking to my sis, who would fit in the the Trump supports here. She called to gloat but I told her that he is my President now too. If he does a good job I told her that I would vote for him in 2020. I don't think he has done that. None of that though is why he should be impeached. He should be impeached and removed for exactly what the House accuses him of doing. None of us should be OK with illegal foreign election interference, imo. You may feel it should be OK. Damn, I hate doing this. Up thread you asked me "if the House dems were correct in their assumptions about Trump" and now you state emphatically that he should be removed. How dense are you? There has been no foreign election influence by Trump. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted January 29, 2020 Share Posted January 29, 2020 Just now, Tiberius said: Election: We need a new president, the one we have is a bum No one has a problem with that approach. No one. ... But democrats who know they can't beat Trump at the ballot, hence the schiff show we're being subjected to now. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts