Comments by "Killed The Cat" (@killedthecat1034) on "CNN"
channel.
-
359
-
301
-
298
-
238
-
198
-
192
-
192
-
179
-
173
-
168
-
145
-
140
-
140
-
136
-
132
-
129
-
121
-
120
-
120
-
117
-
115
-
111
-
110
-
106
-
92
-
91
-
91
-
81
-
76
-
76
-
74
-
72
-
70
-
70
-
67
-
66
-
66
-
65
-
65
-
63
-
62
-
60
-
59
-
58
-
58
-
56
-
56
-
53
-
53
-
52
-
52
-
51
-
50
-
50
-
50
-
50
-
49
-
47
-
46
-
45
-
45
-
44
-
44
-
43
-
43
-
42
-
42
-
42
-
42
-
42
-
41
-
41
-
41
-
40
-
40
-
39
-
39
-
39
-
39
-
39
-
39
-
38
-
38
-
37
-
37
-
37
-
36
-
36
-
36
-
36
-
35
-
35
-
35
-
34
-
34
-
34
-
33
-
33
-
33
-
32
-
32
-
32
-
32
-
31
-
31
-
31
-
31
-
31
-
31
-
31
-
30
-
30
-
30
-
30
-
30
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
@jiangzuodong2 Sure you "did". 🙄 You guys blaming all this on the media and claiming anyone who disagrees, has not done their "research" is straight out of the rights play book. Especially with someone who does do her own.
Yep! 🙄 Weirdly enough, every Trump supporter ( and only Trump supporters ) has a mother's, uncle's, girlfriend's, gardner, "had" their death certificate or covid-19 test "forged". They all either died from a "heart attack" or "car crash" too, and the ones who's tests where "forged", all went and never took the test because they had to "leave early.... 🤔
And they only seem to ever bring them up, right after the ridiculousness of the same standard deflections, baseless claims and conspiracy theories.
- "Less then 1% has died, who caught Covid 19."
5,135,360 Cases
164,836 Deaths
3.20% given today's current count
- "It was all planned by the Left to make Trump look bad."
One that, apparently, every Med Examiner and coroner in the country is "in on".
- Which is clearly because the left wants mail in ballets, so they can "commit voter fraud" to win.
2 Decades/20 years/5 presidential elections = 1285 cases of voter fraud
Most of which had nothing to do with mail in ballets.
Most of which where, however, found on the right side of the isle.
5 states have had nothing but mail in ballets with no problem.
We have had mail in ballets in this country sense 1967.
Trump has voted with mail in ballets.
- Media bias against Trump rallies and protests... But not "ANTIFA" or "BLM". I would challenge anyone to name a national station that hasn't mentioned or asked the question about the potential risk involving Covid 19, in regards to the BLM protests and Confederate monuments protests... Not once... But several times. You wont find one. You will see a whole lot more of those protestors wearing masks and separating then you will at any Trump rally. Just ask all the sick and quarantined Secret Service members.
- "More are dying from the flu."
2019 flu deaths (at most) 61,000 in a Year.
Covid death in half that time 164,836
"Car accidents" are not deadly and contagious, last time I checked. Apple's and Oranges Deflection.
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
@billboon And great! We can support them by recognising the mistakes "we" made in the past, to get them into this situation, so we don't end up repeating them. Like these! 👉He....
-Had a 33 page laid out plan to contain a pandemic and America, just exactly like covid-19 and chose not to use it because the administration who commissioned it was Obama.
-Decided it wasn't important to refill the medical stockpiles for 3 and 1/2 years.
-Tried to pretend for two and a half months that covid-19 has magically gone away.
-Tried to sell American citizens multiple snake oil cares, taking none of them when he actually got sick.
- Left each state to fend for themselves and forced them into a bidding war against each other, we're literally American lives.
-Called the severity of the worst worldwide pandemic in over a hundred years a democratic hoax.
-Tried to take millions of Americans Healthcare away during the world worldwide pandemic in over a hundred years.
-Made multiple false claims about how it would all just go away by several different dates and got every one wrong.
-Threw multiple large rallies and celebrations with little to no social distancing, instead of setting an example and using a coded safe campaign plan, like President elect Biden did.
-Suggested on a regular basis that we should stop testing for the virus only so the numbers would go down and he would look better.
-Spread false propaganda about covid-19 no worse than the flu.
-Claimed that 99% of all covered cases are totally harmless.
-Discouraged his supporters from listening to the medical experts.
-Constantly lied about our fatality rate.
-Playing on racial tensions, tried to blame Mexico for covid-19 in America, with absolutely nothing to back it up.
-Threatened to defund our already strapped public education system in an effort to try and force children to go back to school when it wasn't safe and no one had a national plan.
-Handled the pandemic so poorly that it crippled our economy and put 9 million people out of work, into a housing crisis and wondering how they were going to feed their children.
-Claims, on multiple occasions, that covid-19 was merely being overblown because of the election in America. Despite the virus being all over the world.
-Lied about Google engineer is building a website to help Americans determine whether they need testing for the coronavirus and to direct them to their nearest testing site.
-Claimed to put a ban on travel from China, but after doing so nearly, 40,000 people travelled from China to the United States under his ban rules.
-Claimed this kind of pandemic was something nobody thought could happen, when experts both inside and outside the federal government sounded the alarm many times in the past decade about the potential for a devastating Global pandemic.
And on... and on... And on....
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
@johoney5458 Enough gun laws, you say?
- There are an estimated 393 mil civilian-owned unregistered guns in America. That translates to 1.2 guns for every man, woman, child and baby in this country.... And that's just the registered ones.
- We have the highest rate of gun ownership in the world, and it's not even close.
- the shooter in Dayton, Ohio, who killed nine people in less than a minute, legally ordered his AR-15 style assault rifle online. He also bought a double drum magazine, allowing him to fire a hundred rounds in the span of a matter of seconds without reloading. That magazine is band in almost every other major developed country.
- if you add up all the u.s. soldiers who have died in every war in our nation's history, from the Revolutionary War to the Civil War to World War II and the recent Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, that number is still lower than the number of civilians who have died in gun-related incidents in the United States in the past 50 years.
- In this country today, you can still buy a gun, if you have been clinically diagnosed with a major mental illness.
- Or, if your in a rush, you can just skip the whole background check process, by getting one at a gun show.
- every other rich country on the planet has figured out how to reduce gun violence. It's time we learned from them.
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
@spitfire5544 Not sure if he does... But... Yes! Absolutely! In many ways. Dignified has very little to do with pregnancy and birth.
1. The first ultrasounds they have to do, involve a stranger sticking a very large camera inside you and wiggling it around.. A lot.
2. With all the exes food coming in for the baby, it's very common for women to get super constipated and develop pregnancy hemorrhoids, which then you have to show a doctor and could have to have them frozen off.
3. When your milk comes in it swells your breasts, that mostly makes them hurt (a lot) get super veiny and somewhat blue, while also forming these white crusty lumps around your nipples.
4. Towards the end of your third trimester you get informed that it is quite common for women to poop while pushing the baby out. Meaning, not only to you get to see something crown out of you, down there, ripping you open, but the person... Or ppl down there reaching inside of you to get the baby out, also gets s*** in their face.
5. That is the best case scenario. If you end up having to have a c-section, like I did, you get stripped naked, numbed up and paralyzed as a room full of ppl, look down at you, cut into you, pull your organs out of your body in from of your family/the dad.
Ya know... Just to name a few... So... No... Dignity doesn't even factor in.
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
@clevisbernier8973 He....
-Had a 33 page laid out plan to contain a pandemic in America, just exactly like covid-19, and chose not to use it because the administration who commissioned it was Obamas.
-Decided it wasn't important to refill the medical stockpiles for 3 and 1/2 years.
-Tried to pretend for two and a half months that covid-19 had magically gone away.
-Tried to sell American citizens multiple snake oil cures, taking none of them when he actually got sick.
- Left each state to fend for themselves and forced them into a bidding war against each other, for literally American lives.
-Called the severity of the worst worldwide pandemic in over a hundred years, a democratic hoax.
-Tried to take millions of Americans Healthcare away during the worst worldwide pandemic in over a hundred years.
-Made multiple false claims about how it would all just go away, by several different dates, and got every one wrong.
-Threw multiple large rallies and celebrations, with little to no social distancing, instead of setting an example and using a covid safe campaign plan, like President elect Biden did.
-Suggested on a regular basis that we should stop testing for the virus, only so the numbers would go down and he would look better.
-Spread false propaganda about covid-19 being no worse than the flu.
-Claimed that 99% of all covered cases are totally harmless.
-Discouraged his supporters from listening to the medical experts.
-Constantly lied about our fatality rate.
-Playing on racial tensions, tried to blame Mexico for covid-19 in America, with absolutely nothing to back it up.
-Threatened to defund our already strapped public education system in an effort to try and force children to go back to school, when it wasn't safe and no one had a national plan.
-Handled the pandemic so poorly that it crippled our economy and put 9 million people out of work, into a housing crisis and wondering how they were going to feed their children.
-Claimed, on multiple occasions, that covid-19 was merely being overblown because of the election in America. Despite the virus being all over the world.
-Lied about Google engineers building a website to help Americans determine whether they need testing for the coronavirus and to direct them to their nearest testing site.
-Claimed to put a ban on travel from China, but after doing so nearly, 40,000 people travelled from China to the United States under his ban rules.
-Claimed this kind of pandemic was something nobody thought could happen, when experts both on inside and outside the federal government sounded the alarm many times in the past decade about the potential for a devastating Global pandemic.
And on... and on... And on....
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
@elitegaming5477 Roy Moore, Matt Schlapp, Lauren Boebert, Christian and Bridget Ziegler, Jerry Falwell Jr., Larry Craig, George Rekers, Ted Haggard, Mark Foley, Dan Crane, Jon Hinson, Jim Bakker, Wes Goodman, and Donald Trump. See the patern? I bet you don't, because you're not allowed.
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
UnitedStates Enclave You mean the Democrats who preferred to fight for a right to vote in a democracy instead of trying to suppress them, under the guise of voter ID, all based on a giant lie.
Republican Voter Suppression Plan
(Sorry... Made it as short as I could.)
- Demonize mail in voting.
- Require absentee ballots to go to ppl OUTSIDE of the state.
- Remove polling locations & ballot boxes from areas that need more & not less, therefore making much longer lines & wait times ( coincidentally in mostly majority Dem districts ).
- Refuse to make election day a national holiday or place it on a weekend. Ensuring the majority of ppl have to work that day.
- Cutting back voting hrs ( Majority being 6 to 6 or 7 to 7 ).
Which all works out to voter suppression... Sense mail in voting isn't available or U "can't" trust it, & U can't use absentee ballots, the majority of WORKING CLASS, TAX PAYING, AMERICAN CITIZENS now have to option to either try & squeeze in their CONSTITUTIONALLY PROTECTED RIGHT TO VOTE an hr before work, an hr during their lunch break or an hr after work, with NO guarantee they will get to vote, given how long the lines are at the remaining polling places.
👉VOTER ID IS THE LEAST OF THE PROBLEMS!👈
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
@Jim myz Apparently you only bothered to read the last page.
"Dear Allen
We write to advise that the statments of financial condition for donald j trump For the years ending June 30th 2011 through June 30th 2020 should no longer be relied upon and you should inform Any recipients they're of who are currently relying upon one or more of those documents that those documents should not be relied upon
We have come to the conclusion based, in part, upon the filings made by the New York Attorney General on January 18th, 2020 20, our own investigation, and information received from internal and external sources. While we have not concluded that the various financial statements, as a whole, contain material Discrepancies, based upon the totality of the circumstances, we believe our advice to youTo no longer rely upon those financial statements is appropriate.
As we have stated in the statements of financial condition, mazers sir's performed its work in accordance with professional standards. Subsequent review of those work papers confirm this.
Due in part to our decision regarding the financial statements, as well as the totallyOf the circumstances, we have also reached the point such that there is a non waverable conflict of interest with the trump organization peri'm organization. As a result, we are not able to provide any new work product to the trump organization."
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
@debbierushing723 Well... Over 630,000 are dead... Their families are grieving their loses, hundreds of thousands are hospitalized at this very moment, even more or facing battles with insurance companies for not having to pay their medical bills for covid, tons of anti-vaxxers all over the country are ticking time bombs, Millions will now have their very own pre-existing condition, hundreds of thousands are homeless, more just now getting back on their feet, over a hundred thousand have needed a lung transplants and lord knows what the next variant will bring...
So... How many of us are "just fine"? Not so great for millions.... But... Hey, as long as your life isn't inconvenienced for a short amount of time, right... 🙄
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
@ryantaylor3828 Wow! Those are some racist ass stereotypey tropes. Also you are deflecting from what the Republicans have been doing to African Americans and Hispanic people for the past 80 plus years.
The father of my child is black. He has a master's degree. He is a retired soldier from the Air Force. His father was never around. He's one of the best people I know. He's my best friend. He's the best father I've ever seen in my life. He is a published author. Never once been in a gang.
If you want to talk about social welfare programs like welfare checks... then start talking about a living wage. In America for almost 60 years now, inflation and worker productivity have gone up but the minimum wage has not met that. Meaning we're working harder and things are getting more expensive but we're not getting paid what we're worth. If you want to get people off welfare, start there.
As far as you trying to shove words into my mouth, that's just you trying to set up an argument you can argue against. Look up the history of the southern Dems and the party flip. Look at the platforms of southern Dems back then and the Reps of today. If you want to take history into account, then you're going to have to take the entirety of the history into account and not just what fits your narrative. If that offends you, then I don't know what to tell you. I, myself, live down south. If I was born over a hundred years ago, I would have been a registered Republican. I was born in 84, however. In this day and age the racist and bigots are on the Republican side. They show up to your rallies and support your candidates. If you don't like that, I don't know what to tell you. Get them to stop I guess....
But here's the part that you just sail right past in your little self-righteous speech. If you gave a damn about black people or minorities at all, you would care no matter what side it was on. Yet you only seem to care about the Democratic side. You're just one of those little posers that like to use racism to attack the left with it, because you got tired of the right having to defend it. So why are you using the platform of racism, a history that has caused more than enough pain for a million lifetimes, to attack one side, while ignoring the other?
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@erico4868 Trump's real estate company tried to avoid renting apartments to African Americans in the 70s and gave preferential treatment to White, according to the federal government.
Trump treated black employees at his casinos differently from whites, according to multiple sources. A former Hotel executive said that Trump criticized a black accountant," black guys counting my money. I hate it. I think that the guy is lazy. And it's possibly not his fault, but laziness is a trait in Blacks."
In 1989, Trump took out ads in the New York newspapers urging the death penalty for 5 black and Latino teenagers accused of raping a white woman in Central Park. He argue that they were guilty as late as October 2016, more than ten years after DNA evidence had exonerated them.
In 1989, on NBC, Trump said, " I think sometimes a black may think they don't have an advantage or this and that. I've said on one occasion, even about myself, if I were starting off today, I would love to be a well-educated black, because I really believe they do have an actual advantage."
He spent years suggesting that the nation's first black president was born not in the United States but in Kenya.
In the 1990s, Trump took out advertisements alleging that the "Mohawk Indian record of criminal activity is well-documented." At the time he was fighting competition for his casino business.
In a 1993 radio interview, he suggested that Native Americans in Connecticut were faking their ancestry. "I think I might have more Indian blood than a lot of the so-called Indians that are trying to open up the reservations."
And thats just some from before he ran for office.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@nickbierman3640 In Georgia, for example, the House has passed a sweeping bill that would limit early-voting hours on weekends and restrict the use of drop boxes for mail ballots, among other provisions. The state Senate, meanwhile, approved a measure that would eliminate no-excuses absentee voting altogether — limiting eligibility to those ages 65 and over, people with disabilities or those who will be away from home on Election Day.
Limits to early or absentee voting are the most common measures among this year’s batch of proposed restrictions, with such bills on the table in 33 states. Nearly 85 million voters used one of those methods to cast their ballots in those states last year — more than half of all Americans who voted in the Nov. 3 election.
And the new proposals could do more than rein in early and mail voting. Like squeezing a balloon, the measures could dramatically shift voting to Election Day. That has raised alarm among voting rights advocates that the 2022 midterm elections and 2024 presidential contest could be marred by catastrophically long waits to vote — particularly in big cities, where lines are already a common hurdle for millions of Americans.
Of the roughly 250 voting restrictions proposed in 43 states — seven times the number introduced in state legislatures by the same time last year — about half seek to limit mail voting, according to the Brennan Center. Proposals target every step of the process, including limiting who is allowed to cast ballots by mail, eliminating the option of being sent a ballot automatically each election cycle and adding ID, notary or witness requirements.
Georgia Republicans have also proposed banning “line-warming” activities such as passing out water and blankets to voters standing in long lines. Supporters of the measure, including Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger (R), say the practice encourages illegal campaign activity if volunteers are advocating for their preferred candidate and handing out free goodies in the process. Opponents say such activities are necessary to ease the discomfort that many voters face in cities that regularly struggle with long lines.
Tennessee is among the states considering stiff new restrictions even though it is a deeply red state where no one contested the results last year. Another is Iowa, where Gov. Kim Reynolds (R) this week signed legislation that reduces early- and Election Day voting hours and moves up the deadline for mail ballots to arrive at local election offices.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@Wodz30 Trump's real estate company tried to avoid renting apartments to African Americans in the 70s and gave preferential treatment to White, according to the federal government.
Trump treated black employees at his casinos differently from whites, according to multiple sources. A former Hotel executive said that Trump criticized a black accountant," black guys counting my money. I hate it. I think that the guy is lazy. And it's possibly not his fault, but laziness is a trait in Blacks."
In 1989, Trump took out ads in the New York newspapers urging the death penalty for 5 black and Latino teenagers accused of raping a white woman in Central Park. He argue that they were guilty as late as October 2016, more than ten years after DNA evidence had exonerated them.
In 1989, on NBC, Trump said, " I think sometimes a black may think they don't have an advantage or this and that. I've said on one occasion, even about myself, if I were starting off today, I would love to be a well-educated black, because I really believe they do have an actual advantage."
He spent years suggesting that the nation's first black president was born not in the United States but in Kenya.
In the 1990s, Trump took out advertisements alleging that the "Mohawk Indian record of criminal activity is well-documented." At the time he was fighting competition for his casino business.
In a 1993 radio interview, he suggested that Native Americans in Connecticut were faking their ancestry. "I think I might have more Indian blood than a lot of the so-called Indians that are trying to open up the reservations."
And thats just some from before he ran for office.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@ivanbrokhov3748 I know facts are hard for you to comprehend, at your what ? third grade level now. But do try.
Concentration camp... a place where large numbers of people, especially political prisoners or members of persecuted minorities, are deliberately imprisoned in a relatively small area with inadequate facilities, sometimes to provide forced labor or to await mass execution. The term is most strongly associated with the several hundred camps established by the Nazis in Germany and occupied Europe in 1933–45, among the most infamous being Dachau, Belsen, and Auschwitz.
On June 12, the Department of Health and Human Services announced that Fort Sill, an Army post that hosted a World War II internment camp for detainees of Japanese descent, will now be repurposed to detain migrant children.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@oliverphippen1957 - That is why Trump lied, on camera, about mentioning Biden in the phone call, when first asked...
- That is why Trump was only interested in the investigation, only after Biden began running against him...
- That is why there has never been an official investigation into Ukraine and the Biden's opened till this very day....
- That is why Trump is willing to break obstruction laws, to prevent anyone who was actually on the phone call, from testifying...
- That is why the Reps are trying to block further witnesses from testifying in the actual trial, despite arguing the exact opposite during Clinton's impeachment...
- That is why Trump has been trying to discredit the whistleblowers from the start, despite not even knowing who they are....
- That is why Trump refused to testify in the house, lied about being allowed to testify, despite being asked to...
- That is why the Reps pulled that ridiculous storm the castle stunt, regardless of the fact that half of them could have just walked in the room and been given equal time to ask questions, yet chose not to...
I could go on... the breadth and width of what you are ignoring to be able to make that statement... it clearly shows you are not willing to acknowledge, let alone consider all relevant material, and only have interest and what already fit your preconceived notions.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@hopelessent.1700 Trump....
-Had a 33 page laid out plan to contain a pandemic in America, just exactly like covid-19, and chose not to use it because the administration who commissioned it was Obamas.
-Decided it wasn't important to refill the medical stockpiles for 3 and 1/2 years.
-Tried to pretend for two and a half months that covid-19 had magically gone away.
-Tried to sell American citizens multiple snake oil cures, taking none of them when he actually got sick.
- Left each state to fend for themselves and forced them into a bidding war against each other, for literally American lives.
-Called the severity of the worst worldwide pandemic in over a hundred years, a democratic hoax.
-Tried to take millions of Americans Healthcare away during the worst worldwide pandemic in over a hundred years.
-Made multiple false claims about how it would all just go away, by several different dates, and got every one wrong.
-Threw multiple large rallies and celebrations, with little to no social distancing, instead of setting an example and using a covid safe campaign plan, like President elect Biden did.
-Suggested on a regular basis that we should stop testing for the virus, only so the numbers would go down and he would look better.
-Spread false propaganda about covid-19 being no worse than the flu.
-Claimed that 99% of all covered cases are totally harmless.
-Discouraged his supporters from listening to the medical experts.
-Constantly lied about our fatality rate.
-Playing on racial tensions, tried to blame Mexico for covid-19 in America, with absolutely nothing to back it up.
-Threatened to defund our already strapped public education system in an effort to try and force children to go back to school, when it wasn't safe and no one had a national plan.
-Handled the pandemic so poorly that it crippled our economy and put 9 million people out of work, into a housing crisis and wondering how they were going to feed their children.
-Claimed, on multiple occasions, that covid-19 was merely being overblown because of the election in America. Despite the virus being all over the world.
-Lied about Google engineers building a website to help Americans determine whether they need testing for the coronavirus and to direct them to their nearest testing site.
-Claimed to put a ban on travel from China, but after doing so nearly, 40,000 people travelled from China to the United States under his ban rules.
-Claimed this kind of pandemic was something nobody thought could happen, when experts both on inside and outside the federal government sounded the alarm many times in the past decade about the potential for a devastating Global pandemic.
And on... and on... And on....
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@you457wx7 SoOoOo.. there is a difference between thinking you know something, and being able to prove it. Here is the thing, though... if Trump wanted to have the bidens investigated without... Ya know... Breaking the law, he had options. He could have either asked for the investigation back when the original one was still open and Biden was not his political opponent in a presidential election... Or he could of had an independent investigation opened by... Ya know... The justice department, of which he is the head, and had them work with Ukraine, and come to an independent conclusion. Hell! He could of done both. If he had, the Democrats would not have a leg to stand on, when it came to impeachment, on this issue.
SoOoOo.... Either he was willfully ignorant of his options and... Ya know... The laws, of the country... That he runs... Or he did not care that he broke the law.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@NCC2087 60+ different courts, with 60+ different judges, on all sides of the political spectrum, all over the country, in local, state, federal and Supreme Court case's, giving 60+ different opportunities to present evidence of mass voter fraud, most of which, were thrown out before even reaching the trial portion, due to lack of evidence.
27 different states have a statuary provision allowing for automatic recounts. 43 states have a statuary provision allowing for requested recounts. Only two states, Missouri and Tennessee, neither Battleground States do not have specific Provisions for automatic or requested recounts.
4 Battleground states have had recounts. Georgia had to recounts. All of which came up with the same numbers.
If there is all this evidence, why has it not been presented in court?
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@Daddys_Home_002 and some more...
In a pitch to Black voters in 2016, Trump said, “You’re living in poverty, your schools are no good, you have no jobs, 58 percent of your youth is unemployed. What the hell do you have to lose?”
Trump stereotyped a Black reporter at a press conference in February 2017. When April Ryan asked him if he plans to meet and work with the Congressional Black Caucus, he repeatedly asked her to set up the meeting — even as she insisted that she’s “just a reporter.”
In the week after white supremacist protests in Charlottesville, Virginia, in August 2017, Trump repeatedly said that “many sides” and “both sides” were to blame for the violence and chaos that ensued — suggesting that the white supremacist protesters were morally equivalent to counterprotesters who stood against racism. He also said that there were “some very fine people” among the white supremacists. All of this seemed like a dog whistle to white supremacists — and many of them took it as one, with white nationalist Richard Spencer praising Trump for “defending the truth.”
Throughout 2017, Trump repeatedly attacked NFL players who, by kneeling or otherwise silently protesting during the national anthem, demonstrated against systemic racism in America.
Trump reportedly said in 2017 that people who came to the US from Haiti “all have AIDS,” and he lamented that people who came to the US from Nigeria would never “go back to their huts” once they saw America. The White House denied that Trump ever made these comments.
Speaking about immigration in a bipartisan meeting in January 2018, Trump reportedly asked, in reference to Haiti and African countries, “Why are we having all these people from shithole countries come here?” He then reportedly suggested that the US should take more people from countries like Norway. The implication: Immigrants from predominantly white countries are good, while immigrants from predominantly Black countries are bad.
Trump denied making the “shithole” comments, although some senators present at the meeting said they happened. The White House, meanwhile, suggested that the comments, like Trump’s remarks about the NFL protests, will play well to his base. The only connection between Trump’s remarks about the NFL protests and his “shithole” comments is race.
4
-
@Daddys_Home_002 And some more
Trump denied making the “shithole” comments, although some senators present at the meeting said they happened. The White House, meanwhile, suggested that the comments, like Trump’s remarks about the NFL protests, will play well to his base. The only connection between Trump’s remarks about the NFL protests and his “shithole” comments is race.
Trump mocked Elizabeth Warren’s presidential campaign, again calling her “Pocahontas” in a 2019 tweet before adding, “See you on the campaign TRAIL, Liz!” The capitalized “TRAIL” is seemingly a reference to the Trail of Tears — a horrific act of ethnic cleansing in the 19th century in which Native Americans were forcibly relocated, causing thousands of deaths.
Trump tweeted later that year that several Black and brown members of Congress — Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), Ayanna Pressley (D-MA), Ilhan Omar (D-MN), and Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) — are “from countries whose governments are a complete and total catastrophe” and that they should “go back” to those countries. It’s a common racist trope to say that Black and brown people, particularly immigrants, should go back to their countries of origin. Three of the four members of Congress whom Trump targeted were born in the US.
Trump has called the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus the “Chinese virus” and “kung flu.” The World Health Organization advises against linking a virus to any particular region, since it can lead to stigma. Trump’s adviser, Kellyanne Conway, previously described the term “kung flu” as “highly offensive.” Meanwhile, Asian Americans have reported hateful incidents targeting them due to the spread of the coronavirus.
Trump suggested that Kamala Harris, who’s Black and South Asian, “doesn’t meet the requirements” to be former Vice President and Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden’s running mate — yet another example of birtherism.
4
-
@Daddys_Home_002 Trump launched his campaign in 2015 by calling Mexican immigrants “rapists” who are “bringing crime” and “bringing drugs” to the US. His campaign was largely built on building a wall to keep these immigrants out of the US.
As a candidate in 2015, Trump called for a ban on all Muslims coming into the US. His administration eventually implemented a significantly watered-down version of the policy.
When asked at a 2016 Republican debate whether all 1.6 billion Muslims hate the US, Trump said, “I mean a lot of them. I mean a lot of them.”
He argued in 2016 that Judge Gonzalo Curiel — who was overseeing the Trump University lawsuit — should recuse himself from the case because of his Mexican heritage and membership in a Latino lawyers association. House Speaker Paul Ryan, who endorsed Trump, later called such comments “the textbook definition of a racist comment.”
Trump has been repeatedly slow to condemn white supremacists who endorse him, and he regularly retweeted messages from white supremacists and neo-Nazis during his presidential campaign.
He tweeted and later deleted an image that showed Hillary Clinton in front of a pile of money and by a Jewish Star of David that said, “Most Corrupt Candidate Ever!” The tweet had some very obvious anti-Semitic imagery, but Trump insisted that the star was a sheriff’s badge, and said his campaign shouldn’t have deleted it.
Trump has repeatedly referred to Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) as “Pocahontas,” using her controversial — and later walked-back — claims to Native American heritage as a punchline.
At the 2016 Republican convention, Trump officially seized the mantle of the “law and order” candidate — an obvious dog whistle playing to white fears of Black crime, even though crime in the US is historically low. His speeches, comments, and executive actions after he took office have continued this line of messaging.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@markcherry6256 Here is the problem with your claims. You are only saying them because Trump told you a lie and you didn't bother fact checking it. 👇
Fact ✔
The population of Michigan is 9.962 mil as of the 2017 census.
Trump would of had to of subpoenaed Michigan voter rolls to be able to know who is and who is not on the absentee ballot list. The public record will only give you...
Number of votes
Number registered
Number of population
Turnout
Look for yourself
https://www.michigan.gov/sos/0,4670,7-127-1633_8722-29616--,00.html
The population size is not what counts. What counts is the average voter turn out. Which is 2.1 mil or 29%.
The total number of registered voters in Michigan is 7,471,088.
"President Donald Trump erroneously tweeted that Michigan’s Democratic secretary of state was “illegally” sending “absentee ballots to 7.7 million people” for this year’s primary and general elections.
The state said it will send absentee ballot applications — not actual ballots — to all registered voters, who may want to vote by mail.
Trump, who has been critical of mail-in voting, made the false claim May 20, in a since-deleted tweet.
“Breaking: Michigan sends absentee ballots to 7.7 million people ahead of Primaries and the General Election,” he wrote. “This was done illegally and without authorization by a rogue Secretary of State. I will ask to hold up funding to Michigan if they want to go down this Voter Fraud path.”
About an hour after his message was sent, Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson corrected the president on Twitter.
“Hi! I also have a name, it’s Jocelyn Benson. And we sent applications, not ballots. Just like my GOP colleagues in Iowa, Georgia, Nebraska and West Virginia,” she tweeted.
Benson is correct that Iowa, Georgia, Nebraska and West Virginia have mailed absentee ballot applications to voters.
Trump’s original tweet was later deleted, six hours after he posted it, according to Politwoops. The president replaced it with one saying “ballot applications” — instead of just “ballots” — still claiming it’s “illegal.”"
https://www.factcheck.org/2020/05/trumps-false-tweet-about-michigan-absentee-ballot-applications/
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@thehatefull1761 So... A few things...
1. I "know" what can be proven. Which you didn't bother to do. You may operate your life off of hearing something and then just running with it, but I do not.
2. "Democrats hate Republicans". 👈 I'm sure there are some Dems that nonsensically hate all Reps on site... But... I'm not one of them, I haven't come across many and those I do, I tell the same thing to, that I tell ALMOST ALL THE REPS I run into that do the same. It's a willfully ignorant overgeneralization that uses the same logic as racism. I personally live in the land of the Reps.... And when I say that, I mean, other then 1 person, everyone I know, voted for Trump the first time.
3. So... What it sounds like, in your claims, name and writing, you are try to project and assume that others think the way you do.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@Miki Miki The combination of 💥👉racism and power👈💥 does nothing to offend you, but don't let some lady on the internet call you 😲buttercup😲. That's just a bridge too far! 🙄
1. Pithy has never been my thing. Long winded with everyone.
2. I have a mixed race 11 year old boy... And we live in Louisiana. So... Yeah... Its literally hitting home.
3. Wether that was the case or not, it's still the principle. It's the same argument everytime with you guys. You can't argue Against Racism is wrong, so you always gotta make it about something else. Why is that? Why can't we go "racism is wrong" and then you go, "yeah it is", and have that be the end of it 1 damned time? Why y'all always gotta feel compelled to add the "but"? Everytime?
4. I've told you who the victims are in this particular case in damn near every comment. You keep intentionally ignoring it because you have no argument against it and you don't want to look bad. She is a clear and Casual racist, which is revealed in that video. She is also a 💥👉JUDGE👈💥!!!!!! One that 💥👉DECIDES👈💥 how to 💥👉PUNISH BLACK PPL👈💥 for the crimes they commit, or on whether or not they've committed a crime at all, 💥👉EVERY DAY👈💥!!!! I wonder how you will excuse missing the point when it's that big and bold. Lets see.
5. Sure! Lets transition a discussion about racism, which apparently doesn't qualify as "BIG PICTURE MATERIAL" to you, into
- weather of the word rant was appropriate
- that someone was stealing her car so it's totally cool to be racist while they're doing that
- and finally because someone filmed her being racist and some news channels put it up because they saw the alarming fact that she was not only racist but she was racist and the judge, it's now an invasion of privacy issue
Please... Privacy is simply the diversion you landed on after 2 tries, that seamed to work best as a deflection. If only this wasn't a thread and no one could see what you had wrote before.
6. No one can do anything about what's in her head but the thing you constantly ignore is it's not just in her head if she's a judge deciding on the fate of African American people. The thing you keep trying to ignore. The thing you keep trying to ignore. The thing you keep trying to ignore. The thing you keep trying to ignore.
The thing you keep trying to ignore, Buttercup!
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
Mj light Trump's real estate company tried to avoid renting apartments to African Americans in the 70s and gave preferential treatment to White, according to the federal government.
Trump treated black employees at his casinos differently from whites, according to multiple sources. A former Hotel executive said that Trump criticized a black accountant," black guys counting my money. I hate it. I think that the guy is lazy. And it's possibly not his fault, but laziness is a trait in Blacks."
In 1989, Trump took out ads in the New York newspapers urging the death penalty for 5 black and Latino teenagers accused of raping a white woman in Central Park. He argue that they were guilty as late as October 2016, more than ten years after DNA evidence had exonerated them.
In 1989, on NBC, Trump said, " I think sometimes a black may think they don't have an advantage or this and that. I've said on one occasion, even about myself, if I were starting off today, I would love to be a well-educated black, because I really believe they do have an actual advantage."
He spent years suggesting that the nation's first black president was born not in the United States but in Kenya.
In the 1990s, Trump took out advertisements alleging that the "Mohawk Indian record of criminal activity is well-documented." At the time he was fighting competition for his casino business.
In a 1993 radio interview, he suggested that Native Americans in Connecticut were faking their ancestry. "I think I might have more Indian blood than a lot of the so-called Indians that are trying to open up the reservations."
And thats just some from before he ran for office.
4
-
4
-
Mj light Again.... How does any of that relate to these facts? Why do you keep deflecting from them? Its like you can't account for them or something. 😁😁😁
"Trump's real estate company tried to avoid renting apartments to African Americans in the 70s and gave preferential treatment to White, according to the federal government.
Trump treated black employees at his casinos differently from whites, according to multiple sources. A former Hotel executive said that Trump criticized a black accountant," black guys counting my money. I hate it. I think that the guy is lazy. And it's possibly not his fault, but laziness is a trait in Blacks."
In 1989, Trump took out ads in the New York newspapers urging the death penalty for 5 black and Latino teenagers accused of raping a white woman in Central Park. He argue that they were guilty as late as October 2016, more than ten years after DNA evidence had exonerated them.
In 1989, on NBC, Trump said, " I think sometimes a black may think they don't have an advantage or this and that. I've said on one occasion, even about myself, if I were starting off today, I would love to be a well-educated black, because I really believe they do have an actual advantage."
He spent years suggesting that the nation's first black president was born not in the United States but in Kenya.
In the 1990s, Trump took out advertisements alleging that the "Mohawk Indian record of criminal activity is well-documented." At the time he was fighting competition for his casino business.
In a 1993 radio interview, he suggested that Native Americans in Connecticut were faking their ancestry. "I think I might have more Indian blood than a lot of the so-called Indians that are trying to open up the reservations."
And thats just some from before he ran for office."
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@OrcaBob 4337 So... I usually just call the nonsensical assumptions about total strangers and childish insults exactly what they are and leave it at that.. Because they are all just masks for their own insecurities anyways, and so.. Defending against that always seamed pointless to me.... BUT.... considering this one started out this way... And my goal tends to be helping people who do those kinds of things discredit themselves, I will have to make an exception with this one. 👇
Hi! I'm Charlotte Morgan. I live in Louisiana. I am 37. I am giving you this info, so you can verify who I am by looking me up on Facebook. I have a mixed race 10 year old son, named Gabriel. His father is my best friend. As I said, I live in Louisiana. The Rep loving Baptist bible belt.... As an atheist, single mother to a mixed race child, that one side calls the "N word" and the other calls "passing".
A place where kids at his swim camp tell him "the president (Trump) hates him because he is black". Where I made the news last year for punching a popular local radio host for calling my son a "N word Baby" when I was giving him a 5 min Lyft ride. Only to have him drop the charges because of "bad publicity". Where I volunteer with 2 other graphic designers to do all the graphics for the local BLM and women's march events. A place where he has one mixed older brother and one AfAm younger brother and sister, that I love as my own. That I would gladly raise as my own if something ever happened to their moms.... Who are also my friends.
I don't have to lie about or hide who I am. I am exactly what I represent myself to be. I live it everyday. I can't know what it would be like to live as a minority in this country. I do know how it feels to be the loved one of one... And seeing the daily pain it causes them. I don't understand how the father of my child doesn't get as angry about that stuff as I do. He says he is used to it... And that makes me sad.
As for "hate".... I hate these people and their ignorance. Their need to make themselves feel better by making others feel worse. I have always hated bullies. Especially those that attack my loved ones... And that is exactly what they are. School yard bullies, all growed up... However I'm not irrational. I have a big brother and a mother, as well as several friends who are in the service and are staunch Republicans... all of whom voted for Trump the first time. I don't think they are racist or dumb. I don't feel the need to paint everybody in the world with the same paint brush because it's convenient for my argument. Maybe you should try that.
3
-
3
-
@OrcaBob 4337 😯 Wow! " when everyone else unites it's called civil rights when White People Unite it's called white supremacy." It depends on what your uniting for? What the hell are you uniting for? And unrepresented? Seriously? A white man in America is going to complain about being unrepresented? Really? Sweetheart, people think you sound like a racist because you sound like a racist. That's why you're so defensive about it. If you talk to them like you're phrasing this stuff to me...
For instance, the only reason why, for example, African Americans get together in a group and work towards a common goal that has to do with their culture is because they would be discriminated against because of that culture or because of that color of their skin. White people really don't have that problem, sweetheart. I have news for you, minorities would much rather not have to group up to just be treated like everybody else. They would much rather just be treated like everybody else. The reason that it would be redundant for like a group of white people to saunter into a town hall somewhere and talk about how they're being discriminated because of the color of their skin, is because they're not. That's why it would be redundant for that to happen. Knock out some men who are white don't get discriminated against in other ways. For instance, man, even white men have a tendency to be screwed over when it comes to kid custody cases. For some reason the automatic assumption is always the mother even though that might not be the best place for the child. My point being, it's not that you may not have your own raison d'etre but it's just not about the color of your skin.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
Trump 2020 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 Posted this here also, I see! Well, I guess I'll have to post the proof of your 11 DIFFERENT LIES in this comment, here as well! 😜✌
Let's break down all 11 LIES you just told....
Lie #1 ... You misquoted "the economist" who said it. The quote was... " I honestly believe if anyone of the Democrats on that debate stage won the presidency, the games of the last two and a half years would be wiped out 👉( Conveniently leaving out the ","Pence said."" That was right here )👈 Taxes would Skyrocket. The stock market with tank. Jobs would vanish, and we would get that recession these naysayers keep talkin about."
Lie #2 #3 .... The " leading economist " you where referring to is 👉MIKE PENCE👈 and has a 👉LAW👈 degree and not an economics degree. Therefore, is not an Economist of any kind.
Lie #4 #5 .... The think you tried to pass off as, what a "leading economist said", was actually the 👉TITLE👈 of a Fox Business article, written by Blair Shiff and published August 19th 2019. Oh and you seamed to of forgotten a key word at the end of that title as well.
" Recession coming if Democrat wins White House in 2020" 👉( What you left out was, ": Pence" )👈
Lie #6 #7 #8 #9 ... Misquoting what Pence, and not a leading Economist, said in your second quote. This is quoting the article you got this quote from. Which some KEY DIFFERENCES....
" As I stand before you today, I'm also mindful of the fact that America has a 👉( not a "big" )👈 choice to make in the next year and a half," PENCE 👉( not "he" )👈 said. "A choice of whether we're going to stay on the path that's created unprecedented Prosperity or whether we're going to take the hard left turn 👉( not "of a guaranteed recession" )👈 that 👉( left the word "that" out all together, for some reason )👈 you heard leading Democrats offer on a debate stage right here in Detroit two weeks ago."
Lie #10 ... You tried to pass of the Fox Business articles words as your own by not quoting it....
👉" But his biggest message was clear: if you like how the economy is going, you should vote for Trump."👈
Lie #11 ... I don't know what you were trying to do with this one. Maybe make it sound more official, I guess? Or maybe you where saying the fake economist AKA Mike Pence was from a US economic Institute... Either way... Its a lie.... What you said...
" Says leading Economist at us economic Institute "
The article you tried to plagiarize and intentionally incorrectly quote states that, 👉" Vice President Mike Pence addressed Detroit economic Club Monday at the Motor City Casino "👈
Its almost like you intentionally edited your comment to mislead people about who said these things and how they said them....
https://www-foxbusiness-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.foxbusiness.com/politics/if-the-democrats-win-a-recession-will-happen-vice-president-mike-pence.amp?amp_js_v=a2&_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQEKAFwAQ%3D%3D#aoh=15668437520870&_ct=1566843758636&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&_tf=From%20%251%24s&share=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.foxbusiness.com%2Fpolitics%2Fif-the-democrats-win-a-recession-will-happen-vice-president-mike-pence
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@Dick_Interritus Yeah... That's the problem. A pandemic, the spread, the mutation and to get it is so unpredictable and has so many moving parts, it's not what people want to hear but it's what's honest. It's about wait and see.
What I would say... if we could put together three solid months, with majority no spikes or even, hopefully, a steady decline in infection rate across the board, that at least extends beyond the flu infection rate, while, simultaneously, getting every state at least 75% vaccinated... That would be a good time to ease the mandates. It's just the getting there part...
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@mhall801 14th comment down, addressed to @Taylor Fox
" 👈. No, for being fake just like the Democrat Party. Bunch of evil low life's. "
Not using a qualifier, like, "most" or "some" or "all" is either a generalization or an all-encompassing statement. So, do you not know how the English language works or were you just trying to generalize every Democrat in the world? Being that, by definition, every Democrat is a member of the Democrat Party. In other words, what type of ignorant would you prefer to be? Me, personally, I would probably stand by my original ignorance, because at least then I'd be consistent. Just a suggestion...
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@irgong6875 If that's what you got out of it, your cherry picking.
Why wait until he was running against him?
Why try and cover the call up, by lying about it, trying to put it in a different place for more classified material then it would have normally gone in, lying about it and changing his story if he really did nothing wrong?
Why would he ask Ukraine to investigate when he is the head of the justice department?
If you can't make your argument while considering all relevant material, you need to rethink your argument.
When I'm not willing to do is play along with this whataboutism and Trump trying to deflect from his actions.
Cuz here's the thing, I personally don't want correct people on my side, being my leaders. If anyone were to ask in an honest way and not just a way that would deflect from Trump's actions, I would say if they had an investigation and by Nana's son ended up being dirty, send their asses to jail, get them out of office, get them away from being in any kind of leadership over me. That however does not detract from trumps curruption and you guys not wanting to deal with that.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@MeowNSheeit Donald Trump....
-Had a 33 page laid out plan to contain a pandemic in America, just exactly like covid-19, and chose not to use it because the administration who commissioned it was Obamas.
-Decided it wasn't important to refill the medical stockpiles for 3 and 1/2 years.
-Tried to pretend for two and a half months that covid-19 had magically gone away.
-Tried to sell American citizens multiple snake oil cures, taking none of them when he actually got sick.
- Left each state to fend for themselves and forced them into a bidding war against each other, for literally American lives.
-Called the severity of the worst worldwide pandemic in over a hundred years, a democratic hoax.
-Tried to take millions of Americans Healthcare away during the worst worldwide pandemic in over a hundred years.
-Made multiple false claims about how it would all just go away, by several different dates, and got every one wrong.
-Threw multiple large rallies and celebrations, with little to no social distancing, instead of setting an example and using a covid safe campaign plan, like President elect Biden did.
-Suggested on a regular basis that we should stop testing for the virus, only so the numbers would go down and he would look better.
-Spread false propaganda about covid-19 being no worse than the flu.
-Claimed that 99% of all covered cases are totally harmless.
-Discouraged his supporters from listening to the medical experts.
-Constantly lied about our fatality rate.
-Playing on racial tensions, tried to blame Mexico for covid-19 in America, with absolutely nothing to back it up.
-Threatened to defund our already strapped public education system in an effort to try and force children to go back to school, when it wasn't safe and no one had a national plan.
-Handled the pandemic so poorly that it crippled our economy and put 9 million people out of work, into a housing crisis and wondering how they were going to feed their children.
-Claimed, on multiple occasions, that covid-19 was merely being overblown because of the election in America. Despite the virus being all over the world.
-Lied about Google engineers building a website to help Americans determine whether they need testing for the coronavirus and to direct them to their nearest testing site.
-Claimed to put a ban on travel from China, but after doing so nearly, 40,000 people travelled from China to the United States under his ban rules.
-Claimed this kind of pandemic was something nobody thought could happen, when experts both on inside and outside the federal government sounded the alarm many times in the past decade about the potential for a devastating Global pandemic.
And on... and on... And on....
3
-
@jessejameson9749 Nope... Ask Donald Trump when he was doing all this..
He....
-Had a 33 page laid out plan to contain a pandemic in America, just exactly like covid-19, and chose not to use it because the administration who commissioned it was Obamas.
-Decided it wasn't important to refill the medical stockpiles for 3 and 1/2 years.
-Tried to pretend for two and a half months that covid-19 had magically gone away.
-Tried to sell American citizens multiple snake oil cures, taking none of them when he actually got sick.
- Left each state to fend for themselves and forced them into a bidding war against each other, for literally American lives.
-Called the severity of the worst worldwide pandemic in over a hundred years, a democratic hoax.
-Tried to take millions of Americans Healthcare away during the worst worldwide pandemic in over a hundred years.
-Made multiple false claims about how it would all just go away, by several different dates, and got every one wrong.
-Threw multiple large rallies and celebrations, with little to no social distancing, instead of setting an example and using a covid safe campaign plan, like President elect Biden did.
-Suggested on a regular basis that we should stop testing for the virus, only so the numbers would go down and he would look better.
-Spread false propaganda about covid-19 being no worse than the flu.
-Claimed that 99% of all covered cases are totally harmless.
-Discouraged his supporters from listening to the medical experts.
-Constantly lied about our fatality rate.
-Playing on racial tensions, tried to blame Mexico for covid-19 in America, with absolutely nothing to back it up.
-Threatened to defund our already strapped public education system in an effort to try and force children to go back to school, when it wasn't safe and no one had a national plan.
-Handled the pandemic so poorly that it crippled our economy and put 9 million people out of work, into a housing crisis and wondering how they were going to feed their children.
-Claimed, on multiple occasions, that covid-19 was merely being overblown because of the election in America. Despite the virus being all over the world.
-Lied about Google engineers building a website to help Americans determine whether they need testing for the coronavirus and to direct them to their nearest testing site.
-Claimed to put a ban on travel from China, but after doing so nearly, 40,000 people travelled from China to the United States under his ban rules.
-Claimed this kind of pandemic was something nobody thought could happen, when experts both on inside and outside the federal government sounded the alarm many times in the past decade about the potential for a devastating Global pandemic.
And on... and on... And on....
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@antbeats6161 "Trump falsely claimed that “the Democrats don’t want to do anything having to do with protecting people from eviction,” even though the House Democrats had already passed a coronavirus relief bill to do exactly that."
"Trump once again misleadingly claimed that testing was behind the United States’ large number of cases, boasting that the U.S. “is only 5% of the world’s population, but we have conducted over 25% of the world’s testing.” While American testing is better than some countries, it does not explain the huge caseload, nor does it change the fact that the U.S. also has 22% of the world’s COVID-19 deaths."
"Trump falsely said if the Democrats controlled Washington, they would pass “legislation gutting every single police department in America.” Nearly 90% of funding for police comes from local governments, and presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden has said he opposes “defunding the police.”"
"The president repeated his bogus claim about the genesis of the Veterans Choice program, which was launched in 2014 under the Obama administration. Trump took credit for the law, claiming “no president’s ever been able to do it, and we got it done.”"
https://www.factcheck.org/2020/08/factchecking-trumps-weekend-press-briefings/
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
Trump's real estate company tried to avoid renting apartments to African Americans in the 70s and gave preferential treatment to White, according to the federal government.
Trump treated black employees at his casinos differently from whites, according to multiple sources. A former Hotel executive said that Trump criticized a black accountant," black guys counting my money. I hate it. I think that the guy is lazy. And it's possibly not his fault, but laziness is a trait in Blacks."
In 1989, Trump took out ads in the New York newspapers urging the death penalty for 5 black and Latino teenagers accused of raping a white woman in Central Park. He argue that they were guilty as late as October 2016, more than ten years after DNA evidence had exonerated them.
In 1989, on NBC, Trump said, " I think sometimes a black may think they don't have an advantage or this and that. I've said on one occasion, even about myself, if I were starting off today, I would love to be a well-educated black, because I really believe they do have an actual advantage."
He spent years suggesting that the nation's first black president was born not in the United States but in Kenya.
In the 1990s, Trump took out advertisements alleging that the "Mohawk Indian record of criminal activity is well-documented." At the time he was fighting competition for his casino business.
In a 1993 radio interview, he suggested that Native Americans in Connecticut were faking their ancestry. "I think I might have more Indian blood than a lot of the so-called Indians that are trying to open up the reservations."
And thats just some from before he ran for office.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@Mulinaster It has the look of a fact based argument... Which is your intent, I'm sure... But cherry picking is rampant, ya snuck in a twisty falsehood and an unquantifiable declaration.
"Trump is seeking credit he doesn’t deserve for black job growth. He’s also wrong to assert that Democrats haven’t done anything to improve the economic situation for African Americans.
It’s true that black unemployment did reach a record low during the Trump administration: 5.9 percent in May 2018. It currently stands at 6 percent.
But many economists view the continued economic growth since the middle of 2009, when Democratic President Barack Obama was in office, as the primary explanation for hiring. More important, there are multiple signs that the racial wealth gap is now worsening and the administration appears to have done little, if anything, to specifically address this challenge.
African Americans also had higher income prior to the Trump administration. A black household earned median income of $40,258 in 2017, the latest data available. That’s below a 2000 peak of $42,348, according to the Census Bureau.
The most dramatic drop in black unemployment came under Obama, when it fell from a recession high of 16.8 percent in March 2010 to 7.8 percent in January 2017."
https://apnews.com/f78f4205f474482db8bb8fa7a5ebfa27
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@swmarb5236 The employment-population ratio measures the share of a demographic group that has a job, and it's been lower for Black people for years.
The unemployment rate has also spiked for all racial groups in the US during the coronavirus pandemic, and is especially high for Black Americans.
People of color, and especially Black Americans, are severely underrepresented at the top of the corporate hierarchy.
Black Americans have historically been underrepresented in the highest echelons of government, as well.
Black workers have historically earned far less than white workers.
Similarly, overall income for Black Americans was about 42% lower than for whites in 2018.
There's a similar disparity at the household level. Lower incomes mean that the poverty rate for Black families is over twice that of white families.
The aggregate wealth white households have held has historically far outstripped that held by the Black community. And while it has increased for white people since the 1980s, it's remained stagnant for Black people.
One of the contributing factors to the household wealth disparity is student loans.
The wage gap between races also interacts with the gender wage gap between men and women.
One common way to illustrate the gender and race wage gaps is through looking at "equal pay days" for different groups.
Black Americans are underrepresented in high-paying jobs
A key part of the "American Dream" is leaving your children in a better economic position than you were in, but that dream is less attainable for Black Americans.
Educational opportunities remain starkly split by race.
The share of both white and Black Americans with college degrees has increased dramatically over the last half-century, but there's still a gap.
As with income, intergenerational educational mobility varies widely between racial groups.
One common way to illustrate the gender and race wage gaps is through looking at "equal pay days" for different groups.
Thus, the share of Black households that own their own homes is lower than other racial groups.
The coronavirus crisis has only exacerbated an already wide disparity in access to healthcare.
The current coronavirus pandemic has had a disparate impact on people of color.
Black prisoners are overrepresented in the US prison population compared to their share of the total US population.
Black men are roughly five times more likely to be imprisoned than their white counterparts — and nearly 13 times as likely in the 18-19 age group.
Marijuana usage rates are similar between white and Black Americans, yet Black Americans are 3.64 times more likely to get arrested on marijuana possession charges.
Just to name a few.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
Land of the Free Yeah... You know exactly how! That is why 👆 there, when I kept bring it up, you tried about 9 different times here AND on. One of my own videos, deflect and distract from the subject. The time for playing ignorant, for you, has past, I'm afraid. Now... You can sack up, own your s*** and regain some semblance of credibility here or you can keep playing these childish games and show everyone, you are EXACTLY WHAT I SAID YOU WHERE.... Someone who doesn't give a s*** about racism and is just USING the and of those who endure it to have a platform to attack the Democratic Party. Either way, I'm not playing this game with you. I will call it out everytime I see it, though. You decide for yourself how much of a joke you want to make out of yourself.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@Dan-ud8hz This is who you are talking to.
If ppl show you who they are, believe them. This is who this person is. ( I abbreviated some but do have the screenshots if you want the whole thing.)
Threat beginner comment - Basically Trump can shoot everyone on 5th Avenue and get away with it.
cj p - if they were antifa or in a pussy hat... Then yes it would be epic and I would want to see him shoot more.
Me - So you're basically saying you want to see the president of the United States commit murder and then you want him to get away with it... All we need to know about you, to figure out how jacked up in the head you are.
(This part is a lil long and crazy ranty, so highlights)👇
cj p - if he shot you, I would throw a black party.
(Some comment section thing about people cheering for a red state woman dying in a hurricane and CNN YouTube commenters cheering. Basically a justification for his actions. Which tells us, he does feel the need to justify it or aka he knows he is wrong.) (Then assumptions about what I would do, just encase that justification didn't work.)(Libs are evil then...) I don't need to fake it. When I watch the skinny effeminate antifa kid get mowed down by a red pickup... I laughed and watched it again. He didn't even break a bone. When I saw it another video of a motorist get out of his white suburban and beat the crap out of an antifa weirdo standing in front of his car... I laughed again and make jokes in the comments like every other person did. You want links to those videos they are pretty good?
Me - 👈👈👈ANNNNNDDD... A perfect example of what I was talking about, everyone. This is all you need to know about him, to know nothing that comes out of his mouth is important, in any way. He is always so eager to help me prove that point and I really do appreciate it! 😉✌
Me - BTW, you are talking about taking a little boys mother away from him. That is what you are celebrating. That is who you are right now... I'm sure yours would be super proud that just came out of her little boys mouth. You are such a sad person.
cj p - you were going to raise a little nut job. He might be better off adopted. And there you go again with the virtue signaling. I don't use my kid as a shield. Pathetic how you're trying to squeeze guilt from me when I'm using satire. No wonder you don't get Trump jokes. I bet memes fly past you too. Fifty bucks says your son's girlfriend's will never get along with his overbearing controlling mother with no humor.
(👆You will notice, throughout this portion, you see them justifying, excusing and trying to flip what he has said onto me. All signs he knows what he has said, was wrong.)
Me - 👈👈👈 Yep... This is who this person is. 👆👆👆This is why anything they say, does not matter. They aren't a good person. They aren't even mostly human. When people show you who they are, believe them.
I'm going to screenshot this, copy and paste it everywhere I see this "person" from now on.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@MajorMovieDeal Sigh...
Okay, you need to understand that going back and looking at one side of things and not the other is not at all what I said. Would you not agree that having an objective standpoint on the facts at hand would entail going back and looking at both sides? Is that logical to you?
As far as right winger and left Winger violence you need to look at both sides. That was my claim.
"Obama weaponized the IRS and intelligence agencies against his political opponents." - where is your proof for this claim?
" we see the left boycotting conservatives, and Trump supporters all the time," - and? You do know this is America, right? The land where protests and boycotts are perfectly legal... and you know ....in the Constitution and shit... you remember that whole thing that Thomas Jefferson said, back in the day, about how dissent is the purest form of patriotism?
" confronting them at College, restaurants, public places " - see my last answer... Lol
" and even threatening them and their families at their homes," - To be very clear, if anyone is threatening anyone else, their families or their homes in any kind of real way, then that is absolutely wrong and they should go to jail. Irregardless a party, irregardless of side, irregardless of ethnicity or religion or any of that crap..... It has been my personal experience however, our side is willing to say that about our people more than yours and when our people are wrong we hold them to the same standard we hold you to. Even in this last comment of yours you are already trying to excuse and offuskate your people. With vague references to being set up. " there have been numerous fake hate crimes blamed on Trump supporters, like the one that two-bit actor pulled in Chicago recently. There is also the unwarranted media attack on the Catholic school boy wearing the Maga hat who was confronted by the American activist, he was totally mangled for this standing here."
What I didn't see is what I asked for. Now we could go back and forth, bit for bit on violence and claims and such from either party in the last decade but I think you know I would win that and so instead how about we just admit that? Hopefully?
" you people are so ignorant, so intolerant, so pathetic." - now I gave you fair warning dumbass. I gave you a choice. You can either speak to me in an adult manner or you can act like an ass whole child and get treated like an a**** child. Still up to you.
Okay , I forgot about Tucker Carlson. You might need to be more specific cuz dude does a lot of s***. However I think you might be talking about the IHOP thing? To which I simply respond, you're a right winger and do not believe in the free market?
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@rodneyboehner3007 "Biden’s approval rating hit 60% in an April 9 to an April 12 Politico-Morning Consult poll with nearly 2,000 respondents, though his average rating is 53.1% at 85 days into his presidency, according to FiveThirtyEight’s running tracker. "
"By contrast, Donald Trump’s approval rating never cracked 45.5% during the same period of his presidency, and sat at about 41% on day 85."
"Of the last six presidents, only Trump (41.2%) had a lower average approval rating than Biden after 85 days in office, though George W. Bush and Bill Clinton both clocked in just a tick higher, at 54.2% and 53.4%, respectively. "
Biden’s approval rating hit 60% in an April 9 to an April 12 Politico-Morning Consult poll with nearly 2,000 respondents, though his average rating is 53.1% at 85 days into his presidency, according to FiveThirtyEight’s running tracker. "
Yeah.. That's all you got. 😘
"
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@flyingsavage8522 So.. You've decided to try and claim that I am doing, what I just pointed out what you are, in an attempt to ironically deflect from the fact that your deflecting from the original topic, to a bunch of claims you have yet to prove... But claim are obvious.... 👈 See why I don't engage with deflectors? You do it right from the start and the odds are, that is all you will ever do. Each go, getting more and more convoluted then the last.
I gave you the parameters upon which you must meet before I engage with you in this debate...
"So, first you would need to address the subject at hand, and demonstrate that you're willing to hold both sides accountable equally and then we could move on to other subjects. At which time you would have to provide proof of their existence before arguing them. I'll be Waiting."
They are reasonable and measured, and should, NOT AT ALL, be hard to accomplish ( by your own admission ), if you have genuine concern for these issues and are telling the whole truth. I have explained why these things are required, as well. If you cannot meet them, that falls under the category of not my problem. Your choice.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
SGT Gardner Hey crazy! He....
-Had a 33 page laid out plan to contain a pandemic and America, just exactly like covid-19 and chose not to use it because the administration who commissioned it was Obama.
-Decided it wasn't important to refill the medical stockpiles for 3 and 1/2 years.
-Tried to pretend for two and a half months that covid-19 has magically gone away.
-Tried to sell American citizens multiple snake oil cares, taking none of them when he actually got sick.
- Left each state to fend for themselves and forced them into a bidding war against each other, we're literally American lives.
-Called the severity of the worst worldwide pandemic in over a hundred years a democratic hoax.
-Tried to take millions of Americans Healthcare away during the world worldwide pandemic in over a hundred years.
-Made multiple false claims about how it would all just go away by several different dates and got every one wrong.
-Threw multiple large rallies and celebrations with little to no social distancing, instead of setting an example and using a coded safe campaign plan, like President elect Biden did.
-Suggested on a regular basis that we should stop testing for the virus only so the numbers would go down and he would look better.
-Spread false propaganda about covid-19 no worse than the flu.
-Claimed that 99% of all covered cases are totally harmless.
-Discouraged his supporters from listening to the medical experts.
-Constantly lied about our fatality rate.
-Playing on racial tensions, tried to blame Mexico for covid-19 in America, with absolutely nothing to back it up.
-Threatened to defund our already strapped public education system in an effort to try and force children to go back to school when it wasn't safe and no one had a national plan.
-Handled the pandemic so poorly that it crippled our economy and put 9 million people out of work, into a housing crisis and wondering how they were going to feed their children.
-Claims, on multiple occasions, that covid-19 was merely being overblown because of the election in America. Despite the virus being all over the world.
-Lied about Google engineer is building a website to help Americans determine whether they need testing for the coronavirus and to direct them to their nearest testing site.
-Claimed to put a ban on travel from China, but after doing so nearly, 40,000 people travelled from China to the United States under his ban rules.
-Claimed this kind of pandemic was something nobody thought could happen, when experts both inside and outside the federal government sounded the alarm many times in the past decade about the potential for a devastating Global pandemic.
And on... and on... And on....
So my question for you is, what is your evidence that no other president could have done that?
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@jragon9215 Well... I have to disagree with the Illegal thing, on the grounds of we should be better then this. If we are going to locking them up, then we should, at the very least, be treating them with human decency. If we can't do that, then we need to send them back right away....with that being said... The rest aren't unreasonable things to want. However these are our leader. Which means, they ran for office and got elected. Elected, specifically to represent us. The person who represents me, just went on National Television and decided that the proper way to exercise some political discourse, was to go about acting like a third grader, by calling people names. That person represents me right now. Our leaders needs to more than care about what we care about. We deserve to be able to look at them and see them as a role model for our children. So, yes. You should expect more.
Yeah... There is not one moment in time that I have ever said that my side was perfect... And if this was a topic about some stupid thing a Dem did, I'd be scolding them, as well. Which is more then I can say for you, thus far.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@eby2257 Well... At least we agree on something... and we are probably closer on the abortion thing than you think. I'm just not willing to Forest a woman to be a human incubator. HOWEVER... my stance on abortion has always been this.... abortion should be readily available, safe, way less frequent then it is but always the woman's choice.
I find women who use abortion as birth control, disgusting. Especially if they do it frequently. Other than in an extreme situation, I personally do not think that I could ever have an abortion. I had five miscarriages before I had my little boy. He is my world and the air I breathe. I also know there are women out there who don't get the choice over what happens to their own bodies. There are also women that has their health compromise or the health of their child in the womb compromised to the point that neither one of them have a good chance of living. In those cases, especially if the woman already has a child, I would understand it. Sometimes contraception doesn't work. My son is proof of that, actually. We used a condom and I was on birth control. If a woman came to me and asked me what she should do because she can't afford a baby or the situation isn't healthy for them, I would urge them to give them up for adoption. Older kids don't do too well with adoption but babies go like crazy.
The only difference would be, in all of those cases, if it was not personally me, I would never presume to force my beliefs on their own bodies. I would never presume to take that choice away from that woman. I would hate it if they made one that I didn't like but I would never take that choice away.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@joshfrank1680 Well... Your going to actually have to ask me about something I actually commented on directly.... I actually think we can manage that one fairly well with community outreach. The problem is, us going around and helping minorities and the elderly or disabled to get a valid form of ID could fall under the intentionally vague voter solicitation statutes.
On the other hand, you're wrong about voter IDs being free. Not sure what state you're coming from but in many, like mine, you have to pay money to get an ID and even more to get a duplicate. You have to have proof of residence... Like an electric or gas bill in your name. You have to have another form of ID to get that ID. Which given the state could be any variety of ID options. And, again, given the state, you would need several other things.
As far as your assumption about Joe Biden's opinion of minorities, taken from a silly gas, I'm assuming you're going to hold every other politician on your side of the aisle to that same standard, right?
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
Brian Searle That sure is a whole lot more then just 2. Denying recorded historical history is never a good thing.
Strom Thurmond
John Connolly
Miles E Goodwin
" the Civil Rights Act of 1964, signed by President Lyndon B Johnson, although a southern Democrat himself, was unable to Rally the per diem received heavy opposition from both Southern Democrats and 👉Southern Republicans👈."
"By 1948 the protection of segregation led Democrats to the Deep South to reject Truman and run a third-party ticket of 👉Dixiecrats👈 in the 1948 election."
"During the Civil Rights movement, Democrats in the south initially still voted loyal lead to their party. After the signing of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the old argument that all whites had to stick together to prevent civil rights legislation lost its Force because the legislation had now been passed."
" in the presidential election of 1952 and 1956 Republican nominee Dwight Eisenhower, a popular World War II General, 👉won several Southern States👈, thus breaking some white Southerners away from their Democratic party pattern."
After the passing of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 " Southern Democrats willingness to support Republicans on a presidential level increase dramatically. 👉Goldwater👈 won many of the solid South States over Democratic candidate Lyndon Johnson, himself a Texan, and with 👉many this Republican support👈 continued and seeped down the ballot to Congressional, State and ultimately local levels."
" some Southern Democrats became Republicans at the national level, while remaining their old party in state and local policies throughout the 70s and 80s. Several prominent conservative Democrats switched parties to become Republicans, including storm Thurmond, John Connolly and Myles E Godwin Jr."
👉 in 1980 Republican Presidential nominee Ronald Reagan won every Southern State except for Georgia."
" many of the representatives, senators, and voters who were referred to as Reagan democrats in the 80s work and serve it is Southern Democrats."
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@henryhudson1297 Science also created the dwarf wheat, the polio vax, made AIDS livable, found better treatments for cancers of all kinds, invented respirators that have saved countless lives, Discovered and harnessed electricity, is helping us Explorer off and on world, the internet, the oceans and a million other things you don't factor in because of your preconceived notions needing to be kept on their narrative.
Science isn't God. There is no God. And, once more, you know it. That's why you got so defensive, right off the bat. Making some money bass was assumptions about total strangers would you even think to challenge your ideals about God. You don't believe in God. You just want to keep believing in God.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
Randy Smith Wait... What? " no Republicans were arrested for working with the Russians"?
Rodger Stone was just recently convicted of five counts of obstruction of justice, one count of making false statements to Congress and one count of witness tampering. The Mueller investigation chargestone on the seven counts in January in connection with his statements to Congress on his communication with people affiliated with Julian Assange and WikiLeaks.... and we're talkin post Embassy camp out from hell.
The indictment laying out the charger Stone was convicted on alleged that stone made, multiple false statements to HIC about his interactions regarding organization one, and falsely denied possessing records that contained evidence of these interactions in 2017 testimony.
Michael Cohen, Trump's former personal lawyer and right-hand man was sentenced to three years in prison on fraud and line charges, weeks after Mueller released a memorandum that detailed more than 70 hours of cooperating and witness testimony. In a separate filing Cohen told prosecutors about previously unknown contact with a Russian national who claimed to be a trusted person in the Russian Federation who offered the campaign political synergy and Synergy on a governmental level. Cohen claimed that person repeatedly suggested a meeting between Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin.
Cohen pleaded guilty to lying about the dates during which Trump organization actively pursued a business deal to pursue a Trump Tower in Moscow, initially claiming the decisions ended in January 2016 when they in fact continued into the summer of the year.
Prosecutors from the special counsel's office also charged Cohen lied to the Senate select committee on intelligence in testifying that he had never offered to travel to Russia and that he didn't recall any response from the Russian government regarding the deal.
Manafort, Trump's former campaign chairman, was found guilty on 8th Federal counts of bank and tax fraud and pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to obstruct Justice and one count of conspiracy against the US.
The District of Columbia also indicted him on a separate count of failing to register as a foreign agent. Can you guess which country he failed to register as a foreign agent for?
He surrendered to Federal authorities on October 30th, 2017, after he was indicted, and along with his business associate with Rick Gates, on 12 counts, including conspiracy against the US and money laundering.
Manafort was forced to step down as Trump's campaign chairman in May of 2016 after coming under Fire for his connections to Russia oligarchs and his past lobbying efforts abroad. Guess where he went abroad? This one isn't just Russia.
Trump's former campaign chairman is accused of committing crimes while working as an unregistered lobbyist in the US for the Ukraine government and pro Russia interest beginning in 2006.
Mueller charged manafort's right-hand man kislyak on June with witness tampering in a superseding indictment that charges the Russian Citizen and manafort with conspiracy to obstruct Justice and obstruction of justice.
The special counsel has said kislyak has strong ties from past work with Russian intelligence and was in contact with top figures in Trump's 2016 campaign.
Now let's move on to Sam Patten, who plead guilty in federal court for failing to register as a foreign agent while he love bead on behalf of the Ukraine interest in the US. He worked on behalf of several Pro Russia Ukraine political parties, including helping Ukraine oligarchs illegally spend $50,000 in tickets to Trump's January 2017 Inauguration in violation of federal law that bans inauguration funds from accepting money from foreign entities. He also is linked to both manafort and kislyak, as well as the opposition research firm Cambridge analytica.
That is four different campaign officials that are don't to the Bramble with Russians and Russian related charges. I could go on to Gates and all the rest if you like?
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@BoqPrecision So, I looked up pilgrim, cuz I'm a nerd 🤓, and it's basically what you said. Though it is, apparently, both a noun and a verb. Not sure why I didn't know that to begin with, but moving on... 😁
Noun... a person who Journeys to a sacred place for religious reasons.
Verb... travel or wander like a pilgrim.
The best part... I found your answer there. So, there were settlers in the first group that came over but there were also English Puritans. The Puritans were fleeing religious persecution, and sailed in the Mayflower. They founded one of the colonies, Plymouth, Massachusetts, in 1620.
So, I'm making an educated guess that they all just got lumped into 1 General named over recorded history, after that? Even though, they where not all Puritans. So I'm not sure why that would happen, but stranger things have happened. SoOoOo.... Hope that helps! 😁
Can you find out my son's question? Why do they call hamburgers, hamburgers, when they are primarily made up of beef patty? Just for fun! 😉✌
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
Roma Rose Yeah... I was mearly pointing out the flaws in your logic and making an educations guess, as to why one would be making those mistakes. If you can't handle that, then that sounds like something that falls under the perview of, not my problem. That was not me being patronising. If you want to paint it that way, so that you can lazily dismiss the whole think, well... Thats on you as well.
Also, if you don't want people to put you in a box, then maybe it's good if you don't do the same to them. Like the Democrats, all those dirty globalists.... hypocrisy much?
Or how about this one 👉 " leftists are friendly and their beliefs, triggered constantly. Having to go to the shrink for TDS."
To know the definition of something is to begin to understand its ramifications.
It's also to understand enough of the basics of what it is. Like the fat that all four things you just mentioned, were systems of operation. Which means they are not good, nor are they evil. It is all in the hands of the user.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@bansheerider619 60+ different courts, with 60+ different judges, on all sides of the political spectrum, all over the country, in local, state, federal and Supreme Court case's, giving 60+ different opportunities to present evidence of mass voter fraud, most of which, were thrown out before even reaching the trial portion, due to lack of evidence.
27 different states have a statuary provision allowing for automatic recounts. 43 states have a statuary provision allowing for requested recounts. Only two states, Missouri and Tennessee, neither Battleground States do not have specific Provisions for automatic or requested recounts.
4 Battleground states have had recounts. Georgia had to recounts. All of which came up with the same numbers.
If there is all this evidence, why has it not been presented in court?
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@Jefferson Project Trump....
-Had a 33 page laid out plan to contain a pandemic in America, just exactly like covid-19, and chose not to use it because the administration who commissioned it was Obamas.
-Decided it wasn't important to refill the medical stockpiles for 3 and 1/2 years.
-Tried to pretend for two and a half months that covid-19 had magically gone away.
-Tried to sell American citizens multiple snake oil cures, taking none of them when he actually got sick.
- Left each state to fend for themselves and forced them into a bidding war against each other, for literally American lives.
-Called the severity of the worst worldwide pandemic in over a hundred years, a democratic hoax.
-Tried to take millions of Americans Healthcare away during the worst worldwide pandemic in over a hundred years.
-Made multiple false claims about how it would all just go away, by several different dates, and got every one wrong.
-Threw multiple large rallies and celebrations, with little to no social distancing, instead of setting an example and using a covid safe campaign plan, like President elect Biden did.
-Suggested on a regular basis that we should stop testing for the virus, only so the numbers would go down and he would look better.
-Spread false propaganda about covid-19 being no worse than the flu.
-Claimed that 99% of all covered cases are totally harmless.
-Discouraged his supporters from listening to the medical experts.
-Constantly lied about our fatality rate.
-Playing on racial tensions, tried to blame Mexico for covid-19 in America, with absolutely nothing to back it up.
-Threatened to defund our already strapped public education system in an effort to try and force children to go back to school, when it wasn't safe and no one had a national plan.
-Handled the pandemic so poorly that it crippled our economy and put 9 million people out of work, into a housing crisis and wondering how they were going to feed their children.
-Claimed, on multiple occasions, that covid-19 was merely being overblown because of the election in America. Despite the virus being all over the world.
-Lied about Google engineers building a website to help Americans determine whether they need testing for the coronavirus and to direct them to their nearest testing site.
-Claimed to put a ban on travel from China, but after doing so nearly, 40,000 people travelled from China to the United States under his ban rules.
-Claimed this kind of pandemic was something nobody thought could happen, when experts both on inside and outside the federal government sounded the alarm many times in the past decade about the potential for a devastating Global pandemic.
And on... and on... And on....
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@DJPlayz102 I don't think. I check the facts. Because it is Beyond irresponsible to spread disinformation during a worldwide crisis oh, such as this. Especially when the facts are literally at the tip of everybody's fingers. 👇
He wasn't just the wrong. He was wrong by a country mile. 👇
And so are you. Taking into account that every. Country has a different sized population, you calculate percentage per population count. Using raw numbers means nothing, when you consider the variables. You have to put them on the same levels. 👇
United States Latest estimate: 28.24 per thousand people; 9,348,458 in total (as of 11 May 2020).
Australia Latest estimate: 34.43 per thousand people; 877,927 in total (as of 12 May 2020).
Austria Latest estimate: 36.56 per thousand people; 329,314 in total (as of 12 May 2020).
Bahrain Latest estimate: 116.3 per thousand people; 197,898 in total (as of 12 May 2020).
Belarus Latest estimate: 30.1 per thousand people; 284,445 in total (as of 12 May 2020).
Belgium Latest estimate: 42.09 per thousand people; 487,863 in total (as of 10 May 2020).
Canada Latest estimate: 30.36 per thousand people; 1,145,683 in total (as of 12 May 2020).
Czech Republic Latest estimate: 29.33 per thousand people; 314,138 in total (as of 11 May 2020).
Denmark Latest estimate: 57.71 per thousand people; 334,260 in total (as of 12 May 2020).
Estonia Latest estimate: 48.98 per thousand people; 64,975 in total (as of 11 May 2020).
Germany Latest estimate: 32.89 per thousand people; 2,755,770 in total (as of 03 May 2020).
Ireland Latest estimate: 52.41 per thousand people; 258,808 in total (as of 12 May 2020).
Israel Latest estimate: 53.44 per thousand people; 462,580 in total (as of 11 May 2020).
Italy Latest estimate: 28.81 per thousand people; 1,741,903 in total (as of 12 May 2020).
Latvia Latest estimate: 41.91 per thousand people; 79,047 in total (as of 12 May 2020).
Lithuania Latest estimate: 70.67 per thousand people; 192,386 in total (as of 12 May 2020).
Luxembourg Latest estimate: 90.09 per thousand people; 56,394 in total (as of 12 May 2020).
New Zealand Latest estimate: 40.87 per thousand people; 197,084 in total (as of 11 May 2020).
Norway Latest estimate: 37.86 per thousand people; 205,239 in total (as of 12 May 2020).
Portugal Latest estimate: 54.32 per thousand people; 553,855 in total (as of 10 May 2020).
Qatar Latest estimate: 46.96 per thousand people; 135,294 in total (as of 12 May 2020).
Russia Latest estimate: 39.78 per thousand people; 5,805,404 in total (as of 12 May 2020).
Slovenia Latest estimate: 31.05 per thousand people; 64,547 in total (as of 11 May 2020).
Spain Latest estimate: 34.76 per thousand people; 1,625,211 in total (as of 07 May 2020).
Switzerland Latest estimate: 36.61 per thousand people; 316,851 in total (as of 11 May 2020).
https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus-testing#which-countries-do-we-have-testing-data-for
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@richardgreene6810 All you have demonstrated is your need to willfully ignorant of understanding socialism. You don't even understand the limitations of it. Its an economic platform, only. It does not restrict your freedoms. It allocates resources to the most needed places, as well as funding. That is it. It wont prevent you from owning a gun, voting, speaking out or any of the rest. Unless your version of freedom involves taking food from childrens mouths because you simply want more then you need?
No one could prove that to you. You have made up your mind already. Which is why your now trying to set up a false dichotomy. A situation in which either I have to "prove" something to you or I'm "brainwashed". Why? Because you said so... I guess...
You don't even want to acknowledge the fact that America isn't run on pure capitalism. It's a hybrid system. Hence the socialist run programs in america, that you will try to cherry pic data from, in order to say it's not socialist. Like you tried to do with the military and their "only resorce", apparently.... Weapons.
1. The Military/Defense - The United States military is the largest and most funded socialist program in the world. It operates thanks to our taxpayer dollars and protects the country as a whole. From the richest citizens to the homeless who sleep under the bridge. We are all protected by our military whether we pay taxes or not. This is complete socialism.
2. Highways/Roads - Those roads and highways you drive on every single day are completely taxpayer funded. Your tax dollars are used to maintain, expand, and preserve our highways and roads for every one's use. President Eisenhower was inspired by Germany's autobahn and implemented the idea right here in America. That's right, a republican president created our taxpayer funded, national highway system. This was a different time, before the republican party came down with a vicious case of rabies that never went away.
4. Police - Ever had a situation where you had to call the police? Then you have used a taxpayer funded socialist program. Anyone can call the police whether they pay taxes or not. They are there to protect and serve the community, not individuals. This is complete socialism on a state level, but still socialism all the same. Would you rather have to swipe your credit card before the police will help you?
5. Fire Dept. - Hopefully you have never had a fire in your home. But if you have, you probably called your local taxpayer-funded fire department to put the fire out. Like police, this is state socialism. You tax dollars are used to rescue your entire community in case of a fire. It use to be set up where you would pay a fee every month to the fire dept. for their service. If you didn't pay, they let your house burn down. Sadly, a man from Tennessee had this exact situation happen to him in 2011 because he didn't pay his $75.00 fee. I guess that small town in Tennessee would rather let people's houses burn down that resort to evil socialism. So don't take for granted the fact that you have a 24/7 fire dept. to put out your burning home thanks to socialism.
9. Garbage Collection - Like having your garbage collected once a week instead of having to drive it to the landfill yourself? Thank socialism.
13. CIA - The Central Intelligence Agency is vital to America's security. The CIA is completely taxpayer funded to protect the public from enemies.
14. FBI - The Federal bureau of investigations is a taxpayer funded government agency.
18. Social Security - You pay a tax to help ensure that our grandparents and senior citizens of America have money to live off of when they are retired or too elderly to work. I love hearing rich people bitch about this one because the truth is that they do not pay a social security tax, like most payroll taxes. This little piece of socialism helps prevent our senior citizens from sinking into poverty and starving to death.
30. Bird Flu Vaccine - You don't have bird flu right now and probably aren't worried about it because our federal government used taxpayer funds to pump vaccines all over America.
31. G.I. Bill - The G.I. bill allows veterans to pursue an education by using taxpayer dollars to help them pay for most of their schooling. It also helps them with loans, savings, and unemployment benefits.
36. The Pentagon - Our defense system in America is a socialist system from top to bottom. We as taxpayers fund the pentagon completely.
47. WIC - WIC is a federally funded program to assist women, infants, and children. WIC helps low-income families by providing funding for nutrition, education, and health care for children.
50. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) - The CDC helps promote and enact the health and safety of the public along with helping to prevent and control illness and disease. The CDC is a government program that operates on taxpayer funding.
https://m.dailykos.com/stories/2012/3/29/1078852/-75-Ways-Socialism-Has-Improved-America
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
Yep... There are Trump trolls....
- Callously and inaccurately quoting death rate numbers. US 3.55%
- They all have "breathing problems", all the sudden... Because... screw all you other people's lives and not having irreparable lung damage because, when I go to the grocery store the mask is itchy.
- People die of other NON-CONTAGIOUS things, so who cares if previous non/wrongly treated pandemics, of this contagion magnitude, have literally whipped out half the worlds population before. Don't they know that me and my husband have drinking at bars to do, and little Johnny simply MUST have his 7th B Day Party at chucky cheese!
- Clearly, if you don't blindly follow Trump in everything you do, you are a Never Trumper. Oh... Wait... I forgot... You actually voted for him last time... Well... Well... Well... I "clearly" wasn't talking about you. Even though I was just responding to what you just said... But now presented with inconvenient facts I have to quickly change my narrative, because this one isn't working for me anymore.
- TRUMP 2020... Despite all logic, fact and reason, that I need to ignore, in order to continue to say that.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@realthings5821 5. You claim the cases were thrown out by technicalities. That is what it has standing on. However from this statement, " you, presumably, want poor cases included, despite them having no bearing on any conclusion, for no reason at all." 👈 is you trying to already dismiss any evidence that goes against your chosen narrative. What is "Poor cases"? You made the claimed that all the cases were thrown out by technicalities. They were not. A whole bunch of them we're not. You made this claim to point out that they didn't investigate. Except.... not being thrown out on standing meant that each one of those cases had every opportunity in the world to present preliminary evidence in order to show the court that they needed to proceed to a trial.
" if one large enough case support my argument than I am correct" 👈 and this is true. Why? Because you said so? The only big case you've presented so far west Texas which I dismantled in two seconds because it was such a ridiculous suit.... and, because all Texas had to do was to render their "evidence" to one person who lived in that state and have them file suit. It didn't even have to be a lawyer or a government worker. They could have pulled anyone off the street to do that. Yet they did not. The courts didn't block it and the courts can initiate those kinds of Investigations. You can't go to court and get a warrant on nothing and those are the only part of Investigations that courts decide.
These are several different sources, siting lists of post election lawsuits. It is literally everywhere. Yet you claim they where all thrown out for technical issues. False... there is absolutely no reason you shouldn't already have this information unless you did not want it. I can provide more, if you like.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-election_lawsuits_related_to_the_2020_United_States_presidential_election?wprov=sfla1
https://ballotpedia.org/Ballotpedia%27s_2020_Election_Help_Desk:_Tracking_election_disputes,_lawsuits,_and_recounts
https://www-businessinsider-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.businessinsider.com/trump-campaign-lawsuits-election-results-2020-11?amp_js_v=a6&_gsa=1&&usqp=mq331AQKKAFQArABIIACAw%3D%3D#aoh=16247394361449&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&_tf=From%20%251%24s&share=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.businessinsider.com%2Ftrump-campaign-lawsuits-election-results-2020-11
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@realthings5821 "why would I bother to question you?" That would be a great question if I have not already explained why. However, you seem to ignore anything that doesn't fit your narrative. Because if you are presenting criticism towards me, it needs to be based on facts and not massive assumptions. If it's based on massive assumptions on your part, it's baseless criticism. Much like you have done all along, you are making massive assumptions based on a tiny bit of information that does not support that level of severity. You are doing so because you are trying to present a narrative for which you cannot sustain. You are also doing your damnedest to ignore you're clear habit, at least on here, of making massive assumptions in order to fit your narrative. 👈 Now... 👈That right there, is a criticism of you based on only the information that I have now, that you have presented in this exchange. It does not presume any further, and qualifies the results as limited because this exchange is all the info I have. Meaning, it is an accurate criticism based on all relevant material available at the time. It does not presume past its mark... To make a point.
If you have to make a bunch of stuff up in order to have a point, you don't have a point.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@travisjohnson7065 1. While you, apparently, like to set up a bunch of false equivalencies and Paper Tigers, I do not break that way. You keep talking about a body as if that's life. Its not. Its a shell. It must closely resembles that of someone in a permanent vegetative state. You can keep the body operating but there's nobody home. Not simply a body. Science defines life as consciousness and the ability to feel pain.
2. In Most states, abortion limitations are so strict now that zygotes and newly-formed fetuses are the norms. 3 to 12 weeks. During this time, there's no basic motor function, no cognitive ability whatsoever because the brain hasn't even switched on yet. In fact, through most of that time span, it's not even done developing.
At this point, what's inside your reproductive system, has no more consciousness then that of the sperm before it entered the egg. Given that standard, male masturbation is murder.
3. Which leads us to 3. Your false equivalency trying to split the atom between development and growth, is, hopefully, intentional. During that stage, in the womb, the brain is developing its basic building blocks and actually forming itself. The growth you're trying to equate it with is a point when the brain has already formed but is now gaining girth and switching certain parts of it on. Scientifically, two completely different stages.
I'm talking about building the lamp and you're talking about turning it on, like their the same thing. They are not.
4. As for "life lyrically being displayed buy unborn children", that all depends on what stage of development you're talking about. Between 12 and 16 weeks the brain starts turning on and forming basic motor skills. Which require a brain to tell your body what to do. After 12 weeks, I, myself, would not support abortion unless it was an extreme circumstance. Which is only predicated on the fact that I would have the right to tell somebody what to do with their own body. Which I don't. And neither do you. After that point, there are signs of life. Because it has a Consciousness and that has become alive. Any involuntary movement before that is body development. Basically anything before 12 weeks when it comes to movement is like how a doctor checks your reflexes by knocking on your knee and it involuntarily kicks. It's called a muscle spasm.
5. The reason that I'm claiming you don't care about the life of the other body and play, is because you haven't mentioned it once. You are treating women like a walking talking human incubators. Like that's our primary function in life.
6. The virtue signaling is crazy misguided. That's only you failing to see the other side of that coin. Let's say abortion became illegal tomorrow. If that would happen, do you understand the equally as messed up stuff as murder would be happening in this country? What start with childhood sexual assault. If abortion was outlawed completely tomorrow, in this country on unfortunately regular basis there would be a child being strapped down, while doctors force them to give birth to their assaulters child. There would be mothers being forced to die giving birth and leaving the children they already had, without their mothers. There would be a surge of back ally abortions and deaths, and/or mutilation.
Just to name a few.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@m3ictsolutions993 by the way, you skipped all this👇... Which is kind of funny because you're the one that asked for it. It's like you don't want to see it or something. LOL
"and you're right, it's not very hard. As a matter of fact, Trump released all the evidence for his crimes thus far that have been proven, himself. Ironically. Dude just can't stop shooting himself in the foot.
In the edited version of the July 25th transcript... And I say edited version because if he released an edited version and it still showed him committing a crime, what does the unedited version show? But I digress. In the edited version of the July 25th transcript it shows him committing campaign Finance fraud. When he asked the president of a foreign country to investigate his den political opponent in the next election, that is campaign Finance fraud.
He has also committed three provable obstruction of Congress violations. All having to do with subpoenas. He tried to curtail 1 Witnesses testimony by abusing his executive privilege. He tried to stop another witness from even testifying and he has ordered his administration not to release subpoenaed documents to the house. This isn't the Mueller investigation. His office is not going to protect him from being charged for obstruction this time. Impeachment is a whole new ballgame.
Those documents that he refuses to turn over for subpoena, by the way, are ones that will tie the money, the aid from Ukraine and why it was held. If that's proven, you also have bribery extortion and conspiracy."
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
23 days as an American citizen...
Hard concrete floors,
threats,
bologna sandwich diet,
loosing 30 pounds,
no showers,
wet whip every 3 - 4 days
and being treated like you're not even human, by people, who I'm sure, would claim to be.
Tell me this, even if he wasn't a citizen, what makes anyone deserve that, for crossing a line, which hurt exactly no one?
3
-
3
-
@UCa_12p7sF44dU23xz_BjKwQ Oh sweetheart, you can lie to yourself all you want, as well. It doesn't mean any of us have to play along.
You talked about, Dems are offering the illegals free healthcare. I clarified and told you they were offering the illegal immigrants, that we detain, Healthcare, while we are the ones that are locking them up. Because this is not the Middle Ages and we are not barbarians.
Then you gave that BS line about, open borders. Specifically mentioning decriminalizing illegal Crossing. I corrected you on that, saying that, they want to make it a misdemeanor and not a felony. Which it was before. Which would be a little something called, a proportional response. Again because this is not the Middle Ages and we are not barbarians.
Then you reverted back to your third grade status of name-calling and when I called you out on that you got all pissy.
At no point, did you present any clips of Dems, saying what you tried to say they did. Because you can't because your lying.
The end! Night night little boy! Its passed your bed time!
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@williamh5646 Let me count the ways...
Foreign emoluments- Article 1 section 9
November 16th 2016 the Trump International Hotel host about a hundred foreign diplomats for a tour, baiting them with champagne and Sliders and sending them home with goodie bags.
December 7th 2016 the Kingdom of Bahrain host its National Day celebration at the Trump International Hotel.
December 14th 2016 the embassy of Azerbaijan hosts a Hanukkah Party at the Trump International Hotel.
January 23rd through 26th of 2017 An employee of Qorvis MSLGROUP, a firm hired by Saudi Arabia to Lobby Congress to repeal a law allowing 911 victims to sue the kingdom, pains for at least one room at the Trump International Hotel.
January 27th 2017 Trump issues a travel ban on Nationals from several majority-muslim countries, notably excluding nations in which he himself has business interests. He also plugs the Trump Turnberry Resort in Scotland during an appearance with British prime minister Theresa May. " I happen to be in Scotland at Turnberry cutting a ribbon when brexit happened and we had a vast amount of press there."
February 11th 2017 Trump host the Japanese prime minister at his Palm Beach Mar-A-Lago club, golfing 27 holes together and hashing out how to respond to news of a North Korean intermediate-range ballistic missile launch in the middle of the dining area. According to the White House, the host of the visit is a gift from Trump.
February 21st 2017 Trump wins 3 trade marks from the Mexican Institute of industrial property.
March 17th 2017 the Trump organization announces that it won't begin donating profits from foreign officials to the US Treasury As Trump promised.
April 11th 2017 the New York Times reports that the Trump organization has 157 trademark applications pending in 36 countries.
October 22nd 2017 Trump Cashes in on an Irish golf tourism conference, in part sponsored by the governments of Ireland and Northern Ireland, held at the Trump International Golf Links and hotel in Ireland.
October 31st 2017 Mexico's foreign US ambassador tweets that the state department is encouraging diplomats to stay at the Trump International Hotel during official visits.
Ongoing the state-owned Industrial and Commercial Bank of China, Trump's Towers largest commercial tenant, pays nearly 2 million per year for office space. This is the year it's supposed to renegotiate its lease.
Domestic emoluments- Article 2 Section 1
August 5th 2000 13 Trump Old Post Office LLC signs a 60 year lease with a government agency to open the Trump International Hotel in Washington DC from which Trump has yet to divest his interests.
November 14th 2016 6 days after the election, Trump receives all but final approval from National Park Service for a 32 million-dollar historic preservation tax credit for the Trump International Hotel
January 1st 2017 Trump celebrates New Year's Eve at Mar-A-Lago at an 800 guest event that cost over $500 per ticket
March to May 2017 Marine Governor Paul LePage stains at Trump Hotel during a taxpayer-funded trip to Washington, spends at least $2,500 on accommodations at the hotel.
March 11th 2017 Trump had seen Trump National Golf Course in Virginia for a working lunch with members of his cabinet.
March 22nd 2017 The Washington Post reports that the Secret Service, strained under the cost of providing security at Trump Tower and Mar-A-Lago, has requested an additional 60 million in funding to protect the first family.
February to April 2017 the Secret Service pays at least $63,000 directly to Mar-A-Lago to account for Trump's visit to the property
October 5th 2017 USA Today reports that the Secret Service golf cart have at Trump properties has run into at least $137,000
These are only a few from the very first year....
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
W TF? Hey guy, you know who make up the the majority of their argument with childish 3rd grade insults? People who don't have real one. Do better or do everyone else a favor and shut up. 😜💩😂
I'm actually starting to believe that whole you can't read thing now. Cuz now I have to explain this to you. When you make a claim, the onus is then on you to back it up. When you instead, choose to insist that the person you made the claim to, has two then prove the claim wrong, that you never proved in the first place.... you just look like a jackass... is the gist of it.
Besides, I don't understand, friend? If you know that's what it says, and therefore, I'm assuming have seen it, then all you have to do is copy that part of it, pasted in the comment section and shut me up, right?
That's all you have to do, friend. Tic tock tick tick
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@headoftaxreformandpercenta4908
For example...
YOU - " Tell me one thing that is false about my initial comment. Not only did you put a 👉period👈, instead of a question mark. Right after, you immediately said, 👉"You Can't"👈.
BUT THEN... I did! 😁👇
I literally quoted you step by step and gave you explanations along the way, illustrating every part of it, in order to answer you. What did you do after that? 👉 Ignored it. 👈👇👇👇
"Things that you got wrong about your initial comment.
" it's always on a run it how you choose to listen to the media blatantly lie without any desire for evidence" 👈 How in the world would you qualify that statement? You don't even know my real name... But you somehow know what I "always" do?
"without any desire for evidence"
Almost every interaction I have with anyone on here begins with me requiring them to provide evidence for their claims. Go look around the threads... You'll see plenty of evidence for that.
" but when people counter your fragile believes you want to be certain they do all the homework for you"
Again... Total stranger... You would have no way of knowing the state of what I do or do not "believe". For instance... Your word usage is incorrect. I don't believe anything. I am presented evidence for it. The have the the facts to back it up. Then I repeat it.
"do all the homework for you."
You mean require ppl to back up their claims, instead of them expecting me to prove their claims right? Why... Yes... That is exactly what I expect and give.
"If you want the truth, turnoff to news" 👈 As I said... If you have proof this clip isn't try, present it? And I don't mean, give some vague reference to some show. I mean, provide specific proof of those specific claims.
" you're literally choosing to live in a world of lies to confirm your own beliefs instead of searching for the actual truth" 👈 Again... What's my name? How do you know what I do? What is your evidence of this claim? Bc I don't automatically believe the total stranger on the internet?
Just to name a few."
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@headoftaxreformandpercenta4908 Its not difficult at all to get specific. I've done it several times. Everytime I do you try to ignore it, even when its your own questions. Then come back with more, " I could totally prove everything I say specifically but I'm not going to and here's the Myriad of vague shady excuses as to why".
For example...
YOU - " Tell me one thing that is false about my initial comment. Not only did you put a 👉period👈, instead of a question mark. Right after, you immediately said, 👉"You Can't"👈.
BUT THEN... I did! 😁👇
I literally quoted you step by step and gave you explanations along the way, illustrating every part of it, in order to answer you. What did you do after that? 👉 Ignored it. 👈👇👇👇
"Things that you got wrong about your initial comment.
" it's always on a run it how you choose to listen to the media blatantly lie without any desire for evidence" 👈 How in the world would you qualify that statement? You don't even know my real name... But you somehow know what I "always" do?
"without any desire for evidence"
Almost every interaction I have with anyone on here begins with me requiring them to provide evidence for their claims. Go look around the threads... You'll see plenty of evidence for that.
" but when people counter your fragile believes you want to be certain they do all the homework for you"
Again... Total stranger... You would have no way of knowing the state of what I do or do not "believe". For instance... Your word usage is incorrect. I don't believe anything. I am presented evidence for it. The have the the facts to back it up. Then I repeat it.
"do all the homework for you."
You mean require ppl to back up their claims, instead of them expecting me to prove their claims right? Why... Yes... That is exactly what I expect and give.
"If you want the truth, turnoff to news" 👈 As I said... If you have proof this clip isn't try, present it? And I don't mean, give some vague reference to some show. I mean, provide specific proof of those specific claims.
" you're literally choosing to live in a world of lies to confirm your own beliefs instead of searching for the actual truth" 👈 Again... What's my name? How do you know what I do? What is your evidence of this claim? Bc I don't automatically believe the total stranger on the internet?
Just to name a few."
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
Robert Phipps well, first I live in one of the reddest States in America. My entire friend and family base are Republicans and voted for Trump in the last election. I am a lone liberal here basically. All of them lifelong Republicans, and not one of them are voting for Trump again. Now, I'm not going to play fortune teller like you are, because I deal in facts oh, but I will say that it's not as Lockdown as you guys like to believe.
You have numbers? Please show them to me...? Because whoever just gave you what you just described, is lying to you. The actual government numbers tell a different story. Which I will be more than happy to show you. again, I deal in facts and not hopes and dreams.
Also, for those of us who actually read the Mueller report, we can spot right off the bat who hasn't and is lying about it. Unless you want to show me what page in the 448 page report that says no collusion? You guys betting on us being as L informed as you are, never really works out for you.
If you want to see what the Democrats are doing for everybody, you should go look on Mitch McConnell's desk. I think the count was up to 312 bills with Democrats on it in a variety of different areas that he refuses to put up for a vote in the Senate because it might give a democratic political win. They're walking and chewing gum at the same time. The other side is just too corrupt to give a damn about the people. You should go look up what they had to do and just to get the 9/11 responders bill to be put up for a vote. ...
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@kgs_7186 1. The Whistleblower statute is effective, for the most part, because of the anonymity in it. It allows for people to come forward, without fear of retaliation, to stop them or punish them. For this, they are under no obligation to share the whistleblowers identity.
2. The whistleblower is moot, at this point. The things in the whistleblowers report have been confirmed to be true with other corroborating evidence, outside of the report. For this, there is no reason to bring forth the whistleblower... Other then to know who they are, in order to better attack their credibility. Which they have already demonstrated, they don't necessarily need to try that anyways...
Unless you can explain why a legally protected whistleblower needs to reveal themselves, in order to answer questions about the claims in their report, that has already been independently verified?
Take a look at why they are ignoring it.
3
-
3
-
@kgs_7186 1. That has a lot to do with Trump's obstruction. You can't first complain about the quality of the witnesses and what they have to testify to and then not recognized Trump's continuous effort to block any witness that could testify to anything more than that, with obstruction of Congress Acts. Which leads you to have to ask, why would he be pleading not guilty and then blocking Witnesses and documents and anything else he can towards the investigation? If he is innocent, he should have nothing to hide or worry about.
2. Your characterization of Christine Ford is at best way over exaggerated. Which begs the question why you would need to over exaggerate that much.
3. You are also way over exaggerating Robert Miller's testimony. You're also not providing any examples for either the Mueller testimony or Christine Ford testimony.
4. What you are making very clean, When You Say "Nothing Burger Russian collusion" claim is that you don't know the facts of the case, have not read the report and are, therefore, intentionally ignoring public and relevant information, and don't know what the law is, in regards to that claim.
🔹10 laid out cases for Obstruction
🔹3 reasons why they did not recommend charges. None of which had to do with him not being guilty
🔹Collusion is not a thing under the law. Trump set up that impossible standard for the purpose of gaslighting people like you. The crimes would fall under the legal statutes for conspiracy, campaign finance and other things, such as, failure to register as a foreign agent.
🔹Under those previews, there was not enough evidence to make a case. Not any but not enough. Which, like in the impeachment case, had a lot to do with the obstruction. Again, you can't has Trump obstruct an investigation at every turn and then ignore that to say that the case was not proven for this or for that... Without acknowledging that it was not proven for this or for that because of the obstruction.
5. There where 3 legal experts that testified in regards to their being enough evidence for impeachment. 1 Testified against that. So how did you not know that, if you say you watch it on CSPAN? Maybe you should just sight the source you are really getting all this from?
6. The 3 legal experts that testified for proceeding with impeachment, did so by citing the newly-released 300-page report that makes the argument. Have you read it?
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@kgs_7186 https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20181102-why-dont-rape-and-sexual-assault-victims-come-forward
"2. A ‘real’ sexual assault survivor always reports immediately
According to UK Home Office data, 46% of recorded rapes were reported on the day they took place – while 14% of people took more than six months to report that they’d been assaulted. If the victim was a child, they were even more likely to delay coming forward: just 28% of those aged under 16 reported the offence on the day it happened, while a third waited for longer than six months.
That is just for assaults that ultimately are reported. Many others are not. In the US, for example, studies have estimated that two out of three sexual assaults never are reported.
There is no evidence that suggests the timing of when you report is linked to the genuineness of the report – Nicole Westmarland
There are many reasons why some people either delay reporting or never do, as testified to by the “#WhyIDidn’tReport” hashtag on Twitter. “A lot of people don’t report because they don’t want the perpetrator to go to prison: maybe they’re in love with them, or it’s a family member, or it’s a partner and are reliant on their income,” says Nicole Westmarland, director of Durham Centre for Research into Violence and Abuse in the UK. “Another common reason I hear from students is that they don’t want to ruin the rest of the person’s life.”
Even so, “there is no evidence that suggests the timing of when you report is linked to the genuineness of the report", she says."
3
-
@kgs_7186 https://www-psychologytoday-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-compassion-chronicles/201809/stop-shaming-victims-sexual-assault-not-reporting?amp_js_v=a2&_gsa=1&&usqp=mq331AQCKAE%3D#aoh=15758753430711&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&_tf=From%20%251%24s&share=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.psychologytoday.com%2Fus%2Fblog%2Fthe-compassion-chronicles%2F201809%2Fstop-shaming-victims-sexual-assault-not-reporting
"1. Victims are too ashamed to come forward. Shame is at the core of the intense emotional wounding women (and men) experience when they are sexually violated. Sexual assault is, by its very nature, humiliating and dehumanizing. The victim feels invaded and defiled while simultaneously experiencing the indignity of being helpless and at the mercy of another person.
This is what a former client shared with me about her experience of being shamed by a sexual assault:
“I felt so humiliated when I was raped. I felt dirty and disgusting. The thought of this horrible man being inside me made me want to vomit. I felt contaminated. I didn’t want to see anyone. I was afraid to look anyone in the eyes because I felt so much shame.”
Victims of sexual assault also feel shame because as human beings we want to believe that we have control over what happens to us. When that personal power is challenged by a victimization of any kind, we believe we “should have” been able to defend ourselves. And because we weren’t able to do so, we feel helpless and powerless. This powerlessness causes us to feel further humiliated. This is especially true for boys and men who are sexually assaulted, since males are raised to believe they should be tough and strong and be able to fight off any attacker. Males who were unable to do so experience horrific shame.
2. Victims of sexual assault blame themselves. Most victims of sexual assault blame themselves in some way. This is true whether the victim is male or female, young or old.
I have first-hand experience with this self-blame, which I wrote about in my newly published memoir, Raising Myself: A Memoir of Neglect, Shame and Growing Up Too Soon:
“My mother was asleep when I got home, so I hid my bloody underwear and torn dress where she wouldn’t find them and went to bed. As I lay alone in my dark room I vowed to myself that I would never tell anyone what happened, not even my mother—or rather, especially not my mother. I felt so alone with my pain, but I didn’t feel like I deserved any comforting. Mostly, I didn’t want anyone to know what a stupid idiot I had been to go out with Harvey in the first place.”
As Matt Atkinson wrote in his book, Resurrection After Rape: A Guide to Transforming from Victim to Survivor, “Self-blame is by far, the most devastating after effect of being sexually violated. This is particularly true for former victims of child sexual abuse and adult victims of sexual assault. In fact, ninety percent of rape trauma recovery is undoing a victim’s tendency to self-blame. Ten percent is everything else. But the ten percent has to come after the end of self-blame: it can’t happen while the former victim is still ashamed and guilty.”
3. Victims are afraid of being blamed. This makes sense since we have a victim-blaming culture in which we make the assumption that if something bad happens to you, it is somehow your own fault. This is particularly true for the way we blame women. “She shouldn’t have gone to that party,” “What does she expect if she wears a dress that short. She’s just asking for it.” “It’s her own fault for drinking so much.”
Blaming the victim is by far the most common reaction people have when a victim tells others that she was sexually assaulted and is, by far, the most damaging. The idea is that the victim “put herself in that position” or was “asking for it.” Not only does the victim not receive the comfort and support she needs, but she is further shamed by being blamed for her own victimization. As one former client told me: “My boyfriend got so angry with me. He yelled at me for going to that party in the first place. ‘I told you those guys were trouble! You should have never been there.’ And then he yelled at me for not leaving the party earlier: ‘And why didn’t you leave when Linda did? That was so stupid of you to stay there all alone! And you were probably drunk, weren’t you? Dammit Gina, what did you expect?’”
It is fairly common for boyfriends and husbands to blame the victim. Men are extremely tribal. They identify with one another so intensely that some feel personally attacked whenever another man is being accused of something like rape. Because of this, some, will defend the man and blame the victim. Other men have the belief that women are the ones who bear the duty to prevent rape. But women are guilty of blaming the victim as well. This can be a way of convincing themselves that they will never be raped because they would never put themselves in that position.
4. Victims are afraid they will not be believed. Sexual misconduct is the most under-reported crime because victims’ accounts are often scrutinized to the point of exhaustion and there is a long history of women not being believed when they attempted to report a sexual violation. Although friends and family usually believe a woman when she tells them she was sexually assaulted, when it comes to reporting the crime, it is another story. Most women have heard horror stories about how other victims have had to jump through hoops in order to be believed and often the perpetrator’s word is taken over hers, especially when the rape has occurred on a college campus or when the perpetrator is a popular guy on campus, such as a star football player. This was the situation with my former client Courtney:
“I was raped at a party by a popular football player,” she told me. “When I reported it to the police it ended up being my word against his. And I became the town pariah. Everyone at school hated me and constantly made comments like, ‘How could you accuse Randy of doing such a thing!’ ‘You’re ugly—he can get any girl he wants, why would he chose you?’ ‘You’re just trying to hurt him—why would you do such a thing?’ It got so bad I had to drop out of school. But Randy just kept on playing football. By the time the case went to court, I couldn’t even step outside my house. There was a mistrial because half of the people on the jury supported Randy. My family had to move out of town so I could get a new start.”
Young college women are being sexually assaulted in record numbers. Many are afraid to report the rape to their college administration because of a long history of cases being mishandled. How can victims get past their fear of not being believed and not being supported by their college administrators when they continue to be treated badly?
3
-
@kgs_7186 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effects_and_aftermath_of_rape
"Self-blameEdit
Further information: Blame § Self-blame
Self-blame is among the most common of both short- and long-term effects and functions as an avoidance coping skill that inhibits the healing process and can often be remedied by a cognitive therapy technique known as cognitive restructuring.
There are two main types of self-blame: behavioral self-blame (undeserved blame based on actions) and characterological self-blame (undeserved blame based on character). Survivors who experience behavioral self-blame feel that they should have done something differently, and therefore feel at fault. Survivors who experience characterological self-blame feel there is something inherently wrong with them which has caused them to deserve to be assaulted.
A leading researcher on the psychological causes and effects of shame, June Tangney, lists five ways shame can be destructive:[20]
lack of motivation to seek care;
lack of empathy;
isolation;
anger;
aggression.
Tangney notes the link of shame and anger. "In day-to-day life, when people are shamed and angry they tend to be motivated to get back at a person and get revenge."
In addition, shame is connected to psychological problems – such as eating disorders, substance abuse, anxiety, depression, and other mental disorders as well as problematic moral behavior. In one study over several years, shame-prone children were also prone to substance abuse, earlier sexual activity, less safe sexual activity, and involvement with the criminal justice system.[20]
Behavioral self-blame is associated with feelings of guilt within the survivor. While the belief that one had control during the assault (past control) is associated with greater psychological distress, the belief that one has more control during the recovery process (present control) is associated with less distress, less withdrawal, and more cognitive reprocessing.[21] This need for control stems from the just-world belief, which implies that people get what they deserve and the world has a certain order of things that individuals are able to control. This control reassures them that this event will not happen again.[22]
Counseling responses found helpful in reducing self-blame are supportive responses, psychoeducational responses (learning about rape trauma syndrome) and those responses addressing the issue of blame.[23] A helpful type of therapy for self-blame is cognitive restructuring or cognitive-behavioral therapy. Cognitive reprocessing is the process of taking the facts and forming a logical conclusion from them that is less influenced by shame or guilt.[24] Most rape survivors cannot be reassured enough that what happened to them is "not their fault." This helps them fight through shame and feel safe, secure, and grieve in a healthy way. In most cases, a length of time, and often therapy, is necessary to allow the survivor and people close to the survivor to process and heal.[25]"
3
-
3
-
3
-
@kgs_7186 https://www.secasa.com.au/pages/feelings-after-sexual-assault/
"Guilt/self blame
"I feel as if I did something to make this happen. If only I hadn't..."
Victims of sexual assault may feel that they could have avoided it by acting differently. These sorts of reactions are often strongly linked to the myths about sexual assault that prevail in the community which frequently blame the victim rather than the offender. The behaviour and reactions of friends, family, police, lawyers and social workers may reinforce the victim's own feeling that s/he 'asked for it'. The victim may also feel guilty that they have brought shame on their family and themselves by talking about it or reporting it to the police. Similarly, if they believe they could have resisted more forcefully they may also feel at fault. This is particularly true for adult survivors of childhood sexual abuse who tend to see themselves as they are now, as adults rather than as they were at the time of the abuse.
The offender is always at fault, never the victim. Nothing a victim does is 'asking for it'. Equally, the victim's strategies for surviving the assault are issues for affirmation, not condemnation.
Embarrassment/shame
"I feel so dirty, like there is something wrong with me now. Can you tell that I've been raped? What will people think?"
Many people who have been sexually assaulted feel intensely ashamed and embarrassed. They often feel dirty and in some way 'marked for life'. This reaction may prevent victims from speaking out about the assault. Cultural background factors can intensify such feelings. Underpinning these reactions is the internalisation of the myths pertaining to sexual assault.
Loss of confidence
"I feel I can't do anything any more....even the simplest things."
The experience of assault exposes the victim to the stark reality that they cannot always protect themselves no matter how hard they try. The assault is not only an invasion of the victim's physical self but also the intellectual, social and emotional self. The experience of assault brings vulnerability issues to the fore, which can devastate self-confidence and destroy assumptions about the world and your place within it."
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@patdexter9188 You can try and blame everything on the media, all you like. At this point, we know you brainwashed cult members are going to do that anyways. You are to far invested in his lies and excuses, to turn back now.... But that doesn't mean the rest of us have to pretend he isn't going to go down in history as the cruelest, most corrupt, juvenile president we've had. His indiscretions are miles long. Often choosing to do them or admit to them, on camera. So you keep trying to hold Donald Trump up as some kind of angelic God, that never does anything wrong... and the media as some Demon rat, with a side kick named pinky, who constantly plots to take over the world... But all that is telling anyone, at this point, is that you need psychiatric help. 😉✌
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
Let's be clear, the PRESIDENT of this UNITED STATES, sat in the dinning room of the WHITE HOUSE for 3 HOURS and WATCHED, while a VIOLENT MOB of his SUPPORTERS, STORMED the CAPITAL, BEAT POLICE, HUNTED for our other NATIONS LEADERS with WEAPONS, chanted to HANG his own VP, presumably on the WORKING GALLOWS they had CONSTRUCTED outside, while his FAMILY, STAFF and his OWN MEDIA LOYALISTS BEGGED HIM to walk into THEN NEXT ROOM and tell them to STOP the VIOLENCE.
SoOoOo... Why isn't he in jail?
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
Hingle McCringleberry boy have you read me wrong. sweetheart the only one here being ignorant is you. Please do not ever even come close to indicating that you and me think the same when it comes to the way we think about people. See, the primary difference between me and you is going to be what we use to come to the conclusions we have. I tend to use logic, common sense and fact. You seem to use racist tropes and useless hateful nonsense, with a heavy helping of willful ignorance.
Cuz what exactly are you implying there? All black people voted for Obama because he was black? Does that mean that all white people vote for other white people just because they're white? And how would one go about collecting that data to be able to come to that conclusion? You just made a blanket Assumption of 26% of our population without knowing 99.9% of them. I find that's usually done because people like you aren't interested in facts or truth. You just want your ignorant assumptions parodied back to you. I have a mixed-race nine-year-old son. Are you basically saying that without even meeting this small child, he is half completely ignorant just because half of who he is, is African-American? Are you saying his daddy, who is African-American is ignorant as well? Even though you've never met him? Even if you did make any of those implications, they wouldn't matter not at all. Why? Because you're making them out of a place of ignorance. Just like the comments you're making about Obama.
Grow up, educate yourself and for the love of everything that is Holy, less Kool-Aid, more independent thought. 😉✌
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
Mj light I mean... You can keep lying... But at this point, its just gonna make you look silly! 😁😁😁
"Trump's real estate company tried to avoid renting apartments to African Americans in the 70s and gave preferential treatment to White, according to the federal government.
Trump treated black employees at his casinos differently from whites, according to multiple sources. A former Hotel executive said that Trump criticized a black accountant," black guys counting my money. I hate it. I think that the guy is lazy. And it's possibly not his fault, but laziness is a trait in Blacks."
In 1989, Trump took out ads in the New York newspapers urging the death penalty for 5 black and Latino teenagers accused of raping a white woman in Central Park. He argue that they were guilty as late as October 2016, more than ten years after DNA evidence had exonerated them.
In 1989, on NBC, Trump said, " I think sometimes a black may think they don't have an advantage or this and that. I've said on one occasion, even about myself, if I were starting off today, I would love to be a well-educated black, because I really believe they do have an actual advantage."
He spent years suggesting that the nation's first black president was born not in the United States but in Kenya.
In the 1990s, Trump took out advertisements alleging that the "Mohawk Indian record of criminal activity is well-documented." At the time he was fighting competition for his casino business.
In a 1993 radio interview, he suggested that Native Americans in Connecticut were faking their ancestry. "I think I might have more Indian blood than a lot of the so-called Indians that are trying to open up the reservations."
And thats just some from before he ran for office."
3
-
Mj light How does all of this relate to that and why can't you seam to reply to the fact? Why do you keep deflecting from them? Telling... Very telling.
"Trump's real estate company tried to avoid renting apartments to African Americans in the 70s and gave preferential treatment to White, according to the federal government.
Trump treated black employees at his casinos differently from whites, according to multiple sources. A former Hotel executive said that Trump criticized a black accountant," black guys counting my money. I hate it. I think that the guy is lazy. And it's possibly not his fault, but laziness is a trait in Blacks."
In 1989, Trump took out ads in the New York newspapers urging the death penalty for 5 black and Latino teenagers accused of raping a white woman in Central Park. He argue that they were guilty as late as October 2016, more than ten years after DNA evidence had exonerated them.
In 1989, on NBC, Trump said, " I think sometimes a black may think they don't have an advantage or this and that. I've said on one occasion, even about myself, if I were starting off today, I would love to be a well-educated black, because I really believe they do have an actual advantage."
He spent years suggesting that the nation's first black president was born not in the United States but in Kenya.
In the 1990s, Trump took out advertisements alleging that the "Mohawk Indian record of criminal activity is well-documented." At the time he was fighting competition for his casino business.
In a 1993 radio interview, he suggested that Native Americans in Connecticut were faking their ancestry. "I think I might have more Indian blood than a lot of the so-called Indians that are trying to open up the reservations."
And thats just some from before he ran for office."
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@potsmokingatheist9290 Soooo... Let's go bit by bit then....
"Where is it?"
I have the feeling that the best way to start is to give you the definition of Obstruction of Justice. Just to move things along.
Obstruction of Justice : obstruction of justice in the United States jurisdictions is a process crime consisting of obstructing prosecutors or other officials.
Obstruction of Justice : the crime or act of willfully interfering with the process of justice and law especially by influencing, threatening, harming or impeding a witness, potential witness, juror or judicial or legal officer or by Furnishing false information in or otherwise impeding an investigation or legal process.
1. Trump fired Comey. In May of 2017 Trump fired FBI director James Comey, who was overseeing the investigation into whether members of the Trump campaign colluded with Russia Nationals to interfere in the 2016 election. Shortly before he's fired the director, Trump reportedly asked him to drop the investigation into his National Security adviser Michael Flynn, which Trump denies. Following comey's firing, Trump even told a reporter that he had been thinking about "the Russia thing" when he made the decision to fire Comey.
2. Trump's role in creating misleading statements on the Trump Tower meeting. At Trump Tower in June of 2016 Donald Trump jr. Met with Natalie Veselnitskaya, an attorney from Russia, who supposedly had "dirt" on Hillary Clinton. The meeting quickly went downhill when it became clear that the attorney did not have any incriminating evidence on Clinton. A report published by The Washington Post stated that Trump "personally dictated" a public statement about the meeting that misrepresented the meetings content as being "primarily" an about adoption program.
3. Trump leveraged pardon power to influence Witnesses. Trump's lawyer, John Dowd, reportedly told lawyers representing Paul manafort and Michael Flynn that Trump might be willing to Pardon them if they were charged in the Russia investigation.
4. Trump pressure Jeff sessions over his recusal from the Russia investigation. Trump told White House counsel Don mcgahn to convince attorney general Jeff sessions to not recuse himself from the Russia investigation, which he oversaw as Attorney General. Sessions recused himself from the inquiry in March of 2017. A week after Comey was fired, Deputy attorney-general Rod Rosenstein appointed Mueller as special counsel to head the investigation.
5. Trump channels FBI director James Comey, " I need loyalty. I expect loyalty."
6. Trump asked Director of National Intelligence Dan coats and director of the National Security Agency Michael Rogers to publicly deny there was collusion between the Trump campaign and Russians.
7. Trump also tried to fire special counsel Robert Mueller.
8. Recently, Trump in the Democrats had a meeting about infrastructure. In which he stated to them, and directly after to a lawn full of reporters and cameras, (with pre-made signs at the ready) that he was not willing to do an infrastructure deal unless they dropped the investigation on him. Basically blackmailing or rather trying to Blackmail the Democrats into dropping an investigation.
3
-
3
-
3
-
@potsmokingatheist9290 " Trump is the best president we've had in your lifetime. "
Lets take the economy first, sense that is what he is always on about. Now I could do this with just about every POTUS in the last 50 years but sense he was the last one, lets take President Obama. This last year Trumps GDP was at 3%. Last year it was 2%. In 2 out of Presdent Obama's 8 years he also got 3% GDP. He also did so without having to dangerously deregulate many things that sould not of been deregulated. The same can not be said for Trump. 3 out of 8 of President Obama's years he beat Trump's first year of 2%
As I said before, Trump dangerously deregulated every sector. For example...
-Streamlining medical Appeals
- commercial and Industrial Solid Waste incineration standards and emissions
-training requirements for entry-level commercial motor vehicle operators
-VA claims and appeals modernization -affordable housing program amendments methane and waste prevention rule
-disclosure exemptions to certain nonprofits
-Public Transportation safety certification
-pre-shift mining examinations rule
-expanding State flexibility to the find essential health benefits and qualified health plans
-Electrical shock prevention rule
Global politics
He alienation often insults long-time friendly global leaders and yet seems to Buddy up to dictators and take their word over the word of our own intelligence agency.
He only has one card to play when it comes to negotiations and it rarely works. He has to try and be a strong man. Even if that means getting us into a trade War or lying about starving desperate men women and children and calling them gang members and terrorists and suggesting that they're invading
Brakes almost every deal we have with other countries, including global warming initiatives and nucular disarmament treaties without provocation and seaming only because they where what Obama did.
There is also an endless list of racism, bully tactics, disrespectful behavor involving our troops, tax cuts for the rich, goverment shutdowns that amounted to nothing, idiotic and childish shuffling of air craft carriers in order to not see a decieced political rivals name, defense of white supremacy, putting children in cages and then loosing them in the system, disapearing tax returns ... I could go on.
In the end, I have given you facts, provable hard data and you have given me speculation, personal attacks and assumptions you need to tell yourself in order to continue believing your already decided conclusion.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@Andrew Rosenthal okay... Keep lying and playing ignorant, while I use your own words to prove you wrong. 👇
I said... In your article it give the definition of capitalism.
"A socio-economic system based on the abstraction of resources into the form of privately-owned money, wealth, and goods, with economic decisions made largely through the operation of a market unregulated by the state"
There are several criteria of the capitalist definition that you presented, that the United States does not actually qualify as being.
"on the abstraction of resources into the form of privately-owned money, wealth, and goods" all of America's money is not actually allocated through privately owned money wealth and goods. That's not how our federal government runs. That's how our free-market runs. However, our government is filled with programs to allocate and regulate money towards specific causes. Not the free market. That's what the budget is for every year. That's how all of our programs local state and federal get funding to run.
"with economic decisions made largely through the operation of a market 👉unregulated👈 by the state."
The major portion of this one that you should pay attention to is 👉unregulated👈. We have countless regulations on both our market and our economy in a ton of different categories. We're talkin infrastructure, medical and Pharmaceutical, trades and regulations, foreign trade, the Fine Arts, education, military defense... And on and on. There is not one part of our government that is unregulated.
YOUR REPLY.... " Those regulations are not the regulations referred to in the article and do not disprove it."
My reply... " please quote me the regulations that it refers to in the article?"
Your reply... " the regulation that refers to in the article?"
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
Nemo Krada All Donald Trump's public remarks ever amount to are, " You're a Boo Boo Head, because you don't agree with and/or like me. I'm the best at everything, ever! Now here are a bunch of lies, that I will now make up on the spot or that I will recycle from Right wing conspiracy Sites and Channels, that I have decided to believe, irregardless of them being true or not, because they fit the narrative I want to believe." His cult, then, parrots that back, here.
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Longhorn 👈 Just a few of the substance based questions this guy has yet to answer. Most based on the claims he is making but not bothering to provide any proof of. Instead, choosing to give an intentionally vague "see above", which does not answer any of the questions below.
Did I say the United States was a lockdown for an entire year, or did I say the United States was locked down for 3 and a half months?
Why do you keep making excuses as to why you can't prove your claim, instead of just using the very simple and well-known ways to get around link deleting? 👉Title and website posting
Why are you trying to insist that it is my job to prove your claims?
Who do you keep insisting that I am punching down to, and how?
Did you or did you not claim that " only Democrats States" where locked down?
Why are you claiming that Louisiana is a Dem state, simply bc it has a Dem Gov, when your Rep run state of Texas voted 49% blue in the last national election, and Louisiana voted 32% blue?
Why do you feel the need to use childish insults, if your so sure about your stance?
What is your evidence that the annual gas price inflation was incorrect?
If you have the info you claim, why is it so hard for you to name the title and website, without posting the link?
How is posting substance based questions you are dodging, " desperate"?
2
-
2
-
@mikejohnson9606 Would that be human centered capitalism, Paid Family Leave, fight for equal pay, reduce wildfire come on nuclear energy, ranked-choice voting, restoration of voting Acts , an end to gerrymandering, reduce mass incarceration, gun control, automatic sunset on Old laws, closely monitored Mental Health on White House staff or what?
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@Dick_Interritus Yep... especially with politicians that openly and often telling you to go against your best interest. They clearly do not have your best interest at heart. Blind loyalty is never a good thing. It never has been and it never will be. If you're a good leader, you earn the loyalty and you keep earning it.
I enjoy the same. I don't often have to seek out opposition on outside sources. I live in the land of Republicans. I'm pretty much everybody's Lib friend down here. I'm used to hearing the opposing side. Though... Only recently (in the last few years) has it become increasingly hostel to voice my opposition. When I do, I'm often "going to hell", "not an American", "a communist" or "support taking away our freedoms"... Then again.. There are certain topics that are deal breakers for me.... Things that I'm just not going to have any respect for you, if you support... But they are not wearing a piece of cloth or getting a vax. It's things like denial of climate change crisis, sexism, racism, bigotry... Condoning of torture... I just can't get with you on that stuff... But I'm not wishing hell on you either. I just simply decide your a crappy person and need to be away from me.... it's just a little surreal. So many, legit, consider us to be enemies. Its crazy.
But.. You have a good weekend as well. 💜
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@3 Fractures Then there was that one time he thought that these African American boys should still die even though they were proven innocent. In fact he thought that's so strongly that he took a full-page ad in the newspaper out.
“Bring Back the Death Penalty”
The so-called Central Park Five were a group of black and Latino teens who were accused—wrongly—of raping a white woman in Central Park on April 19, 1989. Donald Trump took out full-page ads in all four major New York newspapers to argue that perpetrators of crimes such as this one “should be forced to suffer” and “be executed.” In two trials, in August and December 1990, the youths were convicted of violent offenses including assault, robbery, rape, sodomy, and attempted murder; their sentences ranged from five to 15 years in prison. In 2002, after the discovery of exonerating DNA evidence and the confession by another individual to the crime, the convictions of the Central Park Five were vacated. The men were awarded a settlement of $41 million for false arrest, malicious prosecution, and a racially motivated conspiracy to deprive them of their rights. Trump took to the pages of the New York Daily News, calling the settlement “a disgrace.” During his 2016 presidential campaign, Trump would again insist on the guilt of the Central Park Five
https://amp-theatlantic-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/amp.theatlantic.com/amp/article/588067/?amp_js_v=a3&_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQFKAGwASA%3D#aoh=15908934109256&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&_tf=From%20%251%24s&share=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theatlantic.com%2Fmagazine%2Farchive%2F2019%2F06%2Ftrump-racism-comments%2F588067%2F
2
-
@3 Fractures “He Doesn’t Have a Birth Certificate”
“Our current president came out of nowhere, came out of nowhere … The people who went to school with him—they never saw him; they don’t know who he is.” That statement, made at the February 2011 Conservative Political Action Conference, marked the launch of Donald Trump’s public efforts to sow doubt about whether President Barack Obama had been born in the United States. “Birtherism” had been festering for several years before Trump embraced it—supplanting other proponents and becoming its most prominent advocate. In March, on The View, Trump called on Obama to show his birth certificate. In April, he said that he had dispatched a team of investigators to Hawaii to search for Obama’s birth records.
For Trump, the run-up to birtherism had been a controversy that flared when a Manhattan developer proposed building an Islamic cultural center on a site in Lower Manhattan—the so-called Ground Zero mosque. In 2010, on the Late Show, Trump told David Letterman: “I think it’s very insensitive to build it there. I think it’s not appropriate.” Letterman pushed back, saying that blocking an Islamic facility would be akin to declaring “war with Muslims.” Trump answered: “Somebody’s blowing up buildings, and somebody’s doing lots of bad stuff.” Trump offered to buy out one of the investors in order to halt the project. The action made him one of the project’s key opponents and for the first time gave him national visibility on the political right.
https://amp-theatlantic-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/amp.theatlantic.com/amp/article/588067/?amp_js_v=a3&_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQFKAGwASA%3D#aoh=15908934109256&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&_tf=From%20%251%24s&share=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theatlantic.com%2Fmagazine%2Farchive%2F2019%2F06%2Ftrump-racism-comments%2F588067%2F
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@3 Fractures OH! My bad! I forgot to mention number 5. He also "hears" things, no one else can. 🙃👇
"all i here " Me , Me , Me , I , Me , Prove to me, i dont believe you, me, me,I".
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Leslie Asare - Not using the pre made plan for containing the infection in the US, encase of a pandemic, because the Obama administration put together the plan.
- Trump rallies and 4 other of July celebrations, getting tones of secret service sick, as well as others, despite the experts warning against those kinds of large Gatherings. Experts coming from his own Administration.
- Not restocking the emergency medical supplies for three and a half years and then blaming it all on Obama. Which forced the states to get in a bidding war with each other for literal American lives, during the peak of the first wave..
- Waiting 6 months and 145000 American lives to endorse wearing a mask in public, only to take it back 2 Days Later. Heading almost that exact amount of time to start leading by example and wearing a mask himself.
- Promoting untested snake oil, just so we can look like he did something.
- Not having his administration come up with a national plan to get our kids back to school safely and threatening to defund schools that didn't send them back for their own health unsafety, and that of their loved ones they go home too.
- Pushing the early reopening, against medical professionals advices. Sending us in to new spikes and deaths popping up all over the country.
Just to name a few....
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@Ty1919-w He also had an expert put together pandemic containment plan, on day one, that he decided to ignore, because the Obama Administration came up with it.
He also had three and a half years to refill the medical stockpiles, chose not to, and then tried to blame Obama for that.
He's also tried to sell snake oil cures throughout this entire pandemic and, then, when he got sick, didn't use any of them.
He also spent the first six months of the pandemic not wearing a mask.
He's also had rally after rally after rally, disregarding his own administration's advice about social distancing, but making all the people who came, sign releases, so they couldn't sue them, if they got sick.
He also left all the states to fend for themselves while forcing them to go into a bidding war against each other for literal American lives.
I could go on. So... Little token promises for the future really don't mean much when it comes to this guy.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
stephen glover Once again... Your reality is not actual reality.
1. Held money 2 days before call
2. Mention of the held money as well as favor during call
3. Lying about talking about Biden on camera
4. Asking for Biden to be investigated after he became his political opponent in the next presidential election, even though the investigations he was talking about happened while he was in office but long before Biden became his political opponent.
5. Lying on camera about why the money was held.
6. His guy coming out the other day admitting to the quid pro quo
7. Attempting to curtail witness testimony and trying to get other Witnesses not to testify at all
8. Failure to abide by Congressional subpoenas to turn over documents
9. Putting the phone call in storage, where it would not of normally gone and where it wasn't qualified to go, in order to try and hide it.
10. Trying to get his administration to not turn over the whistleblower report, going so far as to try to claim executive privilege over it.
There is more... But... It's enough to prove you wrong.... So... Basiclly... They have him standing over the body, with a knife in his hands, covered in blood, dirt and bruises, muttering he had to die over and over again, with 3 wittnesses in the corners pointing fingers at him and handing them a hand written confession... But your argument is... If he didn't out right say, I stabbed that person to death... They obviously have nothing.... Yeah... I'm not gonna be able to take your word on that one... Or consider it sound logic.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@antbeats6161 To name a few from just this weekend...
"Trump falsely claimed that “the Democrats don’t want to do anything having to do with protecting people from eviction,” even though the House Democrats had already passed a coronavirus relief bill to do exactly that."
"Trump once again misleadingly claimed that testing was behind the United States’ large number of cases, boasting that the U.S. “is only 5% of the world’s population, but we have conducted over 25% of the world’s testing.” While American testing is better than some countries, it does not explain the huge caseload, nor does it change the fact that the U.S. also has 22% of the world’s COVID-19 deaths."
"Trump falsely said if the Democrats controlled Washington, they would pass “legislation gutting every single police department in America.” Nearly 90% of funding for police comes from local governments, and presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden has said he opposes “defunding the police.”"
"The president repeated his bogus claim about the genesis of the Veterans Choice program, which was launched in 2014 under the Obama administration. Trump took credit for the law, claiming “no president’s ever been able to do it, and we got it done.”"
https://www.factcheck.org/2020/08/factchecking-trumps-weekend-press-briefings/
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
kaiss-kc kc Loyola Law School professor Justin Levitt said "[t]here's literally nothing that I've seen yet with the meaningful potential to affect the final result". Ohio State University election law professor Ned Foley noted "[y]ou have to have a legal claim, and you have to have evidence to back it up. And that's just not there." University of Kentucky law professor Joshua Douglas said the lawsuits "all seem to have no merit whatsoever". Bradley P. Moss, an attorney specializing in national security, wrote that the suits "continue to defy reason and logic, and are purely theater ... It's all a farce". University of California, Irvine election law professor Rick Hasen said there is "no evidence of fraud so far that could conceivably affect the election results". Barry Richard, who helped to oversee the Republican-led Florida recount effort during the 2000 election, called the lawsuits "entirely without merit" and said they "will not be successful"; Gerry McDonough, an attorney who worked for the Gore campaign, said Trump "has no chance of overturning the result—it's just impossible". The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency issued a statement calling the 2020 election "the most secure in American history" and noting "[t]here is no evidence that any voting system deleted or lost votes, changed votes, or was in any way compromised".
Jones Day, one of many law firms working for the Trump campaign and one that specifically handled Pennsylvania Democratic Party v. Boockvar, faced internal criticism for its "shortsighted" efforts on litigation that "erode[s] public confidence in the election results".
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Bryan Halstead Maybe you should... Or at least... Provide the tiniest bit of substance behind that.
The Nazis aimed not at separation, but extermination. This is true, but only beginning in 1941. Before that, the used immigration as their method of removing Jews, and camps to encourage this immigration. Child detention centers, some of which where once the Chinese concentration camps, in America, during WW2, in an attempt to discourage immigration, is now a factor... and certainly her sure American Immigration policy is designed to keep out a certain group of people, much as the Nazis to remove a group already there.
Trump, as a presidential candidate explicitly made appeals to violence during his campaign.
Trump's well documented use of dehumanizing language is another clear similarity to the early stages of Nazi rule. He caters to a particular demographic of unhappy voters, as did the Nazis. After all, his "America First" rally cry was the motto of Nazi friendly Americans in the 1930s.
Nazis literally descended on Charlottesville, while screaming, "blood and soil", the same racist slogan as their counterparts in Germany.
The recent executive order making administrative law judges political appointees subject to executive power cannot be seen as anything less than an attempt to bring the courts in line with the administration's political ideology. The Nazis called it coordination, as they sought to co-op government and private organizations.
John Fitzgerald, a GOP Congressional candidate in California, stated live on the radio that," everything we've been told about the Holocaust is a lie." He went on to receive 23% of the primary votes cast, making him the official Republican candidate of the House of Representatives. The GOP endorsed him, then retracted that endorsement. This is not an isolated event. An Illinois, Holocaust denier Arthur Jones won the Republican primary for the State House. The most prominent conservative Challenger for Republican Paul Ryan's house seat from Wisconsin is a white nationalist an anti-semite. In short, actual Nazis are running for office in America and some are winning.
I could go on. Read your history. Nazi Germany did not become what it did with a snap of a finger. It happened slowly and by degrees.
2
-
Bryan Halstead Ya know what is a big part of educating yourself. Allowing for the possibility that someone else, other than you, might actually have a valid point. Don't talk to me about educating myself, if your being so closed minded that, you can't even address the factual historical parallels that were given to you.
Also, false dichotomies don't really work with me. I just called them out. You're putting words into my mouth in order for you to have an argument. If your argument is valid, then you can argue it on the merits alone.
Obama did not announce and publicly glorify, government sponsored human hunting parties, for nonviolent illegal immigrants, breaking out all over the country. He did not publiclly call them all rapists and murderers. He did not say that they come from shit hole countries. Obama did not leverage their children to get them to stop coming. He did not Institute policies that made the situation worse. He did not tell border patrol to break the law. Again... Could go on and on... 😉
Also, I never really got you guys always waving that flag of " Obama deported more people than Trump". You do understand that Trump has been president for less than 3 years and Obama was president for like 8, right?
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@1776concernedcitizen I'm sorry... I just figured your comment was so jammed packed for of crazy, that a rebuttal wasn't necessary. But... Okay...
First we start out with this bit of convoluted thinking.
"I think it's funny how the left claims they're standing up for the Constitution while they attempt to undo the 2016 election from behind closed doors."
Impeachment is actually in the Constitution. SoOoOo.... That would be following the constitution actually... And it's not to reverse anything. It's their Duty to practice the authority of their given branch, when the president of the United States is found to be doing wrong.... And last but not least... How often do you think investigations of any kind, tends to gather, sort and not reveal evidence in the investigatory stage. That is what trials are for.... And there are reps in there asking questions and looking into things as well.
"while at the same time arguing that our Second Amendment is archaic and needs to be abolished."
How many Democratic Representatives has come out and said anything along the lines of taking away all our guns? Now... You are going to say 1... Petty Boy... But you can't name 5 more, or 4... 3...2. You can't name any bills that has that in it. So you are making that statment off of 1 person, saying something 1 time. Then attempting to attack it to the entire Dem party. In other words... You have nothing, except a strong case of confirmation bias.
" I think Pelosi knows they can't even pass impeachment in the house, otherwise they would vote on it."
And what do you get this thought from, exactly? Impeachment is a constitutional process. Like I said above. There are different stages. We are in the inquiry stage. Meaning we're still investigating everything. God forbid we be thorough in our investigation, when it's about something small and silly, like removing the president of the United States from office under Article 2 Section 4. How dare they not rush this process... Its not like its about anything important at all...🙄
You guys are grasping at straws... anything to stop you from having to focus on Trump's actions and the consequences that follow.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@willmont8258 Here is the presidential records Act of 1972. Please show me where it makes that stipulation?
RecoP) of 1978, 44 U.S.C. ß2201-2209, governs the official records of Presidents and Vice Presidents that were created or received after January 20, 1981 (i.e., beginning with the Reagan Administration). The PRA changed the legal ownership of the official records of the President from private to public, and established a new statutory structure under which Presidents, and subsequently NARA, must manage the records of their Administrations. The PRA was amended in 2014, which established several new provisions.
Specifically, the PRA:
Establishes public ownership of all Presidential records and defines the term Presidential records.
Requires that Vice-Presidential records be treated in the same way as Presidential records.
Places the responsibility for the custody and management of incumbent Presidential records with the President.
Requires that the President and his staff take all practical steps to file personal records separately from Presidential records.
Allows the incumbent President to dispose of records that no longer have administrative, historical, informational, or evidentiary value, once the views of the Archivist of the United States on the proposed disposal have been obtained in writing.
Establishes in law that any incumbent Presidential records (whether textual or electronic) held on courtesy storage by the Archivist remain in the exclusive legal custody of the President and that any request or order for access to such records must be made to the President, not NARA.
Establishes that Presidential records automatically transfer into the legal custody of the Archivist as soon as the President leaves office.
Establishes a process by which the President may restrict and the public may obtain access to these records after the President leaves office; specifically, the PRA allows for public access to Presidential records through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) beginning five years after the end of the Administration, but allows the President to invoke as many as six specific restrictions to public access for up to twelve years.
Codifies the process by which former and incumbent Presidents conduct reviews for executive privilege prior to public release of records by NARA (which had formerly been governed by Executive order 13489).
Establishes procedures for Congress, courts, and subsequent Administrations to obtain “special access” to records from NARA that remain closed to the public, following a privilege review period by the former and incumbent Presidents; the procedures governing such special access requests continue to be governed by the relevant provisions of E.O. 13489.
Establishes preservation requirements for official business conducted using non-official electronic messaging accounts: any individual creating Presidential records must not use non-official electronic messaging accounts unless that individual copies an official account as the message is created or forwards a complete copy of the record to an official messaging account. (A similar provision in the Federal Records Act applies to federal agencies.)
Prevents an individual who has been convicted of a crime related to the review, retention, removal, or destruction of records from being given access to any original records
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Sigkim Endorcing Hilary over the other option is responsible. Not sucking up.
He also only did so after he lost the primary. If you knew his record, you would know hpw silly your claim is.
I already told you. He did qhatnhe could to try and keep Trump out of office because he is worse.
You can assume he did it for whatever reason you want though. Makes no difference. At the end of the day, your making things up. Especially sense he has said, multiple times why he did what he did. You have to speculate and make stuff up to believe what you want about him. You have to ignore his long history of ahowing that he fights for the people.
If your argument can't be made on its merits, then it should not be made.
Trump... Well.... You mean other than breaking so many emoluments Clause has in office but I've lost count? Or how about the dangerous deregulations that he's made? Or how about the deals that he's pulled out of simply because they were Obama's that actually hurt America? Or how about making tax cuts to the rich permanent ond putting a clock on the tax cuts for the middle class? Or how about closing to dictators and alienating our longtime allies in the world? Or how about doing nothing about campaign Finance reform While claiming that he's going to clean out the swamp? I could go on....
You know... You wouldn't have to use so many childish tactics... If your argument had merit, right? The only one screaming anything here, is you, and the words your screaming are, "childish destractions, baseless speculations and hot air. "
I have my own disclaimer... No paper tigers, childish and useless taunting, baseless assumptions, whataboutism, excuses or cherry picking facts. Argue your point on the merit or not at all.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@wmp0074 Trump....
-Had a 33 page laid out plan to contain a pandemic in America, just exactly like covid-19, and chose not to use it because the administration who commissioned it was Obamas.
-Decided it wasn't important to refill the medical stockpiles for 3 and 1/2 years.
-Tried to pretend for two and a half months that covid-19 had magically gone away.
-Tried to sell American citizens multiple snake oil cures, taking none of them when he actually got sick.
- Left each state to fend for themselves and forced them into a bidding war against each other, for literally American lives.
-Called the severity of the worst worldwide pandemic in over a hundred years, a democratic hoax.
-Tried to take millions of Americans Healthcare away during the worst worldwide pandemic in over a hundred years.
-Made multiple false claims about how it would all just go away, by several different dates, and got every one wrong.
-Threw multiple large rallies and celebrations, with little to no social distancing, instead of setting an example and using a covid safe campaign plan, like President elect Biden did.
-Suggested on a regular basis that we should stop testing for the virus, only so the numbers would go down and he would look better.
-Spread false propaganda about covid-19 being no worse than the flu.
-Claimed that 99% of all covered cases are totally harmless.
-Discouraged his supporters from listening to the medical experts.
-Constantly lied about our fatality rate.
-Playing on racial tensions, tried to blame Mexico for covid-19 in America, with absolutely nothing to back it up.
-Threatened to defund our already strapped public education system in an effort to try and force children to go back to school, when it wasn't safe and no one had a national plan.
-Handled the pandemic so poorly that it crippled our economy and put 9 million people out of work, into a housing crisis and wondering how they were going to feed their children.
-Claimed, on multiple occasions, that covid-19 was merely being overblown because of the election in America. Despite the virus being all over the world.
-Lied about Google engineers building a website to help Americans determine whether they need testing for the coronavirus and to direct them to their nearest testing site.
-Claimed to put a ban on travel from China, but after doing so nearly, 40,000 people travelled from China to the United States under his ban rules.
-Claimed this kind of pandemic was something nobody thought could happen, when experts both on inside and outside the federal government sounded the alarm many times in the past decade about the potential for a devastating Global pandemic.
And on... and on... And on....
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
All Donald Trump's public remarks ever amount to are, " You're a Boo Boo Head, because you don't agree with and/or like me. I'm the best at everything, ever! Now here are a bunch of lies, that I will now make up on the spot or that I will recycle from Right wing conspiracy Sites and Channels, that I have decided to believe, irregardless of them being true or not, because they fit the narrative I want to believe." His cult, then, parrots that back, here.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@flyingsavage8522 Okay... So thank you for openly lying. 👉" You haven't offered to participate in this conversation" 👉
1. "So, first you would need to address the subject at hand, and demonstrate that you're willing to hold both sides accountable equally and then we could move on to other subjects. At which time you would have to provide proof of their existence before arguing them. I'll be Waiting."
2. "I gave you the parameters upon which you must meet before I engage with you in this debate...
"So, first you would need to address the subject at hand, and demonstrate that you're willing to hold both sides accountable equally and then we could move on to other subjects. At which time you would have to provide proof of their existence before arguing them. I'll be Waiting."
They are reasonable and measured, and should, NOT AT ALL, be hard to accomplish ( by your own admission ), if you have genuine concern for these issues and are telling the whole truth. I have explained why these things are required, as well. If you cannot meet them, that falls under the category of not my problem. Your choice."
3. "Instead of just addressing the main topic and then moving on to the other topics, he's decided to, instead, just claimed that I am the one deflecting"
4. "Once again... As soon as you address the original topic, and stop using all these other topics as a deflection method, I'll be more than happy to address them. Waiting for you..."
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@a_diamond also, don't get me wrong, I'm not advocating for 17 year olds to be considered adults. I'm simply stating that is the law in way too many States, including the one I'm in. Which is why under this new law, if you were to get pregnant after turning 17 by a family member who had groomed you, the law could not charge them with Rave, unless force was used or objection was mounted. Which, by that point, most victims are so accustomed to it, they don't do those things, unfortunately. It's a scenario that is a giant gaping hole in sexual assault and abortion legal legislation. One that way too many bad people slipped through.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@Mister Morgan SoOoOo... Where you just counting on noone taking the time to read the link or look up the bill on Gov sites? That was a fools bluff....
- The last Dem to even touch the bill was Jimmy Carter, in 1979.
- The bill was originally put in place in 1948.
- Its original intent was not to do what you say. It was to strategically dispense propaganda and general information to foreign adversaries and allies, as needed.
- It was also supposed to Shield the American people from it.
- Except over the past 60 plus years, Republicans got to it. To be accurate, one Democrat and 6 Republicans.
- The last few where Ronald Reagan in 1985, George HW Bush in 1991 and 1992....
- Then James Kenneth Glassman (R), the founding executive director of The George Bush Institute.
- Several Dems have protested these changes to the original bill... A good example of which, is Edward Zorinsky, in 1985 tried to fight against these changes.
- John M. Vorys (R) was the one to add the second provision to remove the stigma of propaganda.
- The action in 2012 that you where referring to was by (R) Thornberry. (R) Smith was the other co signer.
- They have tried to ammend the Bill to authorize the domestic dissemination of information and material about the United States intended primarily for foreign audiences, and for other purposes.
The 2 BEST PARTS of your lies...
1. The amendment that you claim to allow this " propaganda " NEVER MADE IT PAST THE HOUSE.... For 2 reasons....
The first, Money..... Of course.
The second, concerns about the freedom of the press provision and freedom of speech provision in the Constitution itself.... The limitation and overlapping of them.
2. OBAMA HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH IT.
Go look for yourself on https://www.congress.gov/bill/112th-congress/house-bill/5736
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@Wilma SoOoOo... Your swallowing a bunch pf right wing scare tactics? Why do they need fear to convince you... Look at the facts. Illegals.... Your saying that like noone else has done anything abput it. They just choose to do it humanely. I would prefer America not to have the reputation I'm ripping children out of their parents arms, losing them in a system to never see their parents again and stuffing them in cages. There are ways to handle things like this that do not have to involve that. Should illigals be here... No... Do we have to loose our humanity in order to deal with the situation... No.
Career polititions... What has he done to combat that? He is being sing right now for profiting from being president by breaking tons of emolument clauses as president. How is that in any way fighting corruption or setting an example?
Job growth has been on a steady decline since he became president. The trend of unemployment going down started way back before he even thought about running. You're giving him credit for a five-man relay race.
The good did not over come the bad. Before he even ran there was a long history of hiring illigals, racism, sexual assault, curruption, bankruptcy, lying and just down right being a bad guy. In his first year and a half in office he had the house Senate and Whitehouse. He could of gotten the wall funded, healcare fixed and a myriad of other things he promised. All he got was tax cuts for the rich, played a ton of golf and blamed the other half of the country for everything.... Then shut down the gov, had government workers standing at food pantries with their family and losing their homes the longest stretch of time in American history, only two gave and make that worth nothing.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@oliverphippen1957 - That is why Trump lied, on camera, about mentioning Biden in the phone call, when first asked...
- That is why Trump was only interested in the investigation, only after Biden began running against him...
- That is why there has never been an official investigation into Ukraine and the Biden's opened till this very day....
- That is why Trump is willing to break obstruction laws, to prevent anyone who was actually on the phone call, from testifying...
- That is why the Reps are trying to block further witnesses from testifying in the actual trial, despite arguing the exact opposite during Clinton's impeachment...
- That is why Trump has been trying to discredit the whistleblowers from the start, despite not even knowing who they are....
- That is why Trump refused to testify in the house, lied about being allowed to testify, despite being asked to...
- That is why the Reps pulled that ridiculous storm the castle stunt, regardless of the fact that half of them could have just walked in the room and been given equal time to ask questions, yet chose not to...
I could go on... the breadth and width of what you are ignoring to be able to make that statement... it clearly shows you are not willing to acknowledge, let alone consider all relevant material, and only have interest and what are ready fit your preconceived notions.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@J L Getting mad? Aren't we precious! No, silly boy. I'm not mad. I know you guys wish you had that much power over us, but I'm afraid you're shooting blanks.
Oh! Look more lies and cherry picked facts, designed to project what you already have decided to be true, back to you, despite all the evidence to the contrary. How original.
Then tell me something... If Trump did nothing wrong on that call, why in the world would he and his cronies have done so much to try and cover it up?
- putting it on a private server, for top secret classified information, even though it didn't meet those qualifications
- abusing his executive privilege to block Congress from getting the report from The Whistleblower
- telling multiple lies about whether the call actually happened or didn't happen, given the hour of the day that he was asked before he released the transcript
- then only releasing the transcript, the report and the money to Ukraine after the news got a hold of the story and he was pressured to
If you think it doesn't make a difference that Biden is a candidate oh, you need to go back to law school. This isn't the Trump White House sweetheart. Just saying stuff does not actually make it true. Sorry
And the way you're using that Twisted logic, it's desperation. Yes that's exactly what I'm saying. I can just go commit a bunch of crimes and then run for president and I'll be fine. 🤣 That is sound logic. If he was trying to investigate Biden on the level, why would he ask another country to do so? Why wouldn't he asked his own?
You didn't destroy anything. You have silly logic. That's all. I'm still good! Don't you worry about me! 😜✌
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
The interview was a little over 16 min long.
- 30 sec of Intro/Trip and queen🇬🇧
- 50 sec on the whether that day🌈
- 3 sec shy of a full minute (57 seconds) on the Vets and WW2🇺🇸
- 2 min and 25 sec Lying about NATO falling apart, on Theresa May and how he saved NATO and made everyone pay.🤥
- 2 min and 45 sec on how the tariffs that he put dow are everyone else's fault but his, lying about Border Patrol numbers, invasion and general fear mongering about brown people🤥
- 2 min 5 secs of him childishly trashing Nancy Pelosi, Robert Mueller and the justifiably respected Democrat prosecutors on his team. Also, lying again about the findings of the Muller Report.🤥
- 1 min 30 sec Lying about Joe Biden, the reason for his GDP and putting words in the mouth of all American farmers.🤥
- 20 sec bragging about how he is holding everyone up so he can do an interview with Fox News. Then another 5 sec on Laura ingraham's ratings 🙄
- 1 min 20 sec about Russia, China and a trade deal. Also, "Witch Hunt", lying about numbers again (Stock Market) and talking shit about Hillary Clinton because he still can't get over the fact that he lost the popular vote 🙄🤥
- 1 min 25 sec being asked about what he can do to unite the country and deciding the best way to do that is to talk more shit about people. At some point deciding to become a $5 a pop mall fortune teller about Mexico and using the usual hypocrisy on deals when talking about China 🙄💩🙄
- 35 sec on✌, military building, 💰, brag, brag, brag, Iran, brag, brag, brag, China again, brag, brag and brag.🙄
- Just over 1 min about fist bumping with the Queen of England, brag, talking with her, complementing her and thankfully the end!🙄💩🙄💩🙄💩🙄💩
Sorry about the sassy pants in the middle and twards the end. It was starting to be like audio water torture up in here. 😢
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@ricflair2743 Trump Report card....
- Jobs +5,121,00
- Unemployment rate 3.8%
- job openings + 26%
- real weekly earnings + 2.6%
- economically growth 2.9%
- S&P 500 + 27.6%
- u.s. Mexico border apprehensions + 31.9%
- home prices + 9.9%
- home ownership + 1.1 points
- corporate profits + 12%
- Federal regulatory restrictions negative 1%
- people without health insurance + 1.1 million
- people with gap insurance + 7 million
- food stamp recipients negative 10.4%
- coal mining jobs + 1900
- manufacturing jobs + 453000
- federal debt held by public + 12.5%
- carbon dioxide emissions plus 2%
- trade deficit + 23.5%
- Consumer Price Index Plus 4.3%
- us crude oil production Plus 25.6%
Job growth slowed a bit under Trump, but unemployment dropped to the lowest level in nearly half a century. The average monthly gain under Trump so far is 197,000. So your numbers about how many jobs have been added in the last 12 months is off but for the better when it comes to your point. It's actually more than that. It would be more around 2.3 million and change.
Here is the thing though, in Obama's second term, his average monthly was 217,000 jobs. Which would make his 2.6 million and change. So, job growth has slowed.
So Trump is going to have to pick up the pace if he is going to fulfill his campaign boast that "he will be the greatest jobs president that God ever created".
The unemployment rate, which was well below the historic Norm when Trump took office, has continued to fall even lower. It was already 4.7% when he was sworn in. The most recent numbers show 3.8% now. So, team effort, is my point.
But the historical more MS 5.6% which is the median monthly rate for all the months since starting 1948. So still good.
One reason why the employment growth has slowed is a shortage of qualified workers. Which is tied to the lack of Education opportunities.
The number unfilled job openings hit more than 7.7 million in November, the highest in the 18 years the BLS has tracked this figure. As of the last day of February, the most recent figure on record, it was still nearly 7.1 million. That's a gain of almost 1.5 million unfilled job openings or 26% since Trump took office. For the first time on record the number of job openings exceeded the number of unemployed people looking for work in March of last year. And in every month sense.
Despite the abundance of jobs, the labor force participation rate which went down 2.8% points during the Obama years, has remained little changed under Trump. Since Trump took office, the rate has fluctuated in a narrow range between 63.2% and 62.7%. It was 63.0% in March, up just .1% from where it was the month Trump took office.
Manufacturing jobs increased under Trump, just at a rate slightly faster than total employment. The number Rose by 453000 between Trump's inauguration and March. That followed a net decrease of 192 thousand under Obama. The increase in January 2017 amounts to 3.7%, compared with the 3.5% increase in overall employment. The number of manufacturing jobs is still 920000 below where it was in December of 2007, at the start of the Great Recession.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@ewalker1057 Nope! You just have to stick with that narrative, no matter what I say or how many times I point out these other children. Which I have many times now. In fact... Lets make a list, so you can stop perpetuating this deflection wrapped in a lie. Then you'll have to come up with some other excuse for trying to minimize these 103 childrens deaths.
1. You didn't point out hypocrisy. You tried to use 👉the unconscionable death of some children👈 to minimize the death of these children.
2. Again... You didn't point out hypocrisy. You tried to use 😮the unconscionable death of some children👈 to minimize the death of these children.
3. However... This isn't about me, as much as you are trying to make it.... because you think I'm more of a convenient Target than 103 dead children... it's about them. It's about the tragedy of these young lives being taken for this BS horrid reason. It's about how that matters. It's about how people like you were trying to distract from that, 👉and use these children's deaths, and other children's deaths👈 in order to attack another side.
4. Infact... You did not, bc you tried to attribute that to me, 👉by making the assumption that I support all those other acts.👈
5. If they don't report on 👉every single child death in the world,👈 they can't report on any of them?
6. Your trying to use 👉dead kids👈 to minimize and deflect from other dead kids. I've mentioned all these children, all along. Even calling it unconscionable. You just choose to ignore that because it doesn't fit your narrative of, make this about me, because I make a better target.
That's just 6 times today that I've mentioned or made reference to all the other children.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@-me-myself-and-I But they did predict it. Several times. Look at the last one, if your to lazy to read the whole thing.
Trump....
-Had a 33 page laid out plan to contain a pandemic in America, just exactly like covid-19, and chose not to use it because the administration who commissioned it was Obamas.
-Decided it wasn't important to refill the medical stockpiles for 3 and 1/2 years.
-Tried to pretend for two and a half months that covid-19 had magically gone away.
-Tried to sell American citizens multiple snake oil cures, taking none of them when he actually got sick.
- Left each state to fend for themselves and forced them into a bidding war against each other, for literally American lives.
-Called the severity of the worst worldwide pandemic in over a hundred years, a democratic hoax.
-Tried to take millions of Americans Healthcare away during the worst worldwide pandemic in over a hundred years.
-Made multiple false claims about how it would all just go away, by several different dates, and got every one wrong.
-Threw multiple large rallies and celebrations, with little to no social distancing, instead of setting an example and using a covid safe campaign plan, like President elect Biden did.
-Suggested on a regular basis that we should stop testing for the virus, only so the numbers would go down and he would look better.
-Spread false propaganda about covid-19 being no worse than the flu.
-Claimed that 99% of all covered cases are totally harmless.
-Discouraged his supporters from listening to the medical experts.
-Constantly lied about our fatality rate.
-Playing on racial tensions, tried to blame Mexico for covid-19 in America, with absolutely nothing to back it up.
-Threatened to defund our already strapped public education system in an effort to try and force children to go back to school, when it wasn't safe and no one had a national plan.
-Handled the pandemic so poorly that it crippled our economy and put 9 million people out of work, into a housing crisis and wondering how they were going to feed their children.
-Claimed, on multiple occasions, that covid-19 was merely being overblown because of the election in America. Despite the virus being all over the world.
-Lied about Google engineers building a website to help Americans determine whether they need testing for the coronavirus and to direct them to their nearest testing site.
-Claimed to put a ban on travel from China, but after doing so nearly, 40,000 people travelled from China to the United States under his ban rules.
-Claimed this kind of pandemic was something nobody thought could happen, when experts both on inside and outside the federal government sounded the alarm many times in the past decade about the potential for a devastating Global pandemic.
And on... and on... And on....
2
-
@kathyb9390 Trump....
-Had a 33 page laid out plan to contain a pandemic in America, just exactly like covid-19, and chose not to use it because the administration who commissioned it was Obamas.
-Decided it wasn't important to refill the medical stockpiles for 3 and 1/2 years.
-Tried to pretend for two and a half months that covid-19 had magically gone away.
-Tried to sell American citizens multiple snake oil cures, taking none of them when he actually got sick.
- Left each state to fend for themselves and forced them into a bidding war against each other, for literally American lives.
-Called the severity of the worst worldwide pandemic in over a hundred years, a democratic hoax.
-Tried to take millions of Americans Healthcare away during the worst worldwide pandemic in over a hundred years.
-Made multiple false claims about how it would all just go away, by several different dates, and got every one wrong.
-Threw multiple large rallies and celebrations, with little to no social distancing, instead of setting an example and using a covid safe campaign plan, like President elect Biden did.
-Suggested on a regular basis that we should stop testing for the virus, only so the numbers would go down and he would look better.
-Spread false propaganda about covid-19 being no worse than the flu.
-Claimed that 99% of all covered cases are totally harmless.
-Discouraged his supporters from listening to the medical experts.
-Constantly lied about our fatality rate.
-Playing on racial tensions, tried to blame Mexico for covid-19 in America, with absolutely nothing to back it up.
-Threatened to defund our already strapped public education system in an effort to try and force children to go back to school, when it wasn't safe and no one had a national plan.
-Handled the pandemic so poorly that it crippled our economy and put 9 million people out of work, into a housing crisis and wondering how they were going to feed their children.
-Claimed, on multiple occasions, that covid-19 was merely being overblown because of the election in America. Despite the virus being all over the world.
-Lied about Google engineers building a website to help Americans determine whether they need testing for the coronavirus and to direct them to their nearest testing site.
-Claimed to put a ban on travel from China, but after doing so nearly, 40,000 people travelled from China to the United States under his ban rules.
-Claimed this kind of pandemic was something nobody thought could happen, when experts both on inside and outside the federal government sounded the alarm many times in the past decade about the potential for a devastating Global pandemic.
And on... and on... And on....
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@gchannel9463 Well, you sound "SUPER rational and mature enough to listen". 😉✌
But sure...
1. The whistleblower report has been proven to be accurate.
2. Trump lied on camera 3 times about the July 25th phone call and mentioning Biden in it.
3. The transcript shows a clear quid pro quo.
4. Trump had the phone call put in storage that it would not normally go into and does not qualify for, in order to keep it from people.
5. Trump put the money on hold on July 23rd, before the scheduled phone call... and has changed his story on camera as to why he did that three times since this all began.
- "I didn't talk about Biden" but if I did, it "would have been fine".
- I talked about him but the money was put on hold because "the EU should be giving more aid and we should be giving less". Which quickly changed after the reports came out showing that the EU has actually given a lot more money in Aid to Ukraine that America has.
- A lot of people are saying Biden did something wrong and I'm concerned about "curruption" in Ukraine.
6. Trump has openly tried to stop Witnesses from testifying in the impeachment inquiry and refuses to turn over documents. These documents being me text message conversations.
7. Rudy Giuliani and his associates being investigated and arrested for involvement in this.
8. Ambassador Taylor, a career Foreign Service Officer, text Soundland asking a pointant question." Are we now saying that security assistance and white house meeting are conditioned on investigations?" Suondland replies, "call me." Not no... Not absolutely not. Not don't be ridiculous that's wrong and against the law.... But Call me.
9. On September 9th Soundland makes a statement... " As I said on the phone, I think it's crazy to withhold security assistance for help with a political campaign". 3 hours later he gets a call from Rudy Giuliani and then puts this statement out. " The president has been crystal clear no quid pro quos for any kind. I suggest we stomped the back and forth by text." It was later found out that Trump told him to make the second statement.
10. On September 11th under pressure from lawmakers, the White House releases the funding for Ukraine without any explanation of what changed.....
Just off the top of my head... Now... I'm more concerned with your delusions... and if you don't know all of this already, what business do you have forming an opinion or speaking on the matter?
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Sara M I do understand what they were talking about. What I don't understand is why this Senator is holding this up to be some kind of great thing. The South trying to force the North into only counting every black person as three fourths of a person, it's not something we need to hold up as something we're proud of. Or that it was a good thing. It was merely a horrible compromise that we convinced ourselves, that we had to make at the time. Nothing more.
As for your generalization of Democrats...
" I guess that's why the Democrats don't get this, they only see what the slave owners were attempting to do because, well, that was their party. "
I wouldn't consider them to be Democrats in the modern-day equivalency of it. I would encourage you to look up the party flipped, Dixiecrats and President Johnson. They switched names, not platforms. Meaning, if I was born back then, as a Democrat now, with the platform values and beliefs system held by the current Democratic party, I would have been a Republican. Especially, considering the fact that those Democrats left to go to the Republican party. Again, the Dixiecrats.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Sara M Actually... You have been getting that quote of mine, slightly wrong, this entire time. It just didn't matter enough, given the context of the exchange, to bring it up before. Now... However....
This is my quote
"You would be referring to the DixieCrats. Today we would call them Republicans."
I was referring to the ideology. That is what you kept getting wrong. It was never about people leaving one party and going to another. Though, that certainly happened, in mass, in the south. It was the same thing that I was referring to when I stated earlier that if I was born, lived and was of voting age, by the time the 40s rolled around, I would have been a registered Rep. Why? Because of the ideology and platform of the party, at the time. I would have also left the Rep party in the late 50s and early 60s, when that ideology began to change. I probably wouldn't have gone Dem right away either. They where still a little to wishy washy for my tastes, until about the late 60s and early 70s.
So, given the ideological platform, tactics and goals, the modern-day equivalence of a dixiecrat, would be a far-right Republican.
2
-
2
-
Sara M But... Thank you for discrediting yourself with that last one. The only reason you could make that claim at this point is if you're intentionally ignoring data that doesn't fit your narrative. For instance, the three-way split ticket you're trying to ignore right now. Having Wallace, in 64 claim MOST. Of the South, running as an independent, against Nixon, and purely on a segregationist platform. Louisiana, Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia and Mississippi.
Your also ignoring the completely simple context of red and blue. The state's where once the other color for a long time and switched to the other, at a pivotal point in the civil rights movement. In large part, due to it, given a phone context of the known history. Except you don't want that full context. You just want to be right... even if you're wrong.
2
-
2
-
2
-
Sara M oh, that's one thing we agree on. You don't know why. Because you don't want to. Instead of a full context of both sides, you would prefer to only have what fits your preconceived notions. It's called confirmation bias. You only seek out information which tells you what you want to hear.
Lets see...
The former head of the Rep party made countless racial slurs and whistle blues, just while running for office and sitting as president... that's not even counting through his entire lifetime.
About half of the Rep representatives have invariably done the same, at one time or another.
They just voted in several states to make it harder to vote, in a variety of ways. Knowing that those ways would inevitably fall hardest on minority communities.
Countless times they have voted for tax cuts for the rich, majority Caucasian people... While cutting back healthcare programs and community service programs to help the people below the poverty line... and at the same time, continuing to block turning the minimum wage into an actual living wage... Knowing that... Again... It would hit minority communities the hardest.
They fight voting for hate crime legislation, on mass, and on a regular basis.
They constantly do silly things, like you just did period trying to equate the governing state of Israel with all Jewish people. Disagreeing with the actions of a governing body is not the same as hating Jewish people. Jesus... Wept... 🤦
Just to name a few....
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@Johnf275 Oh sweetheart, you can lie to yourself all you want, as well. It doesn't mean any of us have to play along.
You talked about, Dems are offering the illegals free healthcare. I clarified and told you they were offering the illegal immigrants, that we detain, Healthcare, while we are the ones that are locking them up. Because this is not the Middle Ages and we are not barbarians.
Then you gave that BS line about, open borders. Specifically mentioning decriminalizing illegal Crossing. I corrected you on that, saying that, they want to make it a misdemeanor and not a felony. Which it was before. Which would be a little something called, a proportional response. Again because this is not the Middle Ages and we are not barbarians.
Then you reverted back to your third grade status of name-calling and when I called you out on that you got all pissy.
At no point, did you present any clips of Dems, saying what you tried to say they did. Because you can't because your lying.
The end! Night night little boy! Its passed your bed time!
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@georgewashington8097 He....
-Had a 33 page laid out plan to contain a pandemic and America, just exactly like covid-19 and chose not to use it because the administration who commissioned it was Obama.
-Decided it wasn't important to refill the medical stockpiles for 3 and 1/2 years.
-Tried to pretend for two and a half months that covid-19 has magically gone away.
-Tried to sell American citizens multiple snake oil cares, taking none of them when he actually got sick.
- Left each state to fend for themselves and forced them into a bidding war against each other, we're literally American lives.
-Called the severity of the worst worldwide pandemic in over a hundred years a democratic hoax.
-Tried to take millions of Americans Healthcare away during the world worldwide pandemic in over a hundred years.
-Made multiple false claims about how it would all just go away by several different dates and got every one wrong.
-Threw multiple large rallies and celebrations with little to no social distancing, instead of setting an example and using a coded safe campaign plan, like President elect Biden did.
-Suggested on a regular basis that we should stop testing for the virus only so the numbers would go down and he would look better.
-Spread false propaganda about covid-19 no worse than the flu.
-Claimed that 99% of all covered cases are totally harmless.
-Discouraged his supporters from listening to the medical experts.
-Constantly lied about our fatality rate.
-Playing on racial tensions, tried to blame Mexico for covid-19 in America, with absolutely nothing to back it up.
-Threatened to defund our already strapped public education system in an effort to try and force children to go back to school when it wasn't safe and no one had a national plan.
-Handled the pandemic so poorly that it crippled our economy and put 9 million people out of work, into a housing crisis and wondering how they were going to feed their children.
-Claims, on multiple occasions, that covid-19 was merely being overblown because of the election in America. Despite the virus being all over the world.
-Lied about Google engineer is building a website to help Americans determine whether they need testing for the coronavirus and to direct them to their nearest testing site.
-Claimed to put a ban on travel from China, but after doing so nearly, 40,000 people travelled from China to the United States under his ban rules.
-Claimed this kind of pandemic was something nobody thought could happen, when experts both inside and outside the federal government sounded the alarm many times in the past decade about the potential for a devastating Global pandemic.
And on... and on... And on....
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@Rick James5678 Trump....
-Had a 33 page laid out plan to contain a pandemic in America, just exactly like covid-19, and chose not to use it because the administration who commissioned it was Obamas.
-Decided it wasn't important to refill the medical stockpiles for 3 and 1/2 years.
-Tried to pretend for two and a half months that covid-19 had magically gone away.
-Tried to sell American citizens multiple snake oil cures, taking none of them when he actually got sick.
- Left each state to fend for themselves and forced them into a bidding war against each other, for literally American lives.
-Called the severity of the worst worldwide pandemic in over a hundred years, a democratic hoax.
-Tried to take millions of Americans Healthcare away during the worst worldwide pandemic in over a hundred years.
-Made multiple false claims about how it would all just go away, by several different dates, and got every one wrong.
-Threw multiple large rallies and celebrations, with little to no social distancing, instead of setting an example and using a covid safe campaign plan, like President elect Biden did.
-Suggested on a regular basis that we should stop testing for the virus, only so the numbers would go down and he would look better.
-Spread false propaganda about covid-19 being no worse than the flu.
-Claimed that 99% of all covered cases are totally harmless.
-Discouraged his supporters from listening to the medical experts.
-Constantly lied about our fatality rate.
-Playing on racial tensions, tried to blame Mexico for covid-19 in America, with absolutely nothing to back it up.
-Threatened to defund our already strapped public education system in an effort to try and force children to go back to school, when it wasn't safe and no one had a national plan.
-Handled the pandemic so poorly that it crippled our economy and put 9 million people out of work, into a housing crisis and wondering how they were going to feed their children.
-Claimed, on multiple occasions, that covid-19 was merely being overblown because of the election in America. Despite the virus being all over the world.
-Lied about Google engineers building a website to help Americans determine whether they need testing for the coronavirus and to direct them to their nearest testing site.
-Claimed to put a ban on travel from China, but after doing so nearly, 40,000 people travelled from China to the United States under his ban rules.
-Claimed this kind of pandemic was something nobody thought could happen, when experts both on inside and outside the federal government sounded the alarm many times in the past decade about the potential for a devastating Global pandemic.
And on... and on... And on....
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Truth bTold See! You say "not my thing", but your the one who brought it up.... Telling... Very telling! 🤣
Of course it is, sweatheart! All ignorant people think what they are saying is true.
Only If you mean "Donald Trump treatment", as in, you saying something sexist and racist, and then people point out that what you said was, infact, sexist and racist... Unless your talking about how you guys like to ignore all of that and, lacking the ground to stand on, you decided, instead, to try and attack the messanger?
"NOBODY" huh? And how do you know this? Talked to everyone in America, have you? How about just the ones with African American children? Not even those, huh? Well.... That's odd! It's almost like your mouth is writing checks, that you butt can't cash, or something... Ya know... Like that.😜✌
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@zbudda " Since 2016 the Democrats have done nothing but divide the country, obstructed Trump's Maga agenda, and focus on removing Trump from office by any means necessary."
This is another silly claim. This is from a 2 second google search. So you have no excuse for this comment you just made. You don't know what they have done because you didn't look.👇
"House Democrats haven’t been squandering time. In addition to their investigations, they’ve been passing legislation at a rapid clip. In all, the House has taken up 51 bills, resolutions, and suspensions since January — 49 of which they’ve passed. This includes a slate of bills to attempt to end the longest government shutdown in history, the result of a protracted fight between Trump and Congress over border wall funding.
Ironically, over the past two weeks, the House has passed bills to address most of the issues Trump mentioned in his tweet. They recently passed a bill to lower prescription drug prices, and another one to protect preexisting conditions. The House also passed nine bills on veterans issues this week alone, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi noted at her weekly press conference. On Thursday, Democrats tried to present Trump their infrastructure plan before he walked out of their meeting."
https://www-vox-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.vox.com/platform/amp/2019/5/24/18637163/trump-pelosi-democrats-bills-congress?amp_js_v=a2&_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQCKAE%3D#aoh=15716870959031&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&_tf=From%20%251%24s&share=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.vox.com%2F2019%2F5%2F24%2F18637163%2Ftrump-pelosi-democrats-bills-congress
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@MrBillmedhurst SoOoOo.... Passiveaggressive insults, of which you could not qualify, are nothing but a sign of insecurity... Just FYI 😆
Never the less... This is why you should not make silly assumptions about people.. Today I woke up, went to work, facetimed a friend who lives out of town during lunch, got off after about 9 hours at work, got my kid off the bus, took him to practice, hung out with friends while the kids trained, stopped to get his Halloween costume on the way home, got home, cooked dinner, helped with homework, ate, hung out with my kid, cat and dog till my kids bed time, did some cleaning... All the while, going back and forth with about 4 different people on here... And its just a Tuesday. Its a little thing called multitasking. You should look it up. 🤣 And how long does it take you to type... That you think the majority of my day was consumed by this? 🤣
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Anne M So... 1... This REALLY REALLY is not about me.
But... Sense you brought it up...
I have faith in things I can prove to be real. Its not that I don't have faith. Its that I don't have blind faith. I choose to have faith in things that are real.
Blind faith tends to end badly. Has so many times in history. Measured and evidence proven, thought process and the conclusion to such, is what tends to be the smart play.
Science... Nor any other entity, person, group, experiment, object... etc... Has ever shown any proof of any higher being of any sort in hundreds of thousands of years.
Religion tends to be made up by people in power, trying to keep that power, by subduing the masses with threats and promises. Usually centered around being punished horribly for not believing and the promise of something after, for those who can't take the pressure of this life being the only one we get.
Your suggestion that because science hasn't been able to prove something to be true or not true as of yet, it makes it "god"... That is nothing new. It is also not sound logic. Just bc one thing can't be figured out right away, it doesn't mean it is "god". It just means it hasn't been figured out yet.
That used to be a lot of things...
Fire
The wheel
Antibiotics
Electricity
👆 We didn't understand all those things, but then we figured them out. That did not mean while we didn't have them figured out, that it was "god" and then after, it was science. It just meant it hadn't been understood yet.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@AirForceOneCV2007
1. "We've done more test in 8 days than South Korea has done in 8 weeks."
2. Gov Cuomo didn't buy 16,ooo vent when he had the chance to stock up for a pandemic, for a very good price, in 2015. Instead, he had death panels and lotteries.
3. The WHO coronavirus test was a bad test.
4. The health insurance industry has agreed to waive all co-payments for Coronavirus treatments.
5. The Obama Administration didn't do anything about swine flu.
6. Claiming the media cut out his request of Russian hackers to find Hillary Clinton's emails, right at the end so that you don't see the laughter, the joke.
7. The USMCA is the biggest trade deal ever made.
8. Years of economic delay are over because Trump reversed the sales economy policies of the previous administration.
9. The democrat-controlled house never even asked John Bolton to testify.
10. Today I opened a major Apple manufacturing plant in Texas that will bring high paying jobs back to America.
11. "Nancy Pelosi, Adam Chef, and the rest of the corrupt Democrats made a promise to their crazy left-wing based that they would impeach me even before I took office."
12. "Many of the people in DACA, no longer very young, are far from Angels. Some are very tough, hardened criminals."
13. Says he is cutting illegal immigration in half.
14. "The Kurds are much safer right now."
15. "Long-standing whistleblower rules we're changed just before submittal of the fake whistleblower report."
16. "Yesterday we have the strongest Dollar in the history of our country."
17. "Wow, report just out! Google manipulated from 2.6 million to 16 million votes for Hillary Clinton in the 2016 election!"
18. "The farmers are receiving 16 billion out of the tariffs that we've gotten from China."
19. Democrats want virtual immunity for illegal aliens who have created horrible crime and murder.
20. "Mexico, they took 30% of our automobile business."
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@rodneyboehner3007 - That is why Trump lied, on camera, about mentioning Biden in the phone call, when first asked...
- That is why Trump was only interested in the investigation, only after Biden began running against him...
- That is why there has never been an official investigation into Ukraine and the Biden's opened till this very day....
- That is why Trump is willing to break obstruction laws, to prevent anyone who was actually on the phone call, from testifying...
- That is why the Reps are trying to block further witnesses from testifying in the actual trial, despite arguing the exact opposite during Clinton's impeachment...
- That is why Trump has been trying to discredit the whistleblowers from the start, despite not even knowing who they are....
- That is why Trump refused to testify in the house, lied about being allowed to testify, despite being asked to...
- That is why the Reps pulled that ridiculous storm the castle stunt, regardless of the fact that half of them could have just walked in the room and been given equal time to ask questions, yet chose not to...
I could go on... the breadth and width of what you are ignoring to be able to make that statement... it clearly shows you are not willing to acknowledge, let alone consider all relevant material, and only have interest and what are ready fit your preconceived notions.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@toobmaniac Yeah... Not everybody is that petty, sugar. I have a long history of examples on the Yputube comment section. The only time I have ever even mentioned someone's spelling or grammar is when I literally didn't understand what they were trying to say and needed them to correct it so I could understand what they meant. Not everyone is as petty as you are... Or as desprate to try and make others feel bad. As I said... Its called being an adult.
It was a late night typo... Cuz I wrote it... Late night... I remember especially because I have been sick for the past 2 days and have done basiclly nothing but sleeping, resting and feeling like crap.
And you are childish... Because instead of presenting a substance based argument, you choose childish insults. If you don't like that label, then you should stop acting in such a manner.
Yes... I did say that. I offered verifiable fact, instead of childish insult. Also, I'm not complaining. You could never have that much power over me, sweetheart. I was just point out the difference in our responses.
Not sure what you think some Canadian dude has to do with me. 🤷 That kinda falls under the catagory of not my problem. I would actually usually say something to people being bullies, irreguardless of weather the person being bullied agrees with me or not. However... You seam to want to present that same juvenile standard, in reguards to me... For no particular reason. So... You 2 can battle it out on the kids playground, all you like.
As for me and proof... You never asked... Because if you had, I would explain to you the proper order of debates. See... You made the original claims. Therefore the onus is on you to prove your claims. Otherwise, you would be asking me to disprove the claims that you have yet to prove. Which makes no sense. So... You prove your claims and... As long as your will agree to conduct yourself as an adult, I would be more then happy to counter your evidence.
Though your further need to try and insult me, in order to make yourself feel better about your obvious insecurities, doesn't give me much hope for your adulthood. Though, we shall see, I suppose. 😉✌
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@Michael-yl2iq No... Sweetheart, in your opinion, you think you can spot silly. In my opinion, that's just you not being able to effectively argue your point, and so you got to try and put labels on me. Cuz it can't just be that we disagree anymore. Someone's always got to be a jackass. 🙄
Where did I say," people are confused over Trump being president"?
Either you're confused by that statement, and should have asked for a clarification, or you're trying to twist my words, because you don't have an argument otherwise.
The confusion, is the impression that is given to the World, about all Americans, that we consider it that man to be a respectable president.
See... This is where I always start butting heads with people. See, I choose to look at all relevant information and then make an educated opinion. You want to look at one thing and go it's settled, cuz I ain't looking anywhere else. You feel free to do that, but that don't mean I got to agree, and that doesn't mean I'm silly because I don't.
Here we go with rights again. 1st Amendment. He has the right to call himself president all damn day long if you would like. I equally have the same right, not to refer to a man, who acts like a child on a daily basis, as my president. Those are our Collective rights!
You give talking about what we grew up learning, but yet again you were only looking at that one thing. We've learned a whole lot more than that, when it came to this country.
But you are right about me being divisive. I want a big ass divided between myself and referring to that man, which respect that he has not earned. If anyone wants to ask me why I don't refer to him as president, I will be more than happy to explain that. As I just did here. I am responsible for my own actions. You just don't seem to understand that I disagree with your point of view, and that does not make me wrong, and it does not make you right. It simply means, we have a difference of opinion.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@davidcouncil493 See the whole Board!
Ford and Reagan had higher unemployment. They where both after the great depression. Also, Obama came in on the Great Recession, brought on by Bush. Which he got us out of with in 7nmonths of his first year in office.
His first year in office the GDP started at -2.5%. At the end of that year, it was +3.9%. Make a GDP growth of 6.4%
Trumps first years GDP growth was 0.4% and his second was 1.7%. Bring it to 3.9% GDP.
OBAMA said auto manufacturing jobs weren't coming back. Which he was incorrect about. Not all jobs, though.
TRUMP has the lowest unemployment sense the 70s. Not the 60s. Johnsons are lower and his term ended in 73. Also, crediting Trump for unemployment, is like crediting the guy who passed the finish line of a five-man relay race... Including Republican presidents, btw.
Also, Job growth is lower than Obama's and has been slowly going down sense Trump has entered office.
- The economy gained a net 11.6 million jobs.
- The unemployment rate dropped to below the historical Norm.
- The average weekly earnings for all workers were up 4.0% after inflation.
- The gain was 3 to 7% of just production and non-supervisory employees.
- After tax corporate profits also set records, as did stock prices.
- The S&P 500 Index Rose 166%. A number of people lacking health insurance dropped by 15 million.
- The premiums Rose but more slowly than before.
- The federal debt Ode to the public Rose 128%.
- Deficits were Rising as Obama deported. Home prices Rose 20%.
- But the homeownership rate hit the lowest point in half a century.
- Illegal immigration declined. The border patrol 35% fewer people trying to get into the US from Mexico.
- Wind and solar power increased 360 9%. Coal production declined 39%.
- Carbon emissions from burning fossil fuels dropped 11%.
- Production of handguns Rose 192%, to a record level.
- The murder rate dropped to the lowest on record in 2014, then Rose and finished at the same rate as when Obama took office.
Jobs +11,641,000
Unemployment rate 4.8%
Job openings +97%
Median household income +5.3%
Real weekly earnings +4%
Home prices +20%
Poverty rate -5%
Food stamp recipients +33%
Homeownership rate -3.8 points
Corporate profits + 57%
S&P 500 + 166%
Federal debt held by public + 128%
Uninsured -15.2 million
Premiums + 43%
U.s. Mexico border apprehensions -35%
Unauthorized immigrant population -6 % Pew -3.6 % CMS
U.s. cold production -38 %
wind and solar power + 369%
carbon dioxide emissions -11 %
us crude oil production +77%
new car MTG + 20%
violent crime rate -16%
handgun production +192%
Guantanamo prisoners -83 %
US military facilities Iraq 284 Afghanistan 1751
Only being willing to focus on your sides strengths and the other sides weaknesses, always comes across as you not being an honest actor.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@Lord_Poyo 1. That is not true. A variety of evidence is presented at court that isn't necessarily broadcast over the news. This could range from...
- witness statements,
- 2 character statements both the accused and the victim...
- more than one person could have been taping
- the 911 call
- recorded audio and body cam footage
- prior record of the officer
And loads more.
2. The only difference between murder 1 and murder 2 is prior intent.
Manslaughter is an unlawful killing that doesn't involve malice or forethought intent to seriously harm or kill or extreme recklessness disregard for life.
3. Logical deduction doesn't necessarily only pertain to what you can imagine. I'm not using emotional equivalent to make my argument. Merely the definition of murder 2. Which, again, does not require prior intent.
4. You seem to be mistaking what you think is logic as to what actually is logic when considering all relevant material. For instance, your assumptions about the taser and gun. As I am stated, one of the key factors that is drummed into your head, not only in Pryor police training but in every maintenance review, is left side right side. In most police departments you can actually get busted down a rank and lose pay for having your taser and your gun on the wrong side. This is not something officers forget or mistake. Especially not a seasoned officer of more than 20 years. It's the wrong Captain sees you... as for getting caught up, that's what your training is for, as well. That's why countless people are not only coming on here but going to the media not being able to understand how this person mistook the taser for the firearm.
5. If you claim to be a logical thinker, then you must consider all relevant material. Not just what fits your narrative. You continuing to make claims like, "which you can in no way prove", only shows your lack of logical Thinking by considering all relevant information.
6. You clearly don't have the training that these people do oh, by the mistakes you're making in your logic, yet you feel confident enough to say that "personal experience doesn't help here". That's not logical thinking.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@potsmokingatheist9290 Ya know what's funny... You keep making shit up. You keep lying. You keep making wild accusations and when asked for any kind of evidence twards it, you don't give it. You make excuses, try to divert by making new or similar accusations against everyone, including me.... The funniest part though... Is when you claim others are lying or that I am somehow willfully blind or brainwashed in some way, when your the one who has been....
- claiming you " take information from all sides so we can make Intelligent Decisions ", but I have given you hard fact, information that you can easily verify, and you choose to ignore it.
-instead everytime your proven wrong or backed into a corner, you just start claiming how "brain washed" I am.
-or you start making assumptions about me and what I do in my day to day. Even though you have never met me in your life. In tern, these can ONLY be lies and assumptions.
-you have not once considered that, maybe if you can't prove what your saying that, maybe you should not say it.
You ignore or simply dismiss factual information that goes against your belief. You believe
- then when asked for proof of your own claims, you provide nothing. Not one time have you provided 1 shread of evidence about anything you have said.
2
-
2
-
@potsmokingatheist9290 First a definition.... What is brainwashing?
The term brainwashing was first coined in the 1950s during the Korean War. It was used to explain how to italic Terry Unruh jeans were able to completely indoctrinate American soldiers to a process of torture and propaganda.
Brainwashing is the theory that a person's core beliefs, ideas, affiliations and values can be replaced, so much so that they have no autonomy over themselves and can't think critically or independently.
You, yourself have presented at least 3 out of the 5 markers for brainwashing. I suspect more but am not willing to say so because there is nkt enough evidence to do so and I choose not to speculate or assume like you do.
Us V Them
Which can be demonstrated by your insistence that Fox is somehow more factual and relivent then CNN and MSNBC ( which is something you assumed that I watch ).
The following is information that you will probably ignore but what the hell. Did you know that Gallup has polled the Most and least trusted news sources once every 3 months for the past 6 years? Here are the results ( which again, you can easily verify ).
- Americans believe that 62% of the news they consume on TV, and newspapers and on the radio is biased.
- they believe that 44% of news reporting and 66% of news on social media is inaccurate
- 80% of them are upset about it
- perception of bias in an accuracy differ based on the respondents political Persuasions, particularly with regard to Fox News, Breitbart, CNN and MSNBC
- the only two media organizations Republican surveyed said weren't biased were Fox News and the Wall Street Journal
- Democrats said they believe that just 44% of news on TV, and newspapers and on the radio is biased, while Republicans said they believed 77% of it is biased
- presented with a host of major news outlets, respondents ranked PBS news and the Associated Press as the least biased Outlets, while Fox News and Breitbart News tied for being perceived as most biased.
Calculating all the different respondents this is what they came up with from most to least bias.
1. Fox news and Breitbart News
87% bias by democrats and 3% bias Republicans for Fox. 73% bias by democrats and 19% by Republicans for Breitbart News
2. MSNBC
1% bias by democrats and 85% bias by Republicans
3. Huffington Post
61% bias rating from Republicans and 9% bias rating from Democrats
4. CNN
87% bias rating from Republicans and 29% bias rating from Democrats
5. Mother Jones
29% bias rating from Republicans and 16% bias rating from Democrats
6. Vox
5% bias rating from Democrats and 16% bias rating from Republicans
7. The New York Times
44% bias rating from democrats' 74% bias rating from Republicans
8. NBC News
42% bias rating from Democrats and 64% bias rating from Republicans
9. Washington Post
40% bias rating from Democrats and 65% bias rating from Republicans
10. ABC News
56% bias rating from Democrats and 60% bias rating from Republicans
It goes on but you get the picture. You will notice I did not spare CNN or MSNBC. Country wide concencus shows your Them V Me bias is incorrect.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@Andrew Rosenthal In your article it give the definition of capitalism.
"A socio-economic system based on the abstraction of resources into the form of privately-owned money, wealth, and goods, with economic decisions made largely through the operation of a market unregulated by the state"
There are several criteria of the capitalist definition that you presented, that the United States does not actually qualify as being.
"on the abstraction of resources into the form of privately-owned money, wealth, and goods" all of America's money is not actually allocated through privately owned money wealth and goods. That's not how our federal government runs. That's how our free-market runs. However, our government is filled with programs to allocate and regulate money towards specific causes. Not the free market. That's what the budget is for every year. That's how all of our programs local state and federal get funding to run.
"with economic decisions made largely through the operation of a market 👉unregulated👈 by the state."
The major portion of this one that you should pay attention to is unregulated. We have countless regulations on both our market and our economy in a ton of different categories. We're talkin infrastructure, medical and Pharmaceutical, trades and regulations, foreign trade, the Fine Arts, education, military defense... And on and on. There is not one part of our government that is unregulated.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
Ben Lutz Your not disagreeing with me on that. I agree that you can and should express yourself in reguards to your belief or lack there of, in our case.... But if you want to be heard... You can't go about it in a way that will make people defensive, sweetheart. I do this every day down here with one thing or another.
Me and my friends joke about how I've been going to hell for years, anyways.... Because I'm not only and athiest, I'm an unwed/single mom, to a mixed race little boy, a Lib, bisexual and pretty "mouthy". Which is what most call it down here. So, I'm always going to hell for something. Lol
Being all that, in a place like this, you have to figure out how to get people to hear you, or it can get pretty isolated. It starts with treating others the way you want them to treat you. Respectfully disagree, like you just did with me. Give fact, and not opinion. That way, if they do end up arguing with you, you can explain that they aren't. They are arguing with facts. That... And having an over all sense of when you have reached someones peek. Which is important... Because if you get to go back and try again, you can go farther with them next time. They will be able to hear more, without getting upset. Building a rapport is important.
The way you spoke to me... I know you can do it! 😉
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Mulinaster Your speaking about safety net programs. Which is 9% of the GDP. 357 billion. Welfare itself is less than a forth of that 9%. Military is 15%. I actually agree with you on military. As do many generals and Armed Forces. There have been so many proposals and Memo's written up over the years from these Armed Forces suggestion that we strategically shrink the size of our military. Which won't put us in any danger but will save us a whole lot of money.
As far as social safety net programs, what would you prefer we spend our tax dollars on, other than the American people?
We need more Vet and Education funding. Which could be covered by The Cutting military funding as a whole. But I'm curious why you think, other than making judgments on these people, upon which the statistics do not back you up, why we should take money away from the people who really need it?
On welfare stats from now back into the early 90s show that the majority of people on welfare, do not stay on it for long, use it to better themselves and their family and the majority work the entire time they are on welfare. Which means they are paying back into welfare, as they are on it. Yet you keep making statements like, " I just see it as something that enables and encourages people not to become solvent, self-sufficient individuals for too much time. "
Less than 3% of people on welfare commits welfare fraud. It wasn't that much to begin with but you guys kept bitching about it, so we can move wagon and away. It generally happened in a 6 year process. Which you guys jump on.... But that's a stat that encompasses all welfare programs. It's set up as a tier system, that caters to families. That's why there's food stamps and public assistance, public housing, medical needs for children WIC program. Your not on all of them, all 6 years.
-People, women, more than men, on agevrage get out of public housing in under a year,
-stop getting public assistance money in under a year and a half, again women more than men.
-food stamps taper off at that time, as their income goes up.
- which happens because over the 6 years, on average, they hold down 2 or more jobs.
- paying more into the system, they are taking out of.
- The 2 program that they tend to stay on for over 2 years and tends to last the entire 6, is medical for children and WIC for children.
That is why you are either ignorant of the facts or need to judge. Public Assistance programs actually work quite well in America. We're always going to need them though, until we get things like a living wage an affordable health care.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Longhorn 👈 Just a few of the substance based questions this guy has yet to answer. Most based on the claims he is making but not bothering to provide any proof of. Instead, choosing to give an intentionally vague "see above", which does not answer any of the questions below.
Did I say the United States was a lockdown for an entire year, or did I say the United States was locked down for 3 and a half months?
Why do you keep making excuses as to why you can't prove your claim, instead of just using the very simple and well-known ways to get around link deleting? 👉Title and website posting
Why are you trying to insist that it is my job to prove your claims?
Who do you keep insisting that I am punching down to, and how?
Did you or did you not claim that " only Democrats States" where locked down?
Why are you claiming that Louisiana is a Dem state, simply bc it has a Dem Gov, when your Rep run state of Texas voted 49% blue in the last national election, and Louisiana voted 32% blue?
Why do you feel the need to use childish insults, if your so sure about your stance?
What is your evidence that the annual gas price inflation was incorrect?
If you have the info you claim, why is it so hard for you to name the title and website, without posting the link?
How is posting substance based questions you are dodging, " desperate"?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Longhorn 👈 Just a few of the substance based questions this guy has yet to answer. Most based on the claims he is making but not bothering to provide any proof of. Instead, choosing to give an intentionally vague "see above", which does not answer any of the questions below.
Did I say the United States was a lockdown for an entire year, or did I say the United States was locked down for 3 and a half months?
Why do you keep making excuses as to why you can't prove your claim, instead of just using the very simple and well-known ways to get around link deleting? 👉Title and website posting
Why are you trying to insist that it is my job to prove your claims?
Who do you keep insisting that I am punching down to, and how?
Did you or did you not claim that " only Democrats States" where locked down?
Why are you claiming that Louisiana is a Dem state, simply bc it has a Dem Gov, when your Rep run state of Texas voted 49% blue in the last national election, and Louisiana voted 32% blue?
Why do you feel the need to use childish insults, if your so sure about your stance?
What is your evidence that the annual gas price inflation was incorrect?
If you have the info you claim, why is it so hard for you to name the title and website, without posting the link?
How is posting substance based questions you are dodging, " desperate"?
1
-
1
-
1
-
Longhorn 👈 Just a few of the substance based questions this guy has yet to answer. Most based on the claims he is making but not bothering to provide any proof of. Instead, choosing to give an intentionally vague "see above", which does not answer any of the questions below.
Did I say the United States was a lockdown for an entire year, or did I say the United States was locked down for 3 and a half months?
Why do you keep making excuses as to why you can't prove your claim, instead of just using the very simple and well-known ways to get around link deleting? 👉Title and website posting
Why are you trying to insist that it is my job to prove your claims?
Who do you keep insisting that I am punching down to, and how?
Did you or did you not claim that " only Democrats States" where locked down?
Why are you claiming that Louisiana is a Dem state, simply bc it has a Dem Gov, when your Rep run state of Texas voted 49% blue in the last national election, and Louisiana voted 32% blue?
Why do you feel the need to use childish insults, if your so sure about your stance?
What is your evidence that the annual gas price inflation was incorrect?
If you have the info you claim, why is it so hard for you to name the title and website, without posting the link?
How is posting substance based questions you are dodging, " desperate"?
1
-
1
-
1
-
Longhorn 👈 Just a few of the substance based questions this guy has yet to answer. Most based on the claims he is making but not bothering to provide any proof of. Instead, choosing to give an intentionally vague "see above", which does not answer any of the questions below.
Did I say the United States was a lockdown for an entire year, or did I say the United States was locked down for 3 and a half months?
Why do you keep making excuses as to why you can't prove your claim, instead of just using the very simple and well-known ways to get around link deleting? 👉Title and website posting
Why are you trying to insist that it is my job to prove your claims?
Who do you keep insisting that I am punching down to, and how?
Did you or did you not claim that " only Democrats States" where locked down?
Why are you claiming that Louisiana is a Dem state, simply bc it has a Dem Gov, when your Rep run state of Texas voted 49% blue in the last national election, and Louisiana voted 32% blue?
Why do you feel the need to use childish insults, if your so sure about your stance?
What is your evidence that the annual gas price inflation was incorrect?
If you have the info you claim, why is it so hard for you to name the title and website, without posting the link?
How is posting substance based questions you are dodging, " desperate"?
1
-
1
-
1
-
Longhorn 👈 Just a few of the substance based questions this guy has yet to answer. Most based on the claims he is making but not bothering to provide any proof of. Instead, choosing to give an intentionally vague "see above", which does not answer any of the questions below.
Did I say the United States was a lockdown for an entire year, or did I say the United States was locked down for 3 and a half months?
Why do you keep making excuses as to why you can't prove your claim, instead of just using the very simple and well-known ways to get around link deleting? 👉Title and website posting
Why are you trying to insist that it is my job to prove your claims?
Who do you keep insisting that I am punching down to, and how?
Did you or did you not claim that " only Democrats States" where locked down?
Why are you claiming that Louisiana is a Dem state, simply bc it has a Dem Gov, when your Rep run state of Texas voted 49% blue in the last national election, and Louisiana voted 32% blue?
Why do you feel the need to use childish insults, if your so sure about your stance?
What is your evidence that the annual gas price inflation was incorrect?
If you have the info you claim, why is it so hard for you to name the title and website, without posting the link?
How is posting substance based questions you are dodging, " desperate"?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Longhorn 👈 Just a few of the substance based questions this guy has yet to answer. Most based on the claims he is making but not bothering to provide any proof of. Instead, choosing to give an intentionally vague "see above", which does not answer any of the questions below.
Did I say the United States was a lockdown for an entire year, or did I say the United States was locked down for 3 and a half months?
Why do you keep making excuses as to why you can't prove your claim, instead of just using the very simple and well-known ways to get around link deleting? 👉Title and website posting
Why are you trying to insist that it is my job to prove your claims?
Who do you keep insisting that I am punching down to, and how?
Did you or did you not claim that " only Democrats States" where locked down?
Why are you claiming that Louisiana is a Dem state, simply bc it has a Dem Gov, when your Rep run state of Texas voted 49% blue in the last national election, and Louisiana voted 32% blue?
Why do you feel the need to use childish insults, if your so sure about your stance?
What is your evidence that the annual gas price inflation was incorrect?
If you have the info you claim, why is it so hard for you to name the title and website, without posting the link?
How is posting substance based questions you are dodging, " desperate"?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Longhorn 👈 Just a few of the substance based questions this guy has yet to answer. Most based on the claims he is making but not bothering to provide any proof of. Instead, choosing to give an intentionally vague "see above", which does not answer any of the questions below.
Did I say the United States was a lockdown for an entire year, or did I say the United States was locked down for 3 and a half months?
Why do you keep making excuses as to why you can't prove your claim, instead of just using the very simple and well-known ways to get around link deleting? 👉Title and website posting
Why are you trying to insist that it is my job to prove your claims?
Who do you keep insisting that I am punching down to, and how?
Did you or did you not claim that " only Democrats States" where locked down?
Why are you claiming that Louisiana is a Dem state, simply bc it has a Dem Gov, when your Rep run state of Texas voted 49% blue in the last national election, and Louisiana voted 32% blue?
Why do you feel the need to use childish insults, if your so sure about your stance?
What is your evidence that the annual gas price inflation was incorrect?
If you have the info you claim, why is it so hard for you to name the title and website, without posting the link?
How is posting substance based questions you are dodging, " desperate"?
1
-
1
-
Longhorn 👈 Just a few of the substance based questions this guy has yet to answer. Most based on the claims he is making but not bothering to provide any proof of. Instead, choosing to give an intentionally vague "see above", which does not answer any of the questions below.
Did I say the United States was a lockdown for an entire year, or did I say the United States was locked down for 3 and a half months?
Why do you keep making excuses as to why you can't prove your claim, instead of just using the very simple and well-known ways to get around link deleting? 👉Title and website posting
Why are you trying to insist that it is my job to prove your claims?
Who do you keep insisting that I am punching down to, and how?
Did you or did you not claim that " only Democrats States" where locked down?
Why are you claiming that Louisiana is a Dem state, simply bc it has a Dem Gov, when your Rep run state of Texas voted 49% blue in the last national election, and Louisiana voted 32% blue?
Why do you feel the need to use childish insults, if your so sure about your stance?
What is your evidence that the annual gas price inflation was incorrect?
If you have the info you claim, why is it so hard for you to name the title and website, without posting the link?
How is posting substance based questions you are dodging, " desperate"?
1
-
1
-
Longhorn 👈 Just a few of the substance based questions this guy has yet to answer. Most based on the claims he is making but not bothering to provide any proof of. Instead, choosing to give an intentionally vague "see above", which does not answer any of the questions below.
Did I say the United States was a lockdown for an entire year, or did I say the United States was locked down for 3 and a half months?
Why do you keep making excuses as to why you can't prove your claim, instead of just using the very simple and well-known ways to get around link deleting? 👉Title and website posting
Why are you trying to insist that it is my job to prove your claims?
Who do you keep insisting that I am punching down to, and how?
Did you or did you not claim that " only Democrats States" where locked down?
Why are you claiming that Louisiana is a Dem state, simply bc it has a Dem Gov, when your Rep run state of Texas voted 49% blue in the last national election, and Louisiana voted 32% blue?
Why do you feel the need to use childish insults, if your so sure about your stance?
What is your evidence that the annual gas price inflation was incorrect?
If you have the info you claim, why is it so hard for you to name the title and website, without posting the link?
How is posting substance based questions you are dodging, " desperate"?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Longhorn 👈 Just a few of the substance based questions this guy has yet to answer. Most based on the claims he is making but not bothering to provide any proof of. Instead, choosing to give an intentionally vague "see above", which does not answer any of the questions below.
Did I say the United States was a lockdown for an entire year, or did I say the United States was locked down for 3 and a half months?
Why do you keep making excuses as to why you can't prove your claim, instead of just using the very simple and well-known ways to get around link deleting? 👉Title and website posting
Why are you trying to insist that it is my job to prove your claims?
Who do you keep insisting that I am punching down to, and how?
Did you or did you not claim that " only Democrats States" where locked down?
Why are you claiming that Louisiana is a Dem state, simply bc it has a Dem Gov, when your Rep run state of Texas voted 49% blue in the last national election, and Louisiana voted 32% blue?
Why do you feel the need to use childish insults, if your so sure about your stance?
What is your evidence that the annual gas price inflation was incorrect?
If you have the info you claim, why is it so hard for you to name the title and website, without posting the link?
How is posting substance based questions you are dodging, " desperate"?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Longhorn 👈 Just a few of the substance based questions this guy has yet to answer. Most based on the claims he is making but not bothering to provide any proof of. Instead, choosing to give an intentionally vague "see above", which does not answer any of the questions below.
Did I say the United States was a lockdown for an entire year, or did I say the United States was locked down for 3 and a half months?
Why do you keep making excuses as to why you can't prove your claim, instead of just using the very simple and well-known ways to get around link deleting? 👉Title and website posting
Why are you trying to insist that it is my job to prove your claims?
Who do you keep insisting that I am punching down to, and how?
Did you or did you not claim that " only Democrats States" where locked down?
Why are you claiming that Louisiana is a Dem state, simply bc it has a Dem Gov, when your Rep run state of Texas voted 49% blue in the last national election, and Louisiana voted 32% blue?
Why do you feel the need to use childish insults, if your so sure about your stance?
What is your evidence that the annual gas price inflation was incorrect?
If you have the info you claim, why is it so hard for you to name the title and website, without posting the link?
How is posting substance based questions you are dodging, " desperate"?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Longhorn 👈 Just a few of the substance based questions this guy has yet to answer. Most based on the claims he is making but not bothering to provide any proof of. Instead, choosing to give an intentionally vague "see above", which does not answer any of the questions below.
Did I say the United States was a lockdown for an entire year, or did I say the United States was locked down for 3 and a half months?
Why do you keep making excuses as to why you can't prove your claim, instead of just using the very simple and well-known ways to get around link deleting? 👉Title and website posting
Why are you trying to insist that it is my job to prove your claims?
Who do you keep insisting that I am punching down to, and how?
Did you or did you not claim that " only Democrats States" where locked down?
Why are you claiming that Louisiana is a Dem state, simply bc it has a Dem Gov, when your Rep run state of Texas voted 49% blue in the last national election, and Louisiana voted 32% blue?
Why do you feel the need to use childish insults, if your so sure about your stance?
What is your evidence that the annual gas price inflation was incorrect?
If you have the info you claim, why is it so hard for you to name the title and website, without posting the link?
How is posting substance based questions you are dodging, " desperate"?
1
-
1
-
1
-
Longhorn 👈 Just a few of the substance based questions this guy has yet to answer. Most based on the claims he is making but not bothering to provide any proof of. Instead, choosing to give an intentionally vague "see above", which does not answer any of the questions below.
Did I say the United States was a lockdown for an entire year, or did I say the United States was locked down for 3 and a half months?
Why do you keep making excuses as to why you can't prove your claim, instead of just using the very simple and well-known ways to get around link deleting? 👉Title and website posting
Why are you trying to insist that it is my job to prove your claims?
Who do you keep insisting that I am punching down to, and how?
Did you or did you not claim that " only Democrats States" where locked down?
Why are you claiming that Louisiana is a Dem state, simply bc it has a Dem Gov, when your Rep run state of Texas voted 49% blue in the last national election, and Louisiana voted 32% blue?
Why do you feel the need to use childish insults, if your so sure about your stance?
What is your evidence that the annual gas price inflation was incorrect?
If you have the info you claim, why is it so hard for you to name the title and website, without posting the link?
How is posting substance based questions you are dodging, " desperate"?
1
-
1
-
1
-
Longhorn 👈 Just a few of the substance based questions this guy has yet to answer. Most based on the claims he is making but not bothering to provide any proof of. Instead, choosing to give an intentionally vague "see above", which does not answer any of the questions below.
Did I say the United States was a lockdown for an entire year, or did I say the United States was locked down for 3 and a half months?
Why do you keep making excuses as to why you can't prove your claim, instead of just using the very simple and well-known ways to get around link deleting? 👉Title and website posting
Why are you trying to insist that it is my job to prove your claims?
Who do you keep insisting that I am punching down to, and how?
Did you or did you not claim that " only Democrats States" where locked down?
Why are you claiming that Louisiana is a Dem state, simply bc it has a Dem Gov, when your Rep run state of Texas voted 49% blue in the last national election, and Louisiana voted 32% blue?
Why do you feel the need to use childish insults, if your so sure about your stance?
What is your evidence that the annual gas price inflation was incorrect?
If you have the info you claim, why is it so hard for you to name the title and website, without posting the link?
How is posting substance based questions you are dodging, " desperate"?
1
-
1
-
1
-
Longhorn 👈 Just a few of the substance based questions this guy has yet to answer. Most based on the claims he is making but not bothering to provide any proof of. Instead, choosing to give an intentionally vague "see above", which does not answer any of the questions below.
Did I say the United States was a lockdown for an entire year, or did I say the United States was locked down for 3 and a half months?
Why do you keep making excuses as to why you can't prove your claim, instead of just using the very simple and well-known ways to get around link deleting? 👉Title and website posting
Why are you trying to insist that it is my job to prove your claims?
Who do you keep insisting that I am punching down to, and how?
Did you or did you not claim that " only Democrats States" where locked down?
Why are you claiming that Louisiana is a Dem state, simply bc it has a Dem Gov, when your Rep run state of Texas voted 49% blue in the last national election, and Louisiana voted 32% blue?
Why do you feel the need to use childish insults, if your so sure about your stance?
What is your evidence that the annual gas price inflation was incorrect?
If you have the info you claim, why is it so hard for you to name the title and website, without posting the link?
How is posting substance based questions you are dodging, " desperate"?
1
-
1
-
1
-
Longhorn 👈 Just a few of the substance based questions this guy has yet to answer. Most based on the claims he is making but not bothering to provide any proof of. Instead, choosing to give an intentionally vague "see above", which does not answer any of the questions below.
Did I say the United States was a lockdown for an entire year, or did I say the United States was locked down for 3 and a half months?
Why do you keep making excuses as to why you can't prove your claim, instead of just using the very simple and well-known ways to get around link deleting? 👉Title and website posting
Why are you trying to insist that it is my job to prove your claims?
Who do you keep insisting that I am punching down to, and how?
Did you or did you not claim that " only Democrats States" where locked down?
Why are you claiming that Louisiana is a Dem state, simply bc it has a Dem Gov, when your Rep run state of Texas voted 49% blue in the last national election, and Louisiana voted 32% blue?
Why do you feel the need to use childish insults, if your so sure about your stance?
What is your evidence that the annual gas price inflation was incorrect?
If you have the info you claim, why is it so hard for you to name the title and website, without posting the link?
How is posting substance based questions you are dodging, " desperate"?
1
-
1
-
1
-
Longhorn 👈 Just a few of the substance based questions this guy has yet to answer. Most based on the claims he is making but not bothering to provide any proof of. Instead, choosing to give an intentionally vague "see above", which does not answer any of the questions below.
Did I say the United States was a lockdown for an entire year, or did I say the United States was locked down for 3 and a half months?
Why do you keep making excuses as to why you can't prove your claim, instead of just using the very simple and well-known ways to get around link deleting? 👉Title and website posting
Why are you trying to insist that it is my job to prove your claims?
Who do you keep insisting that I am punching down to, and how?
Did you or did you not claim that " only Democrats States" where locked down?
Why are you claiming that Louisiana is a Dem state, simply bc it has a Dem Gov, when your Rep run state of Texas voted 49% blue in the last national election, and Louisiana voted 32% blue?
Why do you feel the need to use childish insults, if your so sure about your stance?
What is your evidence that the annual gas price inflation was incorrect?
If you have the info you claim, why is it so hard for you to name the title and website, without posting the link?
How is posting substance based questions you are dodging, " desperate"?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Longhorn 👈 Just a few of the substance based questions this guy has yet to answer. Most based on the claims he is making but not bothering to provide any proof of. Instead, choosing to give an intentionally vague "see above", which does not answer any of the questions below.
Did I say the United States was a lockdown for an entire year, or did I say the United States was locked down for 3 and a half months?
Why do you keep making excuses as to why you can't prove your claim, instead of just using the very simple and well-known ways to get around link deleting? 👉Title and website posting
Why are you trying to insist that it is my job to prove your claims?
Who do you keep insisting that I am punching down to, and how?
Did you or did you not claim that " only Democrats States" where locked down?
Why are you claiming that Louisiana is a Dem state, simply bc it has a Dem Gov, when your Rep run state of Texas voted 49% blue in the last national election, and Louisiana voted 32% blue?
Why do you feel the need to use childish insults, if your so sure about your stance?
What is your evidence that the annual gas price inflation was incorrect?
If you have the info you claim, why is it so hard for you to name the title and website, without posting the link?
How is posting substance based questions you are dodging, " desperate"?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Longhorn 👈 Just a few of the substance based questions this guy has yet to answer. Most based on the claims he is making but not bothering to provide any proof of. Instead, choosing to give an intentionally vague "see above", which does not answer any of the questions below.
Did I say the United States was a lockdown for an entire year, or did I say the United States was locked down for 3 and a half months?
Why do you keep making excuses as to why you can't prove your claim, instead of just using the very simple and well-known ways to get around link deleting? 👉Title and website posting
Why are you trying to insist that it is my job to prove your claims?
Who do you keep insisting that I am punching down to, and how?
Did you or did you not claim that " only Democrats States" where locked down?
Why are you claiming that Louisiana is a Dem state, simply bc it has a Dem Gov, when your Rep run state of Texas voted 49% blue in the last national election, and Louisiana voted 32% blue?
Why do you feel the need to use childish insults, if your so sure about your stance?
What is your evidence that the annual gas price inflation was incorrect?
If you have the info you claim, why is it so hard for you to name the title and website, without posting the link?
How is posting substance based questions you are dodging, " desperate"?
1
-
1
-
Longhorn 👈 Just a few of the substance based questions this guy has yet to answer. Most based on the claims he is making but not bothering to provide any proof of. Instead, choosing to give an intentionally vague "see above", which does not answer any of the questions below.
Did I say the United States was a lockdown for an entire year, or did I say the United States was locked down for 3 and a half months?
Why do you keep making excuses as to why you can't prove your claim, instead of just using the very simple and well-known ways to get around link deleting? 👉Title and website posting
Why are you trying to insist that it is my job to prove your claims?
Who do you keep insisting that I am punching down to, and how?
Did you or did you not claim that " only Democrats States" where locked down?
Why are you claiming that Louisiana is a Dem state, simply bc it has a Dem Gov, when your Rep run state of Texas voted 49% blue in the last national election, and Louisiana voted 32% blue?
Why do you feel the need to use childish insults, if your so sure about your stance?
What is your evidence that the annual gas price inflation was incorrect?
If you have the info you claim, why is it so hard for you to name the title and website, without posting the link?
How is posting substance based questions you are dodging, " desperate"?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Longhorn 👈 🤣🤣🤣 Guys! This is F*** AWESOME! This Real TDS victim here, just went back and edited EVERY COMMENT he said something stupid on, that I asked him a question about! 🤣 I'm not giving all of them... But here are a few examples!
The question I asked 👇
"Why are you claiming that Louisiana is a Dem state, simply bc it has a Dem Gov, when your Rep run state of Texas voted 49% blue in the last national election, and Louisiana voted 32% blue?"
The NOW edited comment 👉 " You seem to think that every state was on lockdown all of last year, when, in reality, it was only 👉democratic-run👈 States. 👉Almost👈 every Republican state was on lockdown for a few weeks to a month."
This is what that part used to say!
" You seem to think that every state was on lockdown all of last year, when, in reality, it was only 👉Democrat👈 States. 👉Every👈 Republican state was on lockdown for a few weeks to a month."
"I'm sure it was a coincidence. It didn't have anything to do with the fact that my immediate response was telling him that I in fact live in a Republican state which was lockdown for 3 and 1/2 months or that he tried to claim that Louisiana comma as a historically Red State and still is to this day has a Democratic governor at the moment."
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@mazinsakharov "Is it that somehow Russia gets to invade Ukraine because Ukraine(a sovereign country who left the Iron Curtain almost unanimously, forever ago) didn't do what they were told to do by not trying to join NATO? " 👈 My 1st attempt to get him to make an actual stance on something...
👉 His Non Response, meant to use just enough words to attempt a diversion. 👉" the Iron Curtain was coined by Winston Churchill who was known for incompetence, Antics and historical fault fictions. Would treat his characterizations of the USSR and Russia with caution.
How does that answer the question or have any relevance to anything other then him trying to fluff his own ego, when he clearly knows what I meant? Anyone?
👉 Non answer B ( going to short hand this one cuz we ain't got the time ) 👉 over a decade ago it didn't used to be a sovereign country...
Okay? And?
"With the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, Ukraine became an independent state, formalised with a referendum in December 1991. On 21 January 1990, over 300,000 Ukrainians organized a human chain for Ukrainian independence between Kyiv and Lviv."
👉Non answer C 👉 Also an attempt to get me to do his homework for him. 👉" how many offensive Wars against Sovereign Nations has NATO engaged in since the fall of the USSR?"
You tell me, Boo Boo? Then be ready to prove they where not defensive acts? I'll wait.
Still waiting for the actual answer to the question. He thinks if he talks enough nonsense he can distract me from the fact that he didn't answer. Ya got the wrong one, Boo Boo.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@brianb.1883 First... All of the things you mentioned only tell people, something is there. Not someone.... Something. We can't afford to man the border now. Its to big. Now you want to add a high tech wall and the money and man power to maintain it. Again... For something that will only notify you if something is there. Then you need to get to it. Which again... Are wall upgrades are not possible to man.... Which isn't in any way guaranteed, considering he already LIED to EVERYONE... Like.... A LOT.... About the funding for the wall.
Second.... he shut down the government, for the longest stretch of time in history, put millions of Gov employees out of work and standing in bread lines with their children, and losing their homes, only to Cave In The End and making all of that, not worth a damn. When all he had to do was Secure the funding in the first year of his term, when he had the house, the Senate and the White House. He didn't care about it then. He just cares about it now when it comes to re-election. Which is why he's stealing money from the military. You believing him or not does not negate the fact that he lied to all of us and he did that to get elected, as well.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Born In Shithole Country OMG! He learned to read! I bet your momma is so proud of you! Here's a cookie for your effort! 🍪
Now... I got another one in my back pocket if you can understand why thats relivant! You asked, " Now please find me in the text of that the male wear down says," the president wants me to let you know...". Now let's go back to your answer to the question. " Could it be, represent his client ".
Now back to your Question again little B** Boy!
" Now please find me in the text of that the male wear down says," the president wants me to let you know...".
And the answer...
" Could it be, represent his client ".
Okay... Now I'm going to hit you with a big complicated word here but I have faith in you little B** Boy. You can understand it, if you use your whole brain. Hopefully...
Are you ready?
It's called, implicit!
Now don't freak out! I'm gonna explain but I treat people the way they act on here and your round about 3 to 5. So I have to take it really slow.
So, if you hire (give some one money) someone to represent you with people in legal matters then, unless otherwise stated by both you and your hired counsel, it is automatically implied that when they are representing you with other counsel, that they are doing so on your behalf. Hence, it is implicit.
Now don't go throwing a fit little b** Boy. I'm going to answer your other question. Remember... I just have to take it slow with you because you told me you can't read and your maturity range is obviously around 3-5. I'm doing that next.
Run! Little b** boy! Run! 🏃
1
-
1
-
Born In Shithole Country Darn! And you where doing so good to! Sorry little B** boy! No more cookies today!
Let me see if I can explain this... So when people give you more then you ask for and then explain that it is to better help you understand the situation, it's a good thing. Understanding things is GOOD!
Now... Explaining the difference between fact and speculation. Let's see... How do I explain this in simple and small words....
Speculation means your guessing.
Fact means it's what happened.
So... since I know you're a slow little b** boy, maybe if you told me where you got confused between fact and speculation, I could explain to you the difference using your example of what I said. Show show me what I said that you thought was speculation and I'll use very small words to try and clear it up for you.
Okay I understand you don't read very well but do you remember those big words that you saw. Right below their is where your answer is. That's why those big old words say there's where the answer is. See I had figured out that you're incurably stupid so I put it in big bold letters in hopes that you wouldn't miss it. I guess you don't get a cookie for that one either. Darn it! Poor little b** boy.
And yes I put it in childish terms because as I stated before, I speak to people in a manner that reflects the age that they are acting. Also remember you can't read big long sentences and big long words. It hurts your little brain.
Are you sure you don't know what speculation means? Because you're sure could do a whole bunch of that right there at the end. Did a good job at speculating. Maybe you should get a cookie. I mean... Unless you want to show me any proof of that?
Show me the evidence that says where...
" the two FBI agents Comey Cent interview Flynn said he was being truthful in his testimony, Comey and McCabe agreed Flynn didn't lie, the nice man Mueller steps in and picks up the file and decrees that Flynn lied and pressured him to the point of bankruptcy to compose against the president."
Also, while you're saying Mueller is apparently a bad bad man maybe you should give some evidence on that as well. Why don't you point out any other investigation that he has ever been in where he conducted himself in any manner, inappropriately?
The Republican, Robert Mueller, has almost a Flawless record. Which is why he got the job. So he would not just decree anything without evidence. He has a long track record saying you're full of s*** and he is not. But if you want backup your words with evidence then feel free.
Run! Little b** boy! Run! 🏃
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Born In Shithole Country The best part!!! The following will be quoted from the article that you just linked me to. 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
" Mueller's roster of lawyers has earned bipartisan a claim for their wealth of experience"
Publicly available voter registration information shows that 13 of the 18 members of Mueller's team have previously registered as Democrats, while 4 had no affiliation or their affiliation could not be found. 9 of the 18 made political donations to Democrats, their contributions totaling more than 57,000. The majority came from one person, who also contributed to Republicans. Sick donated to Hillary Clinton, Trump's opponent in the 2016 race.
Short hand.... Sense I know you don't like to read...
-Team hired and run by 2 REPUBLICANS.
-13 are Democrats.
-4 No affiliation
-9 donated to Democrats
-Totally $57, 000.
-Most from 1 person, who also donated to the REPUBLICANS.
Justice department policy prohibits discrimination on hiring for career positions on the basis of politics.
📌Brian Richardson
no donations
no affiliations
Ryan Dickey
no donations
Democrat
Kyle Freent
Donated $250 to Barack Obama's presidential campaign in 2008, another 252 Obama's re-election campaign in 2012 and 252 Clinton's campaign in 2016
Democrat
📌Scott Meisler
no donations
no affiliations
Greg Andrews donated
$2,700 to the campaign of Senator Kristen gillibrand this year and a thousand to the US Senate campaign of David Hoffman in 2019 in Illinois Democrat
Rush Atkinson
donated $200 to Clinton's campaign in 2016
Democrat
Michael Dreeben
No donations
Democrat
Andrew Goldstein
donated $3,300 to Obama's campaign in 2008 and 2012
Democrat
Adam Jed
no donations
Democrat
Elizabeth Prelogar
Donated $250 each to Clinton's campaign in 2016 and Barack Obama's Victory Fund in 2012
Democrat
📌James Queries
Donated more than 30,000 to various Democratic campaigns in 2016 including $2,700 to Clinton over two decades. Gave $2,500 in 2015 to Republican Jason Chaffetz and $250 to Senator George Allen Republican Virginia in 2005
Democrat
Jeannie Rhee
Donated a total of $5,400 to Clinton's campaign in 2015 and 16 and a total of $4,800 to the Obama Victory Fund in 2008 and 2011. Also made small donations totaling $1,750 to Democratic National Committee and to various Democrats running for Senate.
Democrat
Brandon Van Grack
Donated $286.77 to Barack Obama's campaign in 2008
Democrat
Andrew Weissman
donated $2,300 to the Obama Victory fun in 2008 $2,000 to the DNC in 2006 and $2,300 to the Clinton campaign in 2007
Democrat
📌Aaron Zebley
No donations
No affiliations
Aaron Zelinsky
No donations
Democrat
1
-
1
-
Born In Shithole Country Fact Checks..
- The investigation, named Operation Crossfire hurricane, began on July 31st 2016. The dossier was given to the FBI in September of 2016
Everyone who have confirmed, with the same story, that the dossier was not the start of the investigation, and what actually was.
The FBI
Step Smith of Fox News
Devin Nunes (Nunes Memo)
Democtats in the House Intel Committee (via Memo)
Former FBI director James Comey ( testimony to Congress )
Intelligence from friendly governments (British and Dutch)
Phil Bump
Lisa Page
Spacific public record facts below.
- top FBI officials received the dossier the following September
- the actual impetus was a series of comments made in May 2016 by Trump foreign policy advisor George Papadopoulos to Alexander Downer, a top Australian Diplomat, during a night of "heavy drinking at an upscale London bar."
- Shep Smith, an anchor for Fox News, confirm this series of events, directly contradicting trumps and Fox News host Sean Hannity's false claims that the dossier was the impetus for the start of the investigation
- all of this can be confirmed by the court records from papadopoulos's charges and trial
- Devin Nunes memo described that the information on George Papadopoulos triggered the opening of the original FBI investigation in Late July 2016 into links between the Trump campaign and Russia.
-In late February 2018 a rebuttal Memo by democrats in the house intelligence committee stated that Christopher Steele's reporting Played No role in launching the counterintelligence investigation. Steele's reporting did not reach the counterintelligence team investigating Russia at FBI headquarters until mid September 2016, more than 7 weeks after the FBI opened its investigation, because the probes existence was so closely held within the FBI
- in April 2018, the house intelligence committee, then in Republican control, released a final report on Russian interference in the 2016 presidential American election, which stated that the house intelligence committee found that in Late July 2016 the FBI opened an Enterprise CI investigation into the Trump campaign following the receipt of derogatory information about foreign policy advisor George Papadopoulos.
- in December of 2018, former FBI director James Comey testified before the house judicial committee and describe the origins of the Russia investigation. He described how the investigation initially looked at 4 Americans, and that it was not prompted by the dossier, but by comments made by Papadopoulos. "It was weeks or months after that the so-called Steele dossier came to our attention. Obama had never ordered him to have the FBI surveillance or infiltrate the Trump campaign"
- other factors also played into the FBI's decision to investigate Russian interference in the Donald Trump campaign. Intelligence from friendly governments, especially the British and Dutch, and information about Pages Moscow trip.
- Philip Bump send how there "is no evidence the investigation stemmed from the dossier."
- Lisa Page testify that Bruce Ohr was not the FBI's initial source for their first copies of the early portion of the dossier, but rather that they came from steals FBI Handler in mid to late September. Long after the start of the Russia investigation in Late July.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Born In Shithole Country Let me show you how you saying this⤵ was false.
" not to mention placing FBI agents inside the campaign receiving foreign intelligence assets from Italy UK and Australia to ring information from campaign officials then leaking this information to the press and using all of those questionable information to prosecute certain people that in the end has been proven not to have done a damn thing out of the ordinary"
You are, of course, talking about the "Spygate" conspiracy theory. 🙄
Facts on the matter....
- Trump claims that the Obama Administration with help from the FBI and foreign government officials had both wiretapped Trump Tower an implanted spies in the Trump campaign.
- he did not reveal at the time that he had gotten this information from Breitbart News
- Trump Thomas through his den press secretary Sean Spicer on March 5th asked the Congressional intelligence committee to determine whether executive branch investigative Powers were abused in 2016 as part of their investigation into Russian interference in the election
- Devin Nunes and Lindsey Graham, both on the committee, stated that they would look into and you subpoena power to investigate this claim.
- on March 15th Nunes ( Republican and Trump supporter ) reported that the house intelligence committee ⏩had not found any evidence supporting the wiretapping claim.⏪
- on March 14th Andrew Napolitano stated on a Fox & Friends interview "3 intelligence sources have informed Fox News that President Obama went outside the chain of command" using British government Communications Headquarters to implement surveillance to avoid leaving "American fingerprints". Specifically Robert Hannigan.
- Fox News anchor Bret Baier later stated that the "Fox News division was never able to back up Napolatanos claims".
- Napoleon I was temporarily taken off air by Fox due to the allegations
- one of Napoleon oh sources was Former Intelligence Officer Larry Johnson who later told CNN. Napolitano had misrepresented the statements he made on an online discussion board.
- on March 16th Sean Spicer repeated Napoleono's claims that a White House press breathing. The following day, GC HQ responded with a rare public statement. " recent allegations made by media commentator Judge Andrew Napolitano about gchq being asked to conduct wiretapping against the then president-elect are nonsense they are utterly ridiculous and should be ignored."
- a British government Source said the allegation was "totally untrue and quite frankly absurd".
- Admiral Michael Rogers, Director of National Security Agency, said he has seen nothing to suggest that there was any such activity nor any requests to do so.
- former gchq director David amond told financial times that the suggestion that Barack Obama asked gchq to spy on Trump is just completely barking - that would be evident to anyone who knew the system.
- speaking to NBC's Meet the Press, former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper said "for the part of the National Security I purchased that I oversaw as dni there was no such wiretap activity mounted against the president-elect at the time, or as a candidate, or against his campaign."
- on September 1st 2017 ad MJ Court filing stated that both the FBI and NSD confirm that they have no records related to wiretap as directed by the March 4th 2017 tweets. Furthermore, it said that the Department of Justice and the FBI do not confirm or deny the existence of any other records that are responsive to American oversights FOIA request , which was broader than the alligated wiretap of Trump Tower.
On April 25th 2019 Trump said that his original allegation of wiretapping was "not literal as he had used quotation marks." Saying that "he really meant surveillance spying you can sort of say whatever you want." Trump also said that "his allegations were made just on a little bit of a hunch and a little bit of wisdom maybe." Trump elaborated that "he thought his allegations were pretty insignificant" when he made them.
So Not only was there no evidence of wiretapping or spies being implanted in the campaign but every intelligence agency that could have had anything to do with it, inside and outside of the US, denied anything like that ever happening and then eventually in April Trump took all those allegations back.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@timscott3892 Speaking of Santa... You guys can tell yourself Trump broke no laws as many times as you want, it won't magically make it true. Just like me saying Santa Claus is real a million times doesn't make a jolly red-clad fat man squeeze down my chimney on Christmas Eve. You ignoring all the evidence doesn't make it disappear. It only shows that you have confirmation bias.
1. The whistleblower report has been proven to be accurate.
2. Trump lied on camera 3 times about the July 25th phone call and mentioning Biden in it.
3. The transcript shows a clear quid pro quo.
4. Trump had the phone call put in storage that it would not normally go into and does not qualify for, in order to keep it from people.
5. Trump put the money on hold on July 23rd, before the scheduled phone call... and has changed his story on camera as to why he did that three times since this all began.
- "I didn't talk about Biden" but if I did, it "would have been fine".
- I talked about him but the money was put on hold because "the EU should be giving more aid and we should be giving less". Which quickly changed after the reports came out showing that the EU has actually given a lot more money in Aid to Ukraine that America has.
- A lot of people are saying Biden did something wrong and I'm concerned about "curruption" in Ukraine.
6. Trump has openly tried to stop Witnesses from testifying in the impeachment inquiry and refuses to turn over documents. These documents being me text message conversations.
7. Rudy Giuliani and his associates being investigated and arrested for involvement in this.
8. Ambassador Taylor, a career Foreign Service Officer, text Soundland asking a pointant question." Are we now saying that security assistance and white house meeting are conditioned on investigations?" Suondland replies, "call me." Not no... Not absolutely not. Not don't be ridiculous that's wrong and against the law.... But Call me.
9. On September 9th Soundland makes a statement... " As I said on the phone, I think it's crazy to withhold security assistance for help with a political campaign". 3 hours later he gets a call from Rudy Giuliani and then puts this statement out. " The president has been crystal clear no quid pro quos for any kind. I suggest we stomped the back and forth by text." It was later found out that Trump told him to make the second statement.
10. On September 11th under pressure from lawmakers, the White House releases the funding for Ukraine without any explanation of what changed.....
Just off thw top of my head... Btw, if Trump didn't think he did anything wrong, why was he trying so hard to hide the phone call, lie about what was said during it, trying to get his administration to withhold evidence and dictate witness statements or deny Witnesses to testify at all?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@naythanstonge9411 As far as what he has done... Well.. There are a range of things...
Constantly pocketing taxpayer dollars.
Waiting 6 months and 145000 American deaths to endorse wearing a mask in public, only to take it back 2 Days Later.
Costing American lives by refusing to implement the already made pandemic plan for the country, just because the Obama Administration came up with it.
Leaving the medical stock piles bear for 3 and 1/2 years, forcing states to enter a bidding war with each other for literal American lives.
Deciding that, despite the fact that literally nobody in history has ever won a trade War, getting us in one with China and losing American billions upon billions of dollars over the next couple of years because of it. Not a fourth of which the deal they came to after will recover.
Defending the Postal Service off of ABS narrative, so he can suppress Americans Vote or make them choose between their health and the house of their loved ones, or practicing their legally protected right to elect their leader.
Breaking all manner of foreign and domestic emoluments Clauses. Putting illegal immigrants and their children in cages for months on end, while sending his lawyer to argue the case that things like daily baths, tooth brushes, basic medical attention or three meals a day were not necessities. Despite the fact that if you treated a dog that poorly in america, you would be going to jail.
Banning transgender troops, who had already fought and bled for this country, from the military, simply because they were transgender.
Gassing and shooting rubber bullets at peaceful protesters, so he could have a photo op that exploited the Christian church for his own benefit.
On the record admissions of sexual assault.
After doing nothing on his key promise during his campaign of building a wall that Mexico will pay you for, deciding to shut down the government for so long that government employees were lining up on bread lines and losing their homes just to have him cave after, making all of that meaningless.
After failing at his shut down and to get Mexico to pay for the wall, trying to poach money from the military to do so.
Asking a foreign government to investigate his political opponents son. Inviting the Taliban to Camp David.
Giving turkey The Greenway to invade Syria and attack our Kurdish allies. Trying to take away millions of Americans Healthcare and promising to replace it with something better, but never doing so....
Just a few off the top of my head.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Dankness4201 Yes... I know what your point is... My point is the irony of calling me a sheep, when you are the one only focusing on the info about said virus, that fits your narrative and not all relevant info. Which is what you are doing. There are lots of viruses... That means nothing without context. The context I gave you, that you are choosing to ignore. The context of...
Contagion rate
Death rate
Lack of years of study compared to the flu... The flu isn't killing 166,000 people in under 6 months, in just America. It is rare for the flu to kill.
If you think your rights are being taken away, you need to take a second look at the bill of rights, under the section of states of emergency. You also need to stop being selfish, childish and willfully ignorant. It's a mask... One you wear only in public.... Is it really that hard...
This is about nothing but your ego. You need to be right, so much, that you are willing to be ignorant and risk others lives. That is why you label anyone who disagrees with you as sheep. You know its baseless.. You just can't stand considering any more relevant facts, then those that allow you to keep believing what you want to. Which is why you keep trying to run away.... But you do you... Just don't expect the rest of us to play pretend, with you. 😉✌
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@markwarren5644 Well... If they are a criminal, they are already making bad choices.... they also showing clear lack of reasoning. That does not actually mean that you have to get on their level. Besides... That is why we have the police, the military, federal law enforcement agencies and even security guards. There is absolutely no need for you to go out there and try and live your Rambo fantasy. Statistically, all night usually does is me that there are twice as many bullets flying by less experienced hands, and, therefore, more likely to hit innocent people.
What if they ran their car in there? Well, let me explain the several ways that analogy is flawed.
1. If it didn't happen that often, then that kind of nullifies your point. You would have a point if we had some mad rash of people using their cars as weapons to run people down. That's not the case. In 2019 we had more mass shootings in this country then we had days of the year. So... It's a little more then a one off.
2. We actually already have a couple of solutions for that. Even if it was a one-off. For instance, if you drink and drive you go to jail, pay huge fines and lose your license. They don't make you drive a Prius. They take away your ability to drive all together.
No one is suggesting we take away all our guns. We are just saying that there is absolutely no need for the average citizen to be carrying a submachine gun... Or own a gun at all without a background check and annual gun safety and proficiency training, like police and military have to do every year to be able to carry a weapon. Hell, maybe it's even a good idea to have gun safe requirements. "Crazy"... I know! Requiring people to be responsible with their deadly weapons. How dare we... 🙄
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@majinhiei7 SoOoOo... You just saying, "it's not news" does not actually make it true. That's the real TDS. Trump does his best to try and convince everyone, that just saying things enough, actually makes it true.
CNN is still run by people, and thefore, can still get things wrong, but just because they don't suck Trump off, every chance they get, does not actually mean, they are not news or that everything they say is wrong or divisive.
Its not "emotions". Which is only a word, you guys like to use, because your not evolved enough to realize that the reference does not actually automatically dismiss logical thought.
Basic word Association is what they begin teaching in middle school. Using negative or dehumanizing terms to denote people, and almost exclusively doing so, to discrible people of color, is what racists do on the daily. Having a history of such, while also occupying the Oval office, is news worthy, dispite what you or anyone else thinks. Ignoring that correlation because it doesn't look good, is disingenuous at best.
"CNN blacked mailed a kid for using a Trump meme"
Proof or evidence?
"CNN faked and forged a Muslim protest acting like it was genuine."
Proof or evidence?
"Whenever some one talks positive about Jesus Christ and negative about democrats, they cut them off and pretend that its "technical difficulties".
Proof or evidence?
Also, You argued earlier about how the news should not be about emotion. Jesus Christ is not a provable concept. So how is that not using emotion on the news?
No, I don't because that's not true. I have actually read the Mueller Report, and I do not choose to ignore what does not fit, what I have already decided to be true.
I use logic and fact to inform my opinions. I assume that if I can't make my argument on facts alone, then its not worth making. I also, don't pretend to know the future, in order to make myself feel better.
You clearly don't understand socialism. So maybe its best not to speak on it.
1
-
@majinhiei7 Because I use logic, I read the actual evidence in the Mueller Report, and also noticed that you have yet to do anything but make the claim it was BS. Which means nothing.
Because I use logic, I read scientific studies done on transgender individuals and know that they have been found to have high levels of the other genders sexual hormones and brain chemistry to suggest the same. I read studies of other species with similar traites, suggesting that it occures naturally in genetics across the species spectrum. I also noticed that people who make the argument of having transgender women compete in athletics against other women, can't ever seem to come up with a single example of that happening. Which makes their argument irrelevant.
Because I use logic, don't have to assume that people who belong to a group of Millions are all stupid because they don't agree with what I say or think. I simply use logic and evidence to make my point.
Because I use logic, I also recognize the past six Decades of History, when reps and dems flipped. I don't have to ignore relevant information or six decades worth of history in order to make my argument. I also recognized that all the white supremacists and skinheads claim the Republican side now.
Because I use logic, I choose to look at all relevant information and not just that which reconfirms my preconceived notions. Like with President Obama and the racist backlash that came against him in the form of, the birtherism movement, political charactertures of Obama and the "Obama is a Muslim" conspiracy. I also see people these days, shooting up black churches, running over peacefully protesters and turning on homemade blow torches on them.
"Jumping people"
Proof or evidence?
" setting things on fire"
Proof or evidence?
" spring women in the face with mace"
Proof or evidence?
1
-
1
-
1
-
@rosewimberley1728 Not in my opinion. Which is based off of facts, evidence and logic.
Nor would I say that it is "most" people. More than others, maybe, but not most. Considering 33% or 2.4 billion people believe in Christianity. 24.1% or 1.8 billion people believe in Islam. 16% or 1.2 billion people are secular, non-religious, agnostic or atheist. Which is what I fall under. 15% or 1.15 billion people believe in Hinduism. 7% or 521 million people believe in Buddhism.... And so on and so forth. All but the athiest/ secular/ agnostic/ non-religious group I fall under, is largely determined by which culture and country you where born into and/or grew up in.
You argue it can't be proven to me because I do not believe. I would argue that, that is faulty logic and that doing so would give me a clear bias of whanting to have what I already believe to be true, confirmed.
I was not or do not attack or judge Christians for being Christian, I just simply don't hide my disbelief in the religion, either. I wouldn't expect anyone to hide thier belief.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@mylifeastedturner9731 so, Papadopoulos was speaking to Alexander Downer, who was the Australian diplomat to London. It was at the Kensington wine rooms, in 2016. Over a decade before 2016 and that meeting in the bar, had a roll in securing 25 million and made from his country to help the Clinton Foundation fight AIDS. It was chronicled an Old Government memos, archived on the Australian foreign ministry's website.
The Australian foreign minister says the Clinton Grant was handled like all its other two billion annual foreign aid Awards, and It ultimately helped thousands in Asia gain access to antiviral AIDS medications.
Dems claim it to basically be reaching. That this guy working as a representative of Australia, being 1 in many people working to secure funds for the Clinton AIDS Foundation, as well as many others that year, over a decade before the interaction with Papadopoulos in the bar, is Reps trying to make something out of nothing. One of the many reason one would come to that conclusion being, the Clintons have been deeply involved with world government and politics for many decades now, and for that reason, you would be hard pressed to find anyone, working in that same area, to not of had some kind of interaction with the Clintons. Especially, considering that there doesn't appear to be any other interaction between the Clinton family and Downer, before or after this.
Which sounds reasonable enough to me.
Personally, I was not a Hillary Supporter. I was Bernie 2016 and will be Bernie 2020. I think she is shady, entitled and lacking in substance, for the most part.... But I do try to not let my personal opinions get in the way of basic logic, like Occam's razor.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@majinhiei7 Soo!! I'm gonna go back to the rest and see what you dug up 🤣 but i just had to do this one first.. Cuz... Really??? Lol
"Russian Hoax, the burden of proof on This one belongs to you."
I'm not the one that made the claim. I'm also not the one that made a big stink over... "OMG! I JUST CAN'T BELIEVE YOU DON'T KNOW THIS! YOUR SO STUPID! HPW CAN YOU NOT KNOW THIS! OMG!".... 🤣 So... If I'm so dumb for not knowing it, why can't you prove it? Don't you just need the Mueller Report? All ya gotta do is go in there and show me the page number and give me the quote, right? How hard is that, if it says what you claim it does? Do you not have a copy? Here you go! You can borrow mine! 😜 https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/5955118-The-Mueller-Report.html. Just let me know the page number and I can look it up! 😁😁😁
" If Trump committed a crime, 👉despite Mueller, on multiple occasions the saying "no collusion"👈
I have no idea why you think continuing to make stuff up is going to save you from this mess you got yourself in. 🤣 But WTH! Its fun! Show me 1 time those words EVER came out of his mouth or he wrote them down anywhere!!! If he has done it multiple times then it should be easy to find one of them, right?
"then you clearly know something that Mueller doesn't." No I don't! We both would automatically know that you're lying and trying to get out of having to prove your lies! 😁
" Show me the specific part were Trump committed crime. "
OH, I WOULD LOVE LOVE LOVE LOVE LOVE TO! And will do just that, just as soon as you either prove your original claim OR admit you where lying! 😁
Diversion tactics don't work on me, sweet cheeks! 😉
I'll be waiting for you to put your money where your mouth is! And stop trying to BS about how, your claims, that you have yet to prove, or somehow my job to disprove. Cuz that doesn't make any sense I'm going to call your ass out on Monday every damn time. You shouldn't have said it if you couldn't back it up. 😁😁😁✌
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
William Plummer as far as covid-19 not existing, that is super easy to disprove. From the beginning of the pandemic, the CDC and the WHO had issued an AllShare, which has never been rescinded. Which means, if you want any information about the chemical compound of covid-19 from the US Laboratories that are working on it, studying at or studying a vaccine and treatment processes, all you have to do is request it. Same goes for the World Health Organization when it comes to any information outside of the US. Of course the country would have to be under the World Health Organization. This order is currently active. Every biological scientist in the world wants this thing solved. It's a global pandemic. You making up some masses worldwide conspiracy where are all these countries I'm so far reported over 3 million deaths total sounds a little crazy at this point. That's a level of denial I don't think I'm qualified to deal with. I can give you links to chemical compositions and research. I just don't think that's going to matter to you. Hell, I could give you the memos on the AllShare orders. As I said, though, I don't think that's going to matter to you. I don't think you're all there in the head, baby. You're all over the place. Like, I'm genuinely concerned about your mental health, In This Moment. I can't know, for sure, without medical training oh, but I don't think feeding into your delusions is going to help you. So I'm really not sure if it would be responsible of me to continue to do so.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Altair885 👈 Now let me explain why this one wouldn't answer that question.
Right now, in America, we have a group of radical right crazy extremists that have already attempted and are continuing to attempt to take one of our most fundamental freedoms away from us. The right of every American to pick our leaders. This is current state of events . My question was...
Would you expect slaves to come together with slave owners while those slave owners are fighting to keep them enslaved?
I asked that specific question because he keeps going on about how we need to unite even with the most extreme right-wing that are perpetrating this coup. He's making up all kinds of future... scenarios and trying to call the people in the building tearing stuff up, "sightseers". He also tried to change the question to another one he wanted to answer. If he answered this question, it would either destroy his whole argument or make him look silly. Probably both.
If he would have said "yes. I would have expected for slaves to unify with their slave owners while they were trying to still keep them slaves", I would have pointed out... how do you know that the unification was genuine, considering their slaves and have to do everything their masters tell them to do? He wouldn't have an answer for that. It's applicable for that reason. These people are currently trying to take our rights away to pick our leaders. They are currently inciting violence and literally killing police officers. We don't UniFi with people like that. We put them in jail for treason. His big thing where the people who weren't beating to death police officers with fire extinguishers, carrying pipe bombs or making a Gallows. All the other people who were just sitting around watching and cheering how to "hang Mike Pence" were apparently "innocent bystanders" to him. Never mind they also broke into the capitol. Nevermind they were accomplices under the law to murder, attempted murder, assault, attempted assault and treason. To name a few. They were just sitting there taking pictures, apparently.
This is all over these comments sections now. All the sudden it's finally gotten through to them that they are losing and that they lost the election and all three branches of government, to boot and so now they're about Unity. Now they want to try and claim some kind of moral High Ground, while still excusing and dismissing treason and an attempted coup. No thank you. That BS won't work.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Altair885 Would you expect slaves to come together with slave owners while those slave owners are fighting to keep them enslaved?
1. Ignored
2. Ignored
3. " Garden slaves and their owners, well again just look back to history, there are instances after the Civil War where former slaves did indeed coexist with their former Masters "
Except that isn't the question. You got the circumstance wrong.... 👉 while those slave owners are fighting to keep them enslaved 👈... And the core of the question itself. " Would you expect ". Not what happened.
4. " I think I did answer actually answered your question about slavery?
Except you didn't because you got the circumstance wrong and the core of the question wrong. As I just demonstrated a minute ago.
5. " The slavery question is obviously a play to imply Unity is not possible and so my ideals are flawed. But it means nothing because your hypothesis is based on past event that has a well-documented outcome, it has no relevance to the current affairs of which we are discussing unless you had another point you are trying to make.
The question is now, not "relevant". Except the past and histories the exact same thing you keep pointing out, that proves your point. So apparently we only listen to history when it supports your narrative.
On top of that, and once again, history is not what I'm talking about. Your expectations are the subject of the sentence.
6. " you answers from my on now answered questions first and I will. Thank You observe I've already answered a lot more of your questions then you have mine. "
Now it's time to divert to a silly lie, while simultaneously (passive aggressively) admitting that you haven't actually answered the question up till that point. Which led me to ask another question. I asked you to provide these questions I had not answered. You never did.
7. "Keep trying to turn us around lady, it looks to me like you're perhaps being a little bit of a hypocrite I'm afraid"... currently it seems that you are the one who is not even attempting to answer a number of the later questions I have put to you, why one wonders"
The point in the tactic list that you tried to draw attention away from himself and deflect On To Me, by literally telling me that's what I'm doing. Good times... Once again bringing up this list of questions I have "not" answered, that you claim are there.
8. " okay I'll make it easy for you and answer this one as fast I can even though you have not answered the last few I've asked you."
And do you know why. I told you that you needed to answer this question that you have been ignoring this entire time, and as soon as you did that I would answer whatever questions you like.
" ordinary I would assume no would be easy answer you'd expect. However history has shown that is not always the case, during the Civil War there were black slaves who willingly fought for the Confederacy"
This one is awful special. Cuz you presented an argument claiming that a Slave had a choice. Talk about not having a clue.
9. And finally... After all of that... " no I haven't, you just can't accept the answer I've given you, but just to reiterate it for you my answer was yes and no if you don't understand."
So not once did you ever say yes or no. If you had, we would have moved on by now. Now I was going to ask you what that cop out of an answer meant, but directly below you giving a yes and no answer, you once again start talkin about what you claim to be historical facts and how we can't change them. Except you don't need to change them to answer the question.
" I'm sorry you didn't like the way I answered but I can't change history or go back and ask them why they made the choices they did."
So, what does historical facts about history have to do with your expectations of them? Nothing...
If you contest this, please feel free to go up top and quote me and you to disprove the track record you have of avoiding a question. As well as any discrepancies in the timeline.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Altair885 your queen of not being able to give a definitive answer gets washed down the BS train as soon as you look at your track record on the 20,000 different ways you tried to avoid answering this question. Some of which had nothing to do with your claims from history now. All illustrated here. 👇 You are just lying. Plain and simple. 👇
@John Chilton Would you expect slaves to come together with slave owners while those slave owners are fighting to keep them enslaved?
1. Ignored
2. Ignored
3. " Garden slaves and their owners, well again just look back to history, there are instances after the Civil War where former slaves did indeed coexist with their former Masters "
Except that isn't the question. You got the circumstance wrong.... 👉 while those slave owners are fighting to keep them enslaved 👈... And the core of the question itself. " Would you expect ". Not what happened.
4. " I think I did answer actually answered your question about slavery?
Except you didn't because you got the circumstance wrong and the core of the question wrong. As I just demonstrated a minute ago.
5. " The slavery question is obviously a play to imply Unity is not possible and so my ideals are flawed. But it means nothing because your hypothesis is based on past event that has a well-documented outcome, it has no relevance to the current affairs of which we are discussing unless you had another point you are trying to make.
The question is now, not "relevant". Except the past and histories the exact same thing you keep pointing out, that proves your point. So apparently we only listen to history when it supports your narrative.
On top of that, and once again, history is not what I'm talking about. Your expectations are the subject of the sentence.
6. " you answers from my on now answered questions first and I will. Thank You observe I've already answered a lot more of your questions then you have mine. "
Now it's time to divert to a silly lie, while simultaneously (passive aggressively) admitting that you haven't actually answered the question up till that point. Which led me to ask another question. I asked you to provide these questions I had not answered. You never did.
7. "Keep trying to turn us around lady, it looks to me like you're perhaps being a little bit of a hypocrite I'm afraid"... currently it seems that you are the one who is not even attempting to answer a number of the later questions I have put to you, why one wonders"
The point in the tactic list that you tried to draw attention away from himself and deflect On To Me, by literally telling me that's what I'm doing. Good times... Once again bringing up this list of questions I have "not" answered, that you claim are there.
8. " okay I'll make it easy for you and answer this one as fast I can even though you have not answered the last few I've asked you."
And do you know why. I told you that you needed to answer this question that you have been ignoring this entire time, and as soon as you did that I would answer whatever questions you like.
" ordinary I would assume no would be easy answer you'd expect. However history has shown that is not always the case, during the Civil War there were black slaves who willingly fought for the Confederacy"
This one is awful special. Cuz you presented an argument claiming that a Slave had a choice. Talk about not having a clue.
9. And finally... After all of that... " no I haven't, you just can't accept the answer I've given you, but just to reiterate it for you my answer was yes and no if you don't understand."
So not once did you ever say yes or no. If you had, we would have moved on by now. Now I was going to ask you what that cop out of an answer meant, but directly below you giving a yes and no answer, you once again start talkin about what you claim to be historical facts and how we can't change them. Except you don't need to change them to answer the question.
" I'm sorry you didn't like the way I answered but I can't change history or go back and ask them why they made the choices they did."
So, what does historical facts about history have to do with your expectations of them? Nothing...
If you contest this, please feel free to go up top and quote me and you to disprove the track record you have of avoiding a question. As well as any discrepancies in the timeline.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@doyouevenwarpbro8674 Overuse of identity politics can be a thing... But what's more common is, people like you, throwing around that term, so you don't have to defend your sides shity actions. Its lazy thinking, is what it is. That's why every time the news report something you don't like or isn't reflecting well on your side, you just say "fake news". It doesn't matter if it's actually true. That's just a super lazy way for you guys to dismiss it, without having to defend it. It's like, oops... My side messed up again. It's okay though. I'll just call it fake news or identity politics. That way I don't actually have to use my brain, or consider anybody else's point of view other than my own.
Though, I would love to see your example of using white privilege for African Americans though. If you said they do it, show me? Unless your just talking out your ass?
And you guys always want to talk about how we have this victimhood... But you guys are the ones that want to blame anybody but yourself for everything. Everything is somebody else's fault. You guys are all holier-than-thou now, walking on water, second coming so f**** Jesus m********** Christ. Everything your guys do you got an excuse for but everything we do and we're Satan.
And goes against who? Did I give you the impression that I held my tongue at some point? Cuz I do that s*** with my people too. Say I'm like being consistent. If my sides f**** up I'm going to say so, I have in the past and I will in the future. And nobody's kicked me out yet. Hell, I just got into it the other day was someone talking about how they wanted to deport every Republican. I told them that was a stupid ass comment because it was a stupid ass comment.
Well I'm sorry that you're too dumb to know how insecure, having to put everybody who doesn't agree with your point of view in the stupid column, makes you look. Actually... Na! I'm not sorry about that.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@theniceguy7824 The FDA did an emergency approval. Correct. 👉At first.👈 However, they never stopped studying and testing. Which allowed them to officially approve it for standard, like everything else they approve, a few months ago. Now it is approved in the same way all the other drugs and vacs are. So, that may have been a legit concern at one point. However, not anymore. Which is something I mentioned and something you are ignoring because it doesn't fit your false narrative.
Citing the survival rate is a false right wing narrative. First, then don't measure the survival rate. They measure the death rate and glean the rest from there. Second, the death rate fluctuates on a literal daily basis, and you guys ALWAYS. try and quote the same number. Which doesn't make sense.
Just last week the death rate dropped by 13.3%... Which is great when it goes down. Not so much when it goes the other direction. Which happens as well.
So, I'm, infact, not "ignoring" that. Its a false narrative.
McDonald's? What? You literally have no clue what your talking about. 🤦
👉"FDA does not approve food, beverages, or dietary supplements. ... Food facilities are required to register with FDA, but being registered with FDA does not indicate FDA approval of the facility or its products. New food additives do require FDA approval."👈
The FDA also does not control what companies put on their products according to labels. It requires food companies to list their ingredients on their products them too register with them. New additives are in need of approval. That is it.
Also, the FDA is fine for approving the other vacs but not the covid one? Your contradicting yourself and believing right wing propaganda, instead of facts.
So first, there is "just as many" and now there is "an abundance" of these medical professionals. Which is it? Where are they since I asked you to provide them and you haven't? That's far on this topic the only thing you've proven is that you keep saying there is an ever fluctuating amount of medical professionals that don't agree with the mandate.
1. I'm sure there are doctors and scientists that have shared their personal opinion in this manner. We have an abundance of diverse opinions. However, the medical professionals that need to be listened to as for specialists in the field of study.
2. When a medical professional gives their medical opinion, instead of personal opinion, they are required to back it up with data to support that.
So... I will say, yet again... If you have scientist or medical professionals in the fields of infectious disease, that has given their medical opinion on this and has provided ample data to back it up, feel free to post it here.
As for fear... 700 million + Americans have died from covid-19 and experienced in the last two years. This is the worst worldwide pandemic in over a hundred years. You would have to be tragically naive and completely willfully ignorant not to be afraid of this. You would also have to be as equally ignorant for mocking people who are. It is a rational fear. We all have rational fear for good reason.
You have no basis for the assumption of me not reading your post that I responded to. Your just making that up. Your doing so, in order to manipulate the onus you have of providing source pages for your claims, onto me. What says a lot is that you apparently already know where all this information is because you're claiming it came from the CDC site, yet your not providing it, to back up your claim.... but as I just pointed out, you're doing your best to put the onus of your claims onto me. Which really says all we really need to know about your "CDC numbers".
Sweetheart, that's not how that works. I have absolutely no need to just prove something you have yet to prove. You do understand just saying something doesn't make it true, right?
1
-
1
-
1
-
@nickvignola3 @Nick Vignola I'm a single mom, having a mixed race child out of wedlock, living in southern Louisiana, while being a member of the LBGTQ community, being an atheist and a progressive liberal, who has to work 4 different jobs to take care of me and my little boy. It sucks your struggling as well... But your, by far, not the only one doing so. It certainly does not excuse or explain any mind set you may have.
Like calling me vaccine that is saving American lives, a Nazis vaccine. That's just juvenile.
The reason people are talking about vaccine mandates now is because it took 7 and 1/2 months to get over 50% of the population vaccinated even though it was distributed literally everywhere and completely free. It shouldn't have had to have come to that. But people like you won't pull your head out of your ass long enough to think about more than just your own situation.
You guys always fight the same number with the death rate. You do understand the death rate literally changes everyday, right? Yet you always cite the same damn number. How does that even make sense to you? Just last week the death rate dropped 13.3% from the following week. Which is great when it jumps down but not so much when it jumps up.
And you trying to copy my observation about you being super self-centered, doesn't make any sense. So I'm not sure why you did it. At the end of the day you only give a damn about yourself and not wanting to save other people's lives by getting a vaccine that could also possibly save your own, based on a bunch of false narratives that you didn't bother to look up yourself.
You also trying to tell me that I said something about the Constitution that I didn't say, doesn't actually make it true. It just shows the desperation in your argument.
The Pfizer vaccine does not give you natural immunity. It's literally by definition manufactured immunity. The natural immunity you were referring to would have had to have come from either herd immunity, for which we have not achieved yet in America or having covid early at which point you would only be naturally immune to it for up to six months, depending on the variant.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Mr. Mr. The pandemic... Yes.... The presidency... Yes... Not that it would be the best, by far... We would still have a corrupt, opportunistic D bag sitting in that seat... But... So was her husband and he still managed, with her help, to be the first president, in over 50 years, at the time, to get America out of debt, and set us up for the next 5 years, before Jr got in their.... That is... She also helped President Obama pull us out of the Great recession... And navigated some tricky relationships and situations as secretary of state.... Say what you want about the Clinton's... And I could say a lot... But they knew how to make money and diplomatic relations work for them. 2 things that we would DEFINITELY NEED in terms of a world wide pandemic. So... Yes... On this... She would do better... Though... Once again... Light praise. As for "anyone else".... A Labradoodle would do better then Trump, at this point.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Jim myz And it's not a math problem YOU are having issues with understanding. It's how LLCs file their taxes. Though... Even if you don't know a whole lot about Biz Taxes, you think you would have gleaned they where filed differently through the very specific DATES they cited... Guess not.
June 30th 2011 - June 30yh 2020
Big Biz and LLCs don't file their taxes the same as us, brain trust.
The avg W2 (👉working for someone else👈) gets filed yearly.
1090s (👉self employed👈) actually have the option to file yearly, semi quarterly (👉twice a year, or once every 6 months) or quarterly (4 times a year, or every 3 months👈). This is done to give the small biz owner options as to paying back their lack of withholdings in one lump some (biggest amount), twice a year or for times a year (smallest amount). Not a lot of small businesses has upwards of ten Grand on average to pay back Uncle Sam at the end of the year.
Then their are LLCs or... Big Biz, who are required to file quarterly (Once every 6 months). This is done bc this is a large chunk of where out gov gets the money to keep running the country throughout the year. It is also used by the IRS to keep better track of their earnings and spending, considering that is a lot of finances to review if they would wait a year, and could be more prone to missing the shady.
Now, let's revisit the actual dates, shall we. .. And ask yourself the question of, why they would claim Mazars would not be able to verify the accuracy of 👇
June 30th, 2011 - June 30th, 2020...
And not
Dec 30th, 2010 - Dec 30th, 2019...
Mazars was still responsible for half the years 👉quarterly👈 taxes in 2020. That's why.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@3 Fractures Sense I know you have trouble keeping up with your lies... I made this list for you. That way, you know what you have to provide proof for. You can thank me later! 😁
" old racist Joe has said the n-word several times on live television and suggested that people commit felony gun crimes yet no citizenship"
If it was on tv then there is tape on it. Link it?
" yet you ignore blue check Lefty marks who are calling for violence and the death of police officers."
I'm thinking the only way you're going to be able to prove that is go through all of my YouTube comments, compiled a database of them and then show that I've ignored "blue check lefty marks"? I'll be waiting. 😁
" Democrats want to change the voting demographic so that they can get away with cheap labor and lower standards of living just like the good old days when they formed the clan."
I mean... Like... All of us? Have you talked to all democrats to confirm your "theory"? And why do we push for a living wage, sending the younger generation to get an education and affordable heathcare for all? Wouldn't that go against that claim?
" I guess it's racist to criticize opening the floodgates and letting barbarians killing wave unchallenged. You're right. You have exemplified perfectly why we need Sharia law in this country..."
Now... This is where you started claiming that I wanted Sharia Law... And I would like to know where I every said anything like that? Please feel free to quote me, as I have just done with you. Who are these "barbarians"?
" everything that I mentioned is commonly known information"
Then why have you, thus far, not been able to prove any of it?
" typical Lefty, total dismiss a lot of FBI crimes statistics."
Where? You have not presented any? And what does that have to do with all the above claims you have made, thus far?
" coming from someone who believes Tech censorship is fake news"
Where did I say that?
"Comrade"
Now you make reference to me being Russian a couple of different times but I'm just going to put it on here once. Where is your proof that I am a Russian bot? And if you have proof can you please go tell my English grandmother and my Irish grandmother so I don't have to? OH! BUT WAIT UNTIL IM THERE CUZ I SOOOOOOOOOOOOO NEED TO FILM THAT!!!! 🤣
" pretending like there is no text censorship"
And I said that, where, again? And how is fact checking censorship? Are they taking the post down or they just labeling them as untrue?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@kevkus - That is why Trump lied, on camera, about mentioning Biden in the phone call, when first asked...
- That is why Trump was only interested in the investigation, only after Biden began running against him...
- That is why there has never been an official investigation into Ukraine and the Biden's opened till this very day....
- That is why Trump is willing to break obstruction laws, to prevent anyone who was actually on the phone call, from testifying...
- That is why the Reps are trying to block further witnesses from testifying in the actual trial, despite arguing the exact opposite during Clinton's impeachment...
- That is why Trump has been trying to discredit the whistleblowers from the start, despite not even knowing who they are....
- That is why Trump refused to testify in the house, lied about being allowed to testify, despite being asked to...
- That is why the Reps pulled that ridiculous storm the castle stunt, regardless of the fact that half of them could have just walked in the room and been given equal time to ask questions, yet chose not to...
I could go on... the breadth and width of what you are ignoring to be able to make that statement... it clearly shows you are not willing to acknowledge, let alone consider all relevant material, and only have interest and what are ready fit your preconceived notions.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@somerandomnification Goodness... Look.... I hate this happened. It's sad and pointless.... And just a waste of human life.... But we can NOT go around assigning every police involved death between white police officers and black assailants as as the same thing that George Floyd went through. You have to be reasonable, if we expect them to be. sigh....
Was he or was he not drinking and driving, showing a reckless disregard for human life?
Was he or was he not so drunk while behind the wheel that he passed out, behind the wheel in a Wendy's drive thru?
Where the cops beyond respectful and professional the entire time they where interacting with him before he attacked them, with no sign of racial bias or even anger of any kind?
Did he or did he not attack them, wrestle them to the ground twice?
Did he or did he not grab one of their weapons (POLICE ISSUE taser) and fire and hit one of the police officers with it, while attempting to flee?
Is the REASON he grabbed the TASER (and not a gun) because that is what was out, BECAUSE they had already tried to subdue him with, what you call the NON LETHAL WEAPON, which did not work, AT ALL?
Had he or had he not YET AGAIN shown a reckless disregard for not only his own life by others around him by attacking the police officers multiple times, unprompted?
Was he or was he not doing all of this in a parking lot with quite a few people in it?
Would you feel safe for yourself, your partner and the civilians around you if you had been attacked by a drunk drivers, who had wrestled 2 grown trained police officials to the ground twice, tried to use non lethal force on him, he got your taser, fired it at your partner, disabling him for god knows how long, with innocent people all around and the guy who did all of that is running clear of you being able to do anything about it, understandably at this point having NO CLUE WHAT HE WOULD DO.... Whether he would turn around, attack again or take someone hostage or what....?
They escalated properly after the unwarranted attack. They first tried to Grapple him down the first time with just her hands. Then he got away and they pulled out the tasers. They used it on him and it didn't even slow him down. Then he got a hold of one of the tasers. Then he fires it and hits a cop with it while he's running away. Civilians all around. He's already displayed flippant disregard for human life several times and he was the aggressor. They had no idea that point what she was going to do.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@madeinamerica2531 So... EVERYONE who thinks this person here is going to be an actual adult, check this out... 👈👆 This one's game is first trying to establish a false narrative. Using false dichotomies and outright lies about what you, yourself, have said. If you challenge him on this, he will basically call you crazy and a liar, but when you ask him to quote you or confirm his own quotes, he won't do that either. He also seems to think he is Magic and that everything he says magically becomes true. Once again, don't ask him for proof of this, cuz he'll just call you crazy again. So... Anyone looking for an adult, and honest conversation.... Basically don't look here. This one's too obsessed with needing to be right, even when he's wrong.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@madeinamerica2531 So... EVERYONE who thinks this person here is going to be an actual adult, check this out... 👈👆 This one's game is first trying to establish a false narrative. Using false dichotomies and outright lies about what you, yourself, have said. If you challenge him on this, he will basically call you crazy and a liar, but when you ask him to quote you or confirm his own quotes, he won't do that either. He also seems to think he is Magic and that everything he says magically becomes true. Once again, don't ask him for proof of this, cuz he'll just call you crazy again. So... Anyone looking for an adult, and honest conversation.... Basically don't look here. This one's too obsessed with needing to be right, even when he's wrong.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@madeinamerica2531 So... EVERYONE who thinks this person here is going to be an actual adult, check this out... 👈👆 This one's game is first trying to establish a false narrative. Using false dichotomies and outright lies about what you, yourself, have said. If you challenge him on this, he will basically call you crazy and a liar, but when you ask him to quote you or confirm his own quotes, he won't do that either. He also seems to think he is Magic and that everything he says magically becomes true. Once again, don't ask him for proof of this, cuz he'll just call you crazy again. So... Anyone looking for an adult, and honest conversation.... Basically don't look here. This one's too obsessed with needing to be right, even when he's wrong.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@madeinamerica2531 So... EVERYONE who thinks this person here is going to be an actual adult, check this out... 👈👆 This one's game is first trying to establish a false narrative. Using false dichotomies and outright lies about what you, yourself, have said. If you challenge him on this, he will basically call you crazy and a liar, but when you ask him to quote you or confirm his own quotes, he won't do that either. He also seems to think he is Magic and that everything he says magically becomes true. Once again, don't ask him for proof of this, cuz he'll just call you crazy again. So... Anyone looking for an adult, and honest conversation.... Basically don't look here. This one's too obsessed with needing to be right, even when he's wrong.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@madeinamerica2531 So... EVERYONE who thinks this person here is going to be an actual adult, check this out... 👈👆 This one's game is first trying to establish a false narrative. Using false dichotomies and outright lies about what you, yourself, have said. If you challenge him on this, he will basically call you crazy and a liar, but when you ask him to quote you or confirm his own quotes, he won't do that either. He also seems to think he is Magic and that everything he says magically becomes true. Once again, don't ask him for proof of this, cuz he'll just call you crazy again. So... Anyone looking for an adult, and honest conversation.... Basically don't look here. This one's too obsessed with needing to be right, even when he's wrong.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@madeinamerica2531 So... EVERYONE who thinks this person here is going to be an actual adult, check this out... 👈👆 This one's game is first trying to establish a false narrative. Using false dichotomies and outright lies about what you, yourself, have said. If you challenge him on this, he will basically call you crazy and a liar, but when you ask him to quote you or confirm his own quotes, he won't do that either. He also seems to think he is Magic and that everything he says magically becomes true. Once again, don't ask him for proof of this, cuz he'll just call you crazy again. So... Anyone looking for an adult, and honest conversation.... Basically don't look here. This one's too obsessed with needing to be right, even when he's wrong.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@madeinamerica2531 So... EVERYONE who thinks this person here is going to be an actual adult, check this out... 👈👆 This one's game is first trying to establish a false narrative. Using false dichotomies and outright lies about what you, yourself, have said. If you challenge him on this, he will basically call you crazy and a liar, but when you ask him to quote you or confirm his own quotes, he won't do that either. He also seems to think he is Magic and that everything he says magically becomes true. Once again, don't ask him for proof of this, cuz he'll just call you crazy again. So... Anyone looking for an adult, and honest conversation.... Basically don't look here. This one's too obsessed with needing to be right, even when he's wrong.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@madeinamerica2531 So... EVERYONE who thinks this person here is going to be an actual adult, check this out... 👈👆 This one's game is first trying to establish a false narrative. Using false dichotomies and outright lies about what you, yourself, have said. If you challenge him on this, he will basically call you crazy and a liar, but when you ask him to quote you or confirm his own quotes, he won't do that either. He also seems to think he is Magic and that everything he says magically becomes true. Once again, don't ask him for proof of this, cuz he'll just call you crazy again. So... Anyone looking for an adult, and honest conversation.... Basically don't look here. This one's too obsessed with needing to be right, even when he's wrong.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@madeinamerica2531 So... EVERYONE who thinks this person here is going to be an actual adult, check this out... 👈👆 This one's game is first trying to establish a false narrative. Using false dichotomies and outright lies about what you, yourself, have said. If you challenge him on this, he will basically call you crazy and a liar, but when you ask him to quote you or confirm his own quotes, he won't do that either. He also seems to think he is Magic and that everything he says magically becomes true. Once again, don't ask him for proof of this, cuz he'll just call you crazy again. So... Anyone looking for an adult, and honest conversation.... Basically don't look here. This one's too obsessed with needing to be right, even when he's wrong.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@madeinamerica2531 So... EVERYONE who thinks this person here is going to be an actual adult, check this out... 👈👆 This one's game is first trying to establish a false narrative. Using false dichotomies and outright lies about what you, yourself, have said. If you challenge him on this, he will basically call you crazy and a liar, but when you ask him to quote you or confirm his own quotes, he won't do that either. He also seems to think he is Magic and that everything he says magically becomes true. Once again, don't ask him for proof of this, cuz he'll just call you crazy again. So... Anyone looking for an adult, and honest conversation.... Basically don't look here. This one's too obsessed with needing to be right, even when he's wrong.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@madeinamerica2531 So... EVERYONE who thinks this person here is going to be an actual adult, check this out... 👈👆 This one's game is first trying to establish a false narrative. Using false dichotomies and outright lies about what you, yourself, have said. If you challenge him on this, he will basically call you crazy and a liar, but when you ask him to quote you or confirm his own quotes, he won't do that either. He also seems to think he is Magic and that everything he says magically becomes true. Once again, don't ask him for proof of this, cuz he'll just call you crazy again. So... Anyone looking for an adult, and honest conversation.... Basically don't look here. This one's too obsessed with needing to be right, even when he's wrong.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@madeinamerica2531 " you also stated you'd clear up your intent when I quoted your statement back to you,. I asked, you never explained."
This is my exact quote. 👉"So... I will be more then happy to detail the point I was actually making. Just not the false narrative you are attempting to set up."
"see... what I don't understand is you could literally directly quote me back to myself and yet you keep making things up. You could also ask me what I meant. You choose not to."
In short, there was a stipulation upon that statement, for which, you, yourself, just recognized, yet have not met.
👉"when I quoted your statement back to you,"
You refuse to do so. You keep trying to shove words into my mouth, so you have an actual point. I wont play that game with you. You need me to AND you know it. Which is why... At that point in the conversation, you began calling me various forms of crazy and using meaningless phrases like "word salad", instead of just quoting me back to myself. You need your manufactured framework. Except, that's not my problem, is it...
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@madeinamerica2531 " but if you think I 👉have to"👈 No one ever said your had to. Infact.... It works better when you can't and spend the majority of your time turn yourself into all kinds of funny shapes in order to distract from the fact that you can't without dismantling your own point.
" answer every question you seem to 👉demand"👈 Not once have I demanded.... But I understand why you need to from it that way.
"👉 to prove my own "Outlook"👈 Nope! Just to prove it is somehow a fact. Instead of just your opinion, as you have been treating it.
" a word that you seem to have a problem with." 👈 That is a super weird claim. One that clearly Harkens back to your framing issue. The "dark Outlook" reference, which you know, goes back to your false dichotomy problem. You needing to set up scenarios, as to where, either people agree with you or they are various bad things. Which is a lazy logic outlook, that only serves your confirmation bias.
" I don't. " 👈 You absolutely don't! In fact, as I stated earlier, it serves my purposes better if you don't... Or, in reality, if you can't without dismantling your own argument.
1
-
@madeinamerica2531 " You may ultimately get the last word on this thread, but you're going to have to work for it. I'm going to try man from time to time to make you repeat your copy and paste Queen false statements about me. Cuz I know it means so much to you"👈 This is you, attempting to take back the control, you (by default) agree, you have lost. This way, you can tell yourself, you are in control. You are "making" me do something. Which, ironically, only serves to point out the fact that you don't feel in control... Your basically trying to convince yourself of something here. It is almost done with tactic that is easily dismantled by just pointing it out. Like every dishonest tactic you have used.... But I understand you need to convince yourself of certain things, to be okay in your own head. So... You do you, Boo Boo! 😂
1
-
1
-
@madeinamerica2531 So... EVERYONE who thinks this person here is going to be an actual adult, check this out... 👈👆 This one's game is first trying to establish a false narrative. Using false dichotomies and outright lies about what you, yourself, have said. If you challenge him on this, he will basically call you crazy and a liar, but when you ask him to quote you or confirm his own quotes, he won't do that either. He also seems to think he is Magic and that everything he says magically becomes true. Once again, don't ask him for proof of this, cuz he'll just call you crazy again. So... Anyone looking for an adult, and honest conversation.... Basically don't look here. This one's too obsessed with needing to be right, even when he's wrong.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Tommy Thompson No... That's why DJ is racist.
Trump is racist because.....
Trump’s real-estate company tried to avoid renting apartments to African-Americans in the 1970s and gave preferential treatment to whites, according to the federal government.
Trump treated black employees at his casinos differently from whites, according to multiple sources. A former hotel executive said Trump criticized a black accountant: “Black guys counting my money! I hate it. … I think that the guy is lazy. And it’s probably not his fault, because laziness is a trait in blacks.”
In 1989, Trump took out ads in New York newspapers urging the death penalty for five black and Latino teenagers accused of raping a white woman in Central Park; he argued they were guilty as late as October 2016, more than 10 years after DNA evidence had exonerated them.
In 1989, on NBC, Trump said: “I think sometimes a black may think they don’t have an advantage or this and that. I’ve said on one occasion, even about myself, if I were starting off today, I would love to be a well-educated black, because I really believe they do have an actual advantage.”
He began his 2016 presidential campaign with a speech disparaging Mexican immigrants as criminals and “rapists.”
He uses the gang MS-13 to disparage all immigrants. Among many other statements, he has suggested that Obama’s protection of the Dreamers — otherwise law-abiding immigrants who were brought to the United States illegally as children — contributed to the spread of MS-13.
In December 2015, Trump called fora “a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States,” including refusing to readmit Muslim-American citizens who were outside of the country at the time.
Trump said a federal judge hearing a case about Trump University was biased because of the judge’s Mexican heritage.
In June 2017, Trump said 15,000 recent immigrants from Haiti “all have AIDS” and that 40,000 Nigerians, once seeing the United States, would never “go back to their huts” in Africa.
At the White House on Jan. 11, Trump vulgarly called for less immigration from Haiti and Africa and more from Norway.
He spent years suggesting that the nation’s first black president was born not in the United States but in Kenya, a lie that Trump still has not acknowledged as such.
Trump called Obama (who was editor in chief of the Harvard Law Review) “a terrible student, terrible.”
Trump frequently claimed that Obama did not work hard as president.
Trump falsely claimed that President Obama “issued a statement for Kwanzaa but failed to issue one for Christmas.”
He often casts heavily black American cities as dystopian war zones. In a 2016 debate with Hillary Clinton, Trump said, “Our inner cities, African Americans, Hispanics are living in hell because it’s so dangerous. You walk down the street, you get shot.” Trump also said to black voters: “You’re living in poverty; your schools are no good; you have no jobs.”
He frequently offers false crime statistics to exaggerate urban crime, including about Oakland, Philadelphia and Ferguson, Mo.
He is quick to highlight crimes committed by dark-skinned people, sometimes exaggerating or lyingabout them (such as a claim about growing crime from “radical Islamic terror” in Britain). He is very slow to decry hate crimes committed by whites against dark-skinned people (such as the killing of an Indian man in Kansas last year).
He frequently criticizes prominent African-Americans for being unpatriotic, ungrateful and disrespectful.
He called Puerto Ricans who criticized his administration’s response to Hurricane Maria “politically motivated ingrates.”
He has retweeted white nationalistswithout apology.
He called some of those who marched alongside white supremacists in Charlottesville, Va., last August “very fine people.”
After David Duke, the former leader of the Ku Klux Klan, endorsed him, Trump was reluctant to disavow Duke even when asked directly on television.
Trump hired Steve Bannon as his campaign head and later White House chief strategist. Under Bannon’s leadership, the website Breitbart made white nationalism a central theme. It featured a section, for example, on “black crime.”
Trump endorsed and campaigned for Roy Moore, the Alabama Senate candidate who spoke positively about slavery and who called for an African-American Muslim member of Congress not to be seated because of his religion.
Trump pardoned – and fulsomely praises – Joe Arpaio, the Arizona sheriff sanctioned for racially profiling Latinos and for keeping immigrants in brutal prison conditions.
In the 1990s, Trump took out advertisements alleging that the “Mohawk Indian record of criminal activity is well documented.” At the time, he was fighting competition for his casino business.
In a 1993 radio interview, he suggested that Native Americans in Connecticut were faking their ancestry. “I think I might have more Indian blood than a lot of the so-called Indians that are trying to open up the reservations.”
In a November 2017 meeting with Navajo veterans of World War II, Trump mocked Senator Elizabeth Warren as “Pocahontas.”
Trump has trafficked in anti-Semitic caricatures, including the tweeting of a six-pointed star alongside a pile of cash. He has also been reluctant to condemn anti-Semitic attacks on journalists from his supporters, and he echoed neo-Nazi conspiracy theories by saying that Hillary Clinton “meets in secret with international banks to plot the destruction of U.S. sovereignty in order to enrich these global financial powers, her special interest friends and her donors.”
In a White House meeting with a Korean-American intelligence analyst briefing him on Pakistan, Trump wondered aloud why she was not working on North Korea policy.
Trump once referred to a Hispanic Miss Universe as “Miss Housekeeping.”
At a June 2016 campaign rally, Trump pointed to one attendee and said: “Oh, look at my African-American over here. Look at him.”
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Tommy Thompson Trump is racist because.....
Trump’s real-estate company tried to avoid renting apartments to African-Americans in the 1970s and gave preferential treatment to whites, according to the federal government.
Trump treated black employees at his casinos differently from whites, according to multiple sources. A former hotel executive said Trump criticized a black accountant: “Black guys counting my money! I hate it. … I think that the guy is lazy. And it’s probably not his fault, because laziness is a trait in blacks.”
In 1989, Trump took out ads in New York newspapers urging the death penalty for five black and Latino teenagers accused of raping a white woman in Central Park; he argued they were guilty as late as October 2016, more than 10 years after DNA evidence had exonerated them.
In 1989, on NBC, Trump said: “I think sometimes a black may think they don’t have an advantage or this and that. I’ve said on one occasion, even about myself, if I were starting off today, I would love to be a well-educated black, because I really believe they do have an actual advantage.”
He began his 2016 presidential campaign with a speech disparaging Mexican immigrants as criminals and “rapists.”
He uses the gang MS-13 to disparage all immigrants. Among many other statements, he has suggested that Obama’s protection of the Dreamers — otherwise law-abiding immigrants who were brought to the United States illegally as children — contributed to the spread of MS-13.
In December 2015, Trump called fora “a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States,” including refusing to readmit Muslim-American citizens who were outside of the country at the time.
Trump said a federal judge hearing a case about Trump University was biased because of the judge’s Mexican heritage.
In June 2017, Trump said 15,000 recent immigrants from Haiti “all have AIDS” and that 40,000 Nigerians, once seeing the United States, would never “go back to their huts” in Africa.
At the White House on Jan. 11, Trump vulgarly called for less immigration from Haiti and Africa and more from Norway.
He spent years suggesting that the nation’s first black president was born not in the United States but in Kenya, a lie that Trump still has not acknowledged as such.
Trump called Obama (who was editor in chief of the Harvard Law Review) “a terrible student, terrible.”
Trump frequently claimed that Obama did not work hard as president.
Trump falsely claimed that President Obama “issued a statement for Kwanzaa but failed to issue one for Christmas.”
He often casts heavily black American cities as dystopian war zones. In a 2016 debate with Hillary Clinton, Trump said, “Our inner cities, African Americans, Hispanics are living in hell because it’s so dangerous. You walk down the street, you get shot.” Trump also said to black voters: “You’re living in poverty; your schools are no good; you have no jobs.”
He frequently offers false crime statistics to exaggerate urban crime, including about Oakland, Philadelphia and Ferguson, Mo.
He is quick to highlight crimes committed by dark-skinned people, sometimes exaggerating or lyingabout them (such as a claim about growing crime from “radical Islamic terror” in Britain). He is very slow to decry hate crimes committed by whites against dark-skinned people (such as the killing of an Indian man in Kansas last year).
He frequently criticizes prominent African-Americans for being unpatriotic, ungrateful and disrespectful.
He called Puerto Ricans who criticized his administration’s response to Hurricane Maria “politically motivated ingrates.”
He has retweeted white nationalistswithout apology.
He called some of those who marched alongside white supremacists in Charlottesville, Va., last August “very fine people.”
After David Duke, the former leader of the Ku Klux Klan, endorsed him, Trump was reluctant to disavow Duke even when asked directly on television.
Trump hired Steve Bannon as his campaign head and later White House chief strategist. Under Bannon’s leadership, the website Breitbart made white nationalism a central theme. It featured a section, for example, on “black crime.”
Trump endorsed and campaigned for Roy Moore, the Alabama Senate candidate who spoke positively about slavery and who called for an African-American Muslim member of Congress not to be seated because of his religion.
Trump pardoned – and fulsomely praises – Joe Arpaio, the Arizona sheriff sanctioned for racially profiling Latinos and for keeping immigrants in brutal prison conditions.
In the 1990s, Trump took out advertisements alleging that the “Mohawk Indian record of criminal activity is well documented.” At the time, he was fighting competition for his casino business.
In a 1993 radio interview, he suggested that Native Americans in Connecticut were faking their ancestry. “I think I might have more Indian blood than a lot of the so-called Indians that are trying to open up the reservations.”
In a November 2017 meeting with Navajo veterans of World War II, Trump mocked Senator Elizabeth Warren as “Pocahontas.”
Trump has trafficked in anti-Semitic caricatures, including the tweeting of a six-pointed star alongside a pile of cash. He has also been reluctant to condemn anti-Semitic attacks on journalists from his supporters, and he echoed neo-Nazi conspiracy theories by saying that Hillary Clinton “meets in secret with international banks to plot the destruction of U.S. sovereignty in order to enrich these global financial powers, her special interest friends and her donors.”
In a White House meeting with a Korean-American intelligence analyst briefing him on Pakistan, Trump wondered aloud why she was not working on North Korea policy.
Trump once referred to a Hispanic Miss Universe as “Miss Housekeeping.”
At a June 2016 campaign rally, Trump pointed to one attendee and said: “Oh, look at my African-American over here. Look at him.”
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Tommy Thompson Third time posting it. Let's see what your excuse is this time.
Trump is racist because.....
Trump’s real-estate company tried to avoid renting apartments to African-Americans in the 1970s and gave preferential treatment to whites, according to the federal government.
Trump treated black employees at his casinos differently from whites, according to multiple sources. A former hotel executive said Trump criticized a black accountant: “Black guys counting my money! I hate it. … I think that the guy is lazy. And it’s probably not his fault, because laziness is a trait in blacks.”
In 1989, Trump took out ads in New York newspapers urging the death penalty for five black and Latino teenagers accused of raping a white woman in Central Park; he argued they were guilty as late as October 2016, more than 10 years after DNA evidence had exonerated them.
In 1989, on NBC, Trump said: “I think sometimes a black may think they don’t have an advantage or this and that. I’ve said on one occasion, even about myself, if I were starting off today, I would love to be a well-educated black, because I really believe they do have an actual advantage.”
He began his 2016 presidential campaign with a speech disparaging Mexican immigrants as criminals and “rapists.”
He uses the gang MS-13 to disparage all immigrants. Among many other statements, he has suggested that Obama’s protection of the Dreamers — otherwise law-abiding immigrants who were brought to the United States illegally as children — contributed to the spread of MS-13.
In December 2015, Trump called fora “a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States,” including refusing to readmit Muslim-American citizens who were outside of the country at the time.
Trump said a federal judge hearing a case about Trump University was biased because of the judge’s Mexican heritage.
In June 2017, Trump said 15,000 recent immigrants from Haiti “all have AIDS” and that 40,000 Nigerians, once seeing the United States, would never “go back to their huts” in Africa.
At the White House on Jan. 11, Trump vulgarly called for less immigration from Haiti and Africa and more from Norway.
He spent years suggesting that the nation’s first black president was born not in the United States but in Kenya, a lie that Trump still has not acknowledged as such.
Trump called Obama (who was editor in chief of the Harvard Law Review) “a terrible student, terrible.”
Trump frequently claimed that Obama did not work hard as president.
Trump falsely claimed that President Obama “issued a statement for Kwanzaa but failed to issue one for Christmas.”
He often casts heavily black American cities as dystopian war zones. In a 2016 debate with Hillary Clinton, Trump said, “Our inner cities, African Americans, Hispanics are living in hell because it’s so dangerous. You walk down the street, you get shot.” Trump also said to black voters: “You’re living in poverty; your schools are no good; you have no jobs.”
He frequently offers false crime statistics to exaggerate urban crime, including about Oakland, Philadelphia and Ferguson, Mo.
He is quick to highlight crimes committed by dark-skinned people, sometimes exaggerating or lyingabout them (such as a claim about growing crime from “radical Islamic terror” in Britain). He is very slow to decry hate crimes committed by whites against dark-skinned people (such as the killing of an Indian man in Kansas last year).
He frequently criticizes prominent African-Americans for being unpatriotic, ungrateful and disrespectful.
He called Puerto Ricans who criticized his administration’s response to Hurricane Maria “politically motivated ingrates.”
He has retweeted white nationalistswithout apology.
He called some of those who marched alongside white supremacists in Charlottesville, Va., last August “very fine people.”
After David Duke, the former leader of the Ku Klux Klan, endorsed him, Trump was reluctant to disavow Duke even when asked directly on television.
Trump hired Steve Bannon as his campaign head and later White House chief strategist. Under Bannon’s leadership, the website Breitbart made white nationalism a central theme. It featured a section, for example, on “black crime.”
Trump endorsed and campaigned for Roy Moore, the Alabama Senate candidate who spoke positively about slavery and who called for an African-American Muslim member of Congress not to be seated because of his religion.
Trump pardoned – and fulsomely praises – Joe Arpaio, the Arizona sheriff sanctioned for racially profiling Latinos and for keeping immigrants in brutal prison conditions.
In the 1990s, Trump took out advertisements alleging that the “Mohawk Indian record of criminal activity is well documented.” At the time, he was fighting competition for his casino business.
In a 1993 radio interview, he suggested that Native Americans in Connecticut were faking their ancestry. “I think I might have more Indian blood than a lot of the so-called Indians that are trying to open up the reservations.”
In a November 2017 meeting with Navajo veterans of World War II, Trump mocked Senator Elizabeth Warren as “Pocahontas.”
Trump has trafficked in anti-Semitic caricatures, including the tweeting of a six-pointed star alongside a pile of cash. He has also been reluctant to condemn anti-Semitic attacks on journalists from his supporters, and he echoed neo-Nazi conspiracy theories by saying that Hillary Clinton “meets in secret with international banks to plot the destruction of U.S. sovereignty in order to enrich these global financial powers, her special interest friends and her donors.”
In a White House meeting with a Korean-American intelligence analyst briefing him on Pakistan, Trump wondered aloud why she was not working on North Korea policy.
Trump once referred to a Hispanic Miss Universe as “Miss Housekeeping.”
At a June 2016 campaign rally, Trump pointed to one attendee and said: “Oh, look at my African-American over here. Look at him.”
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@truthbeyond3624 Sigh... So... You can't come up with an adult rebuttal and, instead, decide to try and call me a Boo Boo head, vaguely reference some fantasized cherry picked argument, decide to be, both, super Ironic and dramatic, and then finally, try and throw in a little shoot the messenger, to highlight the fact that you know you could not present an effective argument against the actual message.... And you thought that was a good idea, why?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@truthbeyond3624 "This specific claim can be found at the start of Volume III of the draft report. (That’s the volume that actually delineates the claims. The preceding two “volumes” are fairly short.) In short, the final list of voters who cast mail-in ballots in 2020 was compared to a commercial database of people who moved between households. It found that about 15,000 people had moved elsewhere in Maricopa County before the registration deadline, an additional 1,700 who moved elsewhere in the state and about 6,600 who moved out of state.
What the review did not do is verify that the database results were correct, pointing out that “a small percentage of error is expected within these results.” It did not determine that those who might have moved were ineligible to vote. It acknowledged that “it may be possible for [the voter] to receive a ballot, for example, if they know the present occupant, or if the ballot is improperly forwarded” to them. In its report, the team leading the review, called Cyber Ninjas, recommended that the county do more research."
1
-
1
-
@truthbeyond3624 “Voters who voted in multiple counties totaled 10,342, and 2,382 ballots came from people who no longer lived in Maricopa County.” Here Trump considers two separate claims.
In the first, he’s elevating a section of the review that found more than 10,000 instances in which people with the same first, middle and last names and the same birth years had cast ballots in more than one county. On its surface, this seems significant. But when I opened up Arizona’s voter file Friday morning (data collected by the firm L2), I quickly found that there were four John Smiths living in Arizona who are reported as being 43 years old. Two of them live in Maricopa County. This took me about 30 seconds.
Again we see the same pattern: elevation of something that could be considered questionable without actually resolving it. And, again, Trump seizing upon it as proof of his point.
As for the 2,382 ballots, this was essentially the in-person-voter version of the effort to match cast ballots against that commercial database of people who had moved. It’s not clear that these voters even moved, that they cast votes improperly, that they cast votes illegally or that they cast votes for Biden. Just another bit of doubt elevated in the review that Trump tacks onto his case.
1
-
@truthbeyond3624 “There were also 2,592 ‘more duplicate ballots than original ballots.’ ” This cryptic assertion, unexplained by Trump, is another discrepancy in metrics. In cases where a ballot cannot be read by an electronic voting machine, it is duplicated to be scanned. The county said it duplicated about 28,000 ballots, but the Cyber Ninjas counted about 27,000 ballots that were supposed to be duplicated and about 29,500 duplicates.
What does this mean? Good question. Maybe the Cyber Ninjas miscounted. Maybe the county did. Maybe something got lost in the shuffle. Maybe something else happened. There is no evidence presented that this indicates that too many votes were tallied or even that too many votes were duplicated. It’s just a number, offered among many other numbers, as part of a review initiated to raise questions about voting in the 2020 election.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
👆 Let me tell you a little story about this guy.
So I'm am a Lib Dems... But... I also feel like it's important to give equal opportunity critiques. On our side of the isle I do it to be constructive. You know... Give these right wing trolls less to aim at.
Anywho... Exactly what I was trying to do with this one the other day. They had asked this right winger, who said that there were more gang related shootings then there were mass shootings, to give examples. Then, in the very next sentence, of the same comment, he decides to pretend the guy couldn't answer the question, all so he can say, "I told you so!", in the third and final sentence.
Turns out, pretending, for this one, would be a running theme, cuz after I pointed out how that was obv not cool, this one looses his s*** for about a day and a half.
First trying deflection to the other guys comment and how that some how justified his actions. Then, when it was clear I wasn't biting on the deflection, he moved to childish insults and personal attacks. When that didn't have the desired effect he tried to insist that bc no one else in the thread had come to my defense (or his, btw) that this meant that he was clearly right. At which point I simply pointed out that maybe it was bc no-one was listening to the exchange. After that, all the sudden he had a curiously timed like on his comments. Then he finally addressed his actions, but tried to pawn it off as him being "confident". At which time I pointed out why even the request for examples was a bad idea... And gave him 4 better ones.
It's clearly silly, bc gang shootings aren't exactly hard to find in America, unfortunately.
I told him...
"You SOULD HAVE called him out for deflecting to Whataboutism. You should have asked if that makes any of the kids who die in mass shootings any less dead. You should have told him that, on average, there is at least one mass shooting a day in america and has been for over a decade now. You should have told him it's the difference between one or 2 dead at a time and 12."
Then I told him to stop liking his own posts.... Which was a mistake on my part bc it gave him the opportunity to deflect to that, instead of addressing his own flawed argument.
He went on to insist he did not.... And that it was all a big coincidence. In order to prove this, he tried to like all his comments... Hoping that I wouldn't think of ppl having multiple accounts on here.
You can guess how well that went at this point.
So... After that, I was just "crazy". Which is what I thought was going to be the end of it, right.... Because, on this channel, someone randomly trying to imply that you're "crazy" after their argument isn't going so well, usually means they're scraping the bottom of the proverbial Barrel.... But... Not this one. No! This had long sense become about his ego at this point.
So... Next thing I know a "new guy" pops up! One that Sports strikingly similar cadence and spelling and grammar errors as he had, conveniently agreeing with everything he said and claiming to be the one who liked his comments. Mind you, not going any reasoning behind it, even when asked, but, still, nevertheless, completely agreeing with every single thing he had said. It turned out there "was" someone who was hanging on our every word. 😂
... But it doesn't stop there. No! This guy stop talking to me, and then precedes to have a whole conversation with the other guy, about me and how "wrong" and "crazy" I am. Again... No reason why... I'm just "wrong" and I'm just "crazy".
Finally, he uses that as an excuse to save face and run away.
So, if you've gotten this far and your one of us... you should know that this guy isn't. He doesn't actually care about any of the issues. He acts like much of the right wing trolls that come here. He doesn't actually care about anything he's saying so much as he just wants to be right, even when he's wrong. He isn't one of us. He is just sad.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@americachillout9386 Which is what makes it such a bad analogy. 😂 Even the choice or wars was bad. What you keep CHOOSING to ignore... Is the "fighting" the pandemic, would be listening to the experts, that's you naively and falsely believe you're smarter than... for some stupid reason... When they tell you what you need to do to fight the pandemic. The ones who are fighting, other then our heroic healthcare workers and Nation Guard, are the non essential workers, staying home, stretching our budgets to worrisome levels, going without meals to make sure our kids have food to eat, putting our jobs homes and vehicles at risk of being taken away and surviving off the bare minimum... In order to not go out and contribute to the further spread of the world wide epidemic. Those of us who choose to see the whole picture, the whole facts... And putting our egos aside for the betterment of everyone.
If the virus is "the nazi" in YOUR analogy, then you would be the German allies... Or the American traitors. You are helping the spread, by not listening to the experts.... You are wrong in your own analogy.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
👆 Let me tell you a little story about Waterborne Camper / D R.
So I'm am a Lib Dems... But... I also feel like it's important to give equal opportunity critiques. On our side of the isle I do it to be constructive. You know... Give these right wing trolls less to aim at.
Anywho... Exactly what I was trying to do with this one the other day. They had asked this right winger, who said that there were more gang related shootings then there were mass shootings, to give examples. Then, in the very next sentence, of the same comment, he decides to pretend the guy couldn't answer the question, all so he can say, "I told you so!", in the third and final sentence.
Turns out, pretending, for this one, would be a running theme, cuz after I pointed out how that was obv not cool, this one looses his s*** for about a day and a half.
First trying deflection to the other guys comment and how that some how justified his actions. Then, when it was clear I wasn't biting on the deflection, he moved to childish insults and personal attacks. When that didn't have the desired effect he tried to insist that bc no one else in the thread had come to my defense (or his, btw) that this meant that he was clearly right. At which point I simply pointed out that maybe it was bc no-one was listening to the exchange. After that, all the sudden he had a curiously timed like on his comments. Then he finally addressed his actions, but tried to pawn it off as him being "confident". At which time I pointed out why even the request for examples was a bad idea... And gave him 4 better ones.
It's clearly silly, bc gang shootings aren't exactly hard to find in America, unfortunately.
I told him...
"You SOULD HAVE called him out for deflecting to Whataboutism. You should have asked if that makes any of the kids who die in mass shootings any less dead. You should have told him that, on average, there is at least one mass shooting a day in america and has been for over a decade now. You should have told him it's the difference between one or 2 dead at a time and 12."
Then I told him to stop liking his own posts.... Which was a mistake on my part bc it gave him the opportunity to deflect to that, instead of addressing his own flawed argument.
He went on to insist he did not.... And that it was all a big coincidence. In order to prove this, he tried to like all his comments... Hoping that I wouldn't think of ppl having multiple accounts on here.
You can guess how well that went at this point.
So... After that, I was just "crazy". Which is what I thought was going to be the end of it, right.... Because, on this channel, someone randomly trying to imply that you're "crazy" after their argument isn't going so well, usually means they're scraping the bottom of the proverbial Barrel.... But... Not this one. No! This had long sense become about his ego at this point.
So... Next thing I know a "new guy" pops up! One that Sports strikingly similar cadence and spelling and grammar errors as he had, conveniently agreeing with everything he said and claiming to be the one who liked his comments. Mind you, not going any reasoning behind it, even when asked, but, still, nevertheless, completely agreeing with every single thing he had said. It turned out there "was" someone who was hanging on our every word. 😂
... But it doesn't stop there. No! This guy stop talking to me, and then precedes to have a whole conversation with the other guy, about me and how "wrong" and "crazy" I am. Again... No reason why... I'm just "wrong" and I'm just "crazy".
Finally, he uses that as an excuse to save face and run away.
So, if you've gotten this far and your one of us... you should know that this guy isn't. He doesn't actually care about any of the issues. He acts like much of the right wing trolls that come here. He doesn't actually care about anything he's saying so much as he just wants to be right, even when he's wrong. He isn't one of us. He is just sad.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@904_Florida @Luftwaffe Offizier I quoted you... The one where you said it was "rare". It's not, comparatively to the amount it should be, considering the diversity ratio of ethnicity....
But on the bright side.. I'm glad we agree on some of it and in some ways, I read you wrong.
However jobs and qualifications absolutely have to do with race. If not directly, then slightly indirectly. On average, African Americans get paid almost as little as women when it comes to the dollar. Historically low wages for different Sexes and ethnicity groups leads to less education opportunities for generations to come. Half the country lives paycheck-to-paycheck and a huge hunk of that is women and minorities. Poverty is a cycle. Well I never really agreed with minority quotas oh, I didn't understand the thought process behind it. At several points since African Americans got the right to vote, enough politicians and lawmakers deemed it a necessity to pass laws and regulations that insisted on people hiring women and minorities. That's how much they weren't doing that. You can look at Congress or even the presidency. The only two presidents we've ever had that we're not old white men were President Kennedy and President Obama. Meaning what isn't directly correlated to systemic racism in the hiring process as is simply One Step removed from it. Due to lack of resources for better education.
What exactly is malicious intent to you? Because if you're describing what I think you're describing , you think malicious intent is walking away from the police to get into your car... Where Your Children Are and leave the Hostile situation... at which point a cop decides to shoot you in the back 7 times about a foot away from your kids... also, this isn't the wild West. We do not authorize police officers to use deadly force unless absolutely necessary. People in a free Society find that the Protectors of that Society just generally deciding when they get to execute people without a trial, is a bad thing. You making the excuse that somebody else is acting a certain way so it's cool for you to isn't good either. When We Were Young our mothers were supposed to teach us that two wrongs don't make a right.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Ricky Spanish Well... My dad and Mom were guarding Reagan on AF1 around the time you "went to basic". I was 4. My big Brother, who has done 3 tours in Iraq and Afghanistan is currently serving his 20th year in the Army, was almost 6. My Uncle, who had fought in VN had moved back to NJ by then. My grandfather who served in the Navy during WW2 and beyond and my grandma who was an army nurse in WW2 had already passed, but my other grandpa, who also served in WW2, would still be around in 88. For another 6 years, at least.... And My cousin who would also later serve in combat in Iraq was 5 at the time. All of which are Republicans and all of which would spit in your face, if you said that the right to vote, that they fought and bled for us to have, should only belong to those who served. Which is why I know you are stolen valor. The service teaches you the opposite. Branch, rank and Unit? I mean... If you can? 😁✌
1
-
@degen83 Nope! Wrong again, Bob! You have not read the report, obviously. You continuing to be willfully ignorant of the report and the facts within it doesn't actually make them disapear. It just makes you look silly for thinking it would. You might as well be screaming Benghazi!
The originator of the Mueller investigation was the FBI. It began with Papadopoulos shooting his mouth off to a foreign diplomat, and not, what is popularly believed to be, the Steele dossier. The Steele dossier could not have started the investigation because the FBI did not become aware of the existence of the dossier until 7 weeks after the investigation began. There were 23 indictments, 9 of which where high-ranking Trump campaign officials. Some took deals and some were found guilty.
As far as the investigation goes into collusion, it would be incorrect to say that there was no evidence. There was not enough evidence to indict on collusion, which is actually conspiracy. .. But that has a lot to do with the second part of the investigation, on obstruction of justice, which they had plenty of evidence to indict. 10 counts actually.
Which is why I find it particularly ironic that you said the Dems are "above the law".
So unless you can provide some evidence to the contrary, you have no way of qualifying the statments that you have made.
As for Hillary... She was shady then, is shady now and will be shady tomorrow. Hopefully, one day, justice will seek her out and win. I have no problem recognising corruption, irregardless of whether there is an A or a R before their name. That's called being objective. I don't care what party you're from, you earn my loyalty and my respect or you don't. Its that simple.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@degen83 Nope! Your the one lying. I'm the one providing actual proof. Your just saying a bunch of lies... Trying to pass it off as truth. Though.. You could provide your own proof? Something that contradicts what I have given you direct from the Mueller Report, you keep trying to lie about?
Now... This is just a little snipit of Volume 1. Which described the conspiracy. Yet still enough to prove you the one lying here. Though I can give LOTS MORE! 😉✌
So... Page 9 of the cloud doc and page 1 of Volume 1
" in Late July 2016 soon after Wikileaks first release of stolen documents a foreign government contacted the FBI about a May 2016 encounter with Trump campaign foreign policy advisor George Papadopoulos. 👉Papadopoulos had suggested to a representative of the foreign governments at the Trump campaign had received indications from the Russian government that it could assist the campaign through the anonymous release of information damaging to the Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.👈 That information prompted the FBI on July 31st 2016 to open an investigation into whether individuals associated with the Trump campaign we're coordinating with the Russian government in its interference activities."
" second, a Russian intelligence service conducted computer intrusion operations against entities employees and volunteers working on the Clinton campaign and then released stolen documents. 👉The investigation also identified numerous links between the Russian government and the Trump campaign.👈"
Page 13 of the cloud doc and page 5 of the report...
" the presidential campaign of Donald J Trump showed interest in Wikileaks release of documents and welcomed their potential to damage candidate Clinton."
" the social media campaign and DJ are you hacking operation coincided West a series of contacts between Trump campaign officials and individuals with ties to the Russian government."
" some of the earliest contacts were made in connection with the Trump organization real estate project and Russia Known As Trump Tower Moscow. Candidate Trump signed a letter of interest for Trump Tower Moscow by November 2015, and in January 2016 Trump organization executive Michael Cohen emailed and spoke about the project with the office of Russian government press secretary Dmitry peskov. The Trump organization Pursuit the project through at least June 2016 including by considering travel to Russia by Cohen and candidate Trump."
" campaign foreign policy advisor George Papadopoulos made early contact through a london-based professor who had connections with Russia and traveled to Moscow in April of 2016. Immediately upon his return to London from that trip, he told Papadopoulos that the Russian government had dirt on Hillary Clinton in the form of thousands of emails. One week later in the first week of May 2016 Papadopoulos suggested to a representative of a foreign government that the Trump campaign had received indications from the Russian government that it could assist the campaign through the anonymous release of information damaging to candidate Clinton"
As for obstruction... Here are some more snip its for that. 😁
Page 250 of the cloud doc and page 1 of volume 2
" beginning in 2017 the president of the United States took a variety of actions towards the ongoing FBI investigation into Russia's interference in the 2016 presidential election and related matters that raised questions about whether he had obstructed Justice."
Attempting to set up a falsified paper trail.
" later that afternoon the president cleared the Oval Office and had a one-on-one meeting with Comey. Referring to the FBI's investigation of Flynn the president said, I hope you can see your way clear to letting this go, to letting Flynn go. He is a good guy. I hope you can let this go. 👉Shortly after requesting Flynn's resignation and speaking privately to Coney the president's sught to have Deputy National Security advisor KT McFarland draft an internal letter stating that the president have not directed Flynn to discuss sanctions with kislyak. McFarland declined because she did not know whether that was true and a White House counsel's Office attorney thought that the request would look like a quid pro quo for an ambassadorship she had been offered.👈"
"In early March the president told White House counsel Don mcgahn to stop sessions from recusing. And after sessions announced that he was work using on March 2nd the president expressed anger at the decision and told advisers that he should have an attorney general that would protect him. That weakened the president took sessions aside at an event and urged him to Unruh cues. Later and March Comey publicly disclosed at a congressional hearing that the FBI was investigating the Russian government efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election."
" on June 14th 2017 the media reported that special counsel's office was investigating whether the president had obstructed Justice. The press reports call this a major turning point in the investigation. While Comey had told the president he was not under investigation, following companies firing, the president now was under investigation. The president reacted to this news with a series of tweets criticizing the Department of Justice and the special counsel's investigation."
WAIT FOR IT!
" on June 17th 2017 the president called Magan at home and directed him to call the acting attorney general and say that the special Counsel had conflicts of interest and must be removed. Mcgahn did not carry out the direction, however, deciding that he would resign rather than trigger what he regarded as a potential Saturday night Massacre."
1
-
1
-
@degen83 Nope! Your the one lying. I'm the one providing actual proof. Your just saying a bunch of lies... Trying to pass it off as truth. Though.. You could provide your own proof? Something that contradicts what I have given you direct from the Mueller Report, you keep trying to lie about?
Now... This is just a little snipit of Volume 1. Which described the conspiracy. Yet still enough to prove you the one lying here. Though I can give LOTS MORE! 😉✌
So... Page 9 of the cloud doc and page 1 of Volume 1
" in Late July 2016 soon after Wikileaks first release of stolen documents a foreign government contacted the FBI about a May 2016 encounter with Trump campaign foreign policy advisor George Papadopoulos. 👉Papadopoulos had suggested to a representative of the foreign governments at the Trump campaign had received indications from the Russian government that it could assist the campaign through the anonymous release of information damaging to the Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.👈 That information prompted the FBI on July 31st 2016 to open an investigation into whether individuals associated with the Trump campaign we're coordinating with the Russian government in its interference activities."
" second, a Russian intelligence service conducted computer intrusion operations against entities employees and volunteers working on the Clinton campaign and then released stolen documents. 👉The investigation also identified numerous links between the Russian government and the Trump campaign.👈"
Page 13 of the cloud doc and page 5 of the report...
" the presidential campaign of Donald J Trump showed interest in Wikileaks release of documents and welcomed their potential to damage candidate Clinton."
" the social media campaign and DJ are you hacking operation coincided West a series of contacts between Trump campaign officials and individuals with ties to the Russian government."
" some of the earliest contacts were made in connection with the Trump organization real estate project and Russia Known As Trump Tower Moscow. Candidate Trump signed a letter of interest for Trump Tower Moscow by November 2015, and in January 2016 Trump organization executive Michael Cohen emailed and spoke about the project with the office of Russian government press secretary Dmitry peskov. The Trump organization Pursuit the project through at least June 2016 including by considering travel to Russia by Cohen and candidate Trump."
" campaign foreign policy advisor George Papadopoulos made early contact through a london-based professor who had connections with Russia and traveled to Moscow in April of 2016. Immediately upon his return to London from that trip, he told Papadopoulos that the Russian government had dirt on Hillary Clinton in the form of thousands of emails. One week later in the first week of May 2016 Papadopoulos suggested to a representative of a foreign government that the Trump campaign had received indications from the Russian government that it could assist the campaign through the anonymous release of information damaging to candidate Clinton"
As for obstruction... Here are some more snip its for that. 😁
Page 250 of the cloud doc and page 1 of volume 2
" beginning in 2017 the president of the United States took a variety of actions towards the ongoing FBI investigation into Russia's interference in the 2016 presidential election and related matters that raised questions about whether he had obstructed Justice."
Attempting to set up a falsified paper trail.
" later that afternoon the president cleared the Oval Office and had a one-on-one meeting with Comey. Referring to the FBI's investigation of Flynn the president said, I hope you can see your way clear to letting this go, to letting Flynn go. He is a good guy. I hope you can let this go. 👉Shortly after requesting Flynn's resignation and speaking privately to Coney the president's sught to have Deputy National Security advisor KT McFarland draft an internal letter stating that the president have not directed Flynn to discuss sanctions with kislyak. McFarland declined because she did not know whether that was true and a White House counsel's Office attorney thought that the request would look like a quid pro quo for an ambassadorship she had been offered.👈"
"In early March the president told White House counsel Don mcgahn to stop sessions from recusing. And after sessions announced that he was work using on March 2nd the president expressed anger at the decision and told advisers that he should have an attorney general that would protect him. That weakened the president took sessions aside at an event and urged him to Unruh cues. Later and March Comey publicly disclosed at a congressional hearing that the FBI was investigating the Russian government efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election."
" on June 14th 2017 the media reported that special counsel's office was investigating whether the president had obstructed Justice. The press reports call this a major turning point in the investigation. While Comey had told the president he was not under investigation, following companies firing, the president now was under investigation. The president reacted to this news with a series of tweets criticizing the Department of Justice and the special counsel's investigation."
WAIT FOR IT!
" on June 17th 2017 the president called Magan at home and directed him to call the acting attorney general and say that the special Counsel had conflicts of interest and must be removed. Mcgahn did not carry out the direction, however, deciding that he would resign rather than trigger what he regarded as a potential Saturday night Massacre."
and let me make it easy for you... Here! The Mueller Report! Once again! 😉✌
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/5955118-The-Mueller-Report.html
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@degen83 Nope! Your the one lying. I'm the one providing actual proof. Your just saying a bunch of lies... Trying to pass it off as truth. Though.. You could provide your own proof? Something that contradicts what I have given you direct from the Mueller Report, you keep trying to lie about?
Now... This is just a little snipit of Volume 1. Which described the conspiracy. Yet still enough to prove you the one lying here. Though I can give LOTS MORE! 😉✌
So... Page 9 of the cloud doc and page 1 of Volume 1
" in Late July 2016 soon after Wikileaks first release of stolen documents a foreign government contacted the FBI about a May 2016 encounter with Trump campaign foreign policy advisor George Papadopoulos. 👉Papadopoulos had suggested to a representative of the foreign governments at the Trump campaign had received indications from the Russian government that it could assist the campaign through the anonymous release of information damaging to the Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.👈 That information prompted the FBI on July 31st 2016 to open an investigation into whether individuals associated with the Trump campaign we're coordinating with the Russian government in its interference activities."
" second, a Russian intelligence service conducted computer intrusion operations against entities employees and volunteers working on the Clinton campaign and then released stolen documents. 👉The investigation also identified numerous links between the Russian government and the Trump campaign.👈"
Page 13 of the cloud doc and page 5 of the report...
" the presidential campaign of Donald J Trump showed interest in Wikileaks release of documents and welcomed their potential to damage candidate Clinton."
" the social media campaign and DJ are you hacking operation coincided West a series of contacts between Trump campaign officials and individuals with ties to the Russian government."
" some of the earliest contacts were made in connection with the Trump organization real estate project and Russia Known As Trump Tower Moscow. Candidate Trump signed a letter of interest for Trump Tower Moscow by November 2015, and in January 2016 Trump organization executive Michael Cohen emailed and spoke about the project with the office of Russian government press secretary Dmitry peskov. The Trump organization Pursuit the project through at least June 2016 including by considering travel to Russia by Cohen and candidate Trump."
" campaign foreign policy advisor George Papadopoulos made early contact through a london-based professor who had connections with Russia and traveled to Moscow in April of 2016. Immediately upon his return to London from that trip, he told Papadopoulos that the Russian government had dirt on Hillary Clinton in the form of thousands of emails. One week later in the first week of May 2016 Papadopoulos suggested to a representative of a foreign government that the Trump campaign had received indications from the Russian government that it could assist the campaign through the anonymous release of information damaging to candidate Clinton"
As for obstruction... Here are some more snip its for that. 😁
Page 250 of the cloud doc and page 1 of volume 2
" beginning in 2017 the president of the United States took a variety of actions towards the ongoing FBI investigation into Russia's interference in the 2016 presidential election and related matters that raised questions about whether he had obstructed Justice."
Attempting to set up a falsified paper trail.
" later that afternoon the president cleared the Oval Office and had a one-on-one meeting with Comey. Referring to the FBI's investigation of Flynn the president said, I hope you can see your way clear to letting this go, to letting Flynn go. He is a good guy. I hope you can let this go. 👉Shortly after requesting Flynn's resignation and speaking privately to Coney the president's sught to have Deputy National Security advisor KT McFarland draft an internal letter stating that the president have not directed Flynn to discuss sanctions with kislyak. McFarland declined because she did not know whether that was true and a White House counsel's Office attorney thought that the request would look like a quid pro quo for an ambassadorship she had been offered.👈"
"In early March the president told White House counsel Don mcgahn to stop sessions from recusing. And after sessions announced that he was work using on March 2nd the president expressed anger at the decision and told advisers that he should have an attorney general that would protect him. That weakened the president took sessions aside at an event and urged him to Unruh cues. Later and March Comey publicly disclosed at a congressional hearing that the FBI was investigating the Russian government efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election."
" on June 14th 2017 the media reported that special counsel's office was investigating whether the president had obstructed Justice. The press reports call this a major turning point in the investigation. While Comey had told the president he was not under investigation, following companies firing, the president now was under investigation. The president reacted to this news with a series of tweets criticizing the Department of Justice and the special counsel's investigation."
WAIT FOR IT!
" on June 17th 2017 the president called Magan at home and directed him to call the acting attorney general and say that the special Counsel had conflicts of interest and must be removed. Mcgahn did not carry out the direction, however, deciding that he would resign rather than trigger what he regarded as a potential Saturday night Massacre."
and let me make it easy for you... Here! The Mueller Report! Once again! 😉✌
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/5955118-The-Mueller-Report.html
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
stephen glover First... Thank you for identifying yourself as a TRUMP TROLL. 😁
Second... No-one "think"s anything. That is what the polls have steadily tracked for almost a month now. A steady gain for Biden. Whether you want to live in reality or not is honestly no concern to us.
Third... Fortune telling is not an argument . Sorry.
Forth... You wanting to rewrite history and cherry pick facts, just makes you look silly and forever will. Especially when you guys try and pretend the whole second volume of the Muller report doesn't exist and the the Rep Senate didn't, yet again, do the complete opposite of what they had done before in an impeachment trial, when it was convenient for them. Rigging it for Trump. But when we look at all relevant facts about situations, the truth actually comes out instead of some crazy right-wing bias that you're trying to paint as accurate history.
Fifth... You speak of evidence and produce none. Just you saying, "Nuah!" And trying to play fortune teller. Sorry. Your not magic.
Sixth... Your fit about the Supreme court would ring more genuine if it was applied to all matters involving the Supreme court picks. It doesn't. You guys are just mad because you have been playing games and steeling seats for a hot min with the SC... But can't handle when it's done back to you. Like any childish bully. Don't start s***, won't be s***.
Seventh... Your party and their representatives live on fear.
They're coming over the border to rape you and kill you.
Democrats are burning down our cities
Their socialism is going to destroy our country and we have to stop them.
Etc
Basically, they don't agree with me, and since I'm so massively insecure, that must mean they're evil incarnate. 😂
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ashanator1991 LMAO! You know what makes you guys so easy to shoot down? You contradict yourself from sentence 2 sentence, and don't even realize it.😁🤣😁
Paraphrased... HOW DARE YOU ASSUME I'M A REP!!!!.... Now be quiet you 🌈far leftist🦄! 😁😁😁
Which, I didn't, by the way. You should read closer. I said you were using far-right tropes. Because you're using far-right tropes. Reality is so hard for you guys to grasp, sometimes!
But.... Ya know what... I got some time. Lets investigate your little theory about me. 😁😁😁 Now... Was your "different point of view"
- that I " forgot to take" my "crazy pills for that anxiety" I was feeling?
- Or was it that I needed "to visit" my "safe space so" I "can feel safe again"?
- Or was it your attempt at getting into Hogwarts by magically predicting the future, by claiming "Trump" will win "a second term", and that Dems would have themselves "to blame for it"?
- Or when you made vague and baseless assumptions, about a party filled with millions of people, that you don't even know, and have not provided any proof for, when you claimed that, " because your party's propaganda and lies they sold you over and over again."
So which one of those little "nuggets of knowledge" where you were referring to, when you claimed that I Was only dismissing what you said because it was a different point of view than what I had? I'll be waiting... 😁😁😁
1
-
@ashanator1991 See, sweetheart, I don't mind people who have well thoughtout counter arguments, or even debating them respectfully. That is how an adult learns and grows as a person. Even if I have been proven wrong at any given point, that just means that someone set me straight and next time I won't be.
What I do mind is people coming at me with, childish and baseless attacks... but only to try and reinforce an opinion of Their Own, that they are obviously not too sure of. Cuz if they where actually, so sure of that opinion, they wouldn't care that, what I said was different. They would not feel the need to, so childishly, attack the person who challanged that opinion. They would not need to try and make them feel small, so that they can feel big. It simply would not matter to them.
See! Your really just arguing with yourself, hun. Your just using me as a surrogate, to do so.
That's, why everything has to be my fault, why I have to be stupid, why I have to be so butt hurt... All in your eyes! Its projection 101... I can't possibly even have the tiniest of points, because then your whole world collapses. I have to be brainwashed by MSM, all up in my feeling and basically the devil.... Ya know.... Whatever you need to tell yourself, to be able to get up the next morning. 😜✌
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ashanator1991 Oddly enough, you seamed to of made it and then sailed right past it! That's okay though. I quoted the whole thing for you, again, right here! 😜✌
"LMAO! You know what makes you guys so easy to shoot down? You contradict yourself from sentence 2 sentence, and don't even realize it.😁🤣😁
Paraphrased... HOW DARE YOU ASSUME I'M A REP!!!!.... Now be quiet you 🌈far leftist🦄! 😁😁😁
Which, I didn't, by the way. You should read closer. I said you were using far-right tropes. Because you're using far-right tropes. Reality is so hard for you guys to grasp, sometimes!
But.... Ya know what... I got some time. Lets investigate your little theory about me. 😁😁😁 Now... Was your "different point of view"
- that I " forgot to take" my "crazy pills for that anxiety" I was feeling?
- Or was it that I needed "to visit" my "safe space so" I "can feel safe again"?
- Or was it your attempt at getting into Hogwarts by magically predicting the future, by claiming "Trump" will win "a second term", and that Dems would have themselves "to blame for it"?
- Or when you made vague and baseless assumptions, about a party filled with millions of people, that you don't even know, and have not provided any proof for, when you claimed that, " because your party's propaganda and lies they sold you over and over again."
So which one of those little "nuggets of knowledge" where you were referring to, when you claimed that I Was only dismissing what you said because it was a different point of view than what I had? I'll be waiting... 😁😁😁"
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ashanator1991 Aww! Okay, ya talked me into it. One more for the road! Wouldn't want anyone to think, I was playing faVz, after all! 😉
No silly! Of course not! Of course, that's mostly because nothing you just said was true. See, your making the mistake of thinking that everyone in the world are juvenile assholes, like you. Except they're not. And do you want me to really blow your mind. 😯 Wait for it.... This thread is not the whole world!😯😯😯 Yeah... I Know! See, this is a tiny youtube comment section, thread, with maybe 7 or 8 people comments on it, total. So, even if it was true, that no one likes me here, I'm still all good! Cuz if you looked up from your screen every once in awhile, you would see that there's a big, bright, 🌎 out there, filled with people. 🙋 Some can even act their age. Basic logical thinking, is magical, right!??!!!! Goodnite for now, little ones! Sleep tight! Don't let the bed 🐛 bight! Cuz if they do, it's gonna be anyones fault, other that you! 😜✌
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@irgong6875 Yeah... luckily you're not the one that gets to decide what matters and what doesn't.... Also... Unless you have any proof that things are fabricated... You might as well be screaming into the wind. You Obvy have some conformation bias. When one chooses to ignore all relevant material and only conveniently thinks that the material that is relevant is the one that supports their point of view, they're not being truthful. They want to be right more than they want the truth. If you can't make your argument off of all relevant material, then you have no business making that argument.
Why should I care on why or how he waited for? Really? Do you know the details of the Biden thing? That happened a good while ago and conveniently the one time Trump seems to care about it is when he is running against him in a presidential election. As for the Y, you should care because he's trying to unduly influence our Democratic process.... And he's abusing his power to do so. All of which I think you already know, but it doesn't fit what you've decided to be true, so you're playing dumb.
What another great example of you only paying attention to the relevant material that fits your preconceived notions. He released efficient information only after lying back and forth a couple of times on camera, trying to hide the phone call itself on a top secret server, to which it did not belong, tried to abuse his executive power to keep Congress from getting the Whistleblower report and then finally only caved because he saw the Republican and Democratic lawmakers getting together and saying hey no that's not cool. He had his own party turn against him on that.
If he had nothing to hide and thought he was doing nothing wrong, why do all of that before releasing the information?
When did he change his story... Maybe you don't have enough info about the situation to come to a educated opinion on the matter. He denied several times on camera that he put the money for Ukraine on hold.
https://youtu.be/4S_x5yI4Q6o
https://youtu.be/A0KTdsydt6E
https://youtu.be/rnM1H2RYzzU
https://youtu.be/4Gc8HGtPDtg
To get with Barr for what? That means nothing.
What did I say that was not true?
Really... Cuz the only reason... Biden is an issue is because Trump is try to divert the attention to Biden and npt his actions. SoOoOo... Yeah... WhatAboutIsm... And your buying into it. Which is not a bog suprise. Considering your bias cherry picking thus far.
No... The problem is... Your only willing to look at information that confirms what you want to be true. As evodent by your discribing the "problem" just now. For instance it's not just a Democrat, though that is a good point. It's odd that he's not worried about investigating any Republican corruption. It is his political opponent in the election. Again, another example of you only looking at very specifically tailored information. Runs the justice department. Yet he's going to another country to find out whether Biden did anything shady oh, and only when he becomes his rival candidate in the presidential election, when what he saying happened, happened a long time ago.
As for whether Biden is corrupt or not, here's the difference between me and you. I don't want corruption and Liars as my leaders just because they happen to be on the same side that I'm on. If there is enough evidence, there should be an investigation, there should be a trial and if he is found guilty he should go to jail. I would absolutely not make any excuse for his actions. You however cannot say the same.
1
-
1
-
@Lerian_V SoOoOo... Your a judge? Maybe legal expert? How about constitutional scholar? Are you talking about the DNA that everybody wanted to Fire and? And I mean fired by everybody as in multiple countries?
Trump denied holding the money. I said nothing about him denying the investigation. The Giuliani did do that. Seriously, Trump denied any quid pro quo so we're fine carrying the guy who's been caught in countless lies just while being president denied something that he could have done wrong and everything is hunky-dory now? That... that's your argument? Why I can't find anything wrong with that logic. 🙄
Again... Cherry picking info. He withhold American tax dollars in the form of aid, from ukraine, to get him to investigate his political opponent in the next election, instead of getting the justice department, upon which he runs, to do so, he did so only when he became his opponent, he tried to hide this in a multitude of ways and that involved abusing his executive privilege, lying to the American people in charging a story 3 different times on camera, putting the call in a place for top secert material, and did so only when he because an election opponent.
There was mention of withholding aid if you know what the aid was for and what it was designated to do. Also knowing about the EU.
The Javelins... Is one of the key portions you need to pay attention to. Go look up the Ukraine money for Aid and that history. You'll figure out why him mentioning that was exactly what that was.
1
-
1
-
@irgong6875 How didn't I answer your question? There was a whole paragraph on your question about lion how. So you can stop lying on me. I didn't say you didn't get to decide what matters to you. I said you don't get to decide that for everybody. You can just dismiss things all you want, but unless you're in a place to make decisions like that for the people who matter in this situation, it don't matter. Unless you're under the impression I'm trying to convince you of something? Because I'm not.
You don't have to prove a damn thing to me or anyone else but you're supposed to be an adult and adults have evidence to back up the claims they make. If you can't do that you either need to get used to not people not caring what you're saying or you need to stop arguing it. Which was the larger amount of time? You say you know the the details of the Biden thing. How long after he decided he was going to run did this phone call happen? And how long before that did he do what Trump is claiming he did with his son? Here's another question, why don't you ever hear him talking to other countries about getting dirt on a Republican or someone who's not running against him in a presidential campaign?
" I only pay attention to the material that makes sense" like I said, confirmation bias. Anything that doesn't fit what you've decided to be true you throw up is not making sense. Which is very convenient and it's faulty logic. And it's all the more reason why your opinion should matter.
" asking the question why would he do that and then filling in the gaps is exactly the way to back your preconceived notions... I'm not cherry-picking." Except you seem to be doing just that because you're throwing everything aside that doesn't fit what you want it to be as not mattering. That's called cherry picking oh, that's called confirmation bias. You don't have to guess at someone's motives. You're not considering all of the physical facts. Not guessing at someone's motivations, what they are actually doing. Which includes something they did it for a specific reason.
Say it this is your fault a logic. It's just laying me. Now you're even trying to put words in my mouth. At what point did I say what about the corrupt Republicans? Please quote me where I said that. This whole thing is just a huge example of you using lazy logic and confirmation bias. whatever doesn't fit... What you decided is true, throw it out the window. That way, what I thought was thrue, can be. And I will assume, lie and put words in your mouth if I have to because I have to be right. I'm barely through your first three paragraphs and you've done that so much then I'm about done. You're just simply not being an honest actor.
Not to mention the hypocracy. You literally just got done saying " anything that requires me to guess at someone's motives was Ill take with a grain of salt."
But then you wanna guess on my motives.... isn't that convenient.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Lerian_V Okay, then you can prove it then, right? You can prove that the investigation into Joe Biden was reopened before the July 25th phone call?
You continuing to say that Trump didn't breach any of American laws does not actually make it true. It doesn't actually make the laws go away. It's also something you and me cannot determine.
Most of what he did fell under 👉conflict of interest👈. Upon which, makes him the wrong person to have anything to do with an investigation.
Conflict of interest legal statute in Washington State. .....
A conflict of interest exists when a state officer has "an interest, financial or 👉otherwise👈, direct or 👉indirect👈, or engage in a business or 👉transaction👈 or 👉professional activity👈, or 👉incur an obligation of any nature👈, that is in conflict with the proper discharge of the state officer's or state employee's official duties." Wash. Rev. Code Ann. § 42.52.020.
These are what there is more then enough to indight him with at this point.... campaign finance, bribery, extortion, and obstruction of justice.
Though you do bring up a good point about his duty. Which is why it's curious why he did not go to hia own department of justice to handle the investigations and deal with Ukraine. That would have avoided conflict of interest all together.
Then he tries to cover it up by putting the recording where it doesn't normally go, attempting to invoke executive privilage, getting his administration to not turn over the report and only caving when his own party turned against him. Why do all that?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Dicky Jones Actually, Goebbels is a misnomer to, genius.
The full quote is...
" if you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The LIE can be maintained only for such time as the state can Shield the people from the political, economic and or military consequences of the lie. It, thus becomes vitally important for the state to use all of its powers to repress descent, for the truth is the moral enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest Enemy of the State."
The quote shows up on 500000 web pages and 20 published books. They attribute it to Joseph Goebbels. No one ever gives a citation to the source. A fair number of website citations are to Joseph M. Goebbles. His middle name did not start with an M. There are several hundred pages in German that site the statement, but none give a source.
It was also out of Goebbles character to have said that, especially in public. He always maintained that propaganda had to be truthful.
The Nazis issued a weekly series of posters with inspiring quotes that were displayed throughout Germany. One from 1940 displays his alleged love for the truth.
The hacked up quote itself is one of the more well known false Nazi quotes.
So, maybe check your facts before you go around calling other people's intelligence into question. Cuz, right now you're standing in a big ol glass house. 😉✌
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@MeowNSheeit how many of these things did the Democratic party do?
He....
-Had a 33 page laid out plan to contain a pandemic in America, just exactly like covid-19, and chose not to use it because the administration who commissioned it was Obamas.
-Decided it wasn't important to refill the medical stockpiles for 3 and 1/2 years.
-Tried to pretend for two and a half months that covid-19 had magically gone away.
-Tried to sell American citizens multiple snake oil cures, taking none of them when he actually got sick.
- Left each state to fend for themselves and forced them into a bidding war against each other, for literally American lives.
-Called the severity of the worst worldwide pandemic in over a hundred years, a democratic hoax.
-Tried to take millions of Americans Healthcare away during the worst worldwide pandemic in over a hundred years.
-Made multiple false claims about how it would all just go away, by several different dates, and got every one wrong.
-Threw multiple large rallies and celebrations, with little to no social distancing, instead of setting an example and using a covid safe campaign plan, like President elect Biden did.
-Suggested on a regular basis that we should stop testing for the virus, only so the numbers would go down and he would look better.
-Spread false propaganda about covid-19 being no worse than the flu.
-Claimed that 99% of all covered cases are totally harmless.
-Discouraged his supporters from listening to the medical experts.
-Constantly lied about our fatality rate.
-Playing on racial tensions, tried to blame Mexico for covid-19 in America, with absolutely nothing to back it up.
-Threatened to defund our already strapped public education system in an effort to try and force children to go back to school, when it wasn't safe and no one had a national plan.
-Handled the pandemic so poorly that it crippled our economy and put 9 million people out of work, into a housing crisis and wondering how they were going to feed their children.
-Claimed, on multiple occasions, that covid-19 was merely being overblown because of the election in America. Despite the virus being all over the world.
-Lied about Google engineers building a website to help Americans determine whether they need testing for the coronavirus and to direct them to their nearest testing site.
-Claimed to put a ban on travel from China, but after doing so nearly, 40,000 people travelled from China to the United States under his ban rules.
-Claimed this kind of pandemic was something nobody thought could happen, when experts both on inside and outside the federal government sounded the alarm many times in the past decade about the potential for a devastating Global pandemic.
And on... and on... And on....
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Vince Campbell 3. Not sure why your assumption of me not being able to prove something that you have never asked me to, and only assumed I could not, proves I'm a Dem. But I am... A liberal, infact. Which is not the crime you just made it sound like.
I believe in reasonable gun regulations, treating people like human beings whether they come from this country or not, a woman's right to choose not to be a walking incubator, a living wage, Universal Health Care like every other first-world country has managed to figure out but us, that unless we want the generation that takes care of us when we're old to be a mass parade of idiots, we need to do a better job of funding or public education, that both climate change and covid-19 are real and killing us, that its not any of my damned business who someone else wants to marry or what pronouns they prefer and that torture and playing God is generally a bad practice for a world superpower to participate in... Historically speaking...
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@MeowNSheeit Except all these facts you keep running from and the WAY out of context first clip of the video you presented as evidence of some crazy qanan conspiracy, right?
Donald Trump....
-Had a 33 page laid out plan to contain a pandemic in America, just exactly like covid-19, and chose not to use it because the administration who commissioned it was Obamas.
-Decided it wasn't important to refill the medical stockpiles for 3 and 1/2 years.
-Tried to pretend for two and a half months that covid-19 had magically gone away.
-Tried to sell American citizens multiple snake oil cures, taking none of them when he actually got sick.
- Left each state to fend for themselves and forced them into a bidding war against each other, for literally American lives.
-Called the severity of the worst worldwide pandemic in over a hundred years, a democratic hoax.
-Tried to take millions of Americans Healthcare away during the worst worldwide pandemic in over a hundred years.
-Made multiple false claims about how it would all just go away, by several different dates, and got every one wrong.
-Threw multiple large rallies and celebrations, with little to no social distancing, instead of setting an example and using a covid safe campaign plan, like President elect Biden did.
-Suggested on a regular basis that we should stop testing for the virus, only so the numbers would go down and he would look better.
-Spread false propaganda about covid-19 being no worse than the flu.
-Claimed that 99% of all covered cases are totally harmless.
-Discouraged his supporters from listening to the medical experts.
-Constantly lied about our fatality rate.
-Playing on racial tensions, tried to blame Mexico for covid-19 in America, with absolutely nothing to back it up.
-Threatened to defund our already strapped public education system in an effort to try and force children to go back to school, when it wasn't safe and no one had a national plan.
-Handled the pandemic so poorly that it crippled our economy and put 9 million people out of work, into a housing crisis and wondering how they were going to feed their children.
-Claimed, on multiple occasions, that covid-19 was merely being overblown because of the election in America. Despite the virus being all over the world.
-Lied about Google engineers building a website to help Americans determine whether they need testing for the coronavirus and to direct them to their nearest testing site.
-Claimed to put a ban on travel from China, but after doing so nearly, 40,000 people travelled from China to the United States under his ban rules.
-Claimed this kind of pandemic was something nobody thought could happen, when experts both on inside and outside the federal government sounded the alarm many times in the past decade about the potential for a devastating Global pandemic.
And on... and on... And on....
1
-
@MeowNSheeit well... I'd love to say I was surprised you don't know how to do math.
AT NO POINT sense the pandemic began have we had a 99% survival rate in this country, or in the world.
Cases in the US
13,458,668
Recovered in the US
4,637,268
Deaths in the US
270,823
This means several things... You won't want it to.
1. Even if you took the highest percentage, by figuring out what percent of the total case numbers, are the Dead oh, it still wouldn't be 99%.
Cases 13,458,668
Dead 270,823
Death Rate 2.012257082201597%
The unknown/ill are 8,831,300
Those are important because those consist of those who are currently still ill with the C19, those who will have long lasting or life time heath issue because of C19 and the asymptomatic carriers.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@MeowNSheeit Donald Trump's long list of racist statements is insane. I don't even know why you Trump trolls bring up racism. All you're doing is using a horrible thing like racism to attack the other side. If you actually cared about racism you care about racism on both sides. Which makes you pretty disgusting. When you're honest and an adult, you don't have to justify or ignore everything someone is saying just because they're on your side. You don't have to make a bunch of bulshit excuses and make yourself look like an a**** doing it. You just admit their faults. Lord knows Joe Biden isn't perfect. I don't have to defend that because I've never claimed that. You, on the other hand or trying to sell that Donald Trump may be crass but he's awesome because he did what? Other than being responsible for 270000 + dead Americans do to covid-19? Or that time he shut down the government to try and force funding for his racist wall that would have never worked in the first place, allowing government workers to whine up in food lines for a month-and-a-half until he caved and made that absolutely worth nothing? Or that time he dropped the mother of all bombs for no discernible reason and against his General's advice? Or that time he crippled the EPA and set us back years with climate change? Or that time he's so dangerously deregulated things like jobs and Environmental Protections that it alienated so many of our allies that we've had four generations now? Or that time he got us into a trade War and lost America hundreds of billions of dollars over the next couple of years because everybody was screaming at him and telling him that nobody ever wins a trade War and he didn't listen? Just a few off the top of my head.
As for his racism... This is just a few, cuz I don't have the time or patience to name them all.
Kung Fu, Miss housekeeping, shitholecountries, good people on both sides, stand down and standby, I hate black people counting my money, they don't look like Indians, Pocahontas, Mexicans are rapists and murderers, they all have AIDS, look at my African-American over there....
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@MeowNSheeit Give a logical explanation as to why you keep ignoring these facts and the deaths he has caused?
Donald Trump....
-Had a 33 page laid out plan to contain a pandemic in America, just exactly like covid-19, and chose not to use it because the administration who commissioned it was Obamas.
-Decided it wasn't important to refill the medical stockpiles for 3 and 1/2 years.
-Tried to pretend for two and a half months that covid-19 had magically gone away.
-Tried to sell American citizens multiple snake oil cures, taking none of them when he actually got sick.
- Left each state to fend for themselves and forced them into a bidding war against each other, for literally American lives.
-Called the severity of the worst worldwide pandemic in over a hundred years, a democratic hoax.
-Tried to take millions of Americans Healthcare away during the worst worldwide pandemic in over a hundred years.
-Made multiple false claims about how it would all just go away, by several different dates, and got every one wrong.
-Threw multiple large rallies and celebrations, with little to no social distancing, instead of setting an example and using a covid safe campaign plan, like President elect Biden did.
-Suggested on a regular basis that we should stop testing for the virus, only so the numbers would go down and he would look better.
-Spread false propaganda about covid-19 being no worse than the flu.
-Claimed that 99% of all covered cases are totally harmless.
-Discouraged his supporters from listening to the medical experts.
-Constantly lied about our fatality rate.
-Playing on racial tensions, tried to blame Mexico for covid-19 in America, with absolutely nothing to back it up.
-Threatened to defund our already strapped public education system in an effort to try and force children to go back to school, when it wasn't safe and no one had a national plan.
-Handled the pandemic so poorly that it crippled our economy and put 9 million people out of work, into a housing crisis and wondering how they were going to feed their children.
-Claimed, on multiple occasions, that covid-19 was merely being overblown because of the election in America. Despite the virus being all over the world.
-Lied about Google engineers building a website to help Americans determine whether they need testing for the coronavirus and to direct them to their nearest testing site.
-Claimed to put a ban on travel from China, but after doing so nearly, 40,000 people travelled from China to the United States under his ban rules.
-Claimed this kind of pandemic was something nobody thought could happen, when experts both on inside and outside the federal government sounded the alarm many times in the past decade about the potential for a devastating Global pandemic.
And on... and on... And on....
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Sean moynihan Aww! Puddin! Just couldn't make your argument without acting like a toddler, could you... Keep reading Brain Trust... 😂
"In the impeachment context, abuse of power is generally defined as using the vast powers of the presidency for personal benefit.
Abuse of power is not specifically referred to as an impeachable offense in the U.S. Constitution, which states that a president can be removed from office for "Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors."
But the founders of the United States intended the phrase "other high Crimes and Misdemeanors" to broadly encompass abuses of power, legal scholars said.
Alexander Hamilton, a famed American statesman, wrote in 1788 that impeachment proceedings were for "those offenses which proceed from the misconduct of public men, or, in other words, from the abuse or violation of some public trust."
Louis Michael Seidman, a professor at Georgetown Law, said the core allegation against Republican Trump - that he withheld security aid to Ukraine to pressure it to announce investigations that would benefit him politically - was the sort of conduct the founders considered impeachable.
"The U.S. has a national security interest in Ukraine and it does appear that what the president was doing was putting that national security interest at risk in exchange for political benefits," said Seidman. "If that is what happened, that is the core of what impeachment is about."
Abuse of power was one of the articles of impeachment advanced against President Richard Nixon, who resigned before a full House vote on the charges. In approving the charge of abuse of power against Nixon, a House committee accused of him of authorizing tax audits of political opponents on his "enemies list."
Abuse of power was advanced as an article of impeachment against former President Bill Clinton relating to his affair with a White House intern, but a majority of House members voted against including that charge. Clinton was eventually impeached on two other charges - perjury and obstruction of justice - but was not convicted by the Senate."
Thank you! Come again!
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@HiPo-1 "However, if we look at violent crime cases per 10,000 people, Mr Trump's claim isn't quite correct."
"But the FBI has warned against using its statistics in a way which ranks cities and oversimplifies what causes crime."
"These rough rankings provide no insight into the numerous variables that mould crime in a particular town, city, county, state, tribal area, or region," it says on its website.
"Consequently, they lead to simplistic and/or incomplete analyses that often create misleading perceptions adversely affecting communities and their residents."
https://www-bbc-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.bbc.com/news/amp/world-us-canada-53991722?amp_js_v=a6&_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQFKAGwASA%3D#aoh=16040900788653&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&_tf=From%20%251%24s&share=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.bbc.com%2Fnews%2Fworld-us-canada-53991722
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@antbeats6161 Where these links and quotes I gave you👇 from CNN? And did you provide any thing that would disprove my facts and evidence to back it up that I provided? 👇
""Trump falsely claimed that “the Democrats don’t want to do anything having to do with protecting people from eviction,” even though the House Democrats had already passed a coronavirus relief bill to do exactly that."
"Trump once again misleadingly claimed that testing was behind the United States’ large number of cases, boasting that the U.S. “is only 5% of the world’s population, but we have conducted over 25% of the world’s testing.” While American testing is better than some countries, it does not explain the huge caseload, nor does it change the fact that the U.S. also has 22% of the world’s COVID-19 deaths."
"Trump falsely said if the Democrats controlled Washington, they would pass “legislation gutting every single police department in America.” Nearly 90% of funding for police comes from local governments, and presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden has said he opposes “defunding the police.”"
"The president repeated his bogus claim about the genesis of the Veterans Choice program, which was launched in 2014 under the Obama administration. Trump took credit for the law, claiming “no president’s ever been able to do it, and we got it done.”"
https://www.factcheck.org/2020/08/factchecking-trumps-weekend-press-briefings/ "
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@if7060 better yet... Let's do this...
On day one of the pandemic, did Donald Trump have a 33-page expertly put together plan to contain a pandemic just like Cove in in the US and chose not to use it?
Did Donald Trump not have three and a half years to refill the medical stockpiles for a pandemic and did not do so?
Has Donald Trump not gone out, while Americans are literally dying all over the country, and tried to, on multiple occasions, try to sell us snake oil cures, that he, himself, did not take when he got the virus?
Has Donald Trump not only been interested in illegal immigration when it comes to the southern border, even though that is only 20% illegal immigration coming into America?
In his own words, did Donald Trump not admit to sexual assault on multiple women?
In his own words has Donald Trump not made a multitude of racist comments in the past 70 years as well as being sued for racial discrimination against the Nixon doj twice, and settled both times?
I could go on...
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@A A Well... Realistically there could be some bad people in the caravan. Statistically, there probably was. I'm not unreasonable to assume all these people had sainthood status.... However, you claim of speaking to "illegal immigrants" and what they told you, is both anecdotal at best, statistically and accurate and doesn't make much sense. Let me explain.
First, statistically inaccurate because in the past (if I rememebr correctly, cuz its been a min sense I looked up that particular stat) decade there has only been 1 noun terroristic actor caught coming through the southern border. I'll have to look up his name. As I said... Its been a min but he was planning a terroristic act but got caught before he could. At which time he said he came through there a few months back and not in a caravan.
Which bring me to my second point. Common sense. Terrorists are funded. They are getting money from somewhere. So it would not make sense to track across 2 desert countries, for months on end, in a group of desperate, hungry and scared asylum-seekers, only to arive at a border crossing, turn themselves in and claim asylum, only to be put in a detention facility to await their claim being processed. All with a less then stellar chance to be approved and get to stay. There are a million easier ways to get in the country then doing all of that.
But even if that was true... Its still no reason to deny all these other people the legal right they have to claim asylum that they have.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@scottemmons6409 As for your claim of support, you may wanna stop watching so much Russian state TV.
"Due to its good relations with the Russian Federation and Ukraine, India has maintained a neutral position as a non-aligned state."
"China aims to take diplomatic measures and strike a balance between western countries and Russia. On the other side, the Chinese president Xi Jinping is eager to boost the nation’s ties with Russia, so it cannot endorse the invasion of Ukraine by Russia. Beijing’s foreign minister, Wang Yi, pleaded with all parties to be restrained."
In this conflict, countries that were once part of the Soviet Union, including Belarus, Armenia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, and Kyrgyzstan, will stand by Russia.
"Also extending its support to Putin was Cuba, a close ally of the Russians."
"As a result of Russia’s recognition of the two Ukrainian provinces of Luhansk and Donetsk as independent countries, Japan, South Korea, Australia, and Canada are all supporting Ukraine."
""There is full support among NATO countries – Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Iceland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, the United Kingdom, and the United States. It is the cause of the most massive support for Ukraine from the United States and the United Kingdom."
"Germany and France made a hurried visit to Moscow recently to defuse the controversy that has newly erupted. The United States and Canada halted approval of the Nord Stream 2 pipeline after President Putin recognized two breakaway regions of Ukraine as independent nations and sent Russian troops there."
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@danemart1842 I've already given you info to refute your claims. Backed up by actual data, that you choose to ignore. Thus proving your cherry picking. So thanks for proving my point.
"Voter ID laws are a backhanded form of discrimination, pointless because we already have voter registration and are inherently against the freedom this country is supposed to stand for. Every single American who has registered to vote has the absolute right, in America, to vote. End of story.
"Millions of Americans Lack ID. 11% of U.S. citizens – or more than 21 million Americans – do not have government-issued photo identification.1
Obtaining ID Costs Money. Even if ID is offered for free, voters must incur numerous costs (such as paying for birth certificates) to apply for a government-issued ID.
Underlying documents required to obtain ID cost money, a significant expense for lower-income Americans. The combined cost of document fees, travel expenses and waiting time are estimated to range from $75 to $175.2
The travel required is often a major burden on people with disabilities, the elderly, or those in rural areas without access to a car or public transportation. In Texas, some people in rural areas must travel approximately 170 miles to reach the nearest ID office.3"
https://www.aclu.org/other/oppose-voter-id-legislation-fact-sheet
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@danemart1842 Your right! I forgot to disabuse that silly, and suspiciously specific request. One you, yourself did not come up with, but the right wing talking heads told you to argue because they think they have a point, they do not. They are just as bad as yiu, with the cherry picking, I'm afraid. This bill changes existing laws, for the most part. Which technically enough, to them, who do not wish to look to closely, means, there are no "new" laws. Because it doesn't technically make new laws, and only pollutes and corrupts existing laws, you guys think you have an argument. Like that, at all, makes a difference to the effect.
1
-
@danemart1842 First... I would like to thank your for finally admitting by example, that you cherry pick, by asking that question. 😁 See, I have posted the same info, with the same links provided twice now. Both times you have either choose to ignore it, because you could not argue against it, or you where, ironically, too lazy to click the link and read it. But, it's cool. I'll just post it again, and again, and again, and again. You can just keep trying to ignore it and then you'll discredit yourself more and more and that will work out just fine for me. Here we go.
The ACLU, sites generations of studies to come up with 21 mil disenfranchised, mostly minority or disabled voters.
"Voter ID laws are a backhanded form of discrimination, pointless because we already have voter registration and are inherently against the freedom this country is supposed to stand for. Every single American who has registered to vote has the absolute right, in America, to vote. End of story.
"Millions of Americans Lack ID. 11% of U.S. citizens – or more than 21 million Americans – do not have government-issued photo identification.1
Obtaining ID Costs Money. Even if ID is offered for free, voters must incur numerous costs (such as paying for birth certificates) to apply for a government-issued ID.
Underlying documents required to obtain ID cost money, a significant expense for lower-income Americans. The combined cost of document fees, travel expenses and waiting time are estimated to range from $75 to $175.2
The travel required is often a major burden on people with disabilities, the elderly, or those in rural areas without access to a car or public transportation. In Texas, some people in rural areas must travel approximately 170 miles to reach the nearest ID office.3"
https://www.aclu.org/other/oppose-voter-id-legislation-fact-sheet
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@danemart1842 by the way, did you get around to reading these studies and Link from the ACLU and the 21 million voters you're trying to mischaracterize for the benefit of your own lack of an argument? Or are you still trying to pretend that doesn't exist? Here! I'll post it again... Just encase "you missed it". 😁👇
Voter ID laws are a backhanded form of discrimination, pointless because we already have voter registration and are inherently against the freedom this country is supposed to stand for. Every single American who has registered to vote has the absolute right, in America, to vote. End of story.
"Millions of Americans Lack ID. 11% of U.S. citizens – or more than 21 million Americans – do not have government-issued photo identification.1
Obtaining ID Costs Money. Even if ID is offered for free, voters must incur numerous costs (such as paying for birth certificates) to apply for a government-issued ID.
Underlying documents required to obtain ID cost money, a significant expense for lower-income Americans. The combined cost of document fees, travel expenses and waiting time are estimated to range from $75 to $175.2
The travel required is often a major burden on people with disabilities, the elderly, or those in rural areas without access to a car or public transportation. In Texas, some people in rural areas must travel approximately 170 miles to reach the nearest ID office.3"
https://www.aclu.org/other/oppose-voter-id-legislation-fact-sheet
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Mr.White10-65 just because some people can't accept that certain things happened in America, does not mean that I have not done my research before I have opened my mouth.
Concentration camp... a place where large numbers of people, especially political prisoners or members of persecuted minorities, are deliberately imprisoned in a relatively small area with inadequate facilities, sometimes to provide forced labor or to await mass execution. The term is most strongly associated with the several hundred camps established by the Nazis in Germany and occupied Europe in 1933–45, among the most infamous being Dachau, Belsen, and Auschwitz.
On June 12, the Department of Health and Human Services announced that Fort Sill, an Army post that hosted a World War II internment camp for detainees of Japanese descent, will now be repurposed to detain migrant children.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@hellwithit Ummm... I'm confused. When... Ya know... In the world... Did I say, that I was?
I am English, Irish, German and Swedish. Mostly the first 2, though. Some of my fam came over during the original British colonization of North America. Some have fought in every American war sense and to this day. Other parts of my family didn't come over for a long time and instead, formed the original IRA, in Irland. Then took part in the Infamous, prison, IRA, hunger strikes.
I have dual citizenship with Great Britain and America because up some crazy law at the time, where I was born in England but off the American base and so I was technically a British and American citizen.
1
-
@hellwithit Yeah... Go look at your original question. That comma was not there... And so, in that sentence structure I answered that question accurately, but its whatever... I guess.
Moving on.... It is a more interesting question, this way, however. Cuz, depending on how you look at it, we can be and we aren't. Plus it's all pretty inconsistent. From the Conqueror standpoint, I'm an American because I was born into a country that was formed by slaughtering and enslaving in indigenous people and taking over their land, then forming a working government upon that soil. Only later to... kind of... half-ass... make it right. Now, we have done good and bad after the fact. Which could be argued for. May good things have come from America, and Americans. Which means, the very least we can say, is that in a lot of ways, America has made the best out of the situation.
So, in that context, we conquered, therefore we are.
From a native people context, we stole the land, in one of the most horrible ways imaginable. Practically wiping out an entire civilization. Completelty wiping out some.
All coutries have a good and bad history, though. It's compared mostly in the way to what human nature can do. Good and bad. Its a mixed bag. That does not mean that we should not try to do good for people though. It does not excuse us only caring about the people who you're born on this side of the Border. That is not adequate criteria to dismiss someone's life and decide that it means less than ours does. Especially, from a country, founded and built by immigrants. We should do better.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@theheretic3764 But I tell you what... Oh Bitch ass wise one... let's go with your premise for half a second... That way you can explain this to me....
Your comment was, " I yeah that's exactly what we're saying... Indians had Mongoloid DNA. They are not indigenous to America."
What does... Ya know what... I was going to ask you what indigenous man but I ain't got that kind of time.
Indigenous - originating or occurring naturally in a particular place; native
Indigenous people, also known as first peoples, Aboriginal people or native people, are ethnic groups who are the original settlers of a given region, in contrast to groups that have settled, occupied or colonized the area more recently.
In smaller words for your special Ed ass... for an ethnic group of people to be indigenous to the area they would have had to have settled ( sorry to big of a work. Been there 😜 ) and then procreated ( to big again, my bad. Had babies 😜 ) in an area for a long time.
Groups are usually described as indigenous when they maintain Traditions or other aspects of an early culture that is associated with a given region. Not all indigenous people share this characteristic, as many have adopted substantial elements of a colonizing culture, such as dress, religion or language. Indigenous people may be settled in a given region or exhibit a nomadic lifestyle across a large territory, but they are generally historically associated with a specific territory on which they depend.
The ancestors of living Native Americans arrived in what is now the United States at least 😜 15,000 😜 years ago, possibly much earlier, from Asia via Beringia. A vast variety of people's, societies and cultures subsequently developed.
The British first arrived and established Jamestown in Virginia in 😜1607😜.
Do I need to do that math for you to slow learner?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@theheretic3764 Awwwwesome! You must be getting so sad now! Deleting comments again, I see! 😜😜😜
Don't worry! Screenshot that one too. Just in case you decided to tell a stupid ass lie again.
This one said...
"Shhhhhhh....🤫
It's all in the links I posted... How they immigrated here. Dispersed. ... 😏"
That's the part where you admitted that they immigrated here. Then you skipped the part that made them "indigenous" to the area because apparently you're too stupid to know what indigenous people are, and the definition of the words you use.
Because indigenous does not necessarily mean that you originated from the area. You know what indigenous means? Do you know what indigenous people are? Of course you don't, slow learner. So let me fill you in. Ya know.... again. 🤣🤣🤣
Indigenous - originating 👉👉👉or👈👈👈 occurring naturally in a particular place; native
Indigenous people, also known as First Peoples, Aboriginal people or native people, or ethnic groups who are the 🤯 original settlers🤯 of a given region, in contrast to groups that have settled occupied or colonized the area more recently.🤣😂🤣😂😜
Groups are usually described as indigenous when they maintain Traditions or other aspects of an early culture that is associated with a given region. I'm only judging these people share this characteristic, as many have adapted Substantial elements of a colonizing culture, such as dress, religion or language. Indigenous people may be settled in a given region or exhibit nomadic lifestyle across a large territory, but they are generally historically associated with a specific territory on which they depend. 😜😜😜😜😜😜😜😜😜😜
Then I gave you a timeline and some fun math to do.
The ancestors of 👉living Native Americans👈 arrived in what is now the 👉United States👈 at least 👉15,000 years ago👈, possibly much earlier, from Asia via Beringia. a vast variety of peoples Societies and cultures subsequently developed.
The British first arrived and established Jamestown, in what now is Virginia, in 👉1607👈.
Now, if the British got here in 1607 and the Indians have been here for 15,000 years.... then that means the british got here 412 years ago.... that means by the tike the british got here, the indians had been here for a little over 11,000 years. I'm pretty sure that's meets the "indigenous" quota. AT least you anyone who isn't trying to not have to NOT HAVE TO admit that they were wrong.
THEN, you went off on this whole little tangent, which sounded a little like you were staring in the mirror and masturbating with your tears while you were saying it.
It also kind of smacked of desperation, because let's face it, no one has to try that hard to feel like they're above somebody else unless they don't really think they are. I mean, it was basically like you were screaming into the wind about how you didn't have a tiny penis.
" you're so used to faking it aren't you? Acquiring just enough information to come across as an intelligent"
Which, BTW oh, I'm not usually a grammar Nazi but if you're trying to put down somebody's intelligence in a particular sentence, it's usually a good idea to make sure that sentence doesn't have unnecessary words in front of the word intelligent. Just saying...🤣😂🤣😂🤣
But I digress....
" In line? What is it like to be so terrified the people are actually going to figure you out? To realize that you're a fraud? This latent hostility you've developed for people that are actually more well-read and more intelligent than you?"
You're trying so hard at this point.😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣
" See I look at those people laughing at me in the corner and you know what?"
No, what? Other than the fact that you're fixing to put down your own analogy! 😜
" I don't want to be them. But you? Oh god it pains you so that you're not.
Sad. 😦
And repulsive. 🤢"
Hey, I'm glad we can finally agree on something. You are sad and repulsive. 😛✌
1
-
@theheretic3764 You're so sad. 😢 but somehow, it's still funny to see you so desprate... So here we go again... Lol
A random quote, without a source, that does not confirm or deny anything, when you actually read it and one that,for some reason, assumes that the only evidence of indigenous Indians in America is "stories". Or are you the one cherry picking out of whatever article you got that from? Cuz that's the only explanation as to the only reference they made to there Theory, in the way of evidence for current indigenous Indian history, being "stories".
So which is it? Are you cherry picking from an unknown article or do they really think the only evidence of indigenous Indians in America come from stories?
And, again, what do you think that proves? It did not confirm or deny anything. 😂😂😂
Did you even read that before posting? Cuz that is usually a good idea.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@joshuaoverlord5327 Boulder, Colorado (King Soopers grocery store)
Date: March 10
Lives lost: 10
Weapon used: Ruger AR-556 pistol
Orlando, Florida (Pulse nightclub)
Date: June 12, 2016
Lives lost: 49
Weapon used: Sig Sauer MCX
Parkland, Florida (Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School)
Date: Feb. 14, 2018
Lives lost: 17
Weapon used: Smith and Wesson M&P15, that manufacturer's version of the AR-15, USA TODAY reported.
Las Vegas (Highway 91 country music festival)
Date: Oct. 1, 2017
Lives lost: 58
Weapons used: 23 different weapons were recovered in the gunman's hotel suite, including multiple AR-15 style rifles and hundreds of rounds of ammunition, USA TODAY reported.
Aurora, Colorado (Century 16 movie theater)
Date: July 20, 2012
Lives lost: 12
Weapon used: One AR-15 variant from Smith & Wesson, a pump-action 12-gauge shotgun and at least one .40-caliber semiautomatic pistol, according to The New York Times.
Sandy Hook Elementary School (Newtown, Connecticut)
Date: Dec. 14, 2012
Lives lost: 27
Weapon used: Remington AR-15-style bushmaster, USA TODAY reported.
Waffle House (Nashville, Tennessee)
Date: April 22, 2018
Lives lost: 4
Weapon used: AR-15 assault-style rifle, according to The Tennessean.
San Bernadino, California (holiday office party at Inland Regional Center):
Date: Dec. 2, 2015
Lives lost: 14
Weapon used: Two AR-15 variants (Smith & Wesson M&P assault rifle and a DPMS Panther Arms assault rifle) a Smith & Wesson handgun and a Llama handgun, according to The New York Times.
Midland/Odessa (West Texas cities)
Date: Aug. 31, 2019
Lives lost: 7
Weapon used: At least one AR-15 variant, as stated in a Justice Department press release about a case involving the man who sold the gun to the shooter.
Poway synagogue (near San Diego)
Date: Apr. 27, 2019
Lives lost: 1
Sutherland Springs (rural Texas church service)
Date: Nov. 5, 2017
Lives lost: 26
Weapon used: Ruger AR-15 variant, USA TODAY reported.
Tree of Life Synagogue (Pittsburgh)
Date: Oct. 27, 2018
Lives lost: 11
Weapon used: "multiple firearms'' including a Colt AR-15 rifle and three Glock .357, according to a Justice Department press release about the shooting's designation as a hate crime
Weapon used: AR-15 variant, according to a Justice Department court filing.
That's 210 lives lost in just just 11 school shootings. You wanna keep playing body count? Catch up...
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Scott Covert 👈 👇THIS is this persons sad but persistent attempt to get off the subject at hand by trying to bait me into talking about anything other turn Donald Trump and his racism.
" it also seems like you don't want to acknowledge Biden's racist comments and sexual predations because you know I'm right, and I'm not acknowledging it yourself, you are supporting a racist and creep."
👆THIS is this persons sad but persistent attempt to get off the subject at hand by trying to bait me into talking about anything other turn Donald Trump and his racism.
Anyone who looks up will notice that the original comments and video were about Trump and his racism. This is a very common tactic of the right. They want to do anything other than recognized Trump's wrongdoing, so every time someone brings it up, all they want to do is talk about the other side. They've given up on trying to defend all the craziness he does. Now it's just divert, divert divert, desert, divert, deflect, divert. Even going so far as to try abd insist the main narrative was Biden. I am not going to play that game with them. You shouldn't either. It's simply a transparent attempt to get you on the defensive because they know if they're on it, they would lose.
Now this one's trying to shove words into my mouth to try and get me on that subject, but I've already corrected that once. That's all I need to do. From this point forward, this is the only message they will get from me in regards to any other subject, then the original one that they are desperately trying to avoid. They can say whatever they want about me from now on on a completely different subject. All that will show is their desperation to run away from Trump and his actions.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Scott Covert 👈 Once again, this one Insists on running from the main topic, by attempting to put me on the defensive about another topic. He CANNOT speak about Trump's racism, yet insists claiming "my hypocrisy" in not condemning Joe Biden, "for his", 👉thereby admitting Trump's racism👈, despite his best efforts. He knows He can't defend Trump against racism, he has to change the subject and try to save face. That is why he....👇
1. Keeps trying to 👉DIVERT👈 to Joe Biden.
2. Keeps trying to 👉bait me👈, by putting words in my mouth and calling me names.
3. Making 👉baseless assumptions👈 about what I, and others are doing.
4. 👉Running from substance based questions👈 about the claims he has made. EVEN when the answers to these questions are in this very thread, or the clip above.
5. Constantly insist that I am somehow the problem because 👉I won't play his diversion game👈.
6. Thinking that if he keeps 👉repeating👈 his claim... That it will have... Somehow... Become true, despite any evidence.
7. Attempting, at first, to take a singular situation by itself, until realizing that I would insist he consider 👉all relevant data👈.
8. Sets up 👉paper tiger👈, after 👉paper tiger👈, to have something to 👉argue against👈.
👉I won't play his game👈, and he has nowhere else to go. He came unprepared, and that is a whole lot of 👉effort👈 to not have to address 👉Donald Trump being racist👈. Which is SIMPLY all the point I have to make about this RACISM CONTRIBUTOR. 😁✌
1
-
1
-
@Scott Covert 👈 Once again, this one Insists on running from the main topic, by attempting to put me on the defensive about another topic. He CANNOT speak about Trump's racism, yet insists claiming "my hypocrisy" in not condemning Joe Biden, "for his", 👉thereby admitting Trump's racism👈, despite his best efforts. He knows He can't defend Trump against racism, he has to change the subject and try to save face. That is why he....👇
1. Keeps trying to 👉DIVERT👈 to Joe Biden.
2. Keeps trying to 👉bait me👈, by putting words in my mouth and calling me names.
3. Making 👉baseless assumptions👈 about what I, and others are doing.
4. 👉Running from substance based questions👈 about the claims he has made. EVEN when the answers to these questions are in this very thread, or the clip above.
5. Constantly insist that I am somehow the problem because 👉I won't play his diversion game👈.
6. Thinking that if he keeps 👉repeating👈 his claim... That it will have... Somehow... Become true, despite any evidence.
7. Attempting, at first, to take a singular situation by itself, until realizing that I would insist he consider 👉all relevant data👈.
8. Sets up 👉paper tiger👈, after 👉paper tiger👈, to have something to 👉argue against👈.
👉I won't play his game👈, and he has nowhere else to go. He came unprepared, and that is a whole lot of 👉effort👈 to not have to address 👉Donald Trump being racist👈. Which is SIMPLY all the point I have to make about this RACISM CONTRIBUTOR. 😁✌
1
-
1
-
@Scott Covert 👈 Once again, this one Insists on running from the main topic, by attempting to put me on the defensive about another topic. He CANNOT speak about Trump's racism, yet insists claiming "my hypocrisy" in not condemning Joe Biden, "for his", 👉thereby admitting Trump's racism👈, despite his best efforts. He knows He can't defend Trump against racism, he has to change the subject and try to save face. That is why he....👇
1. Keeps trying to 👉DIVERT👈 to Joe Biden.
2. Keeps trying to 👉bait me👈, by putting words in my mouth and calling me names.
3. Making 👉baseless assumptions👈 about what I, and others are doing.
4. 👉Running from substance based questions👈 about the claims he has made. EVEN when the answers to these questions are in this very thread, or the clip above.
5. Constantly insist that I am somehow the problem because 👉I won't play his diversion game👈.
6. Thinking that if he keeps 👉repeating👈 his claim... That it will have... Somehow... Become true, despite any evidence.
7. Attempting, at first, to take a singular situation by itself, until realizing that I would insist he consider 👉all relevant data👈.
8. Sets up 👉paper tiger👈, after 👉paper tiger👈, to have something to 👉argue against👈.
👉I won't play his game👈, and he has nowhere else to go. He came unprepared, and that is a whole lot of 👉effort👈 to not have to address 👉Donald Trump being racist👈. Which is SIMPLY all the point I have to make about this RACISM CONTRIBUTOR. 😁✌
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@erico4868 Well... Smart girl... But it's whatever. 😁
Though I am a little confused as to why you thought I wasn't being direct. I have never been accused of that before... 😆
Also... Not sure why you think or who you think deamed the Mueller report is not liget... But I would love to hear the evidence for that one???? Cuz, that's gonna be funny! If nothing else. 🤣
Then we come to the part where you try and play fortune teller and think that is some kind of point. It's not. I'm really not sure why so many of you guys thing trying to predict the future without a time machine handy is any kind of lagit argument... 🤷
Doing good for this country... Well... The nicest way I can put that is... Its seriously up for debate... 🙊🙉🙈
But the only one undermining hos presidency, is him. Everytime he abuses his power and breaks the laws. 😶
OH! I get it! Your just special! Is that it. Only you know the real truth. Everyone else is wrong. Is that it? 🤣 Your one of those. You have to be right. You are willing to present nonsense false dichotomies all day long, of which you can provide absolutely no proof for, just because you can't handle being wrong.... That's always just a little sad. 😢🤣
I mean... Just look at that logic... you don't know most of the people on your side or most of the people on the other side, and so you can't back up any of that, BUT you still feel like it's a good idea to make sweeping generalizations about both. "Obviously the people who agree with you or holier-than-thou hard-working patriotic Americans and the other people are demon spawn who never did anything good for anyone!"🤣
Sweetheart, you showed nothing but your obvious bias, willful ignorance or facts, a lack of ability to prove what you claim and irrational need to villainize anyone who might not agree with you, even though you don't know them oh, because you need to be right that damn bad! 🤣
And why not throw some fortune telling in at the end... Just encase you haven't already proven that reality doesn't live where you are. 😉✌
1
-
@erico4868 Hey, you wanna see what your Kryptonite is? 😁
" Russia was a hoax and the people who started the entire Witch Hunt will be held accountable either with loss of gurira, jail or both. That is the future."
Prove it! 😁
" Just because I am right about Trump continuing his presidency does not mean I need to be right."
No... You need to be right.because there is no possible way you can prove that and yet you still continue to say it.... Oh... And Prove it! 😁
By admitting that you're bias oh, you are also admitting that you were seeing things in a way that isn't clear. Which means what your determinations are about the thing you are biased against, couldn't possibly be true. Especially all that silly nonsense. You would have to ignore an incredible amount to say the thing you just did about the Dems.... But lets be clear... I don't think the Dems have hallows and the Reps have horns... There is good and bad on both sides. After all, the dams are impart responsible for why we have Trump now. They decided that Hillary Clinton was their best option in the last election. Even if you don't count all her shadiness, all she gave anyone for her to run by is a bunch of empty platitudes and I'm not him. Not to mention her air of entitlement. Like the presidency was her turn now. People need someone to vote for. Not just against.🙄
Not going to go through all of them because I don't have that kind of time right now but I will mention a few points.
Socialism, monarchy, democracy, oligarchy, dictatorship... do you know what all these things have in common? They are systems of operation. Which is why you painting socialist as a negative doesn't make any sense. Systems of operation are not good or bad. They are in the hands of the user. You don't understand enough about that to be able to form an educated opinion on it. For instance, Republicans are big proponents of local government. States rights and all that... But a good deal of local government is run off of socialist systems. So Republicans are advocating for a socialist regime without even knowing it. Like police departments, fire departments, ambulance services and a big one is social security. Even roadworks is runoff of socialist programs. Socialist is clearly a buzzword for you. But you should really look up what that actually means and how its instituted.
To throw up the slavery flag, is to ignore the past 60 or so years of History.... and you can't willfully ignore that much recent history without having your point be completely nuel void at the end of the day.
And I know who I am defending. You are defending a side that want to excuse law breaking, setting up of concentration camps, wripping of children from there parents and loosing them. Leaving Kurdish soldiers who have saved countless American lives to die after years of fighting side-by-side with them. A racist, currupt, rapist as our world leader. The dangerous deregulation of our country. Wars on climate change scientific evidence so they don't have to do anything abput it and can keep making money on big oil. Shutting down of our gov for the longest time on record... To have millions of government employees standing at breadlines and losing their homes only for him to Cave In The End. Especially when he could have gotten the wall funding in his first year and a half in office when he was in control of the house the Senate and the White House. The only thing he did get done in that first year and a half was tax cuts for the rich... While claiming to be clearing out the swamp.... I mean... I could go on... This is what you are defending... 😉✌
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ericmartin2470 Well... To start... The tariffs themselves violate the agreement. Trump Proclamation imposes a 25% ad valorem tariff on imported steel and a 10% tariff on aluminum articles as of March 23rd
The measure is inconsistent with the general agreement on tariffs and trade and the WTO agreement on safeguards. It does so in part by not taking into consideration National Security. The new tariffs exceed the bound REITs the US has committed to under the WTO rules.
China isn't the only one that thinks so either. Many countries have gone so far as to contest the action and are taking measures to stop it. Including in those are Japan, Venezuela, Brazil, New Zealand, turkey, Korea, Hong Kong, Singapore, Thailand, Pakistan, Norway, Australia, India, El Salvador, Switzerland, Paraguay, Guatemala and Kazakhstan.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ericmartin2470 ... And Wow! Really? You don't know the details of the WTO issue that we have been talking about all along? Seriously?
The tariffs dude! The tariffs are not with in agreement with the WTO. Trump, as usual is going overbored. The US tariff measure is inconsistent with the general agreement on tariffs and trade and the WTO agreement on safeguards. The presidential Proclamation imposes a 25% ad valorem tariff on imported steel and a 10% tariff on aluminum. It exceeds the bound rate the US committed to under the WTO rules. Trump is trying to say that This falls under some kind of National Security WTO exemption rule. Except it doesn't. Which is why a ton of other countries are backing China right now. It's also why China can stand up and call us hypocrites. Japan, Venezuela, Brazil, New Zealand, turkey, Korea, Hong Kong, Singapore, Thailand, Pakistan, Norway, Australia, India, El Salvador, Switzerland, Paraguay, Guatemala and Kazakhstan. He is literally breaking the rules of the WTO in order to punish somebody else for breaking the rules of the WTO.
1
-
1
-
@ericmartin2470 there are a few problems with you continuing to quote Edmund Burke to me. Not counting the argument that these are complex matters and should be. So there for its not generally a good idea to make rash decisions with peoples lives based off of a quote that your taking out of context.
One, of your referring to Trump.... He is not a good man. With mountians of evidence to back it up.
But if your referring to Russia annexing Crimea.... It was messed up but not unlike what Trump is doing now with the GTO. In the sense that they both are using the wrong tactic, and therefore weakened their argument by doing the wrong thing and breaking the rules to get something done which, had they gone about it in a different way, would have probably worked out in there favor.
Russia and Vladimir Putin actually had a good argument for reclaiming Crimea. For a lot of reasons. Not the least of which was the people of Crimea wanted to be Russian citizens instead of Ukrainian citizens. Also Crimea was originally Russian territory. Had he come about it the right way, he would have probably ended up in the same position he's in now except with a stronger stance on the issue and the rest of the world in recognition.
Now, we are back to your "doing nothing" thing. America and the other nations did not do nothing. They did a bunch of things actually and within the bounds of laws and rules. Ukraine and many other world leaders condemn the annexation and considered it to be a violation of international law and Russian signed agreements safeguarding the territorial Integrity of Ukraine. This leg to the other members Aldi Dan G8 suspending Russia from the group, then introducing the first round of sanctions against the country. The United Nations General Assembly also rejected the vote and annexation, adopting a non-binding resolution affirming the territorial Integrity of Ukraine within its International recognized borders. The UN resolution also underscores that the referendum having no validity, can't form the basis for any alteration of the status of Crimea and calls upon all states and international organizations not to recognize or to imply the recognition of Russia's annexation. The assembly reaffirmed non-recognition of the annexation and condemned the temporary occupation of part of the territory of Ukraine.
In the end, even though Russia's ill-advised strongman tactics was not the best way to get it done, it hurt no one and it is what the people of Crimea wanted. That being the case I would argue that your quote really does not apply to the situation.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ericmartin2470 okay so now you're going to tell me what the narrative was that we were just talking about. Which by the way originally was not brought up By Me but by you, when you asked me about what I would do to China. You cannot then completely disregard the subject matter just because you can no longer argue your point with it. You brought up the subject of the tariffs and what I would do. Then you argued how what I was doing was nothing. Then after explaining to you that not only what I was doing wasn't nothing ...I explained to you that if you don't like it... There was recourse within the deal (of the WTO) to change that... and that he was not doing that... but doing something else that was stupid and put America in a worse negotiating standpoint.... And so on and so forth. You can not, now that the conversation isn't working out the way you thought it would, completely disregard the entirety of all of that... and then say no we're talkin about this. That's a cop out. A thing that you accused me of before. Me on the other hand, I'm not working backwards. You talking yourself into a corner isn't my problem.
So would you like to explain why it's totally cool for America the break the rules but not for China?
And let me preface this, I don't like Trump for a variety of reasons but let's just say someone else was president. Let's say it was my very best friend in the world, Sally. If Sally was trying to punish somebody else for breaking the rules by breaking the rules herself, I would still tell her that was a stupid idea. I would explain to her that it puts her in a bad position when it comes to negotiating a damn thing in the future, because noone can trust you to honor your agreement. So in this.... My dear friend... Me, joe, bob, Anne and the rest of the class are going to have to stand up for Sarah and against you because even though we dont like what Sarah is doing either... We don't think you should be the one punishing her given your CHOOSING to do the same thing your punishing her for, in order to punish her. You have lost perspective dear friend and should step back or choose a different tactic. And you know why Sally? Because the only thing necessary for the Triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. - Edmund Burke
Sally = America / president
Sarah = China
Me and all the others being the other countries.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ericmartin2470 here! This is the comment from above that explains the details of the deal that you were ignorant of, yet choose to have an opinion on anyways.
Word for word... Sense I know you like that. 😁
"@Eric Martin ... And Wow! Really? You don't know the details of the WTO issue that we have been talking about all along? Seriously?
The tariffs dude! The tariffs are not with in agreement with the WTO. Trump, as usual is going overbored. The US tariff measure is inconsistent with the general agreement on tariffs and trade and the WTO agreement on safeguards. The presidential Proclamation imposes a 25% ad valorem tariff on imported steel and a 10% tariff on aluminum. It exceeds the bound rate the US committed to under the WTO rules. Trump is trying to say that This falls under some kind of National Security WTO exemption rule. Except it doesn't. Which is why a ton of other countries are backing China right now. It's also why China can stand up and call us hypocrites. Japan, Venezuela, Brazil, New Zealand, turkey, Korea, Hong Kong, Singapore, Thailand, Pakistan, Norway, Australia, India, El Salvador, Switzerland, Paraguay, Guatemala and Kazakhstan. He is literally breaking the rules of the WTO in order to punish somebody else for breaking the rules of the WTO."
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@iliketowatch7988 " Every time a news Outlet gets on air"
That is not proof. That's not even a fully-formed thought. You baselessly assuming that just because they call themselves a news Outlet and Report things, they must be lies, is you doing the exact same thing you're complaining about. Giving your opinion and treating it like it's fact.
" You're stupid if you can't see it." 👈 this, however is what we call a false dichotomy. A scenario you are choosing to set up in your head, as to where, either someone has to agree with you and your "opinion", or they are stupid. Irregardless of the fact that you have provided no proof for your claim.
Fox no longer claims to be a news Outlet. At least not legally. I haven't said boo about Fox. So I'm not quite sure why you're bringing it up.
As I said from the jump, you would have been better off claiming that CNN had a pattern of non provable claims that they have made and then presenting evidence for that. That would have been all you needed to discredit them. Instead, you shot the moon and missed because of your own flawed thinking, clear bias and inability of introspection. Instead, you are doing the exact same thing that you are bitching at them about doing.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@UnKnown-sf9vw Those are inanimate objects. They are not classified as organisms. Requiring it to be alive. An organism is defined by, "an individual animal, plant, or single-celled 👉life👈 form."
"Parasite is an 👉organism👈 that lives in another 👉organism👈, called the host, and often harms it. It depends on its host for survival. Without a host, a parasite cannot live, grow and multiply. For this reason, it rarely kills the host, but it can spread diseases, and some of these can be fatal."
As I said, you're just making things up at this point.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@UnKnown-sf9vw Seriously... Dude.. Stop telling silly lies.
Oxford Dictionary - an 👉organism👈 that lives in or on an 👉organism👈 of another species (its host) and benefits by deriving nutrients at the other's expense.
Webster Dictionary - an 👉organism👈 living in, on, or with another 👉organism👈 in order to obtain nutrients, grow, or multiply often in a state that directly or indirectly harms the host.
The CDC - A parasite is an 👉organism👈 that lives on or in a host 👉organism👈 and gets its food from or at the expense of its host. There are three main classes of parasites that can cause disease in humans: protozoa, helminths, and ectoparasites.
Dictionary co - an 👉organism👈 that lives on or in an 👉organism👈 of another species, known as the host, from the body of which it obtains nutriment.
Biology online - An👉 organism 👈that obtains nourishment and shelter on another 👉organism👈
Wikipedia - Parasitism is a close relationship between species, where one 👉organism👈, the parasite, lives on or inside another 👉organism👈, the host, causing it some harm, and is adapted structurally to this way of life.
Encyclopedia Britannica - parasitism, relationship between two species of 👉plants or animals👈 in which one benefits at the expense of the other, sometimes without killing the host 👉organism👈.
Cambridge Dictionary
- an 👉animal or plant👈 that lives on or in another 👉animal or plant👈 of a different type and feeds from it:
Collins Dictionary - an 👉organism👈 that lives on or in an 👉organism👈 of another species, known as the host, from the body of which it obtains nutriment
Vocabulary co - A creature that lives off another 👉organism👈 is a parasite. The parasite might not hurt the host, but it doesn't do anything to help it, either.
MacMillan dictionary - BIOLOGY a 👉plant or animal👈 that lives in or on another type of animal and feeds on it
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@UnKnown-sf9vw The summary of this interaction.... You have whittled down your arguments to claim that a parasite does not actually need to be a living organism feeding off of another living organism. It can be a living organism feeding also something else. For which you gave a definition that you claimed was "mine", for some strange reason. One, for which you never gave a source for. Which was one of those questions you ignored. Unless you count your lie that it was my definition.... Or to quote you directly,
" from your dictionary"
Even though I gave you 11 different definitions from academic sources, and you used none of them. This is what you claimed to be my definition.
👉 " a parasitic relationship or parasitism is a relationship between a parasite and a host that's beneficial to the parasite and detrimental to The Host "
Now... You tried to be clever and give me the definition of a 👉parasitic relationship👈, and not a 👉parasite👈 itself. Which is why you wont give the source of that definition.
So I gave you the definitions of the actual definition of parasite from 7 different educational sources. You have sense been trying to dismiss them.
Then you tried to exchange parasitic as a descriptive word... Or an adjective, for a noun.... Because in your world an adjective can be a noun and a noun can be an adjective anytime it's convenient for your lack of an argument. All because you're trying to use an example of a parasitic computer or parasitic technology. Which is clearly a descriptor of the technology and/or computer.
And now it's all about everything I'm saying is "dribble" so you don't actually have to come back with a rebuttal for it, because you know you can't.
So... Your going to clearly keep doing several things.
1. Insisting your correct about the definition of parasite, even though literally every definition of parasite proves you wrong.
2. You're going to continue to make passive aggressive Jabs at me because you're insecure about the validity of your argument.
3. You're going to continue to try and dismiss anything you can't argue against.
4. Your going to lie whenever its convenient.
Which is all cool! I will give you facts and question, as you continue to make a record of dodging, ignoring and lying.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@bradynlotterman8164 Look... If you can stay civil... Which you mostly have...i will give you my full opinion on abortion. I say opinion because some is based on science and some on feeling. That will not be something I deny.
Women who use abortion as birth control are disgusting to me. Even the squandering of potential life feels wrong for me. Especially doing so in a callous nature. You are talking to a woman who had 5 miscarriages before having my, now, 10 year old son. Who is my reason for everything... Each one of those children had names and, much like my son, I just knew their sex. Emotionally and hormonal I was quite attached to all of them. If the first one had come into this world he would be 20 today. His name was going to be Oliver. So, to watch women just carelessly throw away something I lost 5 different times...
With that being said... I do recognize the necessity in certain cases for abortions. Even late-term abortions in very rare and extreme cases. If I got to make the decision for all of these women, my choice would be that no one got an abortion unless early abortions were done in the circumstance of rape, incest or life of the mother and child. Late-term abortions would only be done in case of life of the mother and/or child.
Until I had my son, I, personally, would never have chosen abortion. I almost never would now. However, if it's a choice between me and the child I'm carrying dying or just the child I'm carrying dying and I already have a child, I'm getting the abortion. I'm not having my child grow up without his mother. But obviously that's an extreme case.
Given the scientific parameters early abortions, the only person in that equation that will have pain or cognitive issues with that choice, would be the woman. Intellectually, that puts it as being her choice. She is the one that has to live with those consequences. Which comes to the place where we're going to butt heads.
I will always feel like even though I hate some of the decisions, I have no right to decide that for another woman. There's bad no matter what the decision is made. Especially given certain circumstances. However, I don't have to live with it. So I can't make that choice for somebody else. Especially a decision that large.
I have and would counsel any woman that came to me about an abortion, to reconsider it if she would. If nothing else giving that child up for adoption. It's just, at the end of the day I can't force someone to do something. I shouldn't have that power.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@UnKnown-sf9vw Correct! To bad none of the examples you gave where doing anything but 👉mimicking👈 a parasitic relationship, because both of them need to be organisms and none of your examples met that criteria.
Definitions of Parasite. 👇
Oxford Dictionary - an 👉organism👈 that lives in or on an 👉organism👈 of another species (its host) and benefits by deriving nutrients at the other's expense.
Webster Dictionary - an 👉organism👈 living in, on, or with another 👉organism👈 in order to obtain nutrients, grow, or multiply often in a state that directly or indirectly harms the host.
The CDC - A parasite is an 👉organism👈 that lives on or in a host 👉organism👈 and gets its food from or at the expense of its host. There are three main classes of parasites that can cause disease in humans: protozoa, helminths, and ectoparasites.
Dictionary co - an 👉organism👈 that lives on or in an 👉organism👈 of another species, known as the host, from the body of which it obtains nutriment.
Biology online - An👉 organism 👈that obtains nourishment and shelter on another 👉organism👈
Wikipedia - Parasitism is a close relationship between species, where one 👉organism👈, the parasite, lives on or inside another 👉organism👈, the host, causing it some harm, and is adapted structurally to this way of life.
Encyclopedia Britannica - parasitism, relationship between two species of 👉plants or animals👈 in which one benefits at the expense of the other, sometimes without killing the host 👉organism👈.
Cambridge Dictionary
- an 👉animal or plant👈 that lives on or in another 👉animal or plant👈 of a different type and feeds from it:
Collins Dictionary - an 👉organism👈 that lives on or in an 👉organism👈 of another species, known as the host, from the body of which it obtains nutriment
Vocabulary co - A creature that lives off another 👉organism👈 is a parasite. The parasite might not hurt the host, but it doesn't do anything to help it, either.
MacMillan dictionary - BIOLOGY a 👉plant or animal👈 that lives in or on another type of animal and feeds on it
1
-
@UnKnown-sf9vw Correct! To bad none of the examples you gave where doing anything but 👉mimicking👈 a parasitic relationship, because both of them need to be organisms and none of your examples met that criteria.
Definitions of Parasite. 👇
Oxford Dictionary - an 👉organism👈 that lives in or on an 👉organism👈 of another species (its host) and benefits by deriving nutrients at the other's expense.
Webster Dictionary - an 👉organism👈 living in, on, or with another 👉organism👈 in order to obtain nutrients, grow, or multiply often in a state that directly or indirectly harms the host.
The CDC - A parasite is an 👉organism👈 that lives on or in a host 👉organism👈 and gets its food from or at the expense of its host. There are three main classes of parasites that can cause disease in humans: protozoa, helminths, and ectoparasites.
Dictionary co - an 👉organism👈 that lives on or in an 👉organism👈 of another species, known as the host, from the body of which it obtains nutriment.
Biology online - An👉 organism 👈that obtains nourishment and shelter on another 👉organism👈
Wikipedia - Parasitism is a close relationship between species, where one 👉organism👈, the parasite, lives on or inside another 👉organism👈, the host, causing it some harm, and is adapted structurally to this way of life.
Encyclopedia Britannica - parasitism, relationship between two species of 👉plants or animals👈 in which one benefits at the expense of the other, sometimes without killing the host 👉organism👈.
Cambridge Dictionary
- an 👉animal or plant👈 that lives on or in another 👉animal or plant👈 of a different type and feeds from it:
Collins Dictionary - an 👉organism👈 that lives on or in an 👉organism👈 of another species, known as the host, from the body of which it obtains nutriment
Vocabulary co - A creature that lives off another 👉organism👈 is a parasite. The parasite might not hurt the host, but it doesn't do anything to help it, either.
MacMillan dictionary - BIOLOGY a 👉plant or animal👈 that lives in or on another type of animal and feeds on it
1
-
@UnKnown-sf9vw Correct! To bad none of the examples you gave where doing anything but 👉mimicking👈 a parasitic relationship, because both of them need to be organisms and none of your examples met that criteria.
Definitions of Parasite. 👇
Oxford Dictionary - an 👉organism👈 that lives in or on an 👉organism👈 of another species (its host) and benefits by deriving nutrients at the other's expense.
Webster Dictionary - an 👉organism👈 living in, on, or with another 👉organism👈 in order to obtain nutrients, grow, or multiply often in a state that directly or indirectly harms the host.
The CDC - A parasite is an 👉organism👈 that lives on or in a host 👉organism👈 and gets its food from or at the expense of its host. There are three main classes of parasites that can cause disease in humans: protozoa, helminths, and ectoparasites.
Dictionary co - an 👉organism👈 that lives on or in an 👉organism👈 of another species, known as the host, from the body of which it obtains nutriment.
Biology online - An👉 organism 👈that obtains nourishment and shelter on another 👉organism👈
Wikipedia - Parasitism is a close relationship between species, where one 👉organism👈, the parasite, lives on or inside another 👉organism👈, the host, causing it some harm, and is adapted structurally to this way of life.
Encyclopedia Britannica - parasitism, relationship between two species of 👉plants or animals👈 in which one benefits at the expense of the other, sometimes without killing the host 👉organism👈.
Cambridge Dictionary
- an 👉animal or plant👈 that lives on or in another 👉animal or plant👈 of a different type and feeds from it:
Collins Dictionary - an 👉organism👈 that lives on or in an 👉organism👈 of another species, known as the host, from the body of which it obtains nutriment
Vocabulary co - A creature that lives off another 👉organism👈 is a parasite. The parasite might not hurt the host, but it doesn't do anything to help it, either.
MacMillan dictionary - BIOLOGY a 👉plant or animal👈 that lives in or on another type of animal and feeds on it
1
-
@UnKnown-sf9vw Correct! To bad none of the examples you gave where doing anything but 👉mimicking👈 a parasitic relationship, because both of them need to be organisms and none of your examples met that criteria.
Definitions of Parasite. 👇
Oxford Dictionary - an 👉organism👈 that lives in or on an 👉organism👈 of another species (its host) and benefits by deriving nutrients at the other's expense.
Webster Dictionary - an 👉organism👈 living in, on, or with another 👉organism👈 in order to obtain nutrients, grow, or multiply often in a state that directly or indirectly harms the host.
The CDC - A parasite is an 👉organism👈 that lives on or in a host 👉organism👈 and gets its food from or at the expense of its host. There are three main classes of parasites that can cause disease in humans: protozoa, helminths, and ectoparasites.
Dictionary co - an 👉organism👈 that lives on or in an 👉organism👈 of another species, known as the host, from the body of which it obtains nutriment.
Biology online - An👉 organism 👈that obtains nourishment and shelter on another 👉organism👈
Wikipedia - Parasitism is a close relationship between species, where one 👉organism👈, the parasite, lives on or inside another 👉organism👈, the host, causing it some harm, and is adapted structurally to this way of life.
Encyclopedia Britannica - parasitism, relationship between two species of 👉plants or animals👈 in which one benefits at the expense of the other, sometimes without killing the host 👉organism👈.
Cambridge Dictionary
- an 👉animal or plant👈 that lives on or in another 👉animal or plant👈 of a different type and feeds from it:
Collins Dictionary - an 👉organism👈 that lives on or in an 👉organism👈 of another species, known as the host, from the body of which it obtains nutriment
Vocabulary co - A creature that lives off another 👉organism👈 is a parasite. The parasite might not hurt the host, but it doesn't do anything to help it, either.
MacMillan dictionary - BIOLOGY a 👉plant or animal👈 that lives in or on another type of animal and feeds on it
1
-
@UnKnown-sf9vw Correct! To bad none of the examples you gave where doing anything but 👉mimicking👈 a parasitic relationship, because both of them need to be organisms and none of your examples met that criteria.
Definitions of Parasite. 👇
Oxford Dictionary - an 👉organism👈 that lives in or on an 👉organism👈 of another species (its host) and benefits by deriving nutrients at the other's expense.
Webster Dictionary - an 👉organism👈 living in, on, or with another 👉organism👈 in order to obtain nutrients, grow, or multiply often in a state that directly or indirectly harms the host.
The CDC - A parasite is an 👉organism👈 that lives on or in a host 👉organism👈 and gets its food from or at the expense of its host. There are three main classes of parasites that can cause disease in humans: protozoa, helminths, and ectoparasites.
Dictionary co - an 👉organism👈 that lives on or in an 👉organism👈 of another species, known as the host, from the body of which it obtains nutriment.
Biology online - An👉 organism 👈that obtains nourishment and shelter on another 👉organism👈
Wikipedia - Parasitism is a close relationship between species, where one 👉organism👈, the parasite, lives on or inside another 👉organism👈, the host, causing it some harm, and is adapted structurally to this way of life.
Encyclopedia Britannica - parasitism, relationship between two species of 👉plants or animals👈 in which one benefits at the expense of the other, sometimes without killing the host 👉organism👈.
Cambridge Dictionary
- an 👉animal or plant👈 that lives on or in another 👉animal or plant👈 of a different type and feeds from it:
Collins Dictionary - an 👉organism👈 that lives on or in an 👉organism👈 of another species, known as the host, from the body of which it obtains nutriment
Vocabulary co - A creature that lives off another 👉organism👈 is a parasite. The parasite might not hurt the host, but it doesn't do anything to help it, either.
MacMillan dictionary - BIOLOGY a 👉plant or animal👈 that lives in or on another type of animal and feeds on it
1
-
@UnKnown-sf9vw Correct! To bad none of the examples you gave where doing anything but 👉mimicking👈 a parasitic relationship, because both of them need to be organisms and none of your examples met that criteria.
Definitions of Parasite. 👇
Oxford Dictionary - an 👉organism👈 that lives in or on an 👉organism👈 of another species (its host) and benefits by deriving nutrients at the other's expense.
Webster Dictionary - an 👉organism👈 living in, on, or with another 👉organism👈 in order to obtain nutrients, grow, or multiply often in a state that directly or indirectly harms the host.
The CDC - A parasite is an 👉organism👈 that lives on or in a host 👉organism👈 and gets its food from or at the expense of its host. There are three main classes of parasites that can cause disease in humans: protozoa, helminths, and ectoparasites.
Dictionary co - an 👉organism👈 that lives on or in an 👉organism👈 of another species, known as the host, from the body of which it obtains nutriment.
Biology online - An👉 organism 👈that obtains nourishment and shelter on another 👉organism👈
Wikipedia - Parasitism is a close relationship between species, where one 👉organism👈, the parasite, lives on or inside another 👉organism👈, the host, causing it some harm, and is adapted structurally to this way of life.
Encyclopedia Britannica - parasitism, relationship between two species of 👉plants or animals👈 in which one benefits at the expense of the other, sometimes without killing the host 👉organism👈.
Cambridge Dictionary
- an 👉animal or plant👈 that lives on or in another 👉animal or plant👈 of a different type and feeds from it:
Collins Dictionary - an 👉organism👈 that lives on or in an 👉organism👈 of another species, known as the host, from the body of which it obtains nutriment
Vocabulary co - A creature that lives off another 👉organism👈 is a parasite. The parasite might not hurt the host, but it doesn't do anything to help it, either.
MacMillan dictionary - BIOLOGY a 👉plant or animal👈 that lives in or on another type of animal and feeds on it
1
-
@UnKnown-sf9vw Correct! To bad none of the examples you gave where doing anything but 👉mimicking👈 a parasitic relationship, because both of them need to be organisms and none of your examples met that criteria.
Definitions of Parasite. 👇
Oxford Dictionary - an 👉organism👈 that lives in or on an 👉organism👈 of another species (its host) and benefits by deriving nutrients at the other's expense.
Webster Dictionary - an 👉organism👈 living in, on, or with another 👉organism👈 in order to obtain nutrients, grow, or multiply often in a state that directly or indirectly harms the host.
The CDC - A parasite is an 👉organism👈 that lives on or in a host 👉organism👈 and gets its food from or at the expense of its host. There are three main classes of parasites that can cause disease in humans: protozoa, helminths, and ectoparasites.
Dictionary co - an 👉organism👈 that lives on or in an 👉organism👈 of another species, known as the host, from the body of which it obtains nutriment.
Biology online - An👉 organism 👈that obtains nourishment and shelter on another 👉organism👈
Wikipedia - Parasitism is a close relationship between species, where one 👉organism👈, the parasite, lives on or inside another 👉organism👈, the host, causing it some harm, and is adapted structurally to this way of life.
Encyclopedia Britannica - parasitism, relationship between two species of 👉plants or animals👈 in which one benefits at the expense of the other, sometimes without killing the host 👉organism👈.
Cambridge Dictionary
- an 👉animal or plant👈 that lives on or in another 👉animal or plant👈 of a different type and feeds from it:
Collins Dictionary - an 👉organism👈 that lives on or in an 👉organism👈 of another species, known as the host, from the body of which it obtains nutriment
Vocabulary co - A creature that lives off another 👉organism👈 is a parasite. The parasite might not hurt the host, but it doesn't do anything to help it, either.
MacMillan dictionary - BIOLOGY a 👉plant or animal👈 that lives in or on another type of animal and feeds on it
1
-
1
-
@UnKnown-sf9vw Correct! To bad none of the examples you gave where doing anything but 👉mimicking👈 a parasitic relationship, because both of them need to be organisms and none of your examples met that criteria.
Definitions of Parasite. 👇
Oxford Dictionary - an 👉organism👈 that lives in or on an 👉organism👈 of another species (its host) and benefits by deriving nutrients at the other's expense.
Webster Dictionary - an 👉organism👈 living in, on, or with another 👉organism👈 in order to obtain nutrients, grow, or multiply often in a state that directly or indirectly harms the host.
The CDC - A parasite is an 👉organism👈 that lives on or in a host 👉organism👈 and gets its food from or at the expense of its host. There are three main classes of parasites that can cause disease in humans: protozoa, helminths, and ectoparasites.
Dictionary co - an 👉organism👈 that lives on or in an 👉organism👈 of another species, known as the host, from the body of which it obtains nutriment.
Biology online - An👉 organism 👈that obtains nourishment and shelter on another 👉organism👈
Wikipedia - Parasitism is a close relationship between species, where one 👉organism👈, the parasite, lives on or inside another 👉organism👈, the host, causing it some harm, and is adapted structurally to this way of life.
Encyclopedia Britannica - parasitism, relationship between two species of 👉plants or animals👈 in which one benefits at the expense of the other, sometimes without killing the host 👉organism👈.
Cambridge Dictionary
- an 👉animal or plant👈 that lives on or in another 👉animal or plant👈 of a different type and feeds from it:
Collins Dictionary - an 👉organism👈 that lives on or in an 👉organism👈 of another species, known as the host, from the body of which it obtains nutriment
Vocabulary co - A creature that lives off another 👉organism👈 is a parasite. The parasite might not hurt the host, but it doesn't do anything to help it, either.
MacMillan dictionary - BIOLOGY a 👉plant or animal👈 that lives in or on another type of animal and feeds on it
1
-
1
-
@UnKnown-sf9vw Correct! To bad none of the examples you gave where doing anything but 👉mimicking👈 a parasitic relationship, because both of them need to be organisms and none of your examples met that criteria.
Definitions of Parasite. 👇
Oxford Dictionary - an 👉organism👈 that lives in or on an 👉organism👈 of another species (its host) and benefits by deriving nutrients at the other's expense.
Webster Dictionary - an 👉organism👈 living in, on, or with another 👉organism👈 in order to obtain nutrients, grow, or multiply often in a state that directly or indirectly harms the host.
The CDC - A parasite is an 👉organism👈 that lives on or in a host 👉organism👈 and gets its food from or at the expense of its host. There are three main classes of parasites that can cause disease in humans: protozoa, helminths, and ectoparasites.
Dictionary co - an 👉organism👈 that lives on or in an 👉organism👈 of another species, known as the host, from the body of which it obtains nutriment.
Biology online - An👉 organism 👈that obtains nourishment and shelter on another 👉organism👈
Wikipedia - Parasitism is a close relationship between species, where one 👉organism👈, the parasite, lives on or inside another 👉organism👈, the host, causing it some harm, and is adapted structurally to this way of life.
Encyclopedia Britannica - parasitism, relationship between two species of 👉plants or animals👈 in which one benefits at the expense of the other, sometimes without killing the host 👉organism👈.
Cambridge Dictionary
- an 👉animal or plant👈 that lives on or in another 👉animal or plant👈 of a different type and feeds from it:
Collins Dictionary - an 👉organism👈 that lives on or in an 👉organism👈 of another species, known as the host, from the body of which it obtains nutriment
Vocabulary co - A creature that lives off another 👉organism👈 is a parasite. The parasite might not hurt the host, but it doesn't do anything to help it, either.
MacMillan dictionary - BIOLOGY a 👉plant or animal👈 that lives in or on another type of animal and feeds on it
1
-
1
-
@UnKnown-sf9vw Correct! To bad none of the examples you gave where doing anything but 👉mimicking👈 a parasitic relationship, because both of them need to be organisms and none of your examples met that criteria.
Definitions of Parasite. 👇
Oxford Dictionary - an 👉organism👈 that lives in or on an 👉organism👈 of another species (its host) and benefits by deriving nutrients at the other's expense.
Webster Dictionary - an 👉organism👈 living in, on, or with another 👉organism👈 in order to obtain nutrients, grow, or multiply often in a state that directly or indirectly harms the host.
The CDC - A parasite is an 👉organism👈 that lives on or in a host 👉organism👈 and gets its food from or at the expense of its host. There are three main classes of parasites that can cause disease in humans: protozoa, helminths, and ectoparasites.
Dictionary co - an 👉organism👈 that lives on or in an 👉organism👈 of another species, known as the host, from the body of which it obtains nutriment.
Biology online - An👉 organism 👈that obtains nourishment and shelter on another 👉organism👈
Wikipedia - Parasitism is a close relationship between species, where one 👉organism👈, the parasite, lives on or inside another 👉organism👈, the host, causing it some harm, and is adapted structurally to this way of life.
Encyclopedia Britannica - parasitism, relationship between two species of 👉plants or animals👈 in which one benefits at the expense of the other, sometimes without killing the host 👉organism👈.
Cambridge Dictionary
- an 👉animal or plant👈 that lives on or in another 👉animal or plant👈 of a different type and feeds from it:
Collins Dictionary - an 👉organism👈 that lives on or in an 👉organism👈 of another species, known as the host, from the body of which it obtains nutriment
Vocabulary co - A creature that lives off another 👉organism👈 is a parasite. The parasite might not hurt the host, but it doesn't do anything to help it, either.
MacMillan dictionary - BIOLOGY a 👉plant or animal👈 that lives in or on another type of animal and feeds on it
1
-
1
-
@UnKnown-sf9vw Correct! To bad none of the examples you gave where doing anything but 👉mimicking👈 a parasitic relationship, because both of them need to be organisms and none of your examples met that criteria.
Definitions of Parasite. 👇
Oxford Dictionary - an 👉organism👈 that lives in or on an 👉organism👈 of another species (its host) and benefits by deriving nutrients at the other's expense.
Webster Dictionary - an 👉organism👈 living in, on, or with another 👉organism👈 in order to obtain nutrients, grow, or multiply often in a state that directly or indirectly harms the host.
The CDC - A parasite is an 👉organism👈 that lives on or in a host 👉organism👈 and gets its food from or at the expense of its host. There are three main classes of parasites that can cause disease in humans: protozoa, helminths, and ectoparasites.
Dictionary co - an 👉organism👈 that lives on or in an 👉organism👈 of another species, known as the host, from the body of which it obtains nutriment.
Biology online - An👉 organism 👈that obtains nourishment and shelter on another 👉organism👈
Wikipedia - Parasitism is a close relationship between species, where one 👉organism👈, the parasite, lives on or inside another 👉organism👈, the host, causing it some harm, and is adapted structurally to this way of life.
Encyclopedia Britannica - parasitism, relationship between two species of 👉plants or animals👈 in which one benefits at the expense of the other, sometimes without killing the host 👉organism👈.
Cambridge Dictionary
- an 👉animal or plant👈 that lives on or in another 👉animal or plant👈 of a different type and feeds from it:
Collins Dictionary - an 👉organism👈 that lives on or in an 👉organism👈 of another species, known as the host, from the body of which it obtains nutriment
Vocabulary co - A creature that lives off another 👉organism👈 is a parasite. The parasite might not hurt the host, but it doesn't do anything to help it, either.
MacMillan dictionary - BIOLOGY a 👉plant or animal👈 that lives in or on another type of animal and feeds on it
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@UnKnown-sf9vw Correct! To bad none of the examples you gave where doing anything but 👉mimicking👈 a parasitic relationship, because both of them need to be organisms and none of your examples met that criteria.
Definitions of Parasite. 👇
Oxford Dictionary - an 👉organism👈 that lives in or on an 👉organism👈 of another species (its host) and benefits by deriving nutrients at the other's expense.
Webster Dictionary - an 👉organism👈 living in, on, or with another 👉organism👈 in order to obtain nutrients, grow, or multiply often in a state that directly or indirectly harms the host.
The CDC - A parasite is an 👉organism👈 that lives on or in a host 👉organism👈 and gets its food from or at the expense of its host. There are three main classes of parasites that can cause disease in humans: protozoa, helminths, and ectoparasites.
Dictionary co - an 👉organism👈 that lives on or in an 👉organism👈 of another species, known as the host, from the body of which it obtains nutriment.
Biology online - An👉 organism 👈that obtains nourishment and shelter on another 👉organism👈
Wikipedia - Parasitism is a close relationship between species, where one 👉organism👈, the parasite, lives on or inside another 👉organism👈, the host, causing it some harm, and is adapted structurally to this way of life.
Encyclopedia Britannica - parasitism, relationship between two species of 👉plants or animals👈 in which one benefits at the expense of the other, sometimes without killing the host 👉organism👈.
Cambridge Dictionary
- an 👉animal or plant👈 that lives on or in another 👉animal or plant👈 of a different type and feeds from it:
Collins Dictionary - an 👉organism👈 that lives on or in an 👉organism👈 of another species, known as the host, from the body of which it obtains nutriment
Vocabulary co - A creature that lives off another 👉organism👈 is a parasite. The parasite might not hurt the host, but it doesn't do anything to help it, either.
MacMillan dictionary - BIOLOGY a 👉plant or animal👈 that lives in or on another type of animal and feeds on it
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@UnKnown-sf9vw Correct! To bad none of the examples you gave where doing anything but 👉mimicking👈 a parasitic relationship, because both of them need to be organisms and none of your examples met that criteria.
Definitions of Parasite. 👇
Oxford Dictionary - an 👉organism👈 that lives in or on an 👉organism👈 of another species (its host) and benefits by deriving nutrients at the other's expense.
Webster Dictionary - an 👉organism👈 living in, on, or with another 👉organism👈 in order to obtain nutrients, grow, or multiply often in a state that directly or indirectly harms the host.
The CDC - A parasite is an 👉organism👈 that lives on or in a host 👉organism👈 and gets its food from or at the expense of its host. There are three main classes of parasites that can cause disease in humans: protozoa, helminths, and ectoparasites.
Dictionary co - an 👉organism👈 that lives on or in an 👉organism👈 of another species, known as the host, from the body of which it obtains nutriment.
Biology online - An👉 organism 👈that obtains nourishment and shelter on another 👉organism👈
Wikipedia - Parasitism is a close relationship between species, where one 👉organism👈, the parasite, lives on or inside another 👉organism👈, the host, causing it some harm, and is adapted structurally to this way of life.
Encyclopedia Britannica - parasitism, relationship between two species of 👉plants or animals👈 in which one benefits at the expense of the other, sometimes without killing the host 👉organism👈.
Cambridge Dictionary
- an 👉animal or plant👈 that lives on or in another 👉animal or plant👈 of a different type and feeds from it:
Collins Dictionary - an 👉organism👈 that lives on or in an 👉organism👈 of another species, known as the host, from the body of which it obtains nutriment
Vocabulary co - A creature that lives off another 👉organism👈 is a parasite. The parasite might not hurt the host, but it doesn't do anything to help it, either.
MacMillan dictionary - BIOLOGY a 👉plant or animal👈 that lives in or on another type of animal and feeds on it
1
-
1
-
1
-
@UnKnown-sf9vw Correct! To bad none of the examples you gave where doing anything but 👉mimicking👈 a parasitic relationship, because both of them need to be organisms and none of your examples met that criteria.
Definitions of Parasite. 👇
Oxford Dictionary - an 👉organism👈 that lives in or on an 👉organism👈 of another species (its host) and benefits by deriving nutrients at the other's expense.
Webster Dictionary - an 👉organism👈 living in, on, or with another 👉organism👈 in order to obtain nutrients, grow, or multiply often in a state that directly or indirectly harms the host.
The CDC - A parasite is an 👉organism👈 that lives on or in a host 👉organism👈 and gets its food from or at the expense of its host. There are three main classes of parasites that can cause disease in humans: protozoa, helminths, and ectoparasites.
Dictionary co - an 👉organism👈 that lives on or in an 👉organism👈 of another species, known as the host, from the body of which it obtains nutriment.
Biology online - An👉 organism 👈that obtains nourishment and shelter on another 👉organism👈
Wikipedia - Parasitism is a close relationship between species, where one 👉organism👈, the parasite, lives on or inside another 👉organism👈, the host, causing it some harm, and is adapted structurally to this way of life.
Encyclopedia Britannica - parasitism, relationship between two species of 👉plants or animals👈 in which one benefits at the expense of the other, sometimes without killing the host 👉organism👈.
Cambridge Dictionary
- an 👉animal or plant👈 that lives on or in another 👉animal or plant👈 of a different type and feeds from it:
Collins Dictionary - an 👉organism👈 that lives on or in an 👉organism👈 of another species, known as the host, from the body of which it obtains nutriment
Vocabulary co - A creature that lives off another 👉organism👈 is a parasite. The parasite might not hurt the host, but it doesn't do anything to help it, either.
MacMillan dictionary - BIOLOGY a 👉plant or animal👈 that lives in or on another type of animal and feeds on it
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@UnKnown-sf9vw Correct! To bad none of the examples you gave where doing anything but 👉mimicking👈 a parasitic relationship, because both of them need to be organisms and none of your examples met that criteria.
Definitions of Parasite. 👇
Oxford Dictionary - an 👉organism👈 that lives in or on an 👉organism👈 of another species (its host) and benefits by deriving nutrients at the other's expense.
Webster Dictionary - an 👉organism👈 living in, on, or with another 👉organism👈 in order to obtain nutrients, grow, or multiply often in a state that directly or indirectly harms the host.
The CDC - A parasite is an 👉organism👈 that lives on or in a host 👉organism👈 and gets its food from or at the expense of its host. There are three main classes of parasites that can cause disease in humans: protozoa, helminths, and ectoparasites.
Dictionary co - an 👉organism👈 that lives on or in an 👉organism👈 of another species, known as the host, from the body of which it obtains nutriment.
Biology online - An👉 organism 👈that obtains nourishment and shelter on another 👉organism👈
Wikipedia - Parasitism is a close relationship between species, where one 👉organism👈, the parasite, lives on or inside another 👉organism👈, the host, causing it some harm, and is adapted structurally to this way of life.
Encyclopedia Britannica - parasitism, relationship between two species of 👉plants or animals👈 in which one benefits at the expense of the other, sometimes without killing the host 👉organism👈.
Cambridge Dictionary
- an 👉animal or plant👈 that lives on or in another 👉animal or plant👈 of a different type and feeds from it:
Collins Dictionary - an 👉organism👈 that lives on or in an 👉organism👈 of another species, known as the host, from the body of which it obtains nutriment
Vocabulary co - A creature that lives off another 👉organism👈 is a parasite. The parasite might not hurt the host, but it doesn't do anything to help it, either.
MacMillan dictionary - BIOLOGY a 👉plant or animal👈 that lives in or on another type of animal and feeds on it
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@UnKnown-sf9vw Correct! To bad none of the examples you gave where doing anything but 👉mimicking👈 a parasitic relationship, because both of them need to be organisms and none of your examples met that criteria.
Definitions of Parasite. 👇
Oxford Dictionary - an 👉organism👈 that lives in or on an 👉organism👈 of another species (its host) and benefits by deriving nutrients at the other's expense.
Webster Dictionary - an 👉organism👈 living in, on, or with another 👉organism👈 in order to obtain nutrients, grow, or multiply often in a state that directly or indirectly harms the host.
The CDC - A parasite is an 👉organism👈 that lives on or in a host 👉organism👈 and gets its food from or at the expense of its host. There are three main classes of parasites that can cause disease in humans: protozoa, helminths, and ectoparasites.
Dictionary co - an 👉organism👈 that lives on or in an 👉organism👈 of another species, known as the host, from the body of which it obtains nutriment.
Biology online - An👉 organism 👈that obtains nourishment and shelter on another 👉organism👈
Wikipedia - Parasitism is a close relationship between species, where one 👉organism👈, the parasite, lives on or inside another 👉organism👈, the host, causing it some harm, and is adapted structurally to this way of life.
Encyclopedia Britannica - parasitism, relationship between two species of 👉plants or animals👈 in which one benefits at the expense of the other, sometimes without killing the host 👉organism👈.
Cambridge Dictionary
- an 👉animal or plant👈 that lives on or in another 👉animal or plant👈 of a different type and feeds from it:
Collins Dictionary - an 👉organism👈 that lives on or in an 👉organism👈 of another species, known as the host, from the body of which it obtains nutriment
Vocabulary co - A creature that lives off another 👉organism👈 is a parasite. The parasite might not hurt the host, but it doesn't do anything to help it, either.
MacMillan dictionary - BIOLOGY a 👉plant or animal👈 that lives in or on another type of animal and feeds on it
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@UnKnown-sf9vw Cool! 👇 Here 👇 are all the definitions of parasite, except, of course, your made up one. Which one of them don't require both parties to be organisms? And what are the sources of these "definitions" you claim to have given? 👇
Oxford Dictionary - an 👉organism👈 that lives in or on an 👉organism👈 of another species (its host) and benefits by deriving nutrients at the other's expense.
Webster Dictionary - an 👉organism👈 living in, on, or with another 👉organism👈 in order to obtain nutrients, grow, or multiply often in a state that directly or indirectly harms the host.
The CDC - A parasite is an 👉organism👈 that lives on or in a host 👉organism👈 and gets its food from or at the expense of its host. There are three main classes of parasites that can cause disease in humans: protozoa, helminths, and ectoparasites.
Dictionary co - an 👉organism👈 that lives on or in an 👉organism👈 of another species, known as the host, from the body of which it obtains nutriment.
Biology online - An👉 organism 👈that obtains nourishment and shelter on another 👉organism👈
Wikipedia - Parasitism is a close relationship between species, where one 👉organism👈, the parasite, lives on or inside another 👉organism👈, the host, causing it some harm, and is adapted structurally to this way of life.
Encyclopedia Britannica - parasitism, relationship between two species of 👉plants or animals👈 in which one benefits at the expense of the other, sometimes without killing the host 👉organism👈.
Cambridge Dictionary
- an 👉animal or plant👈 that lives on or in another 👉animal or plant👈 of a different type and feeds from it:
Collins Dictionary - an 👉organism👈 that lives on or in an 👉organism👈 of another species, known as the host, from the body of which it obtains nutriment
Vocabulary co - A creature that lives off another 👉organism👈 is a parasite. The parasite might not hurt the host, but it doesn't do anything to help it, either.
MacMillan dictionary - BIOLOGY a 👉plant or animal👈 that lives in or on another type of animal and feeds on it
1
-
1
-
@UnKnown-sf9vw As I said... 👇 Here 👇 are all the definitions of parasite, except, of course, your made up one. Which one of them don't require both parties to be organisms? And what are the sources of these "definitions" you claim to have given? 👇
Oxford Dictionary - an 👉organism👈 that lives in or on an 👉organism👈 of another species (its host) and benefits by deriving nutrients at the other's expense.
Webster Dictionary - an 👉organism👈 living in, on, or with another 👉organism👈 in order to obtain nutrients, grow, or multiply often in a state that directly or indirectly harms the host.
The CDC - A parasite is an 👉organism👈 that lives on or in a host 👉organism👈 and gets its food from or at the expense of its host. There are three main classes of parasites that can cause disease in humans: protozoa, helminths, and ectoparasites.
Dictionary co - an 👉organism👈 that lives on or in an 👉organism👈 of another species, known as the host, from the body of which it obtains nutriment.
Biology online - An👉 organism 👈that obtains nourishment and shelter on another 👉organism👈
Wikipedia - Parasitism is a close relationship between species, where one 👉organism👈, the parasite, lives on or inside another 👉organism👈, the host, causing it some harm, and is adapted structurally to this way of life.
Encyclopedia Britannica - parasitism, relationship between two species of 👉plants or animals👈 in which one benefits at the expense of the other, sometimes without killing the host 👉organism👈.
Cambridge Dictionary
- an 👉animal or plant👈 that lives on or in another 👉animal or plant👈 of a different type and feeds from it:
Collins Dictionary - an 👉organism👈 that lives on or in an 👉organism👈 of another species, known as the host, from the body of which it obtains nutriment
Vocabulary co - A creature that lives off another 👉organism👈 is a parasite. The parasite might not hurt the host, but it doesn't do anything to help it, either.
MacMillan dictionary - BIOLOGY a 👉plant or animal👈 that lives in or on another type of animal and feeds on it
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@InHocSignoVinces-w5m A lot of ppl saying the same thing is only dumb if they don't have the facts to back it up.
Shutting down the gov for 4 months and, as a result, having hundreds of thousands of Gov workers, including our armed forces, standing in bread lines and losing their houses for funding for a wall that was racist/never going to work in the first place. All bc election season was fixing to start up and ppl kept pointing out to him that he had done nothing in 2 years to support his main Champaign promise, of "build the wall". In the end, only to cave and then later take the money from the same military families and STILL not get it built.
Holding multiple Champaign rallies during the height of the pandemic, against his own experts advice. Cuz, getting re-elected was more important to him then his own supporters lives.
Trying to sell everyone multiple snake oil cures and taking none of them, when he got sick.
Trying to downplay the severity of the pandemic as a democratic hoax.
Starting the only kind of war that literally no one in history has ever won. A trade war.
Trying to take healthcare away from hundreds of millions of ppl, with nothing to replace it, simply bc the Obama admin implemented it.
Pulling us out of the climate accords simply bc the Obama admin got us in it.
Gassing peaceful American protestors for a nonsensical photo op.
I mean... I could go on...
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@InHocSignoVinces-w5m 👉 A lot of ppl saying the same thing is only dumb if they don't have the facts to back it up.
Shutting down the gov for 4 months and, as a result, having hundreds of thousands of Gov workers, including our armed forces, standing in bread lines and losing their houses for funding for a wall that was racist/never going to work in the first place. All bc election season was fixing to start up and ppl kept pointing out to him that he had done nothing in 2 years to support his main Champaign promise, of "build the wall". In the end, only to cave and then later take the money from the same military families and STILL not get it built.
Holding multiple Champaign rallies during the height of the pandemic, against his own experts advice. Cuz, getting re-elected was more important to him then his own supporters lives.
Trying to sell everyone multiple snake oil cures and taking none of them, when he got sick.
Trying to downplay the severity of the pandemic as a democratic hoax.
Starting the only kind of war that literally no one in history has ever won. A trade war.
Trying to take healthcare away from hundreds of millions of ppl, with nothing to replace it, simply bc the Obama admin implemented it.
Pulling us out of the climate accords simply bc the Obama admin got us in it.
Gassing peaceful American protestors for a nonsensical photo op.
I mean... I could go on...
1
-
1
-
1
-
@InHocSignoVinces-w5m And.. Again... I will keep repeating it... (Time #3 answering your question)
A lot of ppl saying the same thing is only dumb if they don't have the facts to back it up.
Shutting down the gov for 4 months and, as a result, having hundreds of thousands of Gov workers, including our armed forces, standing in bread lines and losing their houses for funding for a wall that was racist/never going to work in the first place. All bc election season was fixing to start up and ppl kept pointing out to him that he had done nothing in 2 years to support his main Champaign promise, of "build the wall". In the end, only to cave and then later take the money from the same military families and STILL not get it built.
Holding multiple Champaign rallies during the height of the pandemic, against his own experts advice. Cuz, getting re-elected was more important to him then his own supporters lives.
Trying to sell everyone multiple snake oil cures and taking none of them, when he got sick.
Trying to downplay the severity of the pandemic as a democratic hoax.
Starting the only kind of war that literally no one in history has ever won. A trade war.
Trying to take healthcare away from hundreds of millions of ppl, with nothing to replace it, simply bc the Obama admin implemented it.
Pulling us out of the climate accords simply bc the Obama admin got us in it.
Gassing peaceful American protestors for a nonsensical photo op.
I mean... I could go on...
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@user-tj3et5ep6t conjecture is the forming of an opinion based on incomplete information. Which would only apply if I accept your premise that I was originally talking about the legality of her move. Which I've already stated I think twice now, that I'm not. I get that split your trying to turn it into because that seems to be the only way you can come up with an argument but that doesn't actually make it so.
Using your argument, you would have agreed with slavery back when that was legal.
How is asking a public official, why she only does these unnecessary and extreme things when she's left in charge after her boss leaves town, a leading or biased question?
If this was about her going above and beyond, she wouldn't be showboating so she could get elected. She knew good and damn well that unnecessary Act was going to be rescinded as soon as her boss got back into town, yet she did it twice.
To be very clear, the media merely showed a video that she willingly recorded and posted up to get elected using a gun and a Bible. So if you're going to hold the media accountable for showing the video that she put together herself, then why in the world wouldn't you hold her accountable for the same? Unless your bias yourself, of course.
Aspirate being out of context, how was it out of context?
This entire time you've tried to hold the media responsible for things that you excuse when it comes to her. Either everybody's accountable for their actions or you have no business telling anybody they should be.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@bovineone2420 to be clear and because you asked, instead of assume, which I find refreshing coming from someone on your side of the aisle...
My opinion on free speech... I for damn sure ain't going to shut up. The only way to protect my ability not to shut the hell up even when people want me to, is to protect your ability to do the same. When you get into the Nitty Gritty of hate speech, I guess, I have a thick skin. I grew up hanging out with boys. You can call me whatever the hell you want. It isn't going to matter to me. Personally I think that's a strength people need to get through this world. Also it's pretty good to remember that the person who's trying to put you down, is doing so because they don't feel good about themselves and I really don't have anything to do with you. ... But if I did care, if I did mind, I still wouldn't be trying to force somebody else just stop calling me names. because their ability to call me a snobby b** is also my ability to call them an ignorant ass hat. Such as in our constitution. Lol... now, to get to the Constitution itself. There are restrictions on freedom of speech Rd in the Constitution. Like the famous one of you can't run in and scream fire in a crowded room when there isn't one. Inciting mass panic with no cause, isn't covered under free speech. Instructing a group of followers to commit crimes or violence against other people is not covered under free speech. But these are things that are already in there.... So we are already covered.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@keithfrancis4549 The full blown war in Ukraine "isn't" happening? All that Russian propaganda is "real" and they "aren't" mass murdering, gang raping and torturing whole towns of men women and children, 900+ at a time? Putin didn't invade without even telling his troops what they where doing (like they have all said, themselves)... And then making up a bunch of reasons later for ppl like you to pick from... Like 1 battalion of right wing extremists constitutes an entire Nazi state, that somehow elected a Jewish comedian as their president, as well as many other Jewish leaders... or is it the chemical weapons that nobody's ever heard of, there's no documentation for, there's no proof of them being taken to a facility, there's no proof of any facility, there's no proof of any supplies being taken there, there's no proof of any of it even hinting to of happened... But it happened? Or... That some ppl in 2 border towns want to be Russian but never applied for independence in 10 years... Even though they could.... And so decided in stead of MOVING TO RUSSIA... They would just try and take the whole country with them... Cuz that's reasonable? Just 3 of the many ridiculous reasons Russia has tried to give where the genocide going on in Ukraine right now.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Aa Bb 1. What makes the "leftist judges"?
2. What makes them a "stupid lower activist court"?
3. The court is hearing what? To stop the release or to delay it? Cuz, it's coming out either way. That case has already been lost.
4. Well, considering they have already argued the release of the executive records to be released in 2 different courts. Lower and higher, and that there is no reason not to release something that for any other president, would already be released, and because only 1 of 3 court rulings have gone his way at this point, I'm thinking that is a good reason to point to the delay of the release of the records to be ultimately denied. However, I don't treat my baseless speculation and clear bias to be fact, as you are doing. So, I wont say one way or the other, for sure.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Carl G "you wrote in a previous comment the capital police called for backup repeatedly and didn't get it" Yep!
" Are we really supposed to believe that with 2,000 officers in the capital Police Department. Police command called repeatedly for officers to help with backup and those officers refused so."
In that same comment you are referencing... You are intentionally leaving a few things out. Not sure why you wouldn't think I wouldn't immediately call you on that but sure...
1. As I have stated, Have you listened to the capital police testimony or any of the recorded radio chatter from January 6th? I didn't say that police command called them. Literally every officer there called for backup and support at one time or another.
2. Why do you have it in your head that all 2000 Capital police are just chilling in a closet somewhere geared up and ready to go 24/7? They have families. They have homes. Much like literally everywhere else, they work on shifts.
3. And as I have stated... About 3 times now... the protocol dictated you called for the National Guard who actually have to be geared up and ready to go write down the road 24/7. Any hour of the day there is a National Guard unit ready to go either to the capital or to the White House if necessary. That is protocol.... because a long time ago people smarter than obviously you are, thought it was probably a good idea to have that available in our nation's capital.
So why would the capital police, Under Siege from a violent mob, call in Jimmy Joe halfway across the city barbecuing ribs in his backyard, who then has to Gear Up, get out the door, fight past all the traffic and then all the mob, just to get inside and help all the rest of his police officers came with him... when they have a geared up unit right down the road? Why does that make sense to you?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Dan Bertucci Back to history...
The party flip began in the 50s but really got going in Earnest in the 60s. If I was alive back then, and had the ability to vote, I would have been registered as a republican before 1964. What gave me that right to pick my party and vote was the 18th amendment and the woman's rights act, in 1920. That act was passed by President Hoover. A Democrat. He also gave quite the historical speech on the senate floor, before doing so.
Since 1968, no Republican presidential candidate has garnered more than 13% of the African-American vote.
All of which, yet again, disproves your claim of the Dem party opposing all civil rights. Infact, after the civil rights act and the Voting Rights Act, passed in 1964 and 1965, Democrats were the primary opposition two Jim Crow laws all the northern states. By the 1970s, the Dixiecrats were primarily switched over to the Republican Party, because of the northern states Democrats and all the civil rights movement workers systematically dismantling Jim Crow laws.
https://press.princeton.edu/ideas/why-are-blacks-democrats
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Dearly Diane Oh! My bad again. I assumed since you answered my questions and then asked your own in an adult manner, that I was speaking to an actual adult. From this comment, I see I was wrong. Your challenged the slightest on something you say and go immediately to insults. You know if your argument stands against mine, in equal measure, then you don't need the childish insults, right? It's a tell. It's overcompensation for what's lacking.
I don't remember ever asking your opinion on whether I was interested in facts or evidence. I don't feel the need to prove that to you, randomly. I'm not sure why you even brought that up. It seems very weird. You go ahead and believe whatever you would like about me, sweetheart. It makes no difference. You asked me to answer you honestly. I did. That is the end of that transaction.
It's also a little telling when the only part that you said wasn't "stupid" was the part where I ( as actual adults do ) self evaluated, noticed a mistake I had made, and admitted it. I hate to break this to you, sweetheart, but that says more about you than it ever will about me.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@willmont8258 The Presidential Records Act
The history of the PRA and the broader, complementary Federal Records Act (FRA) is well documented. Briefly, the FRA was enacted in 1950. It requires federal agencies, but not the president, to preserve their papers. In 1955, Congress passed the Presidential Libraries Act, which encouraged, but did not require, presidents to donate their records to private libraries so that they could be made available to the general public. The law tracked the norm that President Franklin Roosevelt started when he opened his presidential library in 1941 and eventually donated his papers.
It wasn’t until President Nixon attempted to flout this norm that Congress took action to proactively protect public access to presidential records. After Nixon resigned, he promptly entered into an agreement with the General Services Administration that would have allowed him to destroy his records, including the Watergate tapes. Congress acted quickly to head off the destruction of the tapes, enacting the Presidential Recordings and Materials Preservation Act. That act specifically prohibited Nixon from destroying the tapes, and further specified that:
[n]otwithstanding any other law or any agreement, the [General Services] Administrator shall receive, retain, or make reasonable efforts to obtain, complete possession and control of all papers, documents, memorandums, transcripts, and other objects and materials which constitute the Presidential historical materials of Richard M. Nixon, covering the period beginning January 20, 1969, and ending August 9, 1974.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@dobsr1184 "Did you say Republicans never did anything for black ppl?" Nope!
" did you say Republicans were swastika" Nope!
" I bet your family has them" Nope! At least not any part that I know of. If they did, they would be disowned. I have a mixed race child, Salty Spice.
"Are you suggesting that black Americans are less than?" How you would get that from what I said is some kind of wonder leap logic that I am not familiar with. However, I personally think my mixed race son is the most amazing thing in the world! His daddy is my best damned friend and is the best person I've ever known. He got that from his amazing and big family, that has taken me and my son (who is light skinned like me) in lime we have always been their family and don't let anyone mess with us. Especially the father of my childs grandma. Who walks beside me with her arm around me at big gatherings calling me her daughter, when everyone is wondering who that white girl is! 😂
My adopted big brother, that I Nick named Goo, is one of the best ppl I know, as well. He has 2 beautiful boys and has always had my back.
But... In short... Your making a lot of ignorant assumptions in order to have an argument here.
"How can healthcare be a right if you have to pay for it?" That's the entire point. Every other major country in the world has universal healthcare. Meaning, it's free. Meaning if we're a first world country we shouldn't have people dying because they can't afford to get better. If every other major country in the world can figure it out, then so can we.
" should a free car be a right to?" Most cities and most large towns have access to public transportation, already. It's for people who can't necessarily afford a vehicle but still need to go to work and contribute to society. As well as support themselves.
" why are Democrat cities tossing minorities in jail" why are you singling out Democrat cities and what's your definition of democrat City? Are you saying black people don't go to jail in what you consider to be Republican cities?
Defund the police is something the right-wing Twisted to mean something other than what it was supposed to mean. Basically we want to keep good cops and precincts going while weeding out those bad apples that do things like randomly executes black people in the street that are running away or just standing there doing nothing, or getting in their cars or playing on playgrounds as children, or playing in toy isles of Walmart.
" you are throwing crap to see what sticks" that's a nice opinion of yours. However I articulated my issue with those specific subjects I brought up and brought them all together in order to make the point to the person I was talking to about how Society discriminates against minorities and in particular African-Americans in those cases. If that doesn't fit your agenda then, that's just tough cookies.
" you think black people are not capable of having successful because you think they are less than you" Again... Nope! That's just you continuing to try and shove words into my mouth so you have an actual argument.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Mark The Fart You said I have not debunked 1 thing... 😁
This is 1 example so far of Thoroughly debunking and claim that you have made.😁
BUT WAIT! 😁Cuz, you are not done trying to walk it back! 😊👇
" and don't spout off about Papadopoulos, Flynn or Stone... Those are process crimes that have nothing to do with President Trump or his campaign."
" all those indictments were 👉palmed off👈 to other jurisdictions and have nothing to do with what we are talking about...."
Lets begin with Papadopoulos... on October 5th, 2017, Papadopoulos pleaded 👉guilty👈 in the US District Court of the District of Columbia to 👉making false statements to FBI agents👈 relating to 👉👉contacts he had with agents of the Russian government👈👈 while working for 👉👉👉the Trump campaign.👈👈👈
Now for Flynn we are going to have to go back to a statement you made. 😁 👇
" all those indictments were palmed off to other jurisdictions and have nothing to do with what we are talking about...."
On December 1st, 2017, appeared in federal court to formalize a deal 👉👉👉with special counsel Robert Mueller👈👈👈 to plead guilty to a felony count of willfully and knowingly making false, thick tissues and fraudulent statements to the FBI. He confirmed his intention to cooperate with the special counsel's investigation.
But I thought you said Flynn was "palmed off"? Didn't you also say twice that Papadopoulos, Flynn or and Stone were charged with process crimes that had "nothing to do with President Trump or his campaign"! Except they where all lying to the FBI about the campaigns contacts with Russia, about the campaign and while they where working for Trump. It's almost like you have no idea what your talking about!
Now Stone! 😁 Remember this!?! 👇
" all those indictments were 👉palmed off👈 to other jurisdictions and have nothing to do with what we are talking about...."
On January 25th, 2019, Stone was arrested at his Fort Lauderdale, Florida, home in connection with 👉👉👉Robert Mueller special counsel investigation👈👈👈 and charged in an indictment with witness tampering, obstructing an official proceeding, and five counts of making false statements.
Well... It turns out... All 3 where Related to Trump and the campaign... And All 3 where not palmed off!
In short, it's not the best idea to lie when you're trying to walk back your previous BS claim. 😁✌
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Mark The Fart all you're doing with this comment below is proving that you're not reading my comment oh, like you never read the Mueller report.... oh... and, of course, another failed attempt and moving the goalposts. 😁
" You also fail to understand that those convictions have nothing to do with collusion or conspiracy."
Lets begin with Papadopoulos... on October 5th, 2017, Papadopoulos pleaded 👉guilty👈 in the US District Court of the District of Columbia to 👉making false statements to FBI agents👈 relating to 👉👉contacts he had with agents of the Russian government👈👈 while working for 👉👉👉the Trump campaign.👈👈👈
Now for Flynn we are going to have to go back to a statement you made. 😁 👇
" all those indictments were palmed off to other jurisdictions and have nothing to do with what we are talking about...."
On December 1st, 2017, appeared in federal court to formalize a deal 👉👉👉with special counsel Robert Mueller👈👈👈 to plead guilty to a felony count of willfully and knowingly making false, thick tissues and fraudulent statements to the FBI. He confirmed his intention to cooperate with the special counsel's investigation.
But I thought you said Flynn was "palmed off"? Didn't you also say twice that Papadopoulos, Flynn or and Stone were charged with process crimes that had "nothing to do with President Trump or his campaign"! Except they where all lying to the FBI about the campaigns contacts with Russia, about the campaign and while they where working for Trump. It's almost like you have no idea what your talking about!
Now Stone! 😁 Remember this!?! 👇
" all those indictments were 👉palmed off👈 to other jurisdictions and have nothing to do with what we are talking about...."
On January 25th, 2019, Stone was arrested at his Fort Lauderdale, Florida, home in connection with 👉👉👉Robert Mueller special counsel investigation👈👈👈 and charged in an indictment with witness tampering, obstructing an official proceeding, and five counts of making false statements.
👉👉👉Well... It turns out... All 3 where Related to Trump and the campaign... And All 3 where not palmed off! 👈👈👈
In short, it's not the best idea to lie when you're trying to walk back your previous BS claim. 😁✌"
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Mark The Fart Oh! I forgot about this little nugget as well! 😁 You said... " So go ahead.. Reference where in the mall report there is actual proof that Trump did anything indictable."
Why! I am so glad you asked! This one is the absolute easiest to find of all. And least for those who aren't lying about reading the Mueller report. 😁
The entirety of Volume 2, PAGE 1 - 182! 😁 But I will me specific, since I know you don't like to read, and all! You just like to lie about doing it. 😁
Volume 2, PAGE... Literally.... 1! 🤣 Second Paragraph!
" Beginning and 2017, the president of the United States took a variety of actions towards the ongoing FBI investigation into Russia's interference in the 2016 presidential election and related matters that raised questions about whether he had obstructed Justice. The or appointing the special counsel gave this office jurisdiction to investigate matters that arose directly from the FBI's Russia investigation, including whether the president had obstructed Justice in connection with Russia related investigations. The special counsel's Jurisdiction also covered potentially obstructive acts related to the special counsel's investigation itself. This volume of our report summarizes our obstruction of justice investigation of the president."
But wait! Keep your panties on! We're not done! 😁
Now... On... Again .... Literally.... Page 2 of volume 2.... there are a list of four declarations that are made. All four are pretty relevant but to this particular comment of yours, the fourth one is the most important. 😁
" fourth, if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the president clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so State. Based on these facts and the applicable legal standard, however, we are unable to reach that judgment. The evidence we obtained about the president's actions I'm in 10th present difficult issues that prevent us from conclusively determine a name that no criminal conduct occurred. "
But wait! There's more! 😁
Now... Just going on the read pages 3 - 6 of volume 2 there is 10... Count them... Which I know you won't.... Because that would require you reading the report... But still... 10 laid out, detailed cases of obstruction of justice! 😁 Or at least the summaries of such. Of course you're going to have to actually read volume 2 to get all the relevant details of each laid out case.
1. the campaign's response to reports about Russian support for Trump
2. conduct involving FBI director Comey and Michael Flynn
3. the president's reaction to the continuing Russia investigation
4. the president's termination of Comey
5. the appointment of a special counsel and efforts to remove him
6. efforts to curtail the special counsel's investigation
7. efforts to prevent public disclosure of evidence
8. further efforts to have the Attorney General take control of the investigation
9. efforts to have Megan deny that the president had ordered him to have the special counsel removed
10. conduct towards Flynn and manafort conduct involving Michael Cohen
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Mark The Fart And ya keep saying I I'm such an idiot and I pedal in accusations in conspiracy theories and yada yada yada... I'm such a joke... Yet for some reason...
1. you have yet to bring a scrap of evidence to the table
2. you are using blanket lazy a statement so you don't have to address the actual substance
3. I've never seen as much poorly constructed goalpost moving as that which has come from you, trying to pretend that you can do things like change laws just because you say so... 🤣
4. You constantly keep up this ever more pathetic lie that you actually read the Mueller report but somehow did not retain a scrap of information because you have, those far, gotten zero things right about it, Except.... Maybe the correct spelling of some of the players names
5. you ask for things like page numbers and volume numbers. I don't only give you that but I also give you paragraph number and the quilt and you completely ignore all of that every time I did it. I wonder if that could be because you can't argue against it... Like that's not shockingly obvious right now and hasn't been forever now.
6. You claim me and my kind or so bad and stupid and everything wrong in the world but in this entire conversation. The only thing you have done is lie, be ridiculous, you was transparent Shady tactics and then, of course, because you're on the side you're on, try to put all of that off on me. Cuz if anything in the world is ever on any of you guys, someone has told you that the world will explode. And you were dumb enough to believe it LOL... 🤣
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@mattfoley7881 😁😂😁😂😁😂
You obviously didn't read the report and your gonna be embarrassed as shit today, to find out what it actually says. That should be fun. 😜✌
Little preview?
It's gonna tell you that, there was no "collusion" because that isn't an actual thing under the law, ignorant. 😉
I love how you put, " it also found " after the "collusion" connment, in order to describe "conspiracy". Considering that is what the "collusion" is actually called. So according to you, they found no evidence for (imaginary) collusion or (actual) conspiracy, in reguards to Trump or his campaign. 😂😂😂
Which it doesn't say, BTW. Also, niether does, that fake ass Barr summary. So... I don't know where you got that shit from. 😂😂😂
I mean, you can tell that, simply by the existence of the investigation itself. They had to have something to go on, genius. You can't just, willy-nilly, open a tax payer funded investigation into the president of the United States. Ya gotta have something. 😂😂😂
Best part though! 😁😁😁 wait for it!!!! 😁😁😁
THE ENTIRE, SECOND HALF OF THE REPORT IS DEDICATED TO THE 9 DIFFERENT WAYS, THAT THEY CAN PROVE THAT TRUMP OBSTRUCTED JUSTICE!
Which you would know, if you read the report or had the slightest idea of what the hell you where talking about, you ignorant fool! 😂😂😂
Maybe next time, you educate yourself on what you're talkin about, you know... Before you start talking about it. 😜✌
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
cj p 👈👈👈 HEY EVERYONE!!!! Just encase you wanted to know who this "person" really is.
If ppl show you who they are, believe them. This is who this person is. ( I abbreviated some but do have the screenshots if you want the whole thing.)
Threat beginner comment - Basically Trump can shoot everyone on 5th Avenue and get away with it.
cj p - if they were antifa or in a pussy hat... Then yes it would be epic and I would want to see him shoot more.
Me - So you're basically saying you want to see the president of the United States commit murder and then you want him to get away with it... All we need to know about you, to figure out how jacked up in the head you are.
(This part is a lil long and crazy ranty, so highlights)👇
cj p - if he shot you, I would throw a black party.
(Some comment section thing about people cheering for a red state woman dying in a hurricane and CNN YouTube commenters cheering. Basically a justification for his actions. Which tells us, he does feel the need to justify it or aka he knows he is wrong.) (Then assumptions about what I would do, just encase that justification didn't work.)(Libs are evil then...) I don't need to fake it. When I watch the skinny effeminate antifa kid get mowed down by a red pickup... I laughed and watched it again. He didn't even break a bone. When I saw it another video of a motorist get out of his white suburban and beat the crap out of an antifa weirdo standing in front of his car... I laughed again and make jokes in the comments like every other person did. You want links to those videos they are pretty good?
Me - 👈👈👈ANNNNNDDD... A perfect example of what I was talking about, everyone. This is all you need to know about him, to know nothing that comes out of his mouth is important, in any way. He is always so eager to help me prove that point and I really do appreciate it! 😉✌
Me - BTW, you are talking about taking a little boys mother away from him. That is what you are celebrating. That is who you are right now... I'm sure yours would be super proud that just came out of her little boys mouth. You are such a sad person.
cj p - you were going to raise a little nut job. He might be better off adopted. And there you go again with the virtue signaling. I don't use my kid as a shield. Pathetic how you're trying to squeeze guilt from me when I'm using satire. No wonder you don't get Trump jokes. I bet memes fly past you too. Fifty bucks says your son's girlfriend's will never get along with his overbearing controlling mother with no humor.
(👆You will notice, throughout this portion, you see them justifying, excusing and trying to flip what he has said onto me. All signs he knows what he has said, was wrong.)
Me - 👈👈👈 Yep... This is who this person is. 👆👆👆This is why anything they say, does not matter. They aren't a good person. They aren't even mostly human. When people show you who they are, believe them.
I'm going to screenshot this, copy and paste it everywhere I see this "person" from now on.
1
-
@jonny s This is who you are talking to.
If ppl show you who they are, believe them. This is who this person is. ( I abbreviated some but do have the screenshots if you want the whole thing.)
Threat beginner comment - Basically Trump can shoot everyone on 5th Avenue and get away with it.
cj p - if they were antifa or in a pussy hat... Then yes it would be epic and I would want to see him shoot more.
Me - So you're basically saying you want to see the president of the United States commit murder and then you want him to get away with it... All we need to know about you, to figure out how jacked up in the head you are.
(This part is a lil long and crazy ranty, so highlights)👇
cj p - if he shot you, I would throw a black party.
(Some comment section thing about people cheering for a red state woman dying in a hurricane and CNN YouTube commenters cheering. Basically a justification for his actions. Which tells us, he does feel the need to justify it or aka he knows he is wrong.) (Then assumptions about what I would do, just encase that justification didn't work.)(Libs are evil then...) I don't need to fake it. When I watch the skinny effeminate antifa kid get mowed down by a red pickup... I laughed and watched it again. He didn't even break a bone. When I saw it another video of a motorist get out of his white suburban and beat the crap out of an antifa weirdo standing in front of his car... I laughed again and make jokes in the comments like every other person did. You want links to those videos they are pretty good?
Me - 👈👈👈ANNNNNDDD... A perfect example of what I was talking about, everyone. This is all you need to know about him, to know nothing that comes out of his mouth is important, in any way. He is always so eager to help me prove that point and I really do appreciate it! 😉✌
Me - BTW, you are talking about taking a little boys mother away from him. That is what you are celebrating. That is who you are right now... I'm sure yours would be super proud that just came out of her little boys mouth. You are such a sad person.
cj p - you were going to raise a little nut job. He might be better off adopted. And there you go again with the virtue signaling. I don't use my kid as a shield. Pathetic how you're trying to squeeze guilt from me when I'm using satire. No wonder you don't get Trump jokes. I bet memes fly past you too. Fifty bucks says your son's girlfriend's will never get along with his overbearing controlling mother with no humor.
(👆You will notice, throughout this portion, you see them justifying, excusing and trying to flip what he has said onto me. All signs he knows what he has said, was wrong.)
Me - 👈👈👈 Yep... This is who this person is. 👆👆👆This is why anything they say, does not matter. They aren't a good person. They aren't even mostly human. When people show you who they are, believe them.
I'm going to screenshot this, copy and paste it everywhere I see this "person" from now on.
1
-
@Drunk.Cthulhu This is who you are talking to.
If ppl show you who they are, believe them. This is who this person is. ( I abbreviated some but do have the screenshots if you want the whole thing.)
Threat beginner comment - Basically Trump can shoot everyone on 5th Avenue and get away with it.
cj p - if they were antifa or in a pussy hat... Then yes it would be epic and I would want to see him shoot more.
Me - So you're basically saying you want to see the president of the United States commit murder and then you want him to get away with it... All we need to know about you, to figure out how jacked up in the head you are.
(This part is a lil long and crazy ranty, so highlights)👇
cj p - if he shot you, I would throw a black party.
(Some comment section thing about people cheering for a red state woman dying in a hurricane and CNN YouTube commenters cheering. Basically a justification for his actions. Which tells us, he does feel the need to justify it or aka he knows he is wrong.) (Then assumptions about what I would do, just encase that justification didn't work.)(Libs are evil then...) I don't need to fake it. When I watch the skinny effeminate antifa kid get mowed down by a red pickup... I laughed and watched it again. He didn't even break a bone. When I saw it another video of a motorist get out of his white suburban and beat the crap out of an antifa weirdo standing in front of his car... I laughed again and make jokes in the comments like every other person did. You want links to those videos they are pretty good?
Me - 👈👈👈ANNNNNDDD... A perfect example of what I was talking about, everyone. This is all you need to know about him, to know nothing that comes out of his mouth is important, in any way. He is always so eager to help me prove that point and I really do appreciate it! 😉✌
Me - BTW, you are talking about taking a little boys mother away from him. That is what you are celebrating. That is who you are right now... I'm sure yours would be super proud that just came out of her little boys mouth. You are such a sad person.
cj p - you were going to raise a little nut job. He might be better off adopted. And there you go again with the virtue signaling. I don't use my kid as a shield. Pathetic how you're trying to squeeze guilt from me when I'm using satire. No wonder you don't get Trump jokes. I bet memes fly past you too. Fifty bucks says your son's girlfriend's will never get along with his overbearing controlling mother with no humor.
(👆You will notice, throughout this portion, you see them justifying, excusing and trying to flip what he has said onto me. All signs he knows what he has said, was wrong.)
Me - 👈👈👈 Yep... This is who this person is. 👆👆👆This is why anything they say, does not matter. They aren't a good person. They aren't even mostly human. When people show you who they are, believe them.
I'm going to screenshot this, copy and paste it everywhere I see this "person" from now on.
1
-
@bboygenetics9882 This is who you are talking to.
If ppl show you who they are, believe them. This is who this person is. ( I abbreviated some but do have the screenshots if you want the whole thing.)
Threat beginner comment - Basically Trump can shoot everyone on 5th Avenue and get away with it.
cj p - if they were antifa or in a pussy hat... Then yes it would be epic and I would want to see him shoot more.
Me - So you're basically saying you want to see the president of the United States commit murder and then you want him to get away with it... All we need to know about you, to figure out how jacked up in the head you are.
(This part is a lil long and crazy ranty, so highlights)👇
cj p - if he shot you, I would throw a black party.
(Some comment section thing about people cheering for a red state woman dying in a hurricane and CNN YouTube commenters cheering. Basically a justification for his actions. Which tells us, he does feel the need to justify it or aka he knows he is wrong.) (Then assumptions about what I would do, just encase that justification didn't work.)(Libs are evil then...) I don't need to fake it. When I watch the skinny effeminate antifa kid get mowed down by a red pickup... I laughed and watched it again. He didn't even break a bone. When I saw it another video of a motorist get out of his white suburban and beat the crap out of an antifa weirdo standing in front of his car... I laughed again and make jokes in the comments like every other person did. You want links to those videos they are pretty good?
Me - 👈👈👈ANNNNNDDD... A perfect example of what I was talking about, everyone. This is all you need to know about him, to know nothing that comes out of his mouth is important, in any way. He is always so eager to help me prove that point and I really do appreciate it! 😉✌
Me - BTW, you are talking about taking a little boys mother away from him. That is what you are celebrating. That is who you are right now... I'm sure yours would be super proud that just came out of her little boys mouth. You are such a sad person.
cj p - you were going to raise a little nut job. He might be better off adopted. And there you go again with the virtue signaling. I don't use my kid as a shield. Pathetic how you're trying to squeeze guilt from me when I'm using satire. No wonder you don't get Trump jokes. I bet memes fly past you too. Fifty bucks says your son's girlfriend's will never get along with his overbearing controlling mother with no humor.
(👆You will notice, throughout this portion, you see them justifying, excusing and trying to flip what he has said onto me. All signs he knows what he has said, was wrong.)
Me - 👈👈👈 Yep... This is who this person is. 👆👆👆This is why anything they say, does not matter. They aren't a good person. They aren't even mostly human. When people show you who they are, believe them.
I'm going to screenshot this, copy and paste it everywhere I see this "person" from now on.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
William Burgess " you just described every Democrat I know."
With what? Also, maybe its not a good idea to put all Dems in the same box like that.
" You might be a good girl, which is a narcissist statement."
Not every statment about someone saying something good about themselves is narcissistic. You can, also, not judge someone off of saying some 1 good thing about themselves, as being narcissistic.
" Most people in America think about the same."
Do you know most people in America? How do you qualify that statement?
" The far left on the far right are small minorities. Demographics play a role in all this."
You are correct. I am niether. They play several roles. Which one are you referring to?
" I'm a sixty-two-year-old ex-marine, and I'm from New England. Lowest unemployment in the country. Too damn. Senators, and a rap. Gov. They get it done."
Thank you for your service. I come from a military family. My brother is National Guard unit is in New Orleans right now. He was also there for Katrina. Which happens 72 hours after he got back from his first deployment to Iraq. So again, thank you for your service. Genuinely.
" Now I was a conservative, I don't want to harm illegal trespassers. But it's got to be done right."
When was the last time that you heard about a rain being announced beforehand? How was calling these people rapists and murderers the right way? How is locking children in cages doing things the right way? I coupd go on.
I'm not saying that you should not Deport someone who is found to be here illegally. I'm saying there's a smart way to do it and a humane way to do it. I'm saying we don't have to dehumanize these people to do it. I'm saying, America is better than this and we should act like it because our soldiers fought and died for it.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@gawgabwoy Obviously... You have no idea what your talking About. Walking thousands of miles, for months on end, through 2 desert countries, oftentimes enduring things like rape and hunger, to get your kids to a safe place and away from a place that does horrible s*** to them... in these countries, if your little girl is to pretty, often times, mothers will scar their faces or disfigure them in some way. Their own children. That's because 1 in 5 little girls get taken and sold into sex slavery. Their young boys have just as good of a chance of learning to shoot a gun, around the same time as they should be learning to read. Niether one of them have much of a chance of actually growing up. For a variety of reasons, including starvation, violence, trafficking and drugs.
And... Omg... You really have no clue about the facts of the situation... On either side of the border. Do you? The families they are separating, the children they are putting in these concentration camps, they are Asylum Seekers. People who have turned themselves in for Asylum. Which is legal, by the way. Which Trump and sessions, before he was fired, came out and admitted that they were doing this to deter them from coming over and seeking Asylum. They're separating them from their children on purpose.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
what did you dodge of? I will be more than happy to answer that question for you.
WHAT YOU CHOSE TO FOCUS ON
Well... you claimed they were not concentration camp conditions. I gave you the actual definition of concentration camp.
"a place where large numbers of people, especially political prisoners or members of persecuted minorities, are deliberately imprisoned in a relatively small area with inadequate facilities, sometimes to provide forced labor or to await mass execution. The term is most strongly associated with the several hundred camps established by the Nazis in Germany and occupied Europe in 1933–45, among the most infamous being Dachau, Belsen, and Auschwitz."
Your idea of refuting that was saying.... they do not meet those conditions. You also thought that cherry picking specific words and ignoring all the rest was a rebuttal of some kind. Except, you only picked out the words that were not requirements. That we're only sometimes this happens, sometimes it doesn't. Which are very clear in that actual definition.
Like... political prisoners.... now, I gave you an argument that they were political prisoners but at the same time that's clearly not a requirement by the actual definition.
" a place where large numbers of people, 👉especially political prisoners👈"
Now here, we have the definition pointing out a specific group of people being put in these concentration camps. Clearly implying that that isn't always the case. Therefore it's not a requirement. Otherwise why reference a specific set of them?
Next, you referenced persecuted minority.
" a place where large numbers of people, especially political prisoners or members of persecuted minorities"
Again, why reference those specific groups if everybody there was a persecuted minority? In other words, not a requirement.... Yet again, I gave you an argument as to why it was also true but, it's also not a requirement.
1
-
1
-
@danielporter4568 what did you dodge of? I will be more than happy to answer that question for you.
WHAT YOU CHOSE TO FOCUS ON
Well... you claimed they were not concentration camp conditions. I gave you the actual definition of concentration camp.
"a place where large numbers of people, especially political prisoners or members of persecuted minorities, are deliberately imprisoned in a relatively small area with inadequate facilities, sometimes to provide forced labor or to await mass execution. The term is most strongly associated with the several hundred camps established by the Nazis in Germany and occupied Europe in 1933–45, among the most infamous being Dachau, Belsen, and Auschwitz."
Your idea of refuting that was saying.... they do not meet those conditions. You also thought that cherry picking specific words and ignoring all the rest was a rebuttal of some kind. Except, you only picked out the words that were not requirements. That we're only sometimes this happens, sometimes it doesn't. Which are very clear in that actual definition.
Like... political prisoners.... now, I gave you an argument that they were political prisoners but at the same time that's clearly not a requirement by the actual definition.
" a place where large numbers of people, 👉especially political prisoners👈"
Now here, we have the definition pointing out a specific group of people being put in these concentration camps. Clearly implying that that isn't always the case. Therefore it's not a requirement. Otherwise why reference a specific set of them?
Next, you referenced persecuted minority.
" a place where large numbers of people, especially political prisoners or members of persecuted minorities"
Again, why reference those specific groups if everybody there was a persecuted minority? In other words, not a requirement.... Yet again, I gave you an argument as to why it was also true but, it's also not a requirement.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@danielporter4568 SoOoOo... Are you saying.... In this sentence structure 👇 of the accurate definition for concentration camps, "political prisoner", "persecuted minority" and "sometimes to provide forced labor or to await mass execution", are mandatory?
And if so, then why does the definition take the time to point out those specific groups?
Why does "sometimes to provide forced labor or to await mass execution" have the word "sometimes" in it?
Are you saying that "a place where large numbers of people" and "are deliberately imprisoned in a relatively small area with inadequate facilities", are not the only mandatory sections in this sentence structure of this accurate definition?
And if so, then how so?
"a place where large numbers of people, especially political prisoners or members of persecuted minorities, are deliberately imprisoned in a relatively small area with inadequate facilities, sometimes to provide forced labor or to await mass execution. The term is most strongly associated with the several hundred camps established by the Nazis in Germany and occupied Europe in 1933–45, among the most infamous being Dachau, Belsen, and Auschwitz."
1
-
1
-
@danielporter4568 So did you think I would not notice that you dodged every question? I wonder why that is... 😂 Lets try again, shall we! Unless there's some reason you keep dodging the questions? 😁
"SoOoOo... Are you saying.... In this sentence structure 👇 of the accurate definition for concentration camps, "political prisoner", "persecuted minority" and "sometimes to provide forced labor or to await mass execution", are mandatory?
And if so, then why does the definition take the time to point out those specific groups?
Why does "sometimes to provide forced labor or to await mass execution" have the word "sometimes" in it?
Are you saying that "a place where large numbers of people" and "are deliberately imprisoned in a relatively small area with inadequate facilities", are not the only mandatory sections in this sentence structure of this accurate definition?
And if so, then how so?
"a place where large numbers of people, especially political prisoners or members of persecuted minorities, are deliberately imprisoned in a relatively small area with inadequate facilities, sometimes to provide forced labor or to await mass execution. The term is most strongly associated with the several hundred camps established by the Nazis in Germany and occupied Europe in 1933–45, among the most infamous being Dachau, Belsen, and Auschwitz.""
1
-
1
-
@danielporter4568 "SoOoOo... Are you saying.... In this sentence structure 👇 ,of the accurate definition for concentration camps, "political prisoner", "persecuted minority" and "sometimes to provide forced labor or to await mass execution", 👉👉👉are mandatory?👈👈👈
And if so, then why does the definition take the time to point out those specific groups?
Why does "sometimes to provide forced labor or to await mass execution" have the word "sometimes" in it?
Are you saying that "a place where large numbers of people" and 👉👉👉"are deliberately imprisoned in a relatively small area with inadequate facilities"👈👈👈, are 👉not👈 the only 👉mandatory👈 sections in this sentence structure of this accurate definition?
And if so, then how so?
"a place where large numbers of people, especially political prisoners or members of persecuted minorities, are deliberately imprisoned in a relatively small area with inadequate facilities, sometimes to provide forced labor or to await mass execution. The term is most strongly associated with the several hundred camps established by the Nazis in Germany and occupied Europe in 1933–45, among the most infamous being Dachau, Belsen, and Auschwitz.""
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@danielporter4568 Prove me wrong? You claim... " the entire definition must apply"
The only 2 mandatory portions of the definition of concentration camp, using a plain text reading, are...
"a place where large numbers of people"
"are deliberately imprisoned in a relatively small area with inadequate facilities"
The second one, of course, you keep ignoring....
Because... "👉especially👈 political prisoners or members of persecuted minorities" are specific groups within the camps, that are likely to be a large portion of the camps. 👉Not👈 that they are the 👉only ones👈. If that were the case, the definition would read 👉"are either political prisoners or persecuted minorities"👈. All of which is born out by the word that comes before. 👉"Especially"👈. If they where all either "political prisoners" or "persecuted minorities", 👉especially👈 would not be necessary.
"sometimes to provide forced labor or to await mass execution" is proven not to be mandatory, again, by the word that comes before, "to provide forced labor or await mass executions". That word being, "sometimes". The definition of sometimes is "occasionally, rather than all of the time".
The full definition... Word for word! 😉
"a place where large numbers of people, especially political prisoners or members of persecuted minorities, are deliberately imprisoned in a relatively small area with inadequate facilities, sometimes to provide forced labor or to await mass execution. The term is most strongly associated with the several hundred camps established by the Nazis in Germany and occupied Europe in 1933–45, among the most infamous being Dachau, Belsen, and Auschwitz."
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@danielporter4568 Prove me wrong? You claim... " the entire definition must apply"
The only 2 mandatory portions of the definition of concentration camp, using a plain text reading, are...
"a place where large numbers of people"
"are deliberately imprisoned in a relatively small area with inadequate facilities"
The second one, of course, you keep ignoring....
Because... "👉especially👈 political prisoners or members of persecuted minorities" are specific groups within the camps, that are likely to be a large portion of the camps. 👉Not👈 that they are the 👉only ones👈. If that were the case, the definition would read 👉"are either political prisoners or persecuted minorities"👈. All of which is born out by the word that comes before. 👉"Especially"👈. If they where all either "political prisoners" or "persecuted minorities", 👉especially👈 would not be necessary.
"sometimes to provide forced labor or to await mass execution" is proven not to be mandatory, again, by the word that comes before, "to provide forced labor or await mass executions". That word being, "sometimes". The definition of sometimes is "occasionally, rather than all of the time".
The full definition... Word for word! 😉
"a place where large numbers of people, especially political prisoners or members of persecuted minorities, are deliberately imprisoned in a relatively small area with inadequate facilities, sometimes to provide forced labor or to await mass execution. The term is most strongly associated with the several hundred camps established by the Nazis in Germany and occupied Europe in 1933–45, among the most infamous being Dachau, Belsen, and Auschwitz."
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@danielporter4568 Prove me wrong? You claim... " the entire definition must apply"
The only 2 mandatory portions of the definition of concentration camp, using a plain text reading, are...
"a place where large numbers of people"
"are deliberately imprisoned in a relatively small area with inadequate facilities"
The second one, of course, you keep ignoring....
Because... "👉especially👈 political prisoners or members of persecuted minorities" are specific groups within the camps, that are likely to be a large portion of the camps. 👉Not👈 that they are the 👉only ones👈. If that were the case, the definition would read 👉"are either political prisoners or persecuted minorities"👈. All of which is born out by the word that comes before. 👉"Especially"👈. If they where all either "political prisoners" or "persecuted minorities", 👉especially👈 would not be necessary.
"sometimes to provide forced labor or to await mass execution" is proven not to be mandatory, again, by the word that comes before, "to provide forced labor or await mass executions". That word being, "sometimes". The definition of sometimes is "occasionally, rather than all of the time".
The full definition... Word for word! 😉
"a place where large numbers of people, especially political prisoners or members of persecuted minorities, are deliberately imprisoned in a relatively small area with inadequate facilities, sometimes to provide forced labor or to await mass execution. The term is most strongly associated with the several hundred camps established by the Nazis in Germany and occupied Europe in 1933–45, among the most infamous being Dachau, Belsen, and Auschwitz."
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@danielporter4568 Prove me wrong? You claim... " the entire definition must apply"
The only 2 mandatory portions of the definition of concentration camp, using a plain text reading, are...
"a place where large numbers of people"
"are deliberately imprisoned in a relatively small area with inadequate facilities"
The second one, of course, you keep ignoring....
Because... "👉especially👈 political prisoners or members of persecuted minorities" are specific groups within the camps, that are likely to be a large portion of the camps. 👉Not👈 that they are the 👉only ones👈. If that were the case, the definition would read 👉"are either political prisoners or persecuted minorities"👈. All of which is born out by the word that comes before. 👉"Especially"👈. If they where all either "political prisoners" or "persecuted minorities", 👉especially👈 would not be necessary.
"sometimes to provide forced labor or to await mass execution" is proven not to be mandatory, again, by the word that comes before, "to provide forced labor or await mass executions". That word being, "sometimes". The definition of sometimes is "occasionally, rather than all of the time".
The full definition... Word for word! 😉
"a place where large numbers of people, especially political prisoners or members of persecuted minorities, are deliberately imprisoned in a relatively small area with inadequate facilities, sometimes to provide forced labor or to await mass execution. The term is most strongly associated with the several hundred camps established by the Nazis in Germany and occupied Europe in 1933–45, among the most infamous being Dachau, Belsen, and Auschwitz."
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@T_1357_F Oh and you might have a little better grasp on Irony, as well... Like the irony of this statment, here! 👇
" I was making an incredibly hyperbolic comment in an attempt to make fun of Democrats who 👉believe👈 Trump is guilty, because I 👉know👈 it, and that's enough proof for me,"
But no worries! I'm here to help! See! I have already identify the problem you seem to be having. You seem to be getting the word KNOW and BELIEVE mixed up.
See! The word KNOW means - be aware of through observation, inquiry, or information.... When used as a verb, and how you where using it. Now... You couldn't of 👉observed👈 Trump being innocent on July 25th, during that phone call because you weren't in the white house or on the phone with them. You couldn't have 👉inquired👈 about it because you've shown a propensity of not wanting to add knowledge information or answer questions that do not fit your preconceived notions on this very subject, multiple times. You couldn't have fact based 👉information👈 on this subject of Trumps guilt or innocence because you refuse to see anything that doesn't fit your preconceived notions. You go out of your way to ignore things that don't support what you've already decided to be true.
So obviously... You don't KNOW he hasn't committed a crime. 😉
As for BELIEVE... Well, it means- hold (something) as an opinion; think or suppose.
As in we believe Trump is guilty of a crime... Except it is not an opinion and we don't think or suppose.... Why? Because all that evidence you want to ignore is the actual proof of the crime. Like the transcript... where he ask the president of a foreign country to investigate his political opponent in the next presidential election, after said person announced he was going to be his political opponent in the next presidential election. That is a crime. That is not an opinion. So much as it is legal fact.
But, it's an easy fix. All you have to do is replace you saying that you know with you saying you believe and replace unsane we believe as us actually knowing. Just use the add a button. And it's all fixed! No need to thank me. It was no trouble at all! 😁✌
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@T_1357_F and just for a little recap on the things you are running away from now... 👇😁👇😆👇😋👇😉👇
🤥YOU🤥👉 "There is no evidence. There is allegations."
😁ME😁👉 "The other thing, There's a lot of talk about Biden's son, 👉 that Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great.👈 Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it... It sounds horrible to me."
See where he just asked a foreign gov to investigate his political opponent in the next presidential election.... Yeah... That's a crime. ✌😉
🤥YOU🤥👉 " Allegations that have yet to be substantiated by proof of guilt Beyond A Reasonable Doubt. "
😁ME😁👉 Beyond a reasonable doubt is not the standard in reguards to impeachment. You don't even have to commit a crime to be impeached.
🤥YOU🤥👉 " What evidence proves Beyond A Reasonable Doubt a law was broken?"
😁ME😁👉 "The other thing, There's a lot of talk about Biden's son, 👉 that Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great.👈 Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it... It sounds horrible to me."
See where he just asked a foreign gov to investigate his political opponent in the next presidential election.... Yeah... That's a crime. ✌😉
🤥YOU🤥👉 " Of course you don't want to set a standard for determining guilt."
😁ME😁👉 Ummm... Yeah.... That is not my standard, sweetness! I'm 35 years old. The Constitution was ratified in 1778. Unless I have a secret time machine... I didn't have anything to do with setting the standards for impeachment.
🤥YOU🤥👉 " Unless someone can provide otherwise, any claims of guilt is BS,"
😁ME😁👉 "The other thing, There's a lot of talk about Biden's son, 👉 that Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great.👈 Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it... It sounds horrible to me."
See where he just asked a foreign gov to investigate his political opponent in the next presidential election.... Yeah... That's a crime. ✌😉
🤥YOU🤥👉 " you cite quotes from the transcript selectively, and out of order in order to misconstrue and infer the facts."
😁ME😁👉 Okay.... Sure.... Show me how, quoting the spacific part which shows he comitted a crime, which is what we where talking about, means that I somehow took anything out of context?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Sigkim Examples of Bob and weave but to afraid to step into the ring. (Arguing something on its merits, with facts and evidence. Not rampent speculation, diversion, deflection, cherry picking, lies, ignoring what people say because you can't argue against it and paper tigers.)
"LMAO... NO, I mean by sucking up to the very thing, that stole his, and his supporters chance to have their votes be counted"
Rampent speculation on why someone did what they did, with no proof and him saying differently. Setting up a paper tiger, in the form of, not only mischaracterizing his motivations but his actions, in order for you to be able to have an argument. Sanders never changed one position he had that was opposite of hers. Also, he doesn't have the power to take our vote away. We still have the right to vote for one or the other candidate. It just wasn't him. So that is what we call a lie. All so you can set up a false comparison against Trump. That is in no way arguing your point on its Merit. That is in fact bobbing and weaving, while still being afraid to step into the ring.
" you, and his supporters, can mental gymnastic all the justification you please to try and soothe your asshap over his spineless ring kissing okay."
At that point, I had clearly told you, what he did and the reasons he said that he did it. You ignored this so that you could continue with the paper tiger you set up. All because that is the only narrative that you had to argue with. Even though, it was a lie. That is in no way arguing your point on its Merit. That is in fact bobbing and weaving, while still being afraid to step into the ring.
" translation: I have a problem with others actually challenging fake news indoctrinated claim."
Now.. We have already been through this one. This is another really good example of you having to mischaracterize something I said in order for you to have an argument. It's also you making baseless assumptions about me and where I get my information. Something you could not possibly know oh, but you need to assume I get it from mainstream media in order for you to be able to argue against it. Yet again, setting up another paper tiger.That is in no way arguing your point on its Merit. That is in fact bobbing and weaving, while still being afraid to step into the ring.
" oh thank you for this bichos fake-ass news rhetoric"
Same thing... And at this point... I was getting board. Where are you getting that from again? You know, the assumption that I get my information from the news? Where did I say that again? Feel free to quote me. I'll be waiting... Forever. That is in no way arguing your point on its Merit. That is in fact bobbing and weaving, while still being afraid to step into the ring.
That's not even counting the childish taunting and way to over inflated ego... That just screams that your really needing some attention....
Now we are up to you current comment.... But keep your panties on. I have every intention on answering your questions. I just wanted to make it perfectly chear why was actually bobbing and weaving in this conversation and who was lying. Next up... Your answers.
1
-
1
-
Sigkim Violation of the Foreign Emoluments Clause
The Constitution bars federal officials from receiving payments from foreign officials, something Trump has been accused of breaching since before he even took office. Many of the complaints have centered on the Trump Organization's hotels and golf resorts around the globe. Multiple lawsuits have been filed accusing Trump of violating the clause.
Violation of the Domestic Emoluments Clause
The domestic emoluments clause prohibits a sitting president from accepting compensation beyond that of his salary. Trump's new hotel in Washington, D.C., which has hosted multiple foreign dignitaries and government officials, has been a particular source of controversy.
This link is a case study on some of his foreign emoluments Clause violations. With an active case and detail.
https://www.theusconstitution.org/litigation/trump-and-foreign-emoluments-clause/
The Constitution’s Foreign Emoluments Clause prohibits the president from accepting personal benefits from any foreign government or official.
Trump has retained his ownership interests in his family business while he is in office.
Thus, every time a foreign official stays at a Trump hotel, or a foreign government approves a new Trump Organization project, or grants a trademark, Trump is in violation of the Constitution.
For example: shortly after he was sworn into office, the Chinese government
gave preliminary approval to 38 trademarks of Trump’s name. Then, in June, China approved nine Donald Trump trademarks they had previously rejected.
And every time he goes to golf at a Trump property, he funnels taxpayer money into his family business—violating the Domestic Emoluments Clause.
Other various corruption.
When Trump encouraged police officers to rough up people they have under arrest, he violated his obligation to oversee faithful execution of the laws.
When Trump shared anti-Muslim content on Twitter, he violated his obligation to uphold equal protection of the laws.
President Trump has repeatedly pressured the Department of Justice and the FBI to investigate and prosecute political adversaries like Hillary Clinton.
A piece of corruption that is near and dear to you.
President Trump has repeatedly attacked the concept of an independent press.
He’s called critical coverage “fake news” and journalists “the enemy of the American people,” made threats to change libel laws and revoke licenses, and his battles with CNN led him to try to interfere in the AT&T/Time Warner merger.
This demonstrates his unwillingness to respect and uphold the Constitution, and disdain for the crucial foundations to our free society.
Enforcing its new “zero tolerance” policy, the Trump administration separated as many as 3,000 immigrant children from their parents at the southern border. This policy was meant to deter families from attempting to cross the border.
The children and their families have been held in internment camps and cages with what lawyers call “inhumane conditions”
Due to negligence, the Trump administration has no plan to reunite all children with their families, even deporting some parents while their children remain detained.
Donald Trump knew disclosure of his extramarital affairs with Stephanie Clifford (A.K.A. Stormy Daniels) and Karen McDougal could hurt his chances at winning the 2016 election.
At the direction of Trump, Michael Cohen and American Media, Inc. (AMI), the publisher of the National Enquirer bought the rights to the women’s stories and forced them to sign Non-Disclosure Agreements to prevent them from going public.
Cohen admitted to making illegal, hush-money payments to hide Trump’s affairs in the fall of 2016, just weeks before the election.
Federal prosecutors, and Trump’s co-conspirators Cohen and AMI, all say that Cohen made the payments at Trump’s direction, “in concert with the campaign,” and with the intention of helping Trump win.
Trump is unindicted co-conspirator because he directed Cohen to “cause an unlawful corporate contribution” and an “excessive campaign contribution” by paying the two women hush money with the intent to influence the election.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Sigkim So your reaction to ignoring a bunch of things... That I called you on, is to pivot, deflect and tell me what I should be arguing? Na! I'm good with showing how you can't argue things. I don't need to take tips from someone who has been, thus far, more bluster and less actual substance.
Ya know what else I said though? I said you would contradict yourself.
Above you said this....
"no, I mean by sucking up to the very thing, that stole his, and his supporters chance to have their vote be counted.
👉👉👉In direct contrast👈👈👈, Trump and his supporters fought like hell against the RNC, and when they tried to pull the same shenanigans on Triumph, as the DNC tried on Bernie, and succeeded."
But wait for it...
" by your logic, you should be "arguing" against Donna Brazil's account of how Hillary took over the dnc's finances, showed biased against Bernie, and again how Bernie's reaction of "stoic", 👉👉👉was NOT in direct contrast👈👈👈 to Trump, and his supporters, fighting tooth-and-nail to have a fair shot at becoming the RNC nominee."
That last one was yet another example of you mischaracterizing someone's actions, in order for you to have an argument. Bernie fought against Hillary up until the very end. Being almost entirely self-funded, with barely any name recognition, towards the end he damn near outspent her and got closer to beating her than anyone. He traveled to every single state. Which nobody else did, by the way. He just chose to do so by actually focusing on policy and not childish name calling, division tactics, threats, inciting violence and telling a whole bunch of lies.
Then, when he lost, he put his ego aside and backed her to do what he could to not have Trump in the Whitehouse. He did not flip on any of the things he disagreed with Hilary about. He made that clear in several interviews. So... Mabye try coming up with a lagit argument next time.
1
-
Sigkim Nice try, but I gave you a whole bunch of facts that you're ignoring, on purpose.
And what? I'm ignoring your facts now? Like the Donna brazile thing that you literally just brought up in this comment? How dumb was I supposed to respond to something that wasn't up there until you just posted it? Try an excuse and pivot that makes more sense next time.
But, I tell you what... I'll answer right now.... I don't have a problem with it. I was not a Hillary supporter. I was a Bernie supporter. She went around with a sense of entitlement, like s*** was owed to her. She spoke very little on policy and just used BS catchphrases way too often.... And yeah... She was messing around with the DNC. ... That's what's called being objective enough, not to not end up defending the indefensible, just because you guys are wearing the same blue shirt.
I don't need to defend her actions.... I'm facts, logic and country over team, every day of the week.
Now... How about all the things your ignoring? Or are you going to try and continue to divert from the things you can't defend? Cuz... That's fine also. That says all anyone needs to know. 😉
OH! I see! Your just going to ignore the quotes I gave you, from yourself... That showed all that bobbing and weaving, which I also laid out a clear definition for... All so you can pretend that I'm the one who is lying here. Okay... Good times! That also shows how much BS your talking. Ignoring your own words. SPEAKS VOLUMES! 😂
Now... I responded to the emoluments thing. So I'm not sure what you're talkin about there.
The deals... The 2 biggest is Iran and climate. He even had to make shit up about the Iran one. Which had a good hunk of countries, most of which are our long time allies, backing a country like Iran. They had to back Iran, for goodness sake.... Because he was lying so much.
Also responded to the tax thing... So again... What the hell are you talking about.
No I don't mean diplomacy. Threatening, bullying, lying and just plain old talking s*** about our long-term allies and the dictators, is no diplomacy that I've ever heard of. That's just called trying to be a bully... and then reverting to childish behavior as soon as somebody has the nerve to disagree with him. that's why he likes the dictators. He wants to be one. He's made several comments that point to that as well.
And its very different then other Presidents. They divested from their financial ties. They did go and chill at their hotel with a ton of ppl, and shovel the governments money into them. They showed their tax returns. So either you were lying or drastically ill-informed and need to not talk about this subject until you get more informed.
Oh you were addressed some. With diversion tactics, misrepresentations and Paper Tigers. None of which are arguments. Also the ones you just put above are not the only ones that were there.
You skipped all these. Some of which I am posting for the third time now. That's odd. Its almost like, its on purpose or something.
"You skipped how Trump has retained his own interests and it's family business while he is in office.
That team breaks in emoluments Clause every single time a foreign official or even a local official stays in his hotel or works on a trump project or gets granted a trademark.
Like how the Chinese government approved 38 trademarks of Trumps after he entered office. 9 of which they had previously objected to.
Or every time he goes to golf or hanging out at one of his hotels. He's funneling taxpayer money into his own pocket. Not just for him but for the Secret Service, all his staff and family.
When he encourages police officers to rough up people they have under arrest. When he shares anti-muslim content on Twitter. When he pressures the Department of Justice and the FBI into Prosecuting his political enemies. When he attacks the freedom of the press in the multitude of ways that he does. When he uses children as hostages and lock them in cages and then loses them in a system, that still have yet to be reunited with their parents or found at all, because they kept shity records.
Donald Trump knew disclosure of his extramarital affairs with Stephanie Clifford (A.K.A. Stormy Daniels) and Karen McDougal could hurt his chances at winning the 2016 election.
At the direction of Trump, Michael Cohen and American Media, Inc. (AMI), the publisher of the National Enquirer bought the rights to the women’s stories and forced them to sign Non-Disclosure Agreements to prevent them from going public.
Cohen admitted to making illegal, hush-money payments to hide Trump’s affairs in the fall of 2016, just weeks before the election.
Federal prosecutors, and Trump’s co-conspirators Cohen and AMI, all say that Cohen made the payments at Trump’s direction, “in concert with the campaign,” and with the intention of helping Trump win.
Trump is unindicted co-conspirator because he directed Cohen to “cause an unlawful corporate contribution” and an “excessive campaign contribution” by paying the two women hush money with the intent to influence the election."
Have any idea when your going to get to these curruptions?
by the way, that false dichotomy you keep trying to set up of impeachable offenses... Was not actually the standard that was set for the onset. It was corruption.
Yeah... Sorry... You can keep lying on me if you want with your littlw "rant" but before you do... You might want to scroll up a tiny bit on the comment and re read all those facts that your ignoring, and that I gave. That was you stop making hypocritical and ignorant arguments like that.
How many have I rebutted? All that I know of. Again, scroll up or stop lying. I have clearly Identified that your rebuttals were not actual rebuttals. They where mischaracterizations, Paper Tigers, excuses, deflections, lies, whataboutism and a few questions... Sprinkled on the side. Also... Maybe respond to all the ones your ignoring.
1
-
1
-
1
-
Sigkim Now... I will be more than happy to continue to address yours... And have. So it's your turn. You can address these that you have been ignoring and then we can move on to another subject. Cuz I'm not doing anything else until then. Which shouldn't be a problem because you keep saying that your going to get to everything, right?
"You skipped how Trump has retained his own interests and it's family business while he is in office.
That team breaks in emoluments Clause every single time a foreign official or even a local official stays in his hotel or works on a trump project or gets granted a trademark.
Like how the Chinese government approved 38 trademarks of Trumps after he entered office. 9 of which they had previously objected to.
Or every time he goes to golf or hanging out at one of his hotels. He's funneling taxpayer money into his own pocket. Not just for him but for the Secret Service, all his staff and family.
When he encourages police officers to rough up people they have under arrest. When he shares anti-muslim content on Twitter. When he pressures the Department of Justice and the FBI into Prosecuting his political enemies. When he attacks the freedom of the press in the multitude of ways that he does. When he uses children as hostages and lock them in cages and then loses them in a system, that still have yet to be reunited with their parents or found at all, because they kept shity records.
Donald Trump knew disclosure of his extramarital affairs with Stephanie Clifford (A.K.A. Stormy Daniels) and Karen McDougal could hurt his chances at winning the 2016 election.
At the direction of Trump, Michael Cohen and American Media, Inc. (AMI), the publisher of the National Enquirer bought the rights to the women’s stories and forced them to sign Non-Disclosure Agreements to prevent them from going public.
Cohen admitted to making illegal, hush-money payments to hide Trump’s affairs in the fall of 2016, just weeks before the election.
Federal prosecutors, and Trump’s co-conspirators Cohen and AMI, all say that Cohen made the payments at Trump’s direction, “in concert with the campaign,” and with the intention of helping Trump win.
Trump is unindicted co-conspirator because he directed Cohen to “cause an unlawful corporate contribution” and an “excessive campaign contribution” by paying the two women hush money with the intent to influence the election."
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Sigkim You completely skipped this. We both know why you did that.
"Above you said this....
"no, I mean by sucking up to the very thing, that stole his, and his supporters chance to have their vote be counted.
👉👉👉In direct contrast👈👈👈, Trump and his supporters fought like hell against the RNC, and when they tried to pull the same shenanigans on Triumph, as the DNC tried on Bernie, and succeeded."
But wait for it...
" by your logic, you should be "arguing" against Donna Brazil's account of how Hillary took over the dnc's finances, showed biased against Bernie, and again how Bernie's reaction of "stoic", 👉👉👉was NOT in direct contrast👈👈👈 to Trump, and his supporters, fighting tooth-and-nail to have a fair shot at becoming the RNC nominee."
That last one was yet another example of you mischaracterizing someone's actions, in order for you to have an argument. Bernie fought against Hillary up until the very end. Being almost entirely self-funded, with barely any name recognition, towards the end he damn near outspent her and got closer to beating her than anyone. He traveled to every single state. Which nobody else did, by the way. He just chose to do so by actually focusing on policy and not childish name calling, division tactics, threats, inciting violence and telling a whole bunch of lies. "
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Sigkim You made this contradiction and have been trying to ignore it ever since. You can either quote yourself up top where you didn't address it or you can address it now. Your choice
"Above you said this....
"no, I mean by sucking up to the very thing, that stole his, and his supporters chance to have their vote be counted.
👉👉👉In direct contrast👈👈👈, Trump and his supporters fought like hell against the RNC, and when they tried to pull the same shenanigans on Triumph, as the DNC tried on Bernie, and succeeded."
But wait for it...
" by your logic, you should be "arguing" against Donna Brazil's account of how Hillary took over the dnc's finances, showed biased against Bernie, and again how Bernie's reaction of "stoic", 👉👉👉was NOT in direct contrast👈👈👈 to Trump, and his supporters, fighting tooth-and-nail to have a fair shot at becoming the RNC nominee."
That last one was yet another example of you mischaracterizing someone's actions, in order for you to have an argument. Bernie fought against Hillary up until the very end. Being almost entirely self-funded, with barely any name recognition, towards the end he damn near outspent her and got closer to beating her than anyone. He traveled to every single state. Which nobody else did, by the way. He just chose to do so by actually focusing on policy and not childish name calling, division tactics, threats, inciting violence and telling a whole bunch of lies. "
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@monacallender721 Shouldn't of told me to do that! 😁 Turns out, you didn't do your research. You heard some old false rumors and started repeating them...
"A 2017 article posted on Revenge of the Herd claims, "John McCain was pardoned for treason." It alleges that, during his time as a prisoner of war, McCain gave information to the North Vietnamese in exchange for better treatment, and that he would have been executed if President Richard Nixon didn’t pardon him.
The story resurfaced after McCain’s death and was flagged as part Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.)
It’s not true.
"Desperate, I tried to bargain with him. 'Take me to the hospital and I'll give you the information you want.' I didn't intend to keep my word, reasoning that after my injuries had been treated, I would be strong enough to deal with the consequences of not holding up my end of the bargain,'' McCain wrote.
It’s impossible to determine everything McCain told his captors -- interrogations took place one-on-one, in secluded prisons, more than 50 years ago. Based on his personal accounts, though, McCain was used mostly for propaganda: filmmakers would show him in the hospital, being treated by the North Vietnamese. Officials also encouraged him to say that he wanted the war to end, or that he was grateful to his captors and sorry for his participation in the fighting. McCain said he refused to do so."
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@everhappy6312 Thus, mandatory vaccination in smallpox days, as now in COVID-19 times, is entirely constitutional. “Upon the principle of self-defense, of paramount necessity, a community has the right to protect itself against an epidemic of disease which threatens the safety of its members.” Id. Where a communicable disease is “prevalent” and, worse, “increasing,” “the court would usurp the functions of another branch of government if it adjudged, as matter of law, that the mode adopted under the sanction of the state, to protect the people at large was arbitrary, and not justified by the necessities of the case.” Id. at 28. Given “the knowledge which, it is safe to affirm, is common to all civilized peoples touching smallpox and the methods most usually employed to eradicate that disease,” mandatory vaccination was neither “arbitrary” nor “unreasonable.” Id.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Well... As far as I am aware... Your an adult, right? He did not speak to me that way. He spoke to you that way and as an adult, you can stand up for yourself, correct? I told him he was being funny and awesome, because he was being funny and awesome to me. Again, we are all adults here. Also half the time we were not talking about you.
If he had spoken to me like an ass whole child, then we would have had a completely different conversation. He did not. "Yet, that you applaud?" Where did I applaud that? Please quote me, or move on with your life. Or you can do me a favor and quote me where I said how, "you treat people the way they deserve to be treated." I said, and we'll say again, that I treat people how they present themselves. As in, to me. But please continue to try and make yourself some kind of victim. Cuz did you forget that part where I also tried to speak to you as an adult and the very first time I did, even after warning you, you still decided to act like an ass whole child? You remember any of that? I treat people how they present themselves. So you can justify your actions however you please but don't expect to me to feel sorry for you while you're doing it. You can tell I'm not full of s*** by how I spoke to you to begin with in those first three comments. Not once did I speak to you in a disrespectful Manner and you were the one that started speaking to me in a disrespectful manner. And I hate to break it to you, but I already disagreed with you at that point. So try again. Plus this is all just starting to sound like a justification for you being an a******.
And here we go with the shells again. I get it. You're setting yourself up to be right at the end. That way even if you get proven to be full of s***, you can just say we are all just " paid shills". We understand. You're the victim, and everybody else is wrong. We get it. Move on with your life.
1
-
1
-
@MajorMovieDeal Actually.... I am saying there is more violence from the right. Neo-nazis alone has us beat. SPACIFFICALLY however, I pointed out how you only referenced 1 side of things and from the jump, I insisted and still do insist that both sides be looked at for a legitimate comparison. You did not do that. In fact oh, you seem to suggest that the majority of the stuff on your side was made up. Which suggests to me that you were either incapable or not willing to look at this from an objective standpoint.
Also, most of what you said was covered under freedom of speech. That's what you consider an attack. Lawful protest and boycott is not an "attack". You need to redefine your definition of "attack".
Here we go again with the accusations you don't back up. This is also my problem with your behavior. You just keep making baseless accusations. You think because you say it, it automatically makes it true. Except that's not how reality works.
Example, you can say all day long that the last doesn't reprimand their people for being shity and the encouragement and then I can counter that with I see them reprimanding these people all the time , not to mention I just clearly said it was an acceptable... but then we just go back and forth and never get anywhere. Which is why, when you make a claim, you are supposed to back this claim up. Also, to show a little more credibility on your part, you can go as far as to mention anything happening on your side and how it's wrong. I have yet to see that and that speaks volumes to your impartiality.
"There are the confrontations at restaurants, and public places by mobs of radical leftist screaming in people's faces because they don't like their political ideology, or because they were wearing a Maga hat. Maxine Waters publicly encourage such Behavior."
Again, I'm going to need some examples of these mobs. That was plural by the way. Also you don't get to talk about politicians inciting violence when you're defending the guy who's done it more times than me and my son have fingers and toes. Even offering to pay for their legal fees. This is why you need to have a more objective opinion. Maxine Waters does not have the codes to the nuclear bombs.
Again with the multitude of just baseless accusations. What do you expect me to keep doing with all of this? Big references that generalized the s*** out of the left. These are just words without specific incidents to back them up.
What's this one, for example...
" leftist falsely label all Trump supporters as Nazis, and tries to portray them as less than human, that's deserving to be bullied, or harassed."
Where have I done that? That is an overgeneralization with nothing to back it up again. You aggressively put lefts in this little box of who they are and what they believe, as you preach about not wanting them to do the exact same thing to you. Do you not see the hypocrisy there?
You are literally making a sound like we are the Antichrist right now but at the same time playing the victim because you're assuming that's what we think.
Tucker Carlson... What did they say to threaten his family? I'm genuinely asking, because I am not aware of this incident and again need evidence to back it up. This whole harassing the sponsors thing, you seriously sound like you would be happy in an authoritarian dictatorship. All these things you keep painting in this reprehensible light are literally freedom of speech at work. Also free market. Which is kind of a republican thing. So that confuses me about you. In America we are allowed to call sponsors of people we think are being blatantly racist and bigoted, not to mention lying... And suggest that they do not sponsor this person anymore. This person, by the way, you were trying to hold up as a victim for them doing this, who has a huge platform to say whatever he wants at any given time despite the validity of the statement. But people can't make a few phone calls about him? Hypocrisy again.
I'm not glossing over a damn thing. You are. You make all these claims and refused to look at the other side. You generalize us to basically being Satan incarnate and then insists that we do that to you without an indication that you might think that it's not the best idea to be doing that. You have not acknowledged or reference anything on the other side. you are clearly incapable of looking at this and it from you are clearly incapable of looking at this and it from you are clearly incapable of looking at this from an objective standpoint. Or it's something you have not displayed as of yet. which also kind of proves my point. The one I was saying about how we tend to recognize the people on our side more than you guys recognize the people on your side for doing f*** up s***.
1
-
1
-
@MajorMovieDeal I just said, that almost everything you said in your last comment was untrue. Most of it was actual Assumption of future action but the things that you did say had already happened I can prove otherwise.
" not that ridiculous Russia collusion scam the Democrats and the whores in the media have been pushing for the last two, or three years."
This is what you call a "scam"... All factual data on public record that you can easily look up. Also with multiple credible references. BTW, I like using the exacting nature of Wikipedia because they give lots of details and do not keep anything up without at least three credible references. So most of what I'm going to say is taken from them.
As you know, special prosecutor Robert Mueller was sent to investigate Russian interference in the 2016 United States election and the suspicious links between Trump Associates and Russian officials. He did so between May of 2017 and March of 2019. The FBI had been covertly investigating the Russian activity with the Trump campaign under a pseudonym of Crossfire hurricane. Which all began with coffee boy Papadopoulos , who is actually a trump presidential campaign advisor , specifically for foreign affairs , decided one night he was going to shoot his mouth off , for some damned reason , to an Australian Diplomat in a bar . Where he started talking all kinds of s*** . The thing that peaked this diplomats interest however was him saying that he knew that Russian officials were in possession of politically damaging information related to Hillary Clinton . Which is when Comey started the investigation . Not with this dossier that you guys tend to think start it. Trump found out, tried to turn Comey by insisting that he be loyal to him, which is covered in comey's dictated notes. When he could not do that he fired him and publicly admitted that it was because of the Russia thing. Which is when Muller comes into play and his team. All of which has a lifetime of credible, Fair and publicly accredited prosecution experience. Democrats and Republicans.
Through the investigation a total of 34 individuals were indicted by Mueller. 8 plead guilty or have been convicted of felonies including five Trump Associates and campaign officials. None of them weather for collusion. Which I know you guys like to say. Because collusion isn't a thing under the law and because in cases like, Michael Flynn, they would get more jail time on other charges. However it is still in the court records with Michael Flynn and a few others that collusion, or the legal definitions of collusion were factors. You can also look that up.
Just a quick side note, I'm talk texting this whole thing because it's a lot. So if one part doesn't make sense to you just let me know.
So after all of this clear evidence that there wasn't any kind of hoax... Trump starts freaking out and trying to do whatever he can to stop the investigation, going so far as to commit obstruction of justice I don't know how many times. That is the definition under the law and not just my opinion. This is the opinion of seasoned legal Scholars all over the world. Who have written multiple articles on the many ways he has committed obstruction of justice.
I will list a few though
... actually I'm going to post a link for this because I found an article with credible references that lays it out better than I ever could. It also has a second edition at the bottom for updates since the first article.
https://www-brookings-edu.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.brookings.edu/research/presidential-obstruction-of-justice-the-case-of-donald-j-trump-2nd-edition/amp/?amp_js_v=a2&_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQDoAEB#referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&_tf=From%20%251%24s&share=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.brookings.edu%2Fresearch%2Fpresidential-obstruction-of-justice-the-case-of-donald-j-trump-2nd-edition%2F
Here is also the Wikipedia page for you to get more details on the things you seem to think you know
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_Counsel_investigation_(2017%E2%80%932019)
1
-
@MajorMovieDeal an analysis of the global terrorism database by researchers at the University of Maryland published in 2017 shows a sharp increase in the share of attacks by right-wing extremists, from 6% in mm to 35% in the 2010s. Meanwhile the share of attacks by left-wing terrorists an environmentalist extremist dropped from 64% in mm to 12% in 2010.
The study defines right-wing extremist as violence in support of the belief that personal and or national way of life is under attack and is either already lost or that the threat is imminent, including antique globalism, white supremacy, nationalism, suspicion of the government and beliefs and conspiracies.
An analysis by corns of the same Global terrorism database confirm that the trend persists in 2017, when most attacks in the US were committed by right-wing extremists. Out of 65 incidences in that year, 37 were tied to racist, anti-muslim, homophobic, anti-semitic, racist, anti-government or xenophobic motivations. This list includes an attack by Neo-Nazi extremists James Fields against a crowd of counter-protesters in Charlottesville, which left one woman dead. It also includes attacks against a gay bar in Puerto Rico, mosques in Washington, Texas and Florida, and a vehicle decorated with Jewish iconology in New York. In the same. 7 attacks were linked to Islamic extremists, and 11 attacks were inspired by left-leaning ideologies.
You will notice I'm putting the left in there too. Which is something you did not do with your side.
The right-wing activities is fueling a surge of terrorism in the US. Overall, the US had only six attacks a decade ago but 65 in 2017. The number of fatalities is also increasing, in contrast to a global decrease in Terror attacks.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
TequilaOrWhiskey And SHOCKER! More lies about what "I said". What you're doing is just trying what little credibility you have left. But, hey... You do you.
I said, you guys would have to ignore the last 80 years of history to be able to say that the democrats are the ones with all the racist policies and people. Also that you would have to ignore the last 80 years of history to try and claim (as you did) that the party flip didn't happen.
Again... Doesn't even sound like me.
1. I would say, it began around 80 years ago, but by no means, was it a light switch. A few minor things that happened before this but the first real big move towards it was Lyndon Johnson, the Democratic president, being worried about re-election and trying to Court the northern and blacks vote by supporting the Voting Rights Act and the Civil Rights Act. it's not like he was doing it for altruistic reasons or anything either. It's just what one of the first big pushes were.
Hence, his famous quote, "We just lost the South for a generation." He was referring to southern and VERY racist Democrats. Who would be so mad at his support for those bills, that a HUGE BLOCK of them, on mass, would switch parties, to Republican.
2. I was talking hard data and platform shifts. Something you are trying to stay away from. The 2 key components that the southern democrats turn republicans could not get rid of after taking over the republican party, where lower taxes and states rights. Those are still there. Everything else slowly changed over about a 3 decade time period..... On both sides.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Matthew Pickeral Well thanks! I may have secretly been a little too proud of that one, actually! 😏
And your reading me wrong. Though, the way this thread going, it's understandable. I use the word substance for people who choose not to use any. They simply choose to use a bunch of ignorant insults and put down towards people because they don't agree with them. Instead of just saying, "I don't agree with you and here is why". I detest ignorant bullies, you need to try and bring people down to make themselves feel better. So, I f*** with them and waste their time a little. Since I generally don't care what these people think about me, I don't really mind getting down on their level, either. Go back up and see what they where saying before I said something to them. If it was substance, I would argue substance with them.
Though I'm not sure where you got the whole imaginary level of intelligence thing from. I mean, I don't think I'm stupid or anything... and I make it my business to know what I'm talking about before I start talking about it, unless you're acting super ignorant, I'm not going to think I'm smarter than you. That's not something I assume.
Now if you want to tell me what isn't factual, we could get into that if you like. Santiago Arias Lee understand what is me f**** with people and what is me actually talkin... Lol Cuz ya laughed at Brother Uncle! 😉
I disagree with Trump being a better president than Obama. The numbers just don't add up. I'm objective enough to say that he doesn't get everything wrong... But most Trump protest talk about him like he's the freaking second coming or something. Jobs, GDP growth, the market, and crime legislation, he's about on par. Sometimes a little lower and sometimes a little higher. For instance, Obama said that the auto manufacturing jobs weren't coming back. Trump has gotten a good hunk of them back... But on the other hand, job growth overall has slowed under Trump. That's just 1 example out of many. You think he's not better than Obama but Obama beat him on a few things, by quite a bit and with a harder road to hoe.... Because if you remember correctly, Obama started his first term in the Great Recession.... and got a sound of that b** before his first year was up.
But let me be clear, I voted for Obama twice, but I wasn't a die-hard, by any means. There's some things I disagree with him about. I never thought Hillary was a good idea. She ran that campaign like a jackass. That crap she was pulling with the DNC, just heard General Air of entitlement, and she rarely talked about policy. It was just all platitude. I was for Bernie and still am now. That guy genuinely wants to help us and has a 50-year track record of doing so.
But I have done my homework. I do know the stats. Seriously, it irks me when people talk about things that they don't know about.
Thanks for stopping with the back and forth and actually talking to me though. If someone's going to be an a******, then I can be a b****, but I really do prefer this kind of Exchange.
So... Convince me otherwise?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
And they only seem to ever bring them up, right after the ridiculousness of the same standard deflections, baseless claims and conspiracy theories.
- "Less then 1% has died, who caught Covid 19."
5,135,360 Cases
164,836 Deaths
3.20% given today's current count
- "It was all planned by the Left to make Trump look bad."
One that, apparently, every Med Examiner and coroner in the country is "in on".
- Which is clearly because the left wants mail in ballets, so they can "commit voter fraud" to win.
2 Decades/20 years/5 presidential elections = 1285 cases of voter fraud
Most of which had nothing to do with mail in ballets.
Most of which where, however, found on the right side of the isle.
5 states have had nothing but mail in ballets with no problem.
We have had mail in ballets in this country sense 1967.
Trump has voted with mail in ballets.
- Media bias against Trump rallies and protests... But not "ANTIFA" or "BLM". I would challenge anyone to name a national station that hasn't mentioned or asked the question about the potential risk involving Covid 19, in regards to the BLM protests and Confederate monuments protests... Not once... But several times. You wont find one. You will see a whole lot more of those protestors wearing masks and separating then you will at any Trump rally. Just ask all the sick and quarantined Secret Service members.
- "More are dying from the flu."
2019 flu deaths (at most) 61,000 in a Year.
Covid death in half that time 164,836
"Car accidents" are not deadly and contagious, last time I checked. Apple's and Oranges Deflection.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@KTGNetwork Yeah... I'm not. You just seem to be cherry picking your data.
So... If we are going off of what the CDC says, let's address your question about " less contagious"
"COVID-19 vaccines are effective at keeping you from getting COVID-19, especially severe illness and death. COVID-19 vaccines 💥reduce the risk of people spreading the virus💥 that causes COVID-19. "
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/keythingstoknow.html?s_cid=10493:vaccine%20for%20covid:sem.ga:p:RG:GM:gen:PTN:FY21
I said, "it has a lot to do with quantity and clusters". As in, the amount of antibodies in your system at any given time, and then the amount of people you surround yourself with that have or have not been vaccinated.
"Yes, you should be vaccinated regardless of whether you already had COVID-19. That’s because experts do not yet know how long you are protected from getting sick again after recovering from COVID-19. Even if you have already recovered from COVID-19, it is possible—although rare—that you could be infected with the virus that causes COVID-19 again. Studies have shown that vaccination provides 💥a strong boost💥 in protection in people who have recovered from COVID-19. Learn more about why getting vaccinated is a safer way to build protection than getting infected."
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/faq.html#:~:text=Yes%2C%20you%20should%20be,had%20COVID%2D19.
I never said one way or another about how long they would last. The CDC isn't even sure of that. However, developing the third booster, like moderna just did, suggest that they're getting closer to that answer.
" They also say covid-19 vaccinations help protect people from getting sick or severely ill with covid-19 and my also help protect people around them. "
Yes... There is no guarantee there's going to not be a breakthrough infection even if your vaccinated. There are whole lot less common and if you're vaccinated then get it, it's going to be less contagious and less deadly... But again, there are breakthrough infections and if you get one you are going to be contagious. That is the reason for the "might". A vaccine is not a cure-all. It just makes it extremely less likely you will get ill and if you do extremely less likely that you will pass it on, get severely ill, or die.
You really shouldn't cherry pick your data.
1
-
@KTGNetwork Nope... you accused me of "spreading misinformation", and then I showed you that I was not spreading misinformation using the source 💥you mentioned💥. You were just spreading cherry-picked information. I was giving a fuller spectrum of fact. Which, I then, backed up with CDC quotes and links.
You continue to be confounded by a singular question that has already been answered. You do this because you're not listening to the answer. " If the CDC honestly believes vaccinated people are safe why are they recommending everyone wearing mask again." 👈 You are ignoring the answer to this question because you are attempting to set up a 💥false dichotomy💥. Meaning, you are presenting a false choice of either or... 👉 "It's one of two reasons they are keeping information from us or trying to control us. "
The answer, that you are choosing to ignore, from both, me and the CDC is that there are breakthrough infections. The vaccines, the mask, the social distancing... All of it, has only ever reduce your chances of Contracting covid-19 and getting severely ill or dying from it. 💥There is not a cure-all.💥 It is merely a choice to mitigate Danger of spread and severity for yourself and others.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Mishn0 It's not my job to prove your claims. It is yours.... What I do find funny is that it is almost like a script you guys read from. Every time we ask you to prove your claims... you make the same damn excuses for why you can't. Almost always in the same order. It's always, you assuming, what (US), total strangers to you, consume, information wise, as a deflection and a backhanded insult.... Then when that doesn't work, you shift to, it all the sudden, your job to prove my claim. With the same deflection of assuming that you know where we get our information, even though you don't even know our real names. 🤣
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@mrcountchoculitis3284 Lets take a look at the on going list of excuses why My LiL B** Boy can't back up the s*** he keeps talking! Shall we!?!?! 😂
So.. First.. You claim you would prove to me you are not American if I. Prove to you my brother is in the service.
Then, after I do, you try and convince me its my job to prove your not American.
Then, after I quote you directly saying you will prove your not American after I prove my brothers service, you try and claim I have proven nothing, so you don't have to prove your claims.
Then, after I repeat the proof of my brother being in the service, you go back to trying to convince me it is my job to prove the claim you said you would prove.
And now... It's... My brother isn't my brother!!!
And now... I never gave anything at all... And certainly not like 20 different times now! 😂
And now... His rank, MOS, unit, branch, and where you can find news of his unit, (which you tried to tell me wasn't there when you googled it, but then got proven to be a liar about) isn't proof enough, without his personal info, like his name, while you wont even give the name of the country you are in.
Now he seems to have just transitioned into the fetal position, in the corner of him moms basement, rocking back and forth, with his fingers in his ears and his eyes firmly closed, while trembling and chanting, "Hear No Evil! See No Evil! La! La! La! La! La! La! La!
So which excuse is it little one? 😂
Wow! Its almost like your FOS! 😂
The silly things My LiL B** Boy says to try and Save Face! 😂
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@mvgamer9637 But... I will use this subject as yet another example of you hearing something from someone, that you wanted to believe, and just decided to believe it and repeat it without checking it.
Quoted from the transcript of the portion you are referring to.
"THE PRESIDENT: Well, the virus — look, here’s the — it’s real simple: We have a pandemic for those who haven’t gotten a vaccination. It’s that basic, that simple. Ten thousand people have recently died; 9,950 of them, thereabouts, are people who hadn’t been vaccinated.
There’s a simple, basic proposition: If you’re vaccinated, you’re not going to be hospitalized, you’re not going to be in an ICU unit, and you’re not going to die. "
Feel free to check it yourself
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2021/07/22/remarks-by-president-biden-in-a-cnn-town-hall-with-don-lemon/
1
-
1
-
@mvgamer9637 And now... Your lying about what he actually said... I gave you the word for word transcript and the link to it... And your still claiming the lie.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, the virus — look, here’s the — it’s real simple: We have a pandemic for those who haven’t gotten a vaccination. It’s that basic, that simple. Ten thousand people have recently died; 9,950 of them, thereabouts, are people who hadn’t been vaccinated.
There’s a simple, basic proposition: If you’re vaccinated, you’re not going to be hospitalized, you’re not going to be in an ICU unit, and you’re not going to die.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2021/07/22/remarks-by-president-biden-in-a-cnn-town-hall-with-don-lemon/
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@mvgamer9637 😂 And now the transcript , that came from Whitehouse.gov is "doctoring transcripts". Well... That should be easy to find out. Let's role tape (that your probably never going to listen to) shall we...
👇2:15👇 Exact wording as the gov transcript. 👇
https://youtu.be/0aMea_oMeI0
👆"THE PRESIDENT: Well, the virus — look, here’s the — it’s real simple: We have a pandemic for those who haven’t gotten a vaccination. It’s that basic, that simple. Ten thousand people have recently died; 9,950 of them, thereabouts, are people who hadn’t been vaccinated.
There’s a simple, basic proposition: If you’re vaccinated, you’re not going to be hospitalized, you’re not going to be in an ICU unit, and you’re not going to die." 👆
Next excuse please?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@mvgamer9637 MR. LEMON: Because you know the pandemic is a big concern for everyone, really, around the world —
THE PRESIDENT: Sure is.
MR. LEMON: — especially around America. New cases are up three — you know, three times since last month. Right? The pandemic is a big concern. Hospitalizations, death rising.
So, you said last month that this — that the virus is in retreat. Do you still feel that way? Is that still the case?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, the virus — look, here’s the — it’s real simple: We have a pandemic for those who haven’t gotten a vaccination. It’s that basic, that simple. Ten thousand people have recently died; 9,950 of them, thereabouts, are people who hadn’t been vaccinated.
There’s a simple, basic proposition: If you’re vaccinated, you’re not going to be hospitalized, you’re not going to be in an ICU unit, and you’re not going to die.
So it’s gigantically important that you act like — we all act like Americans that care about our — our fellow Americans. To get — there’s legitimate questions people can ask — that they worry about getting vaccinated — but the questions should be asked, answered, and people should get vaccinated.
But this is not a pandemic. We’ve made sure that since I got in office, we — we’ve inoculated over 160 million people; 85 percent of people over the age of 50. (Applause.) Anyway.
It’s frustrating.
MR. LEMON: But what do you say to people who are worried about a new round of restrictions and mask mandates and so forth?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, I’m saying — look — (laughs) — it’s a little bit like when I got elected. You know, the — this pandemic was out of control. You know, we’ve lost more people in the United States — over 630-some-thousand people than in every major war we’ve ever fought, in the United States of America. And that’s come to a screeching halt for those who’ve been vaccinated. It really has. Not a joke. This is overwhelming evidence to sustain that.
And so, what I say to people who are worried about a new pandemic is: Get vaccinated. If you’re vaccinated, even if you do catch the “virus,” quote, unquote — like people talk about it in normal terms — you’re in overwhelm- — not many people do. If you do, you’re not likely to get sick. You’re probably going to be symptomless. You’re not going to be in a position where you — where your life is in danger.
So, it’s really, kind of, basic.
1
-
@mvgamer9637
MR. LEMON: Because you know the pandemic is a big concern for everyone, really, around the world —
THE PRESIDENT: Sure is.
MR. LEMON: — especially around America. New cases are up three — you know, three times since last month. Right? The pandemic is a big concern. Hospitalizations, death rising.
So, you said last month that this — that the virus is in retreat. Do you still feel that way? Is that still the case?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, the virus — look, here’s the — it’s real simple: We have a pandemic for those who haven’t gotten a vaccination. It’s that basic, that simple. Ten thousand people have recently died; 9,950 of them, thereabouts, are people who hadn’t been vaccinated.
There’s a simple, basic proposition: If you’re vaccinated, you’re not going to be hospitalized, you’re not going to be in an ICU unit, and you’re not going to die.
So it’s gigantically important that you act like — we all act like Americans that care about our — our fellow Americans. To get — there’s legitimate questions people can ask — that they worry about getting vaccinated — but the questions should be asked, answered, and people should get vaccinated.
But this is not a pandemic. We’ve made sure that since I got in office, we — we’ve inoculated over 160 million people; 85 percent of people over the age of 50. (Applause.) Anyway.
It’s frustrating.
1
-
@mvgamer9637 And 👇HERE 👇 Is the full question and answer that goes along with you half a sentence clip.
👉 MR. LEMON: You said that you’re talking to scientists, though, but what — what are they telling you, Mr. President?
THE PRESIDENT: What they’re telling me is, “Let us decide, based on scientific data, in how we proceed. Do it the way we would ordinarily do it.”
Look, for example, everybody talks about how, you know, this virus came — this — this — the drugs that are designed to kill the virus came along so quickly. They’ve been working on it for two decades. There’s nothing quick about this. It’s been over two decades.
So people said, “I’m not taking a drug that was approved so quickly.” It’s been two decades. The truth is we haven’t said it enough to people to allay their feals [sic]. There’s nothing — their fears. This is nothing that just happened yesterday and they said, “Well, let’s take a shot on this.” And there’s a process. Usually the process takes the better part of a year or more to get some of these things decided.
But the expectation — they’re not promising me any specific date — but my expectation, talking to the group of scientists we put together — over 20 of them, plus others in the field — is that sometime maybe in the beginning of the school year — at the end of August, beginning of September, October — they’ll get a final approval saying the FDA said, “No, this is it. It’s good.”
But again, one last thing. I — we don’t talk enough to you about this, I don’t think. One last thing that’s really important is: We’re not in a position where we think that any virus — including the Delta virus, which is much more transmissible and more deadly in terms of non — unvaccinated people — the vi- — the various shots that people are getting now cover that. They’re — you’re okay. You’re not going to — you’re not going to get COVID if you have these vaccinations..👈
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@mvgamer9637 👈 Lets recap on the things this one flat out got wrong or straight out lied about....
1. We have him trying to play Doctor. You know this right wing talking point... "President Biden is somehow mentally impaired because of his age or other reasons. " all because he stumbles through his sentences sometimes because he has a stuttering issue he has had all his life... but most of the time speaks just fine in public... this argument quickly evaporated after he tried to claim that there was plenty of neurologist that have diagnosed President Biden with some mental illness without ever meeting him and then me challenging him to provide evidence of that happening, because no medical doctor is going to put their license on the line for that BS. These "neurologist" never manifested. Shocker
2. Then he starts arguing with.. I guess... his Imaginary liberal friend about Donald Trump not being mentally impaired, because I never said word one about any of that. So that was weird.
3. Then he starts claiming that President Biden wouldn't take medical exams and present them. At which point I linked him the medical records that he released two years ago and the announcement that the White House made, unprompted, about how they're going to release his tax records and medical records at the end of July, again. Which he tried to quickly dismissed by saying that "means nothing to me". Then why'd you bring it up? It's exactly what you were just bitching about him not doing. Which it turns out he did and is fixing to do again.
4. At which point he tries to bring up the recent Town Hall as yet another deflection tactic from the last subject. Basically trying to claim that Joe Biden said that "if you have the vaccine you won't get sick". At which point I took the actual transcript of the speech unquoted his direct comment, which was absolutely not that. Which brings us to the best one and my personal Fav...
5. The transcript, which I quoted from and linked, was from whitehouse.gov... but this one decides the claim that the transcript was edited afterwards to make him sound better... But that's cool! Lets role tape and time stamp the quote from an unedited clip, shall we! 😁 but what do we do... Still keep on insisting that he said it. That he went back and watched him say it. Okay cool! I gave him the full unedited clip of the Town Hall, so just go in there and timestamp where he said it? I'll wait... What happens... instead of using the full unedited version, he finds a known far right-wing YouTuber... Who had literally edited out a 4 second clip of a half a sentence of the town hall intentionally edited that way in order to make it seem as to that is what he said. So when I did was go back in the transcript and the full unedited version of the Town Hall, copy and pasted that whole question and whole answer, time-stamped it and posted the link to the video yet again... But wait... I didn't stop there. I also took all these statements about that very same subject that he had made previously in the town hall and posted those as well. Cuz it turns out that when you at the beginning of that sentence and the rest of those sentences that came before that he was absolutely not saying that. Yep this one is trying to insist that's what he said. Because he completely ignored that whole thing.
That's not even counting the amount of times that he tried to insist that all Democrats are a myriad of horrible things even though he knows none of these people. Its lies... Deflections... And a clear dishonest and bias hate for all things Democrats, liberals and President Biden to a completely illogical and unreasonable degree is all you're going to get from this person. Meanwhile he will insist you are the one doing all of those things.
1
-
1
-
@mvgamer9637 👈 Lets recap on the things this one flat out got wrong or straight out lied about....
1. We have him trying to play Doctor. You know this right wing talking point... "President Biden is somehow mentally impaired because of his age or other reasons. " all because he stumbles through his sentences sometimes because he has a stuttering issue he has had all his life... but most of the time speaks just fine in public... this argument quickly evaporated after he tried to claim that there was plenty of neurologist that have diagnosed President Biden with some mental illness without ever meeting him and then me challenging him to provide evidence of that happening, because no medical doctor is going to put their license on the line for that BS. These "neurologist" never manifested. Shocker
2. Then he starts arguing with.. I guess... his Imaginary liberal friend about Donald Trump not being mentally impaired, because I never said word one about any of that. So that was weird.
3. Then he starts claiming that President Biden wouldn't take medical exams and present them. At which point I linked him the medical records that he released two years ago and the announcement that the White House made, unprompted, about how they're going to release his tax records and medical records at the end of July, again. Which he tried to quickly dismissed by saying that "means nothing to me". Then why'd you bring it up? It's exactly what you were just bitching about him not doing. Which it turns out he did and is fixing to do again.
4. At which point he tries to bring up the recent Town Hall as yet another deflection tactic from the last subject. Basically trying to claim that Joe Biden said that "if you have the vaccine you won't get sick". At which point I took the actual transcript of the speech unquoted his direct comment, which was absolutely not that. Which brings us to the best one and my personal Fav...
5. The transcript, which I quoted from and linked, was from whitehouse.gov... but this one decides the claim that the transcript was edited afterwards to make him sound better... But that's cool! Lets role tape and time stamp the quote from an unedited clip, shall we! 😁 but what do we do... Still keep on insisting that he said it. That he went back and watched him say it. Okay cool! I gave him the full unedited clip of the Town Hall, so just go in there and timestamp where he said it? I'll wait... What happens... instead of using the full unedited version, he finds a known far right-wing YouTuber... Who had literally edited out a 4 second clip of a half a sentence of the town hall intentionally edited that way in order to make it seem as to that is what he said. So when I did was go back in the transcript and the full unedited version of the Town Hall, copy and pasted that whole question and whole answer, time-stamped it and posted the link to the video yet again... But wait... I didn't stop there. I also took all these statements about that very same subject that he had made previously in the town hall and posted those as well. Cuz it turns out that when you at the beginning of that sentence and the rest of those sentences that came before that he was absolutely not saying that. Yep this one is trying to insist that's what he said. Because he completely ignored that whole thing.
That's not even counting the amount of times that he tried to insist that all Democrats are a myriad of horrible things even though he knows none of these people. Its lies... Deflections... And a clear dishonest and bias hate for all things Democrats, liberals and President Biden to a completely illogical and unreasonable degree is all you're going to get from this person. Meanwhile he will insist you are the one doing all of those things.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@muhlenberg2608 So... My fathers side had not come over just yet. They where still in England.
On my mothers side, the Cencaboughs, had been in the country for about a decade and a half by then. My great great great grandma Gwendolyn came over from Ireland with her 3 young boys and her father, who died 2 years later. They worked in a candy shop in New York. One they also lived above.
When the time came, all 3 boys went. 2 came back. My great grandfathers dad didn't come back.... But he was the oldest and fathered twin boys before he left. One of which was my great grandpa who went on to also have twin boys. One of which was my grandpa. He ended up joining the Navy with his twin brother, Peter, who died in WW1. My grandpa came back and met my grandma K, who served as an army nurse. Also full blooded Irish.... They didn't end up having my mom, her twin and their youngest daughter, My aunt Kelly, till later in life, after my grandpa got back from a short stint captioning his own Sub in WW2. He ended up having one of his legs crushed. As well as, part of his left hand.
When my mom and her sisters got old enough they joined the Air Force. Then she went on to have the first child in the next generation. My big brother, and only sibling. He joined the Army at 17 and has fathered 3 children and done 3 tours. 2 in Iraq. 1 in Afghanistan. He past his 20y 3 years ago. My niece... His oldest... Wants to be a Marine. My son... And only child... wants to join the Army when he gets older, like his Uncle RT.
That's just the service on my mothers side.... But all of that including your comments begs the question... What in the world does that deflection of yours have to do with what we where just talking about? Does our families service somehow erase the fact that when America had almost unfettered access to states rights, we got things like decades of slavery?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@who399 Actually, "In 2019, Black people made up 12.2% of the U.S. population (U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey). Blacks, however, represent 26.6% of total arrests, including 51.2% of murder arrests, 52.7% of robbery arrests, 28.8% of burglary arrests, 28.6% of motor vehicle theft arrests, 42.2% of prostitution arrests, and 26.1% of drug arrests." But thanks for coming, Racist.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@mrcountchoculitis3284 Well... I'll be damned... He finally came up with a rebuttal! Took him a day and a half... But... Better late then never, I guess. 😂
Sure thing! Well... In every free country in the world, we have these things called choices. They allow free ppl to work hard and peruse what they are good at. For some, like my brother... That is being damned good Soldier, Fighter, Leader and now Recruiter. For others, it is manufacturing the guns they fire... For some its feeding these brave soldiers.... For some... Its transporting these troops home safe at night after a night out of having fun... For some its making they clothes they wear... For some its designing their recruitment posters and unit symbols.... For some its doing the many different things that need to be done to keep their home country going, while they are gone. All of which are vital components to that free country they fight for.
Most ppl understand all of this. The rest understand it, as well. They just pretend they don't, when it's something they are trying to come up with an argument against.... But failing miserably.
But... Just for s***s and giggles, lets go further down the path that you tried and failed to lay out.
You tell me, if your country was being taken over and you needed troops to come help save you and you children... Would you prefer the other country to send a myriad of seasoned warriors, available to them right away... Orrrr would you prefer to wait at least the 6 to 9 months (depending on the branch) it would take to train a green service person, who has never been in combat, over there to do so?
Common sense is a wonderful thing.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@mrcountchoculitis3284 Oops! 😂😂😂
"Thousands of National Guard members support hurricane relief
By Sgt. 1st Class Denis Ricou, Louisiana National Guard
NEW ORLEANS – More than 5,100 National Guard members from multiple states are assisting with rescue and relief efforts in the wake of Hurricane Ida's destructive path through Louisiana, Mississippi and surrounding areas.
The hurricane made landfall in Louisiana Sunday as a Category 4 storm with 150 mph winds, dumping rain throughout the region, causing widespread flooding, power outages and damage to property.
More than 4,800 Guard members from the Louisiana National Guard fanned out across south Louisiana to protect lives and property, maintain communications and ensure continuity of operations and government. In addition to 195 high-water vehicles and 73 rescue boats, the LANG has 34 helicopters supporting search and rescue, evacuation and reconnaissance missions as needed. By Tuesday, the Louisiana Guard said Guardsmen had rescued 359 people and 55 pets either by high-water vehicles, by boats or by air.
Louisiana Guard members are working with local officials in three parishes and helping distribute meals ready to eat, water, tarps and ice from the Federal Emergency Management Agency.
1
-
1
-
@mrcountchoculitis3284 Oops! "By Spc. Garrett L. Dipuma, Louisiana National Guard Public Affairs Office
BATON ROUGE, La. – Since being activated one week ago on Aug. 12, the Soldiers and Airmen of the Louisiana National Guard have been working tirelessly around the clock conducting several missions including evacuations, search and rescue missions, engineering missions, commodities distribution and security at several shelters.
Currently, the LANG has more than 3,820 Air and Army Guardsman assisting with emergency flood operations and have rescued more than 19,040 citizens and 2,660 pets. The LANG has also issued more than 78,945 MRE’s, 465 tarps, 439,515 bottles of water and 961,500 sandbags. The Guard has also issued more than 2,200 cots and 1,700 blankets for shelter support."
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@mrcountchoculitis3284 So.. First.. You claim you would prove to me you are not American if I. Prove to you my brother is in the service.
Then, after I do, you try and convince me its my job to prove your not American.
Then, after I quote you directly saying you will prove your not American after I prove my brothers service, you try and claim I have proven nothing, so you don't have to prove your claims.
Then, after I repeat the proof of my brother being in the service, you go back to trying to convince me it is my job to prove the claim you said you would prove.
And now... It's... My brother isn't my brother!!!
And now... I never gave anything at all... And certainly not like 20 different times now! 😂
And now... His rank, MOS, unit, branch, and where you can find news of his unit, (which you tried to tell me wasn't there when you googled it, but then got proven to be a liar about) isn't proof enough, without his personal info, like his name, while you wont even give the name of the country you are in.
So which excuse is it little one? 😂
Wow! Its almost like your FOS! 😂
1
-
1
-
1
-
@mrcountchoculitis3284 Lets take a look at the on going list of excuses why My LiL B** Boy can't back up the s*** he keeps talking! Shall we!?!?! 😂
So.. First.. You claim you would prove to me you are not American if I. Prove to you my brother is in the service.
Then, after I do, you try and convince me its my job to prove your not American.
Then, after I quote you directly saying you will prove your not American after I prove my brothers service, you try and claim I have proven nothing, so you don't have to prove your claims.
Then, after I repeat the proof of my brother being in the service, you go back to trying to convince me it is my job to prove the claim you said you would prove.
And now... It's... My brother isn't my brother!!!
And now... I never gave anything at all... And certainly not like 20 different times now! 😂
And now... His rank, MOS, unit, branch, and where you can find news of his unit, (which you tried to tell me wasn't there when you googled it, but then got proven to be a liar about) isn't proof enough, without his personal info, like his name, while you wont even give the name of the country you are in.
Now he seems to have just transitioned into the fetal position, in the corner of him moms basement, rocking back and forth, with his fingers in his ears and his eyes firmly closed, while trembling and chanting, "Hear No Evil! See No Evil! La! La! La! La! La! La! La!
So which excuse is it little one? 😂
Wow! Its almost like your FOS! 😂
The silly things My LiL B** Boy says to try abd Save Face! 😂
1
-
1
-
@mrcountchoculitis3284 Lets take a look at the on going list of excuses why My LiL B** Boy can't back up the s*** he keeps talking! Shall we!?!?! 😂
So.. First.. You claim you would prove to me you are not American if I. Prove to you my brother is in the service.
Then, after I do, you try and convince me its my job to prove your not American.
Then, after I quote you directly saying you will prove your not American after I prove my brothers service, you try and claim I have proven nothing, so you don't have to prove your claims.
Then, after I repeat the proof of my brother being in the service, you go back to trying to convince me it is my job to prove the claim you said you would prove.
And now... It's... My brother isn't my brother!!!
And now... I never gave anything at all... And certainly not like 20 different times now! 😂
And now... His rank, MOS, unit, branch, and where you can find news of his unit, (which you tried to tell me wasn't there when you googled it, but then got proven to be a liar about) isn't proof enough, without his personal info, like his name, while you wont even give the name of the country you are in.
Now he seems to have just transitioned into the fetal position, in the corner of him moms basement, rocking back and forth, with his fingers in his ears and his eyes firmly closed, while trembling and chanting, "Hear No Evil! See No Evil! La! La! La! La! La! La! La!
So which excuse is it little one? 😂
Wow! Its almost like your FOS! 😂
The silly things My LiL B** Boy says to try abd Save Face! 😂
1
-
1
-
1
-
@mrcountchoculitis3284 Lets take a look at the on going list of excuses why My LiL B** Boy can't back up the s*** he keeps talking! Shall we!?!?! 😂
So.. First.. You claim you would prove to me you are not American if I. Prove to you my brother is in the service.
Then, after I do, you try and convince me its my job to prove your not American.
Then, after I quote you directly saying you will prove your not American after I prove my brothers service, you try and claim I have proven nothing, so you don't have to prove your claims.
Then, after I repeat the proof of my brother being in the service, you go back to trying to convince me it is my job to prove the claim you said you would prove.
And now... It's... My brother isn't my brother!!!
And now... I never gave anything at all... And certainly not like 20 different times now! 😂
And now... His rank, MOS, unit, branch, and where you can find news of his unit, (which you tried to tell me wasn't there when you googled it, but then got proven to be a liar about) isn't proof enough, without his personal info, like his name, while you wont even give the name of the country you are in.
Now he seems to have just transitioned into the fetal position, in the corner of him moms basement, rocking back and forth, with his fingers in his ears and his eyes firmly closed, while trembling and chanting, "Hear No Evil! See No Evil! La! La! La! La! La! La! La!
So which excuse is it little one? 😂
Wow! Its almost like your FOS! 😂
The silly things My LiL B** Boy says to try abd Save Face! 😂
1
-
1
-
@mrcountchoculitis3284 Lets take a look at the on going list of excuses why My LiL B** Boy can't back up the s*** he keeps talking! Shall we!?!?! 😂
So.. First.. You claim you would prove to me you are not American if I. Prove to you my brother is in the service.
Then, after I do, you try and convince me its my job to prove your not American.
Then, after I quote you directly saying you will prove your not American after I prove my brothers service, you try and claim I have proven nothing, so you don't have to prove your claims.
Then, after I repeat the proof of my brother being in the service, you go back to trying to convince me it is my job to prove the claim you said you would prove.
And now... It's... My brother isn't my brother!!!
And now... I never gave anything at all... And certainly not like 20 different times now! 😂
And now... His rank, MOS, unit, branch, and where you can find news of his unit, (which you tried to tell me wasn't there when you googled it, but then got proven to be a liar about) isn't proof enough, without his personal info, like his name, while you wont even give the name of the country you are in.
Now he seems to have just transitioned into the fetal position, in the corner of him moms basement, rocking back and forth, with his fingers in his ears and his eyes firmly closed, while trembling and chanting, "Hear No Evil! See No Evil! La! La! La! La! La! La! La!
So which excuse is it little one? 😂
Wow! Its almost like your FOS! 😂
The silly things My LiL B** Boy says to try and Save Face! 😂
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@mrcountchoculitis3284 Lets take a look at the on going list of excuses why My LiL B** Boy can't back up the s*** he keeps talking! Shall we!?!?! 😂
So.. First.. You claim you would prove to me you are not American if I. Prove to you my brother is in the service.
Then, after I do, you try and convince me its my job to prove your not American.
Then, after I quote you directly saying you will prove your not American after I prove my brothers service, you try and claim I have proven nothing, so you don't have to prove your claims.
Then, after I repeat the proof of my brother being in the service, you go back to trying to convince me it is my job to prove the claim you said you would prove.
And now... It's... My brother isn't my brother!!!
And now... I never gave anything at all... And certainly not like 20 different times now! 😂
And now... His rank, MOS, unit, branch, and where you can find news of his unit, (which you tried to tell me wasn't there when you googled it, but then got proven to be a liar about) isn't proof enough, without his personal info, like his name, while you wont even give the name of the country you are in.
Now he seems to have just transitioned into the fetal position, in the corner of him moms basement, rocking back and forth, with his fingers in his ears and his eyes firmly closed, while trembling and chanting, "Hear No Evil! See No Evil! La! La! La! La! La! La! La!
So which excuse is it little one? 😂
Wow! Its almost like your FOS! 😂
The silly things My LiL B** Boy says to try and Save Face! 😂
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@rockmcdwayne1710 If that was your point... You have an insanely bad way of pointing it out. Singling me and the dem party out, due to wonder leaps of logic, based on very little info. Info that is extremely blindly bias, considering the fact that the Dems aren't exactly the ones who have actually tried to violently overthrow our democracy. So if there is some nameless dem out there saying the rep party needs to go far far way... Maybe... Just maybe.. That has something to do with it.
I mean... It was one thing when they just started overlooking countless acts of police brutality and straight out murder of minorities.
It was one thing when they championed or, at the very least, ignored and excused kids in cages, in the name of "border security".
It was one thing when they showed callous disregard for human life, in lue of a basic right they intentionally kept stretching and bending to the point of breaking in order to, maybe, one day, live out their Rambo fantasies, with weapons that are only appropriately used in a war.
It was one thing when they constantly virtue signaled about being "pro life" right up until the point of actually being born. At which time they no longer cared if their parents could make enough money to feed and shelter them due to how little they where paid for all their hard work or that children where dying due to lack of affordable medical care.
It was one thing when they spend all their times virtue signaling about their "rights" being taken away bc they have to home school for a little while, slap on a mask when ya pop by the grocery store or get a Vax in order to get the worst world wide pandemic in over 100 years, under control for more then 2 seconds at a time. There by completely disregarding the most fundamental and Universal look of those rights. The right to live. Cuz you not slapping a mask on for 10 minutes out of your day is totally worth millions of people dying.
All those things are passive. Gross and inexcusable... But passive... But then you literally try and violently overthrow this countries democracy and install a wannabe dictator back into office, all bc the Psychopathic / narcissistic ass clown was a sore loser... Well.. That's no longer passive. That's actively and violently trying to bend a free Society to their own close-minded and brutal will.... and that may have a little something to do with why so many people are so fed up with this version of the far right wing of the Republican Party. I mean... Good God... Its like the entirety of the far right wing of the rep party simultaneously looked at the Tea Party, turn to the guy on the left and said, "Hold my beer!"
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@scipioafricanus6979 Lord... 🙄
1. Provide the source of the "proof" then?
2. Provide the "proof" it had been "swept under the rug"?
3. "Blame everything that is inconvenient for your false narrative, on the media" isn't going to work this time, because I'm not the one making the claim that I can't prove. You are. Provide proof for your claim?
4. 6 states have had all mail in ballets for 2 decades now. Yet none of you cared about it then. Combine that with your insistence that something is true that you cannot possibly prove almost sounds like you're just parroting off a bunch of nonsense that someone told you to stay.
5. In 2016 21% of votes in this country were mail-in votes. Should we also discount those? I'd checked to see if that would switch the election over before you answer.
6. Since World War 1 we have had mail-in ballots in this country. Of course you're going to call those absentee ballots and try and claim that those absentee ballots are different because you have to request them. Except you didn't bother to look up and find that in most States, you can't request an absentee ballot when you're in state.
7. The spin from the right about absentee ballots being safer is basically that with mail-in ballots there's no way to track them. Except that's not true. In Most states if you're even going to allow someone else to turn in your ballot for you you have to designate them beforehand. All ballots have security codes that they are tracked by.
8. Over 100 cases, all over the country, with over 100 judges, many of which who were Trump appointed judges, countless recounts and audits performed, and over a year to prove some kind of mass voter fraud. Yet you can still show me nothing that proves mass voter fraud, and have spent the last day and a half trying to convince me it's my job to prove your claim, and then disprove your claim.
Occam's razor
Is it more likely that all the election officials, all the judges, all the Biden admin and all the Dems Leadership and their staffers had somehow pulled off a country wide mass conspiracy of massive election fraud, based on the sole fact that instead of requesting a ballot it just got sent to you..... Or is it more likely that Donald Trump just lost the election?
Barring any ACTUAL evidence that you present, that you clearly do not have, I rest my case.... And I rest it, not on what the "media" has said, but the facts that you are either ignorant of or willfully ignorant of.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@stephentoth6003 Okay... So, to say he exaggerates is an understatment. He lies. Like... A lot. Most of the time to get him out of something he has done or said. ... Sorry... Not trying to start off to sassy, cuz I am always up for a civil convo, like you... But... Dude just wouldnt know the truth if it came up and bit him on the butt. Lol
And the important part of that is what he does when he lies. Lile the huge group of migrants, the caravan, trying to get here. These where desprate, hungry and scared people.... Just trying to get someqhere safe and he goes and continuously talks about how they have Isis memebers and gang members in there and that it's an invasion. It was hurtful and didn't make sense to anyone looking at it for more than a few seconds. We are talking MS13 and Isis here... Do you really think thats the way they are gonna come over? Walking for months across desert country's for thousands of miles? Thats just silly.... But it did what he wanted it to. Villainized these people. Point being... His lies hurt others and they hurt us as a country. Thats why they should not be downplayed.
So... The border. There is and has been a big problem for a long time. I very much agree. I would agree with your stats even. This is not a small thing. Do people lie to get in? Yes. Do they overstay? Yes. Are they all angels or honest actors? No. Should they come in the right way? Yes. For them and us actually. They come in the right way and it gives them a better chance of making a better life. America afords them the full protection of its rights and privileges to them as citizens. I also don't think it's fair to the people who go through the process of coming in the right way....
That all being said... I alsonsee another side. I see the desperation of these people... You have mothers who litterally scar their little girls faces over there if they are to pretty. They aren't being cruel. They do it because if they don't they have a 1 in 4 chance of being taken and sold into sex slavery. For the boys it's not much better. One in 3 will work for the cartels between the ages of 13 and 30.... And if you don't, you often go hungry. These are not uncommon things... And what makes it worse is our country was a big part in making them lile that. Our drug war empowered the cartels. Our CIA. I'm a mother of an 8 year old little boy. If that was his life, crossing over a border illegally would seam very arbitrary to me. Conning an Asylum claim would also. The average wait time for citizenship is anywhere from 10 to 15 years and Asylum is no less than 2. When you're dealing with that kind of life for you and your children , that might as well be a lifetime away. ...
And then there are the other policies... Taking people's children, putting them in cages and loosing them in the system. Some still haven't been found. Also, the restriction on asylem claims are only getting worse and waittimes for citizenship longer.... With his policies. So claiming he just wants them to come in legally and then making it harder fpr them to even do that. Thats not even counting the ICE agents run a mock. Litterally pulling kids with cancer out of their hospital beds and locking them up, refusing to even take asylum claims at the border with no questions asked... And more.
See... My argument is not that there isn't an issue. We have a broken system amd it needs fixing. My argument is, the way Trump is going about it is cruel and also ineffective, to the point of making it worse.
And don't even get me started on that stupid wall... Of the goverment he held hostage too try and get it. Goverment workers and families lost their homes and their kids when without food. Some lost pentions cuz it went on so long that they had only 2 paths. Quit and get a new job or go broke.... And then it was all for nothing. Hell,that is the only time that wall had a lagit reason. Just to get the goverment back up and help those goverment workers and their fams. So all that wouldnt of been for nothing.
Okay... Sorry... That was a little rant happy. 😊 lol
Bottom line, at some point Mexico needs to take hold of their own country and fix things. I do agree with that... But we need to be helping them do that and not hurting the people. We need a better system. We should not downplay the situation by any means. We just can't forget these people, we can't forget our own moral compass in the process, is all.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Mr. Roboto You've already assumed they don't. That would be how this exchange began. It's why it is continuing. It's become about your ego now. That's why you keep trying to argue the same nonsense point, that leads to the same dead end for you. You keep assuming they do or could have 👉nothing👈. When that can't be possible, due to the Origins of the investigation into him and your own suggestions... Ironically....
"information" 🤔 Hmmm 🤔 information about what, I wonder... And what would that "information" be called, in a court of law, next to other info....? That is right! Evidence!
"testimony"... well... We don't even have to look up the legal term for it there. You used it, yourself. "Testimony".... And what would "testimony" be? That's right! A form of evidence, given in a court of law.
What you are describing is 👉enough👈 evidence, put together, to present in a court of law. 👉Not evidence👈, itself. It's funny how that turned out. Cuz, it turns out that the one who doesn't know what evidence is, is... Well... You.
No one needs to know what the evidence is, in this case, in order to know there is some. You can see the effect of it. The investigation.
So what you are really saying is, your not willing to admit that they have to have something on Gate's, but your willing to assume that they "have" something on Hunter Biden, who holds no public office. It's funny how that works out... Isn't it....
