Pelosi is making Flagpole look like a prophet.
Pelosi is making Flagpole look like a prophet.
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
Monkeys typing wrote:
As a public service for those just joining the thread, Sally thinks Trump is a horrible person and Iggy thinks politics is corrupt across parties. This might not be clear from "Biden is going down!" as a reaction to alleged impending impeachment proceedings against Trump.
I think it is pretty clear our politicians have been self-serving and have done little to address real problems, so the daily drama continues. Warren will be good for the country exposing corporate corruption just as Trump has exposed the Deep State. Hopefully someday we will get to a sensible middle; probably need a crisis to get there though. That is coming in my view; mismanagement and can kicking to last too much longer.
There is no Deep State. Trump would like to create one that does his bidding, and he's getting close, but there has been no Deep State that Trump has exposed.
Flagpole wrote:
brazen2 wrote:
5) You gave a 100% guarantee that HRC would win. Then you moved the goalposts and claimed that you said it with some BS about Trump cheating. Show me the post where you gave limitations to your guarantee BEFORE the election. And don't come back here with some crap about no one can prove you guaranteed an HRC victory. Everyone over the past 3 years remembers your guarantee one way and no one remembers it with limitations. I'll wait for your "unreserved" apology.
I said Trump has ZERO chance to win, and I qualified it by saying he could not cheat and even used Olympic medalists as an example of winners stripped of medals after they had been discovered cheating. Letsrun removed that thread. I made that qualification...just not repeatedly like I did not ZERO chance thing. just because you didn't see it and/or don't remember it doesn't mean I didn't make that qualification. He cheated, so I was RIGHT about the 2016 election.
I would not ever say I didn't say that Hillary would win, because I tell the truth 100% of the time without fail...even though you have no evidence of it, I still tell the truth about it. That's because I have 100% integrity 100% of the time.
No apology tendered. No apology from me needed.
Phone call transcripts will be vague. Trump, if nothing else, does a remarkable job of saying something without ever actually saying it. He lets others like Giuliani do the heavy lifting.
I don't think it's going to be a smoking gun.
If it is and if Trump resigns Pence will win in 2020 no matter who the Dems run with. Voters love voting for conservative religious types as it's a safe choice. Moderates would flock to Pence like lemmings.
Alan
Success/Failure wrote:
Has he been successful in limiting the press?
Absolutely.
Any news that is negative about him he declares to be fake news.
He has some loyal followers who believes that when he says it. He's the president.
So between that and limited press briefings he has been successful in limiting the press.
There are people that used to look at the Washington Post for serious news that now look at it like the National Enquirer because of his words.
All while the National Enquirer has been paying to squash anti-Trump stories.
Fat hurts wrote:
Racket wrote:
Yeah, "unite behind the science" isn't an epic platitude at all. I'd say don't make me laugh, but it's far too late for that.
It's interesting that climate change is/has gone the way of modern politics. The loudest people have hijacked various reasonable environmental movements and pushed them to the extremes. Skeptics claim the government wants all your money and to take over in the name of some sort of Eco-fascsim (which our friend Fat Hurts has actually advocated for in his "We Must Invade Brazil" thesis) and people like Greta have spiraled into some tragic sense of immediate impending doom where the only solution is, at a minimum, to spend trillions of dollars on several green initiatives (all of which are definitely legit of course).
I never said we must invade Brazil. I said I'm afraid it might come to that. And I said, if Canada started dumping raw sewage into rivers that flow to the US, we would take military action if we had to. Brazil is no different.
And Greta is right about impending doom. I wish it were not so, but it is.
I made the mistake of looking closely at the science. I took the red pill. I know what most of you do not. I know it is time to panic and take action.
Here is a polite suggestion for you.
People who know what they are talking about, (think "Citizen Runner" when it comes to climate change), NEVER tell others how brilliant they are, how educated they are, how they "looked closely at the science", how they "took the red pill" . . . Indeed they NEVER list their qualifications or make a personal appeal to their own authority.
People who talk about how brilliant they are, how high their GPA in college was, how they understand these things better than others (think Sally, Flagpole . . .) . . . are NEVER respected - and for very good reason.
If you think that you have something to say, try to NEVER claim personal qualifications. Try to make your argument stand entirely on its own. You are much more likely that way to be taken seriously. Or at least, to not solicit guffaws.
You are welcome
Polite Suggestions R Us wrote:
Fat hurts wrote:
I never said we must invade Brazil. I said I'm afraid it might come to that. And I said, if Canada started dumping raw sewage into rivers that flow to the US, we would take military action if we had to. Brazil is no different.
And Greta is right about impending doom. I wish it were not so, but it is.
I made the mistake of looking closely at the science. I took the red pill. I know what most of you do not. I know it is time to panic and take action.
Here is a polite suggestion for you.
People who know what they are talking about, (think "Citizen Runner" when it comes to climate change), NEVER tell others how brilliant they are, how educated they are, how they "looked closely at the science", how they "took the red pill" . . . Indeed they NEVER list their qualifications or make a personal appeal to their own authority.
