Just admit it... wrote:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CjvwFGZXAAAHUEv.jpg
LOL!! That's an absurd quote- devoid of any factual evidence- that should have disqualified him from running for president.
But, you know, racism and stuff.
Just admit it... wrote:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CjvwFGZXAAAHUEv.jpg
LOL!! That's an absurd quote- devoid of any factual evidence- that should have disqualified him from running for president.
But, you know, racism and stuff.
pop_pop!_v2.2.1 wrote:
WMDs bro wrote:Suddenly the Left holds the CIA in the highest regard. Love it.
Faaaaaallllllsssseeee....
This kind of amnesia is kind of ridiculous. The Cheney administration had so much disdain for all of the existing law enforcement/intelligence agencies he made the DHS.
What does that have to do with the Left's negative opinion of the CIA after the WMD debacle?
Anyway- Nice to see you didn't argue the "evidence" statement.
Conundrum wrote:
I didn't know that you had access to all the information that our intelligence agencies have. Yes you, Donald, and I all believe and the crooked US intelligence agencies are all lying.
You being an individual with a high level of security clearance evaluated the data and confirmed there was no evidence.
Our intelligence agencies lying and Vladimir telling the truth. Boy I bet many Americans didn't see this coming. But you Donald and I did!
WMDs bro wrote:
Interestingly, they've actually both been able to provide the exact same amount of hard evidence- which is zero. None.
Suddenly the Left holds the CIA in the highest regard. Love it.
Was the CIA telling the truth about WMDs, or was Saddam?
Different era, new boogeyman.
WMDs bro wrote:
Was the CIA telling the truth about WMDs, or was Saddam?
Different era, new boogeyman.
Oh, memories! There were issues with the intelligence findings on WMDs, but that's not the reason we went to Iraq. We went to Iraq because the Republican Bush Administration wanted a war and they lied about the degree of confidence of the intelligence community's findings to help justify it. They were going to find a way to invade one way or another. There have been reforms put in place to improve scrutiny of intelligence findings. We have not yet found a way to reform lying, craven Republicans.
If you cannot see the obvious insanity our President saying "the murderous, anti-democratic tyrant from Russia TOLD ME he didn't do nothin' and I believe him more than my intelligence agencies", then there is something wrong with you. These are the actions of a man who has something to hide.
I do have to question the judgement of anyone who think's Vladimir Putin is more trustworthy than our intelligence agencies. And to go back to the WMD fiasco to try to tell themselves its a reasonable position to take is blatant self deception. If someone goes to that length to maintain an obviously foolish belief, then there is no event or argument that would ever convince them otherwise.
The Gallant Pig Man wrote:
WMDs bro wrote:
Was the CIA telling the truth about WMDs, or was Saddam?
Different era, new boogeyman.
Oh, memories! There were issues with the intelligence findings on WMDs, but that's not the reason we went to Iraq. We went to Iraq because the Republican Bush Administration wanted a war and they lied about the degree of confidence of the intelligence community's findings to help justify it. They were going to find a way to invade one way or another. There have been reforms put in place to improve scrutiny of intelligence findings. We have not yet found a way to reform lying, craven Republicans.
If you cannot see the obvious insanity our President saying "the murderous, anti-democratic tyrant from Russia TOLD ME he didn't do nothin' and I believe him more than my intelligence agencies", then there is something wrong with you. These are the actions of a man who has something to hide.
Keeping it REAL 4 FP wrote:
Flagpole wrote:
Votes a year after a president has been elected and even mid-term elections don't tell the tale of what will happen for that president when the next presidential election comes around (see Bill Clinton and 1994 midterms as prime example).
So, I am not overly excited about Democrats picking up lots of seats nationwide. What we have though is a very uncommon President, so all norms are thrown out the window with him.
He will not make it to the ticket for 2020. In less than one year, Mueller has three indictments, and more are assuredly coming.
Ok pretend know-it-all. When you wanna bet, since you're never wrong and love money, let me know.