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@NMN89-k2b VICE PRESIDENT KAMALA HARRIS: So, I was raised as a middle-class kid. I am actually the only person on this stage who has a plan that is about lifting up the middle class and working people of America. I believe in the ambition, the aspirations, and the dreams of the American people. That is why I imagine and have actually a plan to build what I call an opportunity economy. Because here's the thing. We know that we have a shortage of homes and housing, and the cost of housing is too expensive for far too many people. We know that young families need support to raise their children. I intend on extending a tax cut for those families of $6,000, which is the largest child tax credit that we have given in a long time. So that those young families can afford to buy a crib, buy a car seat, and buy clothes for their children. My passion, one of them, is small businesses. I was actually -- my mother raised my sister and me, but there was a woman who helped raise us. We call her our second mother. She was a small business owner. I love our small businesses. My plan is to give a $50,000 tax deduction to start-up small businesses, knowing they are part of the backbone of America's economy. My opponent, on the other hand, his plan is to do what he has done before, which is to provide a tax cut for billionaires and big corporations, which will result in $5 trillion to America's deficit. My opponent has a plan that I call the Trump sales tax, which would be a 20% tax on everyday goods that you rely on to get through the month. Economists have said that Trump's sales tax would actually result for middle-class families in about $4,000 more a year because of his policies and his ideas about what should be the backs of middle-class people paying for tax cuts for billionaires.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ЛенаУсманова-х4щ Well, right now is the false pretext that your corrupt, war criminal, leader is using as a pretext for mass slaughter, torture and rape of your neighbors, the Ukrainian people. Shame on him, and shame on any of you who are still supporting and defending him.
Ну, а сейчас это ложный предлог, который ваш коррумпированный, военный преступник, лидер использует как предлог для массовой резни, пыток и изнасилований ваших соседей, украинского народа. Позор ему и позор любому из вас, кто все еще поддерживает и защищает его.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@kam1470 The Prez of Ukraine is asking and receiving help for his ppl being massacred right now. For the little girls getting shot on the face.. For the little boys being shot in the back, while running away... For the whole towns being raped, tortured, tied up, shot and dumped in mass graves... For the mass refugee crisis... For the war crimes being committed on his ppl... For his people, as they try and stop this unwarranted invasion.... And... More over... The world is responding... The world is helping Ukraine. The world agrees with Ukraine.... And not Russia... But Russia are the ones in the right here? How's that?
As for propaganda.... Russia took over and damn near blew up the largest Nuke power plant in Europe. They control a third of the EUs power now.... And if russia would invade and genocide it's closest neighbor, well trying to come up with an excuse to do so only after that starts, why would the world not have cause to believe the Russia's not going to stop with Ukraine? Putin clearly has no regard for human life... He keeps intentionally aiming for civilians.
However.. I do love you guys who talk about how emotional we are and how much propaganda we swallow when you cherry pick the hell outta situations so you can excuse mass genocide. Most of the Free World is fighting against Russia but to you, that must mean that Russia is right and everybody else is wrong.. Cuz that makes "loads of sense". That's why I bladimir Putin had to just keep trying to make up reasons as to why he invaded a sovereign country? Like that they have chemical weapons factories in Ukraine that nobody knows where the hell they are has any knowledge of them, has any witness to them, has any documents about them and that has never been mentioned before... But they're "there" and that's another excuse to invade a sovereign country.
But this is all propaganda, right? Even though those excuses came right outta Putin's mouth?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
benny pitt conduct involving FBI director Comey and Michael Flynn.
- on January 27th the day after the president was told that Flynn had lied to the vice president and I have made similar statements to the FBI, the president invited, FBI director Comey to a private dinner at the White House and told Comey that he needed to loyalty.
Tried to influince Comey involving the election, when he was running it.
- on February 14th, the day after the president requested Flynn's resignation, the president told an outside advisor, "now that we fired Flynn, the Russia thing is over". The adviser disagreed and said the investigation would continue.
Fired Flynn to try and stop the investigation.
- later that afternoon, so president clear the Oval Office to have a one-on-one meeting with Comey. Referring to the FBI's investigation of Flynn, the president said, "I hope you can see your way clear to letting this go, to letting Flynn go. He is a good guy. I hope you can let this go".
Again trying to get Comey to drop the investigation.
- shortly after requesting cleanse resignation speaking privately Tacoma, the president's want to have the deputy National Security advisor KT McFarland draft an internal letter stating that the president had not directed Flynn to discuss sanctions with kislyak. McFarland declined because she did not know whether that was true, and a White House counsel's Office attorney. That the request would look like a quid pro quo for an ambassadorship she had been offered.
Trying to get subordinates to falsify documents.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@hystericallily9662 1. That just simply is not true, when you actually look at the data. Which I'm sure you haven't.
2. I'm not deflecting from a thing. I'm on topic for the thread and you can't prove otherwise.
3. You are pushing a false narrative because as I stated before, the facts do not back up your claim.
4. You are not bothering to make the distinction. You are not bring up the protestors. Leaving only 1 option. It's tantamount to the same thing and intentional, on your part.
4. You are the reason they riot.There are police that are beating them, harassing them, murdering them, framing them and generally just treating them like they're less than... Then we have the whole swans of police who see this happen and just don't do a damn thing about it. Like those four policemen standing around George Floyd as one of them chokes him to death with his me for 8 minutes.... while mr. Floyd and people surrounding the area are literally begging them for his life. Then they try and tell people about it by kneeling, peaceful protesting and family's of these people speaking out... Yet people like you still play hear no evil/see no evil. For decades now... And you wonder why they riot. You're giving them nothing to lose. What are they going to do just stop these rioters? Arrest them, beat them or kill them? They're already doing that. If YOU want to deescalate, get your head out of the stand and start paying attention to the facts. Start listening to them.
5. CNN uses facts to back up their narrative. I have no issue with that.
6. African Americans are 13.4% of the American population, yet account for 26% of all officer-involved killings.
Caucasian 73% population
African-American 13.4% population
2017 Just police 👉shootings👈
Caucasian 457
African American 221
2018 Just police 👉shootings👈
Caucasian 399
African American 209
2019 Just police 👉shootings👈
Caucasian 370
African American 235
2020 so far, just police 👉shootings👈
Caucasian 215
African American 111
And remember...
Caucasian 73% population
African-American 13.4% population https://www.statista.com/statistics/585152/people-shot-to-death-by-us-police-by-race/
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
More than 100 years of US intervention, drug wars, Banana Republic and right-wing death squads we backed broke their countries.... But somehow they are invading us by trying to come to the Border and Legally claim Asylum?
Even the ones that don't come in a legal port of entry... The majority of which are just here to give their children a future... and yeah! I wish they would come in Legally. If only to give them the rights and protections that doing so affords, but who are we to judge and demonize these people. For a long time now America has acted like we can go anywhere, and do anything, in any other country. How are we not worse? How have we not done worse?
As for Trump, his policies and threats have exacerbated the situation.... Made it way worse. They are holding children in concentration camps right now... And I don't use that phrase to emphasize the point. Some of these places are literally the old Chinese concentration camps we had, in America, in World War II. There has been countless cases where Broder Patrol denies them the right to even apply for Asylum. Which is breaking the law. He perpetrated the longest government shutdown in American history, in order to fund a wall, that every expert says, will not make a difference, and then ended up caving and not getting a dime for it. Meanwhile government workers and their children are losing their homes and having to get into food lines.... All for nothing in the end.
That's how people dare to blame America and Trump.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Special Bronze Yeah... I would love to see you try to qualify that statment. Tell me, how do you intend on asking every Democrat wether they want "slaves" or not? 🤣 I alone prove that tin foil hat theory of yours wrong because I don't want slaves. 🤣
Yes! Dems have many ideas on how to combat climate change. They are, infact, the only ones attemting to legislate the matter.... Maybe if your weren't all Dems evil grr! You would know some of this. Confirmation bias is clearly what your suffering from. Lol
Also, lazy logic. You think its a good idea to make the baseless assumption, about aomeone you don't even know, that they are a drone, so you don't have your Preconcieved Notions challenged... And I'm the one programmed.... Sorry.... Try again, spanky.
If you would have, instead, asked me.... For instance... If I had any criticism of the democratic party that I would like to share, I would have answered, yes.
1. First and foremost, they have the opposite problem of the Republican Party. The Democrats use the carrot way too much and need to pick up a goddamn stick every once and a while. They need to start hplding more people accountable for compromising our democracy. They need to stop worrying, first and foremost, about getting re-elected and start worrying about doing the right thing more.
2.... If they are going to be for the people, they need to stop taking donations from Big Corps.
3... They need to stop pushing middle of the road candidate. That's how we got Donald Trump. People are sick to death of the status quo.
4.... They need to do more to get money out of politics.
Just off the top of my head. This is why people say... Making assumptions makes an ass out of you. 😉✌
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@dandr0id950 SoOoOo... I'm gonna get to your book at some point tonight but, I figured I would address the first line.
" This is you making a political argument..."
Yeah... This 👆 is you, yet again, jumping the gun because of your confirmation bias... While using the same logic I just got done shooting down. 😉
Now... I certainly don't claim to be perfect. I dictate my responses to the level of logical thought and maturity of the person that I am speaking to. If you want to talk substance and have an honest debate, I'll be down for that. If you want to be an asshole and simply come here to needlessly insult people on mass that you don't even know... Well I can be a bitch. Is that somewhat petty... Sure.... But we are all adults here and choose our own actions and words at the end of the day. Not to mention... Some people simply are not worth the time and effort to try and reach them with facts and logic. They simply come here to try and make others feel bad, in order to make themselves feel better... And then other simply need to be right about things... No matter what... For instance.... You came in swinging with... This 1 thread, in this 1 section of the youtube comment section, under this 1 video "proves" that liberals Obvy name call more. Why? Cuz, that is the conclusion you wanted to come to. SoOoOo... I pointed out that silly logic.
If you had come in with substance... Facts, data or even just an open mind... I would have approached you differently.
Your basis of name calling and what makes that wrong is the judgment assumed by it. Which is exactly what you did by coming in here making assumptions about a vast group of people, you don't know, off of the tiniest bit of circumstantial evidence you could find. Now you want to count yourself as somehow better because you only discribed all those people you don't know as a particular name, instead of out right calling them it. At least if you just came out and just called us all childish or even bullies, you would have been being honest about what you where doing. Instead of trying to veil it with posturing and ego. You choose that action, that path... And your an adult. I'm guessing you just where not prepared for someone to deconstruct it like this and call you on your name calling and BS attempt to hide it. Whoops! 😉✌
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@michaelhodges6493 Michael Hodges Well... Thanks...
But that's why I purposely did not bring up the Second Amendment. I could have made that argument for well regulated militia. It's not completely out of bounds. You should take the entirety of the amendment into consideration, but you're right about it shutting down any kind of back and forth.
Yes, the gun show loophole got a bad name. I'm not sure where that started actually... And I'm a big geek, so it's gonna bug me till I look it up now. Lol
Yes, see, that's what is in those bills they're trying to pass. Thats a good solution. The one that you said.
There are quite a few that use modified mags in those kinds of shootings. Also, it's not a ban. It would make it more difficult for people to get it because they would have to get special permits and take a lot of classes, pass a more extensive background check for instance. But it's not a ban, and these are weapons of war. I also haven't heard you yet give me a reason why we need them? Or rather why we need the civilian population to have them? What do they use them for?
Oh, you are right about that. The full autos... Sorry, I'm just so use to speaking about them together oh, but you're right about that and I didn't know that. My bad.
And I should of been more specific. About the type of semi auto. Last I checked... They have a list. Some rifles but no hand guns... And again... Not banned. Restricted. More heavy-duty background checks for those, special permits and training classes. It will be less accessible but still accessible.
Yes... I agree that they need to be a little more specific on the mental illness. And I'm sure they will be. Which is why almost every bill allocates money to studying things like mental illness in the mass shootings. However violence is not the only thing that they're going to be looking at. You don't necessarily have to be violent for it not to be a good idea for you to have a gun, if you have a mental illness. Would you not agree that someone needs to be fully aware of a guns capability and and have at least a basic understanding of how to use one in order to get one?
That's... Not a bad point. Power does run a mock at times. That is a good reason why they need to be really specific when it comes to mental illness. It comforts me though that they actually want to study it before they make a ruling on that kind of thing. I think they know that and they're trying to go in there with as much information as they can.
So thanks for the specs on the guns. I knew some but not all of that. I come from a 5 generation back military family and my mom was also a police officer when I was growing up.
I I think you misunderstood me when I said they don't care. I wasn't talking about Republicans. Actually most of my family are Republican. I was talking about politicians, mostly Republican. But there are some Republicans fighting with the Democrats to get those bills passed. Which is encouraging. I don't assume just every Republican out there are like heartless gun nuts. That would be a silly. I grew up around military and cops. I know they're not heartless
Oh! One thing I would like to have your input on and you didn't mention... the annual proficiency tests, for those who want to open carry? Police and military have to take them if they handled guns on a regular basis. They are trained to do this way more than any civilian would be. So I think it's pretty reasonable to ask a civilian who wants to open carry to pass an annual proficiency test. What do you think?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@marylamb7707 So... Let's Recap, shall we! 😁
- You can prove literally NONE of your claims
- Want to see NO PROOF to the contrary
- Won't say your cult leader does anything wrong
- Try to minimize the importance of defending our democracy, by attempting to minimize the acts of your cult leader
- Constantly deflects to childish insults and overcompensating Emoji use
- Think that anything that is said about your daddy Trump that is negative must be "fake news"
- Parrot back right wing BS talking points like you studied them for a test
- Try to act super confident in everything you're saying, but still feel the need to come here to try and convince yourself you're right, by arguing with us
- Have irrationally convinced yourself that everything that is wrong in the world is the fault of anyone or anything "left"
- Use right wing meaningless buzz words to try and nullify any fact or, even, bit of common sense that goes against your chosen false narrative
- Think that if you just keep calling something a "fact" enough times, it will magically become one
- Think that making fun of ppls disabilities makes you cool
- Think that constantly saying, "I know you are, but what am I" makes you "super clever"
- Oh... And you like your own posts and thing no one knows
Yep! I'm calling it! It's a Cult45 member, right here, guys! Lets thank them for proving, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that they should NOT Be taken seriously for a single sentence. 😊 Thank! 💋
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The interview was a little over 16 min long.
- 30 sec of Intro/Trip and queen🇬🇧
- 50 sec on the whether that day🌈
- 3 sec shy of a full minute (57 seconds) on the Vets and WW2🇺🇸
- 2 min and 25 sec Lying about NATO falling apart, on Theresa May and how he saved NATO and made everyone pay.🤥
- 2 min and 45 sec on how the tariffs that he put dow are everyone else's fault but his, lying about Border Patrol numbers, invasion and general fear mongering about brown people🤥
- 2 min 5 secs of him childishly trashing Nancy Pelosi, Robert Mueller and the justifiably respected Democrat prosecutors on his team. Also, lying again about the findings of the Muller Report.🤥
- 1 min 30 sec Lying about Joe Biden, the reason for his GDP and putting words in the mouth of all American farmers.🤥
- 20 sec bragging about how he is holding everyone up so he can do an interview with Fox News. Then another 5 sec on Laura ingraham's ratings 🙄
- 1 min 20 sec about Russia, China and a trade deal. Also, "Witch Hunt", lying about numbers again (Stock Market) and talking shit about Hillary Clinton because he still can't get over the fact that he lost the popular vote 🙄🤥
- 1 min 25 sec being asked about what he can do to unite the country and deciding the best way to do that is to talk more shit about people. At some point deciding to become a $5 a pop mall fortune teller about Mexico and using the usual hypocrisy on deals when talking about China 🙄💩🙄
- 35 sec on✌, military building, 💰, brag, brag, brag, Iran, brag, brag, brag, China again, brag, brag and brag.🙄
- Just over 1 min about fist bumping with the Queen of England, brag, talking with her, complementing her and thankfully the end!🙄💩🙄💩🙄💩🙄💩
Sorry about the sassy pants in the middle and twards the end. It was starting to be like audio water torture up in here. 😢
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@btredinger SoOoOo... we start off your new comment with obvious insecurities, that you're trying to mask with silly 1990s Junior High put-downs.
Then we move onto crazy roll right wing babble. Standard questions that only outline your ignorance of the situation. But you guys still think they sound good for some reason. That's how I can always tell people who've actually done their research and people who were just parroting back when some right-wing activist has told them.
Why wasn't anyone charged or convicted with collusion? Well sweetheart, that's because collusion isn't a thing under the law. Go to Google it and see if you can find a crime that says collusion. The closest you will find are laws of varying kinds under conspiracy or fraud.
And now let's move on to the dossier of course. Who paid for the dossier, well originally Republican lawmakers dead. It turned out they didn't need it which is where Hillary Clinton picked it up. You guys always seem to forget that part though. Weird it's almost like you're so biased you can't see anything wrong on your side and blow up ours. Who Supply the contents of the dossier? Wow that hasn't all been vetted out yet. They started to investigate some of the dossier and where it came from but after it became irrelevant to the investigation, they didn't feel the need to discredit it any further. So only some things were proven wrong and others were just kind of left out there hanging.
And, yep oh, you heard me. The dossier was rendered irrelevant. How you ask? How many times in the Mueller investigation was the dossier used? How many times was it referenced in the report? So it was used a total of 1 time. It was put in with a whole collection of evidence for the first fisa warrant on Carter Pages office. At the time the FBI had no reason to doubt the person that gave it to them. Once they did they took it out of the other dance for the next 9 fisa warrants and all nine of those warrants got approved by seven different judges with the remaining evidence. That is the only incident of it being used. Hence, the irrelevance of the Steele dossier.
But this is what you guys do, you cling onto the most shaky branch of an investigation, claim it's so important, it snaps and falls to the ground and yet the tree still stands. But you do so because you don't have anything else. You certainly can't argue with the rest of it. That's why you blew up the dossier, that's why you're now trying to blow up the identity of the Whistleblower. Both are completely irrelevant to those cases at this point. But y'all just clinging on to them like they're lifelines.
At least once a week I hear you guys trying to steal reference the dossier is being what started the damn investigation in the first place. Except the FBI didn't even know about the dossier until about seven weeks after the investigation at already began.
The dossier is irrelevant. The whistleblowers identity at this point is irrelevant. Argue relevance or stay quiet because the rest is just going to embarrass you.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@defiance1790 First... Your claim that because his parents where communists and because he grew up around those beliefs, there is a good chance he is as well, is blown out of the water by a few keep details of his and his parents lives.
He was born in 1944. Both his parents joined the Communist Party in 1942, while living in San Francisco. They also both left the Communist Party in 1947, never to return. Meaning, at the most, his parents equated themselves with communism for about 5 years, less then 3 of that was with Carl even existing... And being less then 3 years old. In his book "Loyalties", he explains their youth, at that time, and their left wing activism that had them going to rash extremes. Once realizing what communism really was to the people they surrounded themselves with, they left. Still being active in the left wing ideology for the rest of their lives, but never extremists.
Meaning, Carl Bernstein was never raised in a communist Centric childhood environment. The little time that he experienced his parents being in that environment he was not old enough to even grasp the concept of communism. Hell... He probably couldn't even spell the word at 2 or 3.
BUT... Lets go further... In the same book, (Loyalties) he explains how most children have come to terms with their parents, at one point in time, equating themselves with Communism....
"Bernstein, however, cannot exorcise the “vast reservoir of anger” his upbringing created. His complaint is that political commitment diverts people from the day-to-day business of living. He sees the decision by his parents to join the party in 1942 (when it was at the peak of its popularity) as recklessly endangering the family’s prospects, including his own--although he had yet to be conceived. Instead of organizing to save the Rosenbergs, his mother should have organized her “chaotic” household."
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@defiance1790 1. Nope! Now you are just ignoring evidence, I already gace you... That you already admitted you where wrong about... That now you are trying to reverse, so you can deny doing the very things you claim to dislike. Scroll up and look at the research that you wanted so badly... but not badly enough to look up your own information, yourself... you're just flat-out making baseless assumptions about their motivations at this point.
Specifically, in "Loyalties"... he used to have long conversations with his parents and used to get angry about it. The reason they left the party in 1947 wasn't because of Communism itself, it was because of the extreme Manor that the people they surrounded themselves with, took it to. Those where the only communists they knew. They didn't want to be that. As to where, Bernstein, himself, was fervently against all communism. Which, I happen to disagree with, by the way. As I stated earlier, communism is a system of operation. Specifically an economic one. It's like hating a machine. All in the hands of the user.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@bradynlotterman8164 the reason you were getting so much of this wrong is because you believe right-wing media on spec. Or at least that's what your responses suggest. Your missing huge gaps of information. On multiple things. For instance, voter ID is the right-wing spin. You're arguing voter ID and only voter ID because that's what they're arguing. They want to argue but her ID so you don't pay attention within the rest of the bill.
They refuse to make Election Day a national holiday or move it to a weekend.
They make the voting hours 9 to 5 work hours, which most people work. Especially minority.
They remove polling locations from areas that need more and not less. Making the lines longer in, conveniently, mostly Democratic or minority areas.
They cut back on after hours for early morning voting.
They needlessly demonize mail-in ballots
They require that absentee ballots only be issued to those who are out of state
All of which adds up to this scenario to a lot of democratic and minority voters... the pole in most areas are open from either 6 to 6 or 7 to 7... meaning on voting day. Which means if you're working a nine-to-five like the average American, you have one of the three small windows to try and vote that day. Keep in mind this is all happening with the lines being hours-long, in, again, conveniently mostly Democratic or a minority areas... you could go in the morning before work for maybe an hour, you can try and do it during your lunch break for also maybe an hour or you could try and go after work for also made an hour. None of which guarantees that you're actually going to get to vote.
Voter ID is stupid and pointless but it's the least of our worries. Not to mention it's all based on a lie about voter fraud in the first place.
All of these tactics by the way, they used back in Jim Crow era when black people finally got the right to vote. All these backhanded way of suppressing people's ability to vote, all in very specific areas. Conveniently.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@truthseeker3909 👈 ... And that's why the Rep party is now mostly comprised of substance-less mean girls, who buy into the BS thing they are feed, before vomiting it back up, to make them selves feel clever, only to say, "I know you are, but what am I?", when called on it....
Bc they know they pick s****y representatives who do nothing but fearmonger, divide and, most importantly, give them someone to blame for how their life turned out. They care about nothing they claim to. They are simply a vapid collection of convenient false narratives, trying to make themselves feel better, by trying to make other feel worse all the time. They can defend NONE of their representatives on their merit alone.... And they know it. Infact, they actively drive out the few party members They have left, that they could defend on their merit.
They check their humanity at the door everyday and line up for role call, like good little cult members.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@l-_-sage-_-l when you set up false dichotomies, like if you don't agree with me you're a moron, and do so based on Paper Tigers like both sides do it when nobody said any different, it's...
1. Nothing anyone was arguing against in the first place, and therefore pointless to bring up, given the context of the situation, unless, of course, it's a practice in narcissism....
2. A sure way to achieve confirmation bias. Declaring anybody who doesn't agree with your point of view to be uneducated in some way, is nothing more then setting up a scenario as to where you can assure yourself you're right.
It's not a belief or a good argument. It's simply faulty logic based on made-up terms. These where your actions. Not mine. Which is why you are, for the third time, ignoring getting called out for your faulty logic. All you're doing is proving your projection.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@kaybel5104 Boo Boo... It's all the point I will ever need for you. Thanks to your crazy bias, you are easily shown to be fake as hell. No matter the topic, because you ALWAYS only care if ppl are doing WHATEVER if they are on the left. It works well with your desires to both, try super hard to feign outrage and excuse ANYTHING the right is doing. This is why you lose all the time. I really don't do anything. You discredit yourself, and, therefore, make whatever you say about me, or a specific topic, irrelevant, cuz no one can trust anything you claim. Until you start owning your own sides s***, you're constantly defeating yourself.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@kaybel5104 Remember... No excuses, no ignoring. Just a few...
When Biden took office, the seven-day rolling average for vaccinations was 777,000 a day, but that number rose under Biden to about 3 million a day. As his 100th day approached, about half of the 16-and-older U.S. population had received at least one dose of vaccine. In addition, more than 80% of seniors had received at least one shot, and 25% of American adults were fully vaccinated.
The American Rescue Plan was a $1.9 trillion bill aimed at both providing additional funding for fighting the pandemic and helping the economy through the resulting recession. The measure included aid to state and local governments, increased unemployment insurance, support for vaccination efforts, education aid, refundable child tax credits and housing assistance.
Finally, Biden signed an executive action on his first day in office that brought the United States back into the Paris Climate Agreement, the international protocol that aims to arrest climate change by reducing carbon emissions.
Biden has moved to improve relations with U.S. allies that had been strained during the presidency of Donald Trump. He’s also placed new sanctions on Russia, taking a harder line than his predecessor.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
👆 Let me tell you a little story about Waterborne Camper / D R.
So I'm am a Lib Dems... But... I also feel like it's important to give equal opportunity critiques. On our side of the isle I do it to be constructive. You know... Give these right wing trolls less to aim at.
Anywho... Exactly what I was trying to do with this one the other day. They had asked this right winger, who said that there were more gang related shootings then there were mass shootings, to give examples. Then, in the very next sentence, of the same comment, he decides to pretend the guy couldn't answer the question, all so he can say, "I told you so!", in the third and final sentence.
Turns out, pretending, for this one, would be a running theme, cuz after I pointed out how that was obv not cool, this one looses his s*** for about a day and a half.
First trying deflection to the other guys comment and how that some how justified his actions. Then, when it was clear I wasn't biting on the deflection, he moved to childish insults and personal attacks. When that didn't have the desired effect he tried to insist that bc no one else in the thread had come to my defense (or his, btw) that this meant that he was clearly right. At which point I simply pointed out that maybe it was bc no-one was listening to the exchange. After that, all the sudden he had a curiously timed like on his comments. Then he finally addressed his actions, but tried to pawn it off as him being "confident". At which time I pointed out why even the request for examples was a bad idea... And gave him 4 better ones.
It's clearly silly, bc gang shootings aren't exactly hard to find in America, unfortunately.
I told him...
"You SOULD HAVE called him out for deflecting to Whataboutism. You should have asked if that makes any of the kids who die in mass shootings any less dead. You should have told him that, on average, there is at least one mass shooting a day in america and has been for over a decade now. You should have told him it's the difference between one or 2 dead at a time and 12."
Then I told him to stop liking his own posts.... Which was a mistake on my part bc it gave him the opportunity to deflect to that, instead of addressing his own flawed argument.
He went on to insist he did not.... And that it was all a big coincidence. In order to prove this, he tried to like all his comments... Hoping that I wouldn't think of ppl having multiple accounts on here.
You can guess how well that went at this point.
So... After that, I was just "crazy". Which is what I thought was going to be the end of it, right.... Because, on this channel, someone randomly trying to imply that you're "crazy" after their argument isn't going so well, usually means they're scraping the bottom of the proverbial Barrel.... But... Not this one. No! This had long sense become about his ego at this point.
So... Next thing I know a "new guy" pops up! One that Sports strikingly similar cadence and spelling and grammar errors as he had, conveniently agreeing with everything he said and claiming to be the one who liked his comments. Mind you, not going any reasoning behind it, even when asked, but, still, nevertheless, completely agreeing with every single thing he had said. It turned out there "was" someone who was hanging on our every word. 😂
... But it doesn't stop there. No! This guy stop talking to me, and then precedes to have a whole conversation with the other guy, about me and how "wrong" and "crazy" I am. Again... No reason why... I'm just "wrong" and I'm just "crazy".
Finally, he uses that as an excuse to save face and run away.
So, if you've gotten this far and your one of us... you should know that this guy isn't. He doesn't actually care about any of the issues. He acts like much of the right wing trolls that come here. He doesn't actually care about anything he's saying so much as he just wants to be right, even when he's wrong. He isn't one of us. He is just sad.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@paulsmith7836 1. How many other people did her preform for? What are their beliefs and goals? Does he agree with all of them, as well?
2. Provide proof he made such a claim and in the context for which he did?
3. As president of the INVADED country... I'm sure you would agree that he has... At the most... Half the control over that, right? He isn't the one who is invading another country, correct? He isn't Putin, right?
4. Provide proof for your claim? And provide proof that this, in itself, provides proof for your original claim?
5. Now you are just using obfuscation and bias interpretation. This is in no way proof of anything about him.
6. Almost all leaders that I know of, in any country has, off shore holdings. This is proof of nothing.
7. This is a vague reference to a perceived goal, with absolutely nothing to back it up. It doesn't come close to providing proof for your claim.
8. Provide proof of this?
9. Provide proof of this?
10. How?
" obviously you would just miss everything I wrote because it doesn't fit into your Western nor into your Narrative of the solensky" 👈 This is you making baseless claims of a total stranger, that you have made for at least 2 purposes.
1. To dismiss (in your mind, at least) any counter argument or challenge of validity before they are made and before you even know what they might be. Showing the person with the person who has a problem with bias narratives, is, infact, you....
2. An attempt to deflect from the fact that you, infact, gave nothing that would be considered proof to your original claim. Mostly option and obfuscation, coupled with more claims you need to prove.
The baffling part of all of this is, you seem to want to blame the invaded country for the acts pf the invaders, yet insist that you are, infact, the one, seeing things clearly.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@tommy Tentz The facts don't even fit your claims about President Biden. How in the world do you think President Biden's mistakes, which he has made some, amount to the other clusterflock of Donald Trump presidency, is beyond me.
-Recession,
-Two impeachments,
-Hundreds of thousands of Americans dropping like flies,
-Getting us into the only kind of War literally nobody in history as ever won,
-Having the entire country down not once, but twice.
... the first time two years into his presidency when he realized he had to run for re-election again and had never delivered on his primary promise of building a completely useless wall that would cost hundreds of billions of dollars to construct and maintain... so, therefore, deciding it was a good idea to put hundreds of thousands of government workers out of work for like 5 months and shut down the entire government only to cave in the end when people were standing in bread lines and losing their houses.
.... the second time he didn't just put all the government workers out of work. It was the whole country... all because of his incompetent handling of covid-19.
And that's just a few off the top of my head... I could literally go on for 4 years.
Which is exactly why you don't want to claim your own party. You know you can't defend it but you want to attack the left and Joe Biden anyways.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
goku san The lawyer would be a he and not they. They would be multiple... Who are the others?... Meaning... He refers to "they" often, and often they is often nothing or no one. Just another thing that he makes up... Which you know, but wont admit, because you are a dishonest person, who focuses only on others actions, who do not match what he wants to be true. Telling himself whatever he needs to, in order to do so.... They, in this case, was used as plural. So if the lawyer was the only person, as you admit... Then he was lying, correct?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@funlovenboy Hello, all you silly right wing false talking points your just parroting back at me without bothering to even attempt an original thought.
1. President Biden had tons of detailed and laid out plans for a variety of issues. His first being covid, Obvy. All of which he spoke of often and had laid out on his website.
2. Just a few of many things he has accomplished that is worth value.
1986 Sponsored one of the first climate change bills in the Senate
1991 Presided over confirmation hearings for Clarence Thomas
1993 Presided over confirmation hearings for Ruth Bader
1994 Co-sponsored the Violence Against Women Act
1994 Wrote and sponsored a major federal crime bill
2002 Voted in favor of the Iraq War
2008 Selected as Barack Obama's running mate
2008 Served as the main sponsor for the PROTECT Our Children Act
2009 Oversaw the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act to help end the Great Recession
2010 Helped pass the Affordable Care Act to make health insurance more affordable for the average American
2016 Was put in charge of an initiative called "Moonshot" to prevent and cure cancer
2017 Awarded the Medal of Freedom by Barack Obama
All of which are super easy to find if you're actually looking for them instead of just looking for the things that would support your confirmation bias.
3. While he certainly screwed the pooch on the exit plan for AFG... He was also the only president that had actually pulled us out of there, like we should have been a long damn time ago.
Well I agree it was stupid as hell for him to allow his General to talk him into letting the troops go before everybody else, at the same time I also know that no matter who was going to pull us out of Afghanistan, finally, was going to catch s*** about it. Which is exactly why no one else beforehand did it.. but all of them should have.
He has also spent the better part of the year mending fences with all our long time allies that Trump managed to alienate and stood up to the crony deskbots and dictators that Donald Trump tried to pull closer when he was in office.
He also immediately got us back in to the Paris climate accords that we never should have left and that helped us earn Goodwill with our fellow First World countries. Not to mention setting another good example.
Again, I know this must be super hard for you, but please try thinking for yourself and being objective.
4. I'm just curious if you guys who constantly harass this man for having a legitimate medical condition called a stutter, if you would actually do the same is to say it was a child with the same problem? You just go around making fun of children for having stutters? And by the way just spite having that stutter he managed to work his way up to the highest office in the land. What you doing with your life?
I'm also equally as curious is you actually had a problem with us having a president who clearly couldn't read past of fourth grade level in the white house for four years before President Biden got there?
5. As for there being no reason for anyone to vote for him, you would actually think differently if you could bother to think for yourself instead of just repeating what all the right-wing pundits tell you to. Look things up.
6. I love how you describe him actually caring about the safety and health of his constituents and setting a good example by adhering to the medical guidelines for the worst worldwide pandemic we've had in over 100 years, as "hiding in his basement".
It's called being a responsible adult and thinking about more than just yourself. If only the acting president would have done the same. He wouldn't have held so many super spreader events and not getting a damn about the health and safety of his own constituents even after he tested positive.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Dean4511 - That is why Trump lied, on camera, about mentioning Biden in the phone call, when first asked...
- That is why Trump was only interested in the investigation, only after Biden began running against him...
- That is why there has never been an official investigation into Ukraine and the Biden's opened till this very day....
- That is why Trump is willing to break obstruction laws, to prevent anyone who was actually on the phone call, from testifying...
- That is why the Reps are trying to block further witnesses from testifying in the actual trial, despite arguing the exact opposite during Clinton's impeachment...
- That is why Trump has been trying to discredit the whistleblowers from the start, despite not even knowing who they are....
- That is why Trump refused to testify in the house, lied about being allowed to testify, despite being asked to...
- That is why the Reps pulled that ridiculous storm the castle stunt, regardless of the fact that half of them could have just walked in the room and been given equal time to ask questions, yet chose not to...
I could go on... the breadth and width of what you are ignoring to be able to make that statement... it clearly shows you are not willing to acknowledge, let alone consider all relevant material, and only have interest and what are ready fit your preconceived notions.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Bruce B Trump....
-Had a 33 page laid out plan to contain a pandemic in America, just exactly like covid-19, and chose not to use it because the administration who commissioned it was Obamas.
-Decided it wasn't important to refill the medical stockpiles for 3 and 1/2 years.
-Tried to pretend for two and a half months that covid-19 had magically gone away.
-Tried to sell American citizens multiple snake oil cures, taking none of them when he actually got sick.
- Left each state to fend for themselves and forced them into a bidding war against each other, for literally American lives.
-Called the severity of the worst worldwide pandemic in over a hundred years, a democratic hoax.
-Tried to take millions of Americans Healthcare away during the worst worldwide pandemic in over a hundred years.
-Made multiple false claims about how it would all just go away, by several different dates, and got every one wrong.
-Threw multiple large rallies and celebrations, with little to no social distancing, instead of setting an example and using a covid safe campaign plan, like President elect Biden did.
-Suggested on a regular basis that we should stop testing for the virus, only so the numbers would go down and he would look better.
-Spread false propaganda about covid-19 being no worse than the flu.
-Claimed that 99% of all covered cases are totally harmless.
-Discouraged his supporters from listening to the medical experts.
-Constantly lied about our fatality rate.
-Playing on racial tensions, tried to blame Mexico for covid-19 in America, with absolutely nothing to back it up.
-Threatened to defund our already strapped public education system in an effort to try and force children to go back to school, when it wasn't safe and no one had a national plan.
-Handled the pandemic so poorly that it crippled our economy and put 9 million people out of work, into a housing crisis and wondering how they were going to feed their children.
-Claimed, on multiple occasions, that covid-19 was merely being overblown because of the election in America. Despite the virus being all over the world.
-Lied about Google engineers building a website to help Americans determine whether they need testing for the coronavirus and to direct them to their nearest testing site.
-Claimed to put a ban on travel from China, but after doing so nearly, 40,000 people travelled from China to the United States under his ban rules.
-Claimed this kind of pandemic was something nobody thought could happen, when experts both on inside and outside the federal government sounded the alarm many times in the past decade about the potential for a devastating Global pandemic.
And on... and on... And on....
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Bruce B Trump....
-Had a 33 page laid out plan to contain a pandemic in America, just exactly like covid-19, and chose not to use it because the administration who commissioned it was Obamas.
-Decided it wasn't important to refill the medical stockpiles for 3 and 1/2 years.
-Tried to pretend for two and a half months that covid-19 had magically gone away.
-Tried to sell American citizens multiple snake oil cures, taking none of them when he actually got sick.
- Left each state to fend for themselves and forced them into a bidding war against each other, for literally American lives.
-Called the severity of the worst worldwide pandemic in over a hundred years, a democratic hoax.
-Tried to take millions of Americans Healthcare away during the worst worldwide pandemic in over a hundred years.
-Made multiple false claims about how it would all just go away, by several different dates, and got every one wrong.
-Threw multiple large rallies and celebrations, with little to no social distancing, instead of setting an example and using a covid safe campaign plan, like President elect Biden did.
-Suggested on a regular basis that we should stop testing for the virus, only so the numbers would go down and he would look better.
-Spread false propaganda about covid-19 being no worse than the flu.
-Claimed that 99% of all covered cases are totally harmless.
-Discouraged his supporters from listening to the medical experts.
-Constantly lied about our fatality rate.
-Playing on racial tensions, tried to blame Mexico for covid-19 in America, with absolutely nothing to back it up.
-Threatened to defund our already strapped public education system in an effort to try and force children to go back to school, when it wasn't safe and no one had a national plan.
-Handled the pandemic so poorly that it crippled our economy and put 9 million people out of work, into a housing crisis and wondering how they were going to feed their children.
-Claimed, on multiple occasions, that covid-19 was merely being overblown because of the election in America. Despite the virus being all over the world.
-Lied about Google engineers building a website to help Americans determine whether they need testing for the coronavirus and to direct them to their nearest testing site.
-Claimed to put a ban on travel from China, but after doing so nearly, 40,000 people travelled from China to the United States under his ban rules.
-Claimed this kind of pandemic was something nobody thought could happen, when experts both on inside and outside the federal government sounded the alarm many times in the past decade about the potential for a devastating Global pandemic.
And on... and on... And on....
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@GreenEyeDemon Except, in America today, even if you have a diagnosed severe mental illness, you can still pass a background check, to get a gun. Mental illness plays a big part, in all these mass shootings. So what's the use of the "background" check, again?
And no disrespect, really, but me, and every other parent out there, should not have to worry the our kids are going to catch a bullet at school everyday, just so you can live out your Rambo home invasion fantasy, which, more than likely wont happen, in that very spacific way, that you had to discribe, in order to justify that kind of drum being avalible to the public at large. That's why every other major country has banned that drum mag from sale and distribution to the general public. The cost-benefit analysis didn't turn out very well, on that one.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Keepskatin Starting off your comment with that... I mean... Really dude? Tell me, which side of the isle has all the skinhead an Aryan Nation groups been on for the past 6 decades?
But keep your pants on! Cuz, apparently unlike you, I can be objective. The Super Predator bill your talking abput was crazy racist. It should not have ever been a thing. Much like the mandatory minimum ones, that followed.
But to put Trump, with his decades of racism, up as some kind of social justice Warrior, is disingenuous, at best. One of the first thing he did was bane a minority from this country, as soon as he got in office. Now it's all about keep the brown people out by focusing only on the southern border, even though most drugs, traffickers and illegals come in from a combination of air travel, boat and the northern border.
Dems support, treating everyone, including the LGBTQ community, as equals and with respect... Because... Ya know... This is America. 🙄
The open borders thing is a right wing false talking point. Unless you can show me 1 Dem leader that has come out and said that? I'll be waiting...
The got reparations for 1 and are currently fighting for the rest. Btw, what have the Reps. dine about all that, sense... Ya know... They controlled the House, Senate and the White House for Trump's first two years? I mean.. Other than having plenty of time to pass more tax cuts for the rich, of course.
I don't see anyone advicating for the job thing.... And actually job growth as a whole has gone down sense Trump took office... Though... Again... objectivity... He did seam to be able to get quite a few auto manufacturing jobs back, when Obama said it wasn't going to happen.
The fact that you said that he will tax foreigners and their low-cost economics, means that you know that that isn't happening right now. So come back and talk to me about that when it's actually done. Stop trying to credit him for things he hasn't done yet.
Over all... He has done more harm than good and that is especially true when it comes to our reputation in the world.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Metolius9 Yeah... Your right... I just get all uppity about dead school age children, that could of been saved, if we had some reasonable and rational gun regulations in this country. I'm just funny that way, I guess. 🙄
Humanity and empathy? Really?
Your right again, I guess. What is the matter with me... Thinking that dead school age children should come before, you being able to show off you're cool new automatic weapon, to your buddies, that you probably shouldn't have in the first place.
Yeah... you seem to have had two assume a crap ton of s*** about me, that you couldn't possibly know, in order for you to even have an argument. That should tell you something. But I guess we're both not good at self evaluation. So... Glass houses!
Btw, I am an athiest, bisexual, Lib Dem, single mother, to a mixed race little boy, with 4 jobs, living the Bright Red Bibble Belt of Louisiana. Walk a couple hours in those shoes and then come talk to me about " entitled little girl". This is why you shouldn't assume shit about people, that you don't know. Cuz, you end up being the one who looks like an asshole. 🙄✌
Next time, if you have to assume that much about one person, for you to be able to make a valid argument, maybe consider the arguments not worth making.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@genumanapparel909 No.... Your just playing semantics and have settled on a technicality.
1. The "whatever program" you refuse to learn about (while preaching about me needing to research) means NATO shows up in Ukraine, like it does any other country, when they are needed.
2. The treaty that that America signed with Ukraine for nuclear disarmament means that America shows up.
That was the original point. Also that they're a bit more than just friendly. They have obligations in the country.
Also, you made a claim that NATO is not there. They are.... And as of yesterday, Poland is supplying troops, guns and heavy equipment, in order to support Ukraine, while America is giving the same to Poland. Basically America found a way to get in there and help without starting world war 3. Poland was more then happy to do so, along with 12 other countries sending aid, sanctioning Russia, or sending troops in to stop Putin in his unwarranted invasion into Ukraine. While countless others have disavowed Putin and Russia, and thrown their support behind Ukraine.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@genumanapparel909 "Everyone does it" is a little boys answer. Like my Nana told me and like I now tell my little boy, "IF everyone jumped of London bridge, would you?"
And you mean you brought up Cube as a faulty comparison, based on massive baseless assumptions your making about NATO and their intentions. Cuz... The thing you asked me to respond to twice now, and I responded each time plus one more, is not a scenario that is feasible for NATO and the US to do in Ukraine, because it would break their own nuclear disarmament treaty with Ukraine. Not to mention nobody in the world other than you was talking about nuclear weapons being put in Ukraine. No one is talking about putting a base in Ukraine. NATO doesn't even have embassies. If they became a member of the UN, the UN would put an embassy there. However, BC the UN are their for diplomacy, they only ever have a small battalion to guards for security, with small arms.
Yet... From the jump you have been talking about some kind of phantom security threat to Russia. Like Ukraine is going to be some kind of platform for invading Russia. You guys are making up a threat, much like your making up the Nazi thing, in order to justify, invading another country.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Andrew Rosenthal Basically your argument is,
- Despite their not being enough 👉evidence👈 in either 👉District👈, 👉state👈 and 👉federal👈 court to even hear a case about Mass voter fraud, let alone rule on a case about Mass voter fraud,
- And despite the fact that every state has at least five levels of checks counteracting any attempts of voter fraud
- And despite the fact that you claimed it wasn't about the numbers, yet sited mail in ballot numbers being off
- Even though there is no 👉documented video👈 or 👉data👈 evidence backing up the claims of mass voter fraud, in any 👉County👈, in any 👉state👈, in the entirety of the 👉United States👈,
- Your going to ignore the fact that there are almost a 👉million👈 poll workers at over a 👉hundred thousand👈 polling locations throughout the country, every presidential election (on average), and the only people who are claiming there was voter fraud are a handful of people on the losing side, that you've never met in your life, who (once again) have absolutely no video or data evidence to back them up, you're going to insist there was mass voter fraud in this election, where the guy you wanted to win also didn't win, because those are the people that are telling you what you want to hear.
Oh, and because I'm insisting on more than just taking a stranger's word for it, as evidence of mass voter fraud and the theft of a presidential election in the United States, I'm clearly being too difficult...
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Andrew Rosenthal Basically your argument is,
- Despite their not being enough 👉evidence👈 in either 👉District👈, 👉state👈 and 👉federal👈 court to even hear a case about Mass voter fraud, let alone rule on a case about Mass voter fraud,
- And despite the fact that every state has at least five levels of checks counteracting any attempts of voter fraud
- And despite the fact that you claimed it wasn't about the numbers, yet sited mail in ballot numbers being off
- Even though there is no 👉documented video👈 or 👉data👈 evidence backing up the claims of mass voter fraud, in any 👉County👈, in any 👉state👈, in the entirety of the 👉United States👈,
- Your going to ignore the fact that there are almost a 👉million👈 poll workers at over a 👉hundred thousand👈 polling locations throughout the country, every presidential election (on average), and the only people who are claiming there was voter fraud are a handful of people on the losing side, that you've never met in your life, who (once again) have absolutely no video or data evidence to back them up, you're going to insist there was mass voter fraud in this election, where the guy you wanted to win also didn't win, because those are the people that are telling you what you want to hear.
Oh, and because I'm insisting on more than just taking a stranger's word for it, as evidence of mass voter fraud and the theft of a presidential election in the United States, I'm clearly being too difficult...
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Andrew Rosenthal Basically your argument is,
- Despite their not being enough 👉evidence👈 in either 👉District👈, 👉state👈 and 👉federal👈 court to even hear a case about Mass voter fraud, let alone rule on a case about Mass voter fraud,
- And despite the fact that every state has at least five levels of checks counteracting any attempts of voter fraud
- And despite the fact that you claimed it wasn't about the numbers, yet sited mail in ballot numbers being off
- Even though there is no 👉documented video👈 or 👉data👈 evidence backing up the claims of mass voter fraud, in any 👉County👈, in any 👉state👈, in the entirety of the 👉United States👈,
- Your going to ignore the fact that there are almost a 👉million👈 poll workers at over a 👉hundred thousand👈 polling locations throughout the country, every presidential election (on average), and the only people who are claiming there was voter fraud are a handful of people on the losing side, that you've never met in your life, who (once again) have absolutely no video or data evidence to back them up, you're going to insist there was mass voter fraud in this election, where the guy you wanted to win also didn't win, because those are the people that are telling you what you want to hear.
Oh, and because I'm insisting on more than just taking a stranger's word for it, as evidence of mass voter fraud and the theft of a presidential election in the United States, I'm clearly being too difficult...
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Andrew Rosenthal Basically your argument is,
- Despite their not being enough 👉evidence👈 in either 👉District👈, 👉state👈 and 👉federal👈 court to even hear a case about Mass voter fraud, let alone rule on a case about Mass voter fraud,
- And despite the fact that every state has at least five levels of checks counteracting any attempts of voter fraud
- And despite the fact that you claimed it wasn't about the numbers, yet sited mail in ballot numbers being off
- Even though there is no 👉documented video👈 or 👉data👈 evidence backing up the claims of mass voter fraud, in any 👉County👈, in any 👉state👈, in the entirety of the 👉United States👈,
- Your going to ignore the fact that there are almost a 👉million👈 poll workers at over a 👉hundred thousand👈 polling locations throughout the country, every presidential election (on average), and the only people who are claiming there was voter fraud are a handful of people on the losing side, that you've never met in your life, who (once again) have absolutely no video or data evidence to back them up, you're going to insist there was mass voter fraud in this election, where the guy you wanted to win also didn't win, because those are the people that are telling you what you want to hear.
Oh, and because I'm insisting on more than just taking a stranger's word for it, as evidence of mass voter fraud and the theft of a presidential election in the United States, I'm clearly being too difficult...
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Andrew Rosenthal Basically your argument is,
- Despite their not being enough 👉evidence👈 in either 👉District👈, 👉state👈 and 👉federal👈 court to even hear a case about Mass voter fraud, let alone rule on a case about Mass voter fraud,
- And despite the fact that every state has at least five levels of checks counteracting any attempts of voter fraud
- And despite the fact that you claimed it wasn't about the numbers, yet sited mail in ballot numbers being off
- Even though there is no 👉documented video👈 or 👉data👈 evidence backing up the claims of mass voter fraud, in any 👉County👈, in any 👉state👈, in the entirety of the 👉United States👈,
- Your going to ignore the fact that there are almost a 👉million👈 poll workers at over a 👉hundred thousand👈 polling locations throughout the country, every presidential election (on average), and the only people who are claiming there was voter fraud are a handful of people on the losing side, that you've never met in your life, who (once again) have absolutely no video or data evidence to back them up, you're going to insist there was mass voter fraud in this election, where the guy you wanted to win also didn't win, because those are the people that are telling you what you want to hear.
Oh, and because I'm insisting on more than just taking a stranger's word for it, as evidence of mass voter fraud and the theft of a presidential election in the United States, I'm clearly being too difficult...
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Andrew Rosenthal Basically your argument is,
- Despite their not being enough 👉evidence👈 in either 👉District👈, 👉state👈 and 👉federal👈 court to even hear a case about Mass voter fraud, let alone rule on a case about Mass voter fraud,
- And despite the fact that every state has at least five levels of checks counteracting any attempts of voter fraud
- And despite the fact that you claimed it wasn't about the numbers, yet sited mail in ballot numbers being off
- Even though there is no 👉documented video👈 or 👉data👈 evidence backing up the claims of mass voter fraud, in any 👉County👈, in any 👉state👈, in the entirety of the 👉United States👈,
- Your going to ignore the fact that there are almost a 👉million👈 poll workers at over a 👉hundred thousand👈 polling locations throughout the country, every presidential election (on average), and the only people who are claiming there was voter fraud are a handful of people on the losing side, that you've never met in your life, who (once again) have absolutely no video or data evidence to back them up, you're going to insist there was mass voter fraud in this election, where the guy you wanted to win also didn't win, because those are the people that are telling you what you want to hear.
Oh, and because I'm insisting on more than just taking a stranger's word for it, as evidence of mass voter fraud and the theft of a presidential election in the United States, I'm clearly being too difficult...
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Andrew Rosenthal Basically your argument is,
- Despite their not being enough 👉evidence👈 in either 👉District👈, 👉state👈 and 👉federal👈 court to even hear a case about Mass voter fraud, let alone rule on a case about Mass voter fraud,
- And despite the fact that every state has at least five levels of checks counteracting any attempts of voter fraud
- And despite the fact that you claimed it wasn't about the numbers, yet sited mail in ballot numbers being off
- Even though there is no 👉documented video👈 or 👉data👈 evidence backing up the claims of mass voter fraud, in any 👉County👈, in any 👉state👈, in the entirety of the 👉United States👈,
- Your going to ignore the fact that there are almost a 👉million👈 poll workers at over a 👉hundred thousand👈 polling locations throughout the country, every presidential election (on average), and the only people who are claiming there was voter fraud are a handful of people on the losing side, that you've never met in your life, who (once again) have absolutely no video or data evidence to back them up, you're going to insist there was mass voter fraud in this election, where the guy you wanted to win also didn't win, because those are the people that are telling you what you want to hear.
Oh, and because I'm insisting on more than just taking a stranger's word for it, as evidence of mass voter fraud and the theft of a presidential election in the United States, I'm clearly being too difficult...
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Andrew Rosenthal Basically your argument is,
- Despite their not being enough 👉evidence👈 in either 👉District👈, 👉state👈 and 👉federal👈 court to even hear a case about Mass voter fraud, let alone rule on a case about Mass voter fraud,
- And despite the fact that every state has at least five levels of checks counteracting any attempts of voter fraud
- And despite the fact that you claimed it wasn't about the numbers, yet sited mail in ballot numbers being off
- Even though there is no 👉documented video👈 or 👉data👈 evidence backing up the claims of mass voter fraud, in any 👉County👈, in any 👉state👈, in the entirety of the 👉United States👈,
- Your going to ignore the fact that there are almost a 👉million👈 poll workers at over a 👉hundred thousand👈 polling locations throughout the country, every presidential election (on average), and the only people who are claiming there was voter fraud are a handful of people on the losing side, that you've never met in your life, who (once again) have absolutely no video or data evidence to back them up, you're going to insist there was mass voter fraud in this election, where the guy you wanted to win also didn't win, because those are the people that are telling you what you want to hear.
Oh, and because I'm insisting on more than just taking a stranger's word for it, as evidence of mass voter fraud and the theft of a presidential election in the United States, I'm clearly being too difficult...
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Andrew Rosenthal Basically your argument is,
- Despite their not being enough 👉evidence👈 in either 👉District👈, 👉state👈 and 👉federal👈 court to even hear a case about Mass voter fraud, let alone rule on a case about Mass voter fraud,
- And despite the fact that every state has at least five levels of checks counteracting any attempts of voter fraud
- And despite the fact that you claimed it wasn't about the numbers, yet sited mail in ballot numbers being off
- Even though there is no 👉documented video👈 or 👉data👈 evidence backing up the claims of mass voter fraud, in any 👉County👈, in any 👉state👈, in the entirety of the 👉United States👈,
- Your going to ignore the fact that there are almost a 👉million👈 poll workers at over a 👉hundred thousand👈 polling locations throughout the country, every presidential election (on average), and the only people who are claiming there was voter fraud are a handful of people on the losing side, that you've never met in your life, who (once again) have absolutely no video or data evidence to back them up, you're going to insist there was mass voter fraud in this election, where the guy you wanted to win also didn't win, because those are the people that are telling you what you want to hear.
Oh, and because I'm insisting on more than just taking a stranger's word for it, as evidence of mass voter fraud and the theft of a presidential election in the United States, I'm clearly being too difficult...
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Andrew Rosenthal @Andrew Rosenthal Basically your argument is,
- Despite their not being enough 👉evidence👈 in either 👉District👈, 👉state👈 and 👉federal👈 court to even hear a case about Mass voter fraud, let alone rule on a case about Mass voter fraud,
- And despite the fact that every state has at least five levels of checks counteracting any attempts of voter fraud
- And despite the fact that you claimed it wasn't about the numbers, yet sited mail in ballot numbers being off
- Even though there is no 👉documented video👈 or 👉data👈 evidence backing up the claims of mass voter fraud, in any 👉County👈, in any 👉state👈, in the entirety of the 👉United States👈,
- Your going to ignore the fact that there are almost a 👉million👈 poll workers at over a 👉hundred thousand👈 polling locations throughout the country, every presidential election (on average), and the only people who are claiming there was voter fraud are a handful of people on the losing side, that you've never met in your life, who (once again) have absolutely no video or data evidence to back them up, you're going to insist there was mass voter fraud in this election, where the guy you wanted to win also didn't win, because those are the people that are telling you what you want to hear.
Oh, and because I'm insisting on more than just taking a stranger's word for it, as evidence of mass voter fraud and the theft of a presidential election in the United States, I'm clearly being too difficult...
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Andrew Rosenthal @Andrew Rosenthal Basically your argument is,
- Despite their not being enough 👉evidence👈 in either 👉District👈, 👉state👈 and 👉federal👈 court to even hear a case about Mass voter fraud, let alone rule on a case about Mass voter fraud,
- And despite the fact that every state has at least five levels of checks counteracting any attempts of voter fraud
- And despite the fact that you claimed it wasn't about the numbers, yet sited mail in ballot numbers being off
- Even though there is no 👉documented video👈 or 👉data👈 evidence backing up the claims of mass voter fraud, in any 👉County👈, in any 👉state👈, in the entirety of the 👉United States👈,
- Your going to ignore the fact that there are almost a 👉million👈 poll workers at over a 👉hundred thousand👈 polling locations throughout the country, every presidential election (on average), and the only people who are claiming there was voter fraud are a handful of people on the losing side, that you've never met in your life, who (once again) have absolutely no video or data evidence to back them up, you're going to insist there was mass voter fraud in this election, where the guy you wanted to win also didn't win, because those are the people that are telling you what you want to hear.
Oh, and because I'm insisting on more than just taking a stranger's word for it, as evidence of mass voter fraud and the theft of a presidential election in the United States, I'm clearly being too difficult...
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Andrew Rosenthal Giant list of a week's worth of crazy logic, lies and delusions. All the reasons, anyone who comes here, shouldn't take this crazy, BEYOND blindly partisan, lying and clearly delusional person seriously. Basically a list definitively and proving that this person has absolutely no credibility and that all of that is of their own doing.
1. Lets begin with the first crazy, shall we!
The original poster.
" Delusional people tend to believe in what they're doing."
This is where the Wonder leaps of logic begins. "
This struck entirely too close to home for this delusional person. 🤣 cuz then we get this Wonder leap of logic...
"
"By that logic every person ever would be delusional. Lin-manuel Miranda sure believe in making Hamilton, so you're saying he is delusional."
No, crazy! That is entirely not what that means. 🤣 at the very most, that means that delusional people believe in what they're saying just as much as non delusional people. But I understand why you cannot tell them apart! 🤣
I simply tried to explain to Crazy, to check the sentence descriptors. Which began my trip down the magical Rabbit Hole of this delusional persons crazy mind. Cuz, their response was...
" clearly I'm the one who does understand logic as I am the only one giving any actual arguments. If you had any you'd give them as well so you're admitting you have none."
Signaling to me, clearly from the jump, this person wasn't going to use actual truth. So I went to work. 🤣
""There is some of that crackerjack "logic" again. That is why I told you to look at the descriptors. Now stop your Wonder leaps of nonsensical "logic" and maybe I'll stop embarrassing yourself. ... Or not lol 🤣"
At which point he just tried doing something for which that became a theme for him later. Repeating the same thing over and over again and hoping that would somehow magically manifested into existence.
" you didn't just prove what I said so you don't have any argument against baby. Sounds like you're the one who's wrong."
" still don't disprove me"
" no it's not my saying things that makes it true. The fact that their true makes them true. I just happened to also be saying them. But me saying them isn't what makes them true."
👆 we will also discover later event that was also a delusion of his. Because in many instances but it'll literally all he offers in the way of proof. Just repeating it over and over and over again hoping that it will magically manifest it to be true.
Did I mention during this whole first exchange, crazy here is doing the exact same crazy with like two other people?. I'm a bit masochistic so I kind of stuck around for a lot longer than I should have but they realized crazy was crazy a while ago and don't enjoy screaming into the wind as much as I do. 🤣
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Andrew Rosenthal you don't have to agree with me crazy. The evidence is right here. It's totally cool. I know you're going to keep up with your delusion.
@Andrew Rosenthal Giant list of a week's worth of crazy logic, lies and delusions. All the reasons, anyone who comes here, shouldn't take this crazy, BEYOND blindly partisan, lying and clearly delusional person seriously. Basically a list definitively and proving that this person has absolutely no credibility and that all of that is of their own doing.
1. Lets begin with the first crazy, shall we!
The original poster.
" Delusional people tend to believe in what they're doing."
This is where the Wonder leaps of logic begins. "
This struck entirely too close to home for this delusional person. 🤣 cuz then we get this Wonder leap of logic...
"
"By that logic every person ever would be delusional. Lin-manuel Miranda sure believe in making Hamilton, so you're saying he is delusional."
No, crazy! That is entirely not what that means. 🤣 at the very most, that means that delusional people believe in what they're saying just as much as non delusional people. But I understand why you cannot tell them apart! 🤣
I simply tried to explain to Crazy, to check the sentence descriptors. Which began my trip down the magical Rabbit Hole of this delusional persons crazy mind. Cuz, their response was...
" clearly I'm the one who does understand logic as I am the only one giving any actual arguments. If you had any you'd give them as well so you're admitting you have none."
Signaling to me, clearly from the jump, this person wasn't going to use actual truth. So I went to work. 🤣
""There is some of that crackerjack "logic" again. That is why I told you to look at the descriptors. Now stop your Wonder leaps of nonsensical "logic" and maybe I'll stop embarrassing yourself. ... Or not lol 🤣"
At which point he just tried doing something for which that became a theme for him later. Repeating the same thing over and over again and hoping that would somehow magically manifested into existence.
" you didn't just prove what I said so you don't have any argument against baby. Sounds like you're the one who's wrong."
" still don't disprove me"
" no it's not my saying things that makes it true. The fact that their true makes them true. I just happened to also be saying them. But me saying them isn't what makes them true."
👆 we will also discover later event that was also a delusion of his. Because in many instances but it'll literally all he offers in the way of proof. Just repeating it over and over and over again hoping that it will magically manifest it to be true.
Did I mention during this whole first exchange, crazy here is doing the exact same crazy with like two other people?. I'm a bit masochistic so I kind of stuck around for a lot longer than I should have but they realized crazy was crazy a while ago and don't enjoy screaming into the wind as much as I do. 🤣
@Andrew Rosenthal 2. I tell, #CrazyBYNature over here, that Joe Biden won. Which is the rest begins! 🤣
"👉The way the numbers came out was impossible"👈
This part is important because later on in the back and forth, he would insist this is not about the numbers. He would also insist he doesn't change his story. Except this was his original argument.
Going on later to elaborate about these numbers that later on will become absolutely pointless, because he keeps insisting it's not about the numbers and the data after he knew he couldn't provide proof of that.
" in Pennsylvania are there was 1.8 million mail-in ballots sent out in 2.5 million ended up being counted."
" these numbers were not mistakes and there was no debunking of them or explanation for them"
" those are 100% the objective truth of what really happened as reported by the Pennsylvania state government themselves"
After reading this comment I would literally go to find the Pennsylvania Government website where all of this is and told him to show me that. I found it and linked it for him. At which point he told a lie about how they had taken them down.
The number isn't there anymore."
This portion is important for later on. Pretty much the Crux of one of the biggest lies. Later on he would insist that this was not about the data. He started doing so because I kept asking him for proof of the data. Proof of these numbers.
In the same original statement he also elaborated about these "numbers".
" they have expert statistician jobs getting sworn testimony under penalty of perjury who say that."
Where is this testimony and where are these statisticians? No one will ever know. 🤣
" because it's not about the data of. It's about the breaking of the constitution in the counting of the ballots that's making the ballots in ballot."
" I never changed my story and I didn't lie about anything."
" Biden should have gotten a lot of mail-in votes but not the extreme amount he got. With the amount left to be counted left in Pennsylvania the amount Biden was behind he would have needed an extreme irregularity that could only come from fraud to catch up let alone win in Pennsylvania"
But it's so not about the numbers. LOL
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Andrew Rosenthal 4. Then there was the Epic Saga of dodging giving actual data to back up his claims. Going on forever insisting that , after asking me what sources I would believe and then insisting that I wouldn't believe any sources, me telling him that either government or academic sources were fine about a million times. Then he switch to the ONLY government sources that he would provide was Donald Trump's word.... and because I wasn't willing to take that, from a President Who Lies as much as he breathes, I clearly won't accept any Source. This was all an attempt to not have to admit that he didn't have any proof. Then when that was clearly not going to fly, he switched to the," it's not about the data or the numbers" argument. While insisting he never changes his story, of course. 🤣
I say... "government or scientific sources. I'm done with your excuses. Provide sources of evidence that is either governmental or scientific. Preferably both. So, if you could you would have by now. You're just making excuses and telling lies because you don't have your evidence. So, provide evidence or stop making the claims. It's not that hard."
Directly under that comment.
" I said I had asked you what sources you'd accept."
I say... " I told you three times already. Direct government sources or scientific sources. Stop making excuses. Words from Donald Trump's mouth does not count as a source. The man has literally created a new job description at every local news agency in the country to track the amount of Lies that he tells on a regular basis. Straight from Donald Trump's mouth is not a government Source backed up by data. Nice try though. Government Source numbers."
" Donald Trump is the president. You know the president is in the government right? So you want government sources but only the government sources you agree with? Huh?"
This whole entire time I am asking for gov data. The actual facts and figures. But this one has trouble understanding the difference between someone saying something and something actually being true and backed up by hard facts and data that can be proven. See is there on his side and they just say something then it's automatically true to him.
This goes back and forth for a little while. But you get the picture.
Donald Trump is apparently the only government Source he is willing to give. And just what he says. So at one point I go fine. You want to use Donald Trump is a source and he gave his sources when he was giving this information, then just go to the source is he named and give me that. After saying that he got all quiet about Donald Trump being a source.
1
-
@Andrew Rosenthal Giant list of a week's worth of crazy logic, lies and delusions. All the reasons, anyone who comes here, shouldn't take this crazy, BEYOND blindly partisan, lying and clearly delusional person seriously. Basically a list definitively and proving that this person has absolutely no credibility and that all of that is of their own doing.
1. Lets begin with the first crazy, shall we!
The original poster.
" Delusional people tend to believe in what they're doing."
This is where the Wonder leaps of logic begins. "
This struck entirely too close to home for this delusional person. 🤣 cuz then we get this Wonder leap of logic...
"
"By that logic every person ever would be delusional. Lin-manuel Miranda sure believe in making Hamilton, so you're saying he is delusional."
No, crazy! That is entirely not what that means. 🤣 at the very most, that means that delusional people believe in what they're saying just as much as non delusional people. But I understand why you cannot tell them apart! 🤣
I simply tried to explain to Crazy, to check the sentence descriptors. Which began my trip down the magical Rabbit Hole of this delusional persons crazy mind. Cuz, their response was...
" clearly I'm the one who does understand logic as I am the only one giving any actual arguments. If you had any you'd give them as well so you're admitting you have none."
Signaling to me, clearly from the jump, this person wasn't going to use actual truth. So I went to work. 🤣
""There is some of that crackerjack "logic" again. That is why I told you to look at the descriptors. Now stop your Wonder leaps of nonsensical "logic" and maybe I'll stop embarrassing yourself. ... Or not lol 🤣"
At which point he just tried doing something for which that became a theme for him later. Repeating the same thing over and over again and hoping that would somehow magically manifested into existence.
" you didn't just prove what I said so you don't have any argument against baby. Sounds like you're the one who's wrong."
" still don't disprove me"
" no it's not my saying things that makes it true. The fact that their true makes them true. I just happened to also be saying them. But me saying them isn't what makes them true."
👆 we will also discover later event that was also a delusion of his. Because in many instances but it'll literally all he offers in the way of proof. Just repeating it over and over and over again hoping that it will magically manifest it to be true.
Did I mention during this whole first exchange, crazy here is doing the exact same crazy with like two other people?. I'm a bit masochistic so I kind of stuck around for a lot longer than I should have but they realized crazy was crazy a while ago and don't enjoy screaming into the wind as much as I do. 🤣
@Andrew Rosenthal 2. I tell, #CrazyBYNature over here, that Joe Biden won. Which is the rest begins! 🤣
"👉The way the numbers came out was impossible"👈
This part is important because later on in the back and forth, he would insist this is not about the numbers. He would also insist he doesn't change his story. Except this was his original argument.
Going on later to elaborate about these numbers that later on will become absolutely pointless, because he keeps insisting it's not about the numbers and the data after he knew he couldn't provide proof of that.
" in Pennsylvania are there was 1.8 million mail-in ballots sent out in 2.5 million ended up being counted."
" these numbers were not mistakes and there was no debunking of them or explanation for them"
" those are 100% the objective truth of what really happened as reported by the Pennsylvania state government themselves"
After reading this comment I would literally go to find the Pennsylvania Government website where all of this is and told him to show me that. I found it and linked it for him. At which point he told a lie about how they had taken them down.
The number isn't there anymore."
This portion is important for later on. Pretty much the Crux of one of the biggest lies. Later on he would insist that this was not about the data. He started doing so because I kept asking him for proof of the data. Proof of these numbers.
In the same original statement he also elaborated about these "numbers".
" they have expert statistician jobs getting sworn testimony under penalty of perjury who say that."
Where is this testimony and where are these statisticians? No one will ever know. 🤣
" because it's not about the data of. It's about the breaking of the constitution in the counting of the ballots that's making the ballots in ballot."
" I never changed my story and I didn't lie about anything."
" Biden should have gotten a lot of mail-in votes but not the extreme amount he got. With the amount left to be counted left in Pennsylvania the amount Biden was behind he would have needed an extreme irregularity that could only come from fraud to catch up let alone win in Pennsylvania"
But it's so not about the numbers. LOL
3. Now there was these silly lie about asking me a question then insisting I didn't answer it even if I did answer it.
"What could they present to you that you would say is proof?"
Two comments down from the comment that asked that question, I replied,
but just for s** and giggles What would be proof?
"Every state has at least five different self check programs operating within the electoral system of that state. All the numbers have to line up to a certain degree in all five to certify the election. What would make it not true is as someone had proof, didn't just say, but had proof that those numbers don't line up. This is not what's happening. People lie all the damn time. There are over a million poll workers every four years during the presidential election. There's over a hundred thousand polling places. Getting a fraction of them to lie for you because they're a salty about their guy not winning, not that hard. Switching up the numbers and providing proof that that happened, very hard. Our election system has a myriad of self-checks. Even the recounts came back with the same numbers.
But I'll ask you the same question you asked me, since you're not going to not answer my original one. What would convince you that Joe Biden won legitimately?"
Then we get " You didn't answer it whether you say you did or not."
The truth was I did answer it and in great detail, as you can see. However he didn't have any good responses for it so he tried to pretend it wasn't there. Cuz that's what crazy people do.
4. Then there was the Epic Saga of dodging giving actual data to back up his claims. Going on forever insisting that , after asking me what sources I would believe and then insisting that I wouldn't believe any sources, me telling him that either government or academic sources were fine about a million times. Then he switch to the ONLY government sources that he would provide was Donald Trump's word.... and because I wasn't willing to take that, from a President Who Lies as much as he breathes, I clearly won't accept any Source. This was all an attempt to not have to admit that he didn't have any proof. Then when that was clearly not going to fly, he switched to the," it's not about the data or the numbers" argument. While insisting he never changes his story, of course. 🤣
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Andrew Rosenthal @Andrew Rosenthal Giant list of a week's worth of crazy logic, lies and delusions. All the reasons, anyone who comes here, shouldn't take this crazy, BEYOND blindly partisan, lying and clearly delusional person seriously. Basically a list definitively and proving that this person has absolutely no credibility and that all of that is of their own doing.
1. Lets begin with the first crazy, shall we!
The original poster.
" Delusional people tend to believe in what they're doing."
This is where the Wonder leaps of logic begins. "
This struck entirely too close to home for this delusional person. 🤣 cuz then we get this Wonder leap of logic...
"
"By that logic every person ever would be delusional. Lin-manuel Miranda sure believe in making Hamilton, so you're saying he is delusional."
No, crazy! That is entirely not what that means. 🤣 at the very most, that means that delusional people believe in what they're saying just as much as non delusional people. But I understand why you cannot tell them apart! 🤣
I simply tried to explain to Crazy, to check the sentence descriptors. Which began my trip down the magical Rabbit Hole of this delusional persons crazy mind. Cuz, their response was...
" clearly I'm the one who does understand logic as I am the only one giving any actual arguments. If you had any you'd give them as well so you're admitting you have none."
Signaling to me, clearly from the jump, this person wasn't going to use actual truth. So I went to work. 🤣
""There is some of that crackerjack "logic" again. That is why I told you to look at the descriptors. Now stop your Wonder leaps of nonsensical "logic" and maybe I'll stop embarrassing yourself. ... Or not lol 🤣"
At which point he just tried doing something for which that became a theme for him later. Repeating the same thing over and over again and hoping that would somehow magically manifested into existence.
" you didn't just prove what I said so you don't have any argument against baby. Sounds like you're the one who's wrong."
" still don't disprove me"
" no it's not my saying things that makes it true. The fact that their true makes them true. I just happened to also be saying them. But me saying them isn't what makes them true."
👆 we will also discover later event that was also a delusion of his. Because in many instances but it'll literally all he offers in the way of proof. Just repeating it over and over and over again hoping that it will magically manifest it to be true.
Did I mention during this whole first exchange, crazy here is doing the exact same crazy with like two other people?. I'm a bit masochistic so I kind of stuck around for a lot longer than I should have but they realized crazy was crazy a while ago and don't enjoy screaming into the wind as much as I do. 🤣
@Andrew Rosenthal 2. I tell, #CrazyBYNature over here, that Joe Biden won. Which is the rest begins! 🤣
"👉The way the numbers came out was impossible"👈
This part is important because later on in the back and forth, he would insist this is not about the numbers. He would also insist he doesn't change his story. Except this was his original argument.
Going on later to elaborate about these numbers that later on will become absolutely pointless, because he keeps insisting it's not about the numbers and the data after he knew he couldn't provide proof of that.
" in Pennsylvania are there was 1.8 million mail-in ballots sent out in 2.5 million ended up being counted."
" these numbers were not mistakes and there was no debunking of them or explanation for them"
" those are 100% the objective truth of what really happened as reported by the Pennsylvania state government themselves"
After reading this comment I would literally go to find the Pennsylvania Government website where all of this is and told him to show me that. I found it and linked it for him. At which point he told a lie about how they had taken them down.
The number isn't there anymore."
This portion is important for later on. Pretty much the Crux of one of the biggest lies. Later on he would insist that this was not about the data. He started doing so because I kept asking him for proof of the data. Proof of these numbers.
In the same original statement he also elaborated about these "numbers".
" they have expert statistician jobs getting sworn testimony under penalty of perjury who say that."
Where is this testimony and where are these statisticians? No one will ever know. 🤣
" because it's not about the data of. It's about the breaking of the constitution in the counting of the ballots that's making the ballots in ballot."
" I never changed my story and I didn't lie about anything."
" Biden should have gotten a lot of mail-in votes but not the extreme amount he got. With the amount left to be counted left in Pennsylvania the amount Biden was behind he would have needed an extreme irregularity that could only come from fraud to catch up let alone win in Pennsylvania"
But it's so not about the numbers. LOL
3. Now there was these silly lie about asking me a question then insisting I didn't answer it even if I did answer it.
"What could they present to you that you would say is proof?"
Two comments down from the comment that asked that question, I replied,
but just for s** and giggles What would be proof?
"Every state has at least five different self check programs operating within the electoral system of that state. All the numbers have to line up to a certain degree in all five to certify the election. What would make it not true is as someone had proof, didn't just say, but had proof that those numbers don't line up. This is not what's happening. People lie all the damn time. There are over a million poll workers every four years during the presidential election. There's over a hundred thousand polling places. Getting a fraction of them to lie for you because they're a salty about their guy not winning, not that hard. Switching up the numbers and providing proof that that happened, very hard. Our election system has a myriad of self-checks. Even the recounts came back with the same numbers.
But I'll ask you the same question you asked me, since you're not going to not answer my original one. What would convince you that Joe Biden won legitimately?"
Then we get " You didn't answer it whether you say you did or not."
The truth was I did answer it and in great detail, as you can see. However he didn't have any good responses for it so he tried to pretend it wasn't there. Cuz that's what crazy people do.
4. Then there was the Epic Saga of dodging giving actual data to back up his claims. Going on forever insisting that , after asking me what sources I would believe and then insisting that I wouldn't believe any sources, me telling him that either government or academic sources were fine about a million times. Then he switch to the ONLY government sources that he would provide was Donald Trump's word.... and because I wasn't willing to take that, from a President Who Lies as much as he breathes, I clearly won't accept any Source. This was all an attempt to not have to admit that he didn't have any proof. Then when that was clearly not going to fly, he switched to the," it's not about the data or the numbers" argument. While insisting he never changes his story, of course. 🤣
1
-
@Andrew Rosenthal Added a few more direct quotes to number 4. 😁
4. Then there was the Epic Saga of dodging giving actual data to back up his claims. Going on forever insisting that , after asking me what sources I would believe and then insisting that I wouldn't believe any sources, me telling him that either government or academic sources were fine about a million times. Then he switch to the ONLY government sources that he would provide was Donald Trump's word.... and because I wasn't willing to take that, from a President Who Lies as much as he breathes, I clearly won't accept any Source. This was all an attempt to not have to admit that he didn't have any proof. Then when that was clearly not going to fly, he switched to the," it's not about the data or the numbers