People who talk about how brilliant they are, how high their GPA in college was, how they understand these things better than others (think Sally, Flagpole . . .) . . . are NEVER respected - and for very good reason.
If you think that you have something to say, try to NEVER claim personal qualifications. Try to make your argument stand entirely on its own. You are much more likely that way to be taken seriously. Or at least, to not solicit guffaws.
You are welcome
I agree. I never claimed any special intelligence or special background.
I only talked about what I have done and what I know. It's a personal testimony.
You can choose to believe my testimony or not, but it's mine.
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
^Ivana "Ivanka" Trump Jr ?
^Don Trump Jr ?
^Eric Trump ?
^Jared Kushner ?
^ Fixed
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
WH releasing Ukrainian PM/Trump phone call transcript.
Drama continues....while the debt continues to climb....rearranging the deck chairs.....no worries, take a trip to the Cotswolds in the UK, perhaps a diving trip to Indonesia...or just a microbrew.....
Faked transcript. Edit by Trump and Barr. As with Nixon: No transcripts as facts. The tapes were required, and they proved transcripts were edited.
Flagpole wrote:
Racket wrote:
Yeah, "unite behind the science" isn't an epic platitude at all. I'd say don't make me laugh, but it's far too late for that.
It's interesting that climate change is/has gone the way of modern politics. The loudest people have hijacked various reasonable environmental movements and pushed them to the extremes. Skeptics claim the government wants all your money and to take over in the name of some sort of Eco-fascsim (which our friend Fat Hurts has actually advocated for in his "We Must Invade Brazil" thesis) and people like Greta have spiraled into some tragic sense of immediate impending doom where the only solution is, at a minimum, to spend trillions of dollars on several green initiatives (all of which are definitely legit of course).
I understand that scientists don't typically inspire others to act. I'm glad we all did with regard to lead and with regard to carcinogens and with regard to bad behaviors like smoking and excessive drinking. I don't react to emotional calls for action. I don't typically follow the lead of a teenager. Good for her as a one-off, but if she becomes the face of climate change, that won't be a good thing.
I think Greta understands that as well.
When she testified before congress last week, she did not give a traditional opening statement. Instead, she told them she wanted them to listen to the science instead of her. Then she submitted the IPCC report into the public record.
She said:
I am submitting this report as my testimony because I don’t want you to listen to me. I want you to listen to the scientists. And I want you to unite behind the science. And then I want you to take action.
Polite Suggestions R Us wrote:
Here is a polite suggestion for you.
People who know what they are talking about, (think "Citizen Runner" when it comes to climate change), NEVER tell others how brilliant they are, how educated they are, how they "looked closely at the science", how they "took the red pill" . . . Indeed they NEVER list their qualifications or make a personal appeal to their own authority.
People who talk about how brilliant they are, how high their GPA in college was, how they understand these things better than others (think Sally, Flagpole . . .) . . . are NEVER respected - and for very good reason.
If you think that you have something to say, try to NEVER claim personal qualifications. Try to make your argument stand entirely on its own. You are much more likely that way to be taken seriously. Or at least, to not solicit guffaws.
You are welcome
Based on your suggestion, you are not qualified to make the above post.
Runningart2004 wrote:
Phone call transcripts will be vague. Trump, if nothing else, does a remarkable job of saying something without ever actually saying it. He lets others like Giuliani do the heavy lifting.
I don't think it's going to be a smoking gun.
If it is and if Trump resigns Pence will win in 2020 no matter who the Dems run with. Voters love voting for conservative religious types as it's a safe choice. Moderates would flock to Pence like lemmings.
Alan
1) Vague in the phone call? Maybe. Trump already said to George S. that he would take dirt on an opponent from a foreign country, so clearly he thinks it's ok even though it isn't. Hopefully it will be a transcript of the entire call.
2) What we really need is to hear from the whistle blower, and that looks like that is likely to happen (at least talking to the House or a House Committee) as early as this week. Apparently the phone call was just one thing and was part of a "pattern of behavior" that alarmed the whistle blower. We need to hear about all the things.
3) No way Mike Pence wins if Trump resigns or is removed. People attach scandal to the entire administration. It's why Ford lost to Carter. It is ONE reason why Gore lost to Bush. Moderates don't typically like the brand of uber-conservative right-wing religiosity that Pence embodies. Trump ONLY leads among white men, and many of them voted for him because they thought Trump was "tough". Pence is about as tough as a glass of milk, and he has no charisma whatsoever. A Democrat candidate would destroy Pence.
jesseriley wrote:
Pelosi is making Flagpole look like a prophet.
Or...more likely, I AM one, and it's easy to pick something as what makes me look like that as we approach the prophecy.
It has long been clear to me...Trump IS a criminal. Criminals gonna criminal. It should be no shock to anyone that the House is going to impeach him.
There are only two reasons why a person who is not an elected official supports Trump today:
1) JUST stupid.