Oh that's right, you don't bet, you just make sound statements "He will not" to sound intelligent. The Clintons, both of them, had way more against them, but they slithered thru like teflon Don.
Glad your gal didn't win and I thank the Buckeye State for voting correctly. And that's with all of the propaganda ads falsely toting Clinton as Miss Perfect and trying to "persuade" the ignorant. Sound like anyone you know? I"m glad you wasted your vote on her.
1) You are correct that I do not bet; never have and never will. Weird of you to ask then. Hope you don't have a recovering alcoholic friend because you will probably offer him a beer.
2) The election was a year ago. Elected officials need to do things for the people they were elected to serve. Trump has not done that...hasn't done anything he said he would to get people like you to vote for him, and this is with a Republican House and Senate.
3) I will not make any comments about Hillary since I have no allegiance to her, the election was a year ago, and she is not the president.
4) You can't possibly be proud of anything Trump has done. First of all, he has gotten absolutely nothing other than signing some executive orders done. He has a growing number of people in his own party turning against him, he's the dumbest president we've ever had by far, he has zero leadership skills, and he is batsh!t crazy.
5) Trump will not make it to the end of his first term. He will be fortunate if he stays out of jail. So, impeachment, resign, or 25th Amendment.
There is definitely a Republican civil war going on in Alabama.
Mitch McConnell believes the women are telling the truth about the sexual allegations against Roy Moore and he should step aside.
Moore's response:
The person who should step aside is @SenateMajLdr Mitch McConnell. He has failed conservatives and must be replaced. #DrainTheSwamp
Now if the senate didn't confirm Jeff Sessions for attorney general, they wouldn't be having this problem.
Sessions was confirmed with just 52 to yes votes to 47 no votes. Almost completely a party line vote.
http://www.cnn.com/2017/11/13/politics/mitch-mcconnell-roy-moore/index.html
This could be the KO punch to Moore
betting odds have Jones a solid favorite right now.
http://www.dailywire.com/news/23509/bombshell-beverly-young-nelson-accuses-moore-ben-shapiro
Moore is done and Sessions says he's not interested in the seat. The R's are losing a senate seat in ALABAMA for chrissakes.
Odds we get a tweet from Trump tomorrow morning saying he supported Strange all along?
Flagpole wrote:
Keeping it REAL 4 FP wrote:
Ok pretend know-it-all. When you wanna bet, since you're never wrong and love money, let me know.
Oh that's right, you don't bet, you just make sound statements "He will not" to sound intelligent. The Clintons, both of them, had way more against them, but they slithered thru like teflon Don.
Glad your gal didn't win and I thank the Buckeye State for voting correctly. And that's with all of the propaganda ads falsely toting Clinton as Miss Perfect and trying to "persuade" the ignorant. Sound like anyone you know? I"m glad you wasted your vote on her.
1) You are correct that I do not bet; never have and never will. Weird of you to ask then. Hope you don't have a recovering alcoholic friend because you will probably offer him a beer.
2) The election was a year ago. Elected officials need to do things for the people they were elected to serve. Trump has not done that...hasn't done anything he said he would to get people like you to vote for him, and this is with a Republican House and Senate.
3) I will not make any comments about Hillary since I have no allegiance to her, the election was a year ago, and she is not the president.
4) You can't possibly be proud of anything Trump has done. First of all, he has gotten absolutely nothing other than signing some executive orders done. He has a growing number of people in his own party turning against him, he's the dumbest president we've ever had by far, he has zero leadership skills, and he is batsh!t crazy.
5) Trump will not make it to the end of his first term. He will be fortunate if he stays out of jail. So, impeachment, resign, or 25th Amendment.
Your "no betting" stance is probably the smartest thing you've displayed here on LRC. You'd be losing your shirt on a monthly basis. Here's a couple gems from Flagpole back in mid 2016... before the most EPIC Flagpole of all time...
Flagpole wrote:
Flagpole wrote:
If anyone out there in the world actually loves Trump or cares about him, they had better muzzle that guy when he loses to Hillary.