2) Racist.
There are no other possibilities.
Fake Transcript wrote:
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
WH releasing Ukrainian PM/Trump phone call transcript.
Drama continues....while the debt continues to climb....rearranging the deck chairs.....no worries, take a trip to the Cotswolds in the UK, perhaps a diving trip to Indonesia...or just a microbrew.....
Faked transcript. Edit by Trump and Barr. As with Nixon: No transcripts as facts. The tapes were required, and they proved transcripts were edited.
That would be great. Also need to get all the facts on Hunter Biden and see if Joe is clean. I am sure this will come out as this impeachment strategy is pursued. This will make the coming months very entertaining.
Polite Suggestions R Us wrote:
Here is a polite suggestion for you.
People who know what they are talking about, (think "Citizen Runner" when it comes to climate change), NEVER tell others how brilliant they are, how educated they are, how they "looked closely at the science", how they "took the red pill" . . . Indeed they NEVER list their qualifications or make a personal appeal to their own authority.
People who talk about how brilliant they are, how high their GPA in college was, how they understand these things better than others (think Sally, Flagpole . . .) . . . are NEVER respected - and for very good reason.
If you think that you have something to say, try to NEVER claim personal qualifications. Try to make your argument stand entirely on its own. You are much more likely that way to be taken seriously. Or at least, to not solicit guffaws.
You are welcome
Not my fault that I understand pretty much everything better than pretty much anyone. Now, you decide whether to be trolled by that or not.
Fat hurts wrote:
Flagpole wrote:
I understand that scientists don't typically inspire others to act. I'm glad we all did with regard to lead and with regard to carcinogens and with regard to bad behaviors like smoking and excessive drinking. I don't react to emotional calls for action. I don't typically follow the lead of a teenager. Good for her as a one-off, but if she becomes the face of climate change, that won't be a good thing.
I think Greta understands that as well.
When she testified before congress last week, she did not give a traditional opening statement. Instead, she told them she wanted them to listen to the science instead of her. Then she submitted the IPCC report into the public record.
She said:
I am submitting this report as my testimony because I don’t want you to listen to me. I want you to listen to the scientists. And I want you to unite behind the science. And then I want you to take action.
Yeah...I know. I watched it. I'm admitting my bias against her age here even though I agree with her message. I'm not to the point yet that I admit my bias is wrong. I might get there eventually. Not there yet.
based on your "suggestion" wrote:
Polite Suggestions R Us wrote:
Here is a polite suggestion for you.
People who know what they are talking about, (think "Citizen Runner" when it comes to climate change), NEVER tell others how brilliant they are, how educated they are, how they "looked closely at the science", how they "took the red pill" . . . Indeed they NEVER list their qualifications or make a personal appeal to their own authority.
People who talk about how brilliant they are, how high their GPA in college was, how they understand these things better than others (think Sally, Flagpole . . .) . . . are NEVER respected - and for very good reason.
If you think that you have something to say, try to NEVER claim personal qualifications. Try to make your argument stand entirely on its own. You are much more likely that way to be taken seriously. Or at least, to not solicit guffaws.
You are welcome
Based on your suggestion, you are not qualified to make the above post.
Nice. As the kids no longer say, "Pwned."
Moscow Mitch says he knows nothing about why aid to Ukraine (Russia’s enemy) was delayed. And he didn’t try too hard to find out, either.
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
Fake Transcript wrote:
Faked transcript. Edit by Trump and Barr. As with Nixon: No transcripts as facts. The tapes were required, and they proved transcripts were edited.
That would be great. Also need to get all the facts on Hunter Biden and see if Joe is clean. I am sure this will come out as this impeachment strategy is pursued. This will make the coming months very entertaining.
The Dems infected with terminal TDS have dove into the impeachment abyss without even first having seen the transcript of the alleged impeachable conduct. This has ZERO chance of success by running off a single, anonymous source.
This will backfire on the Democrat Party.
More Flagpolian Flops are on the way
KAG2020
Democrats are in a full blown panic because they know they don't have a prayer of beating Trump in 2020. This whole impeachment is a Pelosi Hail Mary that is going fail BIGLY.
Clownpole is going to flop again.
Rigged for Hillary wrote:
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
That would be great. Also need to get all the facts on Hunter Biden and see if Joe is clean. I am sure this will come out as this impeachment strategy is pursued. This will make the coming months very entertaining.
The Dems infected with terminal TDS have dove into the impeachment abyss without even first having seen the transcript of the alleged impeachable conduct. This has ZERO chance of success by running off a single, anonymous source.
This will backfire on the Democrat Party.
More Flagpolian Flops are on the way
KAG2020
the transcript doesn't matter
just asking ukraine to investigate biden is enough
what is needed is the whistle blower report
the whistle blower wants to appear before congress,
that's the big one.
and the report will get to congress - the law will be followed eventually or someone else who knows the same thing will leak it.
anyway, trumpers have been caught changing transcripts in the past - I have no doubt they would change this one if they don't like what it says.