He has such a sense of self-importance that he is VERY apt to say something treasonous in defeat. He'd better watch it, because he will be imprisoned or worse if he isn't careful. I am serious about this too. In fact, I see this as a 60-40 possibility with the 60 being that he is imprisoned for something he says or does following his defeat. And, the only reason I give that number so low is that I still can't quite believe that he's not human in there somewhere. Part of me thinks there's no way he WON'T be imprisoned following his defeat due to something he does, but I'll stick with 60-40.[/quote
Fool.
If you are talking about Trump, you are correct. He has no filter. He has already encouraged people at his rallies to physically attack protesters by telling them he would pay their legal bills. He has already said he would like to "hit" some of the DNC speakers. Do you think he for sure won't say something in defeat (because he WILL lose) that may at least cause him to be charged with inciting a riot? I can EASILY see him saying something that encourages disgruntled voters to "take the matter into their own hands" or something even more specific. He uses that kind of language and bully attempts, but that will not be allowed to stand if he is threatening the government of the United States or an elected President. Really, what in his behavior tells you that you are convinced he WON'T say something like that?
Wikileaks was working on behalf of Trump and Russia and supplied the administration with information that it then immediately used for political gain. Everybody in the administration knew because Junior told them about it. Wikileaks specifically asked Trump to reject the election results if he lost. (In other words, their goal was to undermine our "democracy" should it have produced an outcome they didn't like.) They (probably Assange himself) also asked that Trump recommend Assange for an ambassadorship in Australia.
Fvck you, Glenn Greenwald.
Isn't Roy Moore the Uber Christian - Ten Commandments monument needs to be displayed in Alabama judicial building? Why am I not surprised?
BTW - watch the video in the link above if you haven't already (and if anything - anything at all - still matters in this country).
PIO! wrote:
BTW - watch the video in the link above if you haven't already (and if anything - anything at all - still matters in this country).
DAMN......YOU SO TRIGGERED❗️???
PIO! wrote:
BTW - watch the video in the link above if you haven't already (and if anything - anything at all - still matters in this country).
This is a low point for or country. Those without values speak out without shame.
hard to watch the decline wrote:
PIO! wrote:
BTW - watch the video in the link above if you haven't already (and if anything - anything at all - still matters in this country).
This is a low point for or country. Those without values speak out without shame.
Looks like the TRIGGERING has taken hold of YOU❗️
?????????????????
WMDs bro wrote:
Was the CIA telling the truth about WMDs, or was Saddam?
Different era, new boogeyman.
Don't rewrite history with your false choices. I know facts are irrelevant now, so, let's just blame it on Darth Cheney.
L L wrote:
There is definitely a Republican civil war going on in Alabama.
Mitch McConnell believes the women
As much as Bannon (wacko) promotes/funds another wacko, I think mainstream Right has an easy target with Moore and are burying him with opposition research.
I've got a great idea for the Conservative Justice Warriors: Clinton, running the Deep State on book tour, bought Moore opposition research from RUSSIANS.
Here's another: McConnell clearly a puppet for Clinton, as is most of the Senate that isn't Paul Ryan's group of liars and fascists. They talk every day.
I'll give you those for free.
pop_pop!_v2.2.1 wrote:
L L wrote:
There is definitely a Republican civil war going on in Alabama.
Mitch McConnell believes the women
As much as Bannon (wacko) promotes/funds another wacko, I think mainstream Right has an easy target with Moore and are burying him with opposition research.
I've got a great idea for the Conservative Justice Warriors: Clinton, running the Deep State on book tour, bought Moore opposition research from RUSSIANS.
Here's another: McConnell clearly a puppet for Clinton, as is most of the Senate that isn't Paul Ryan's group of liars and fascists. They talk every day.
I'll give you those for free.
Holy $hit........YOU B TRIGGERED❗️???❗️
DFF
When I talked about the decline in values. I certainly wasn't referring to you.
You have been a constant articulate voice of reason on this message board. You present the trump values with remarkable clarity.
God bless you and all you do!
(I wish ALL of our posters were just like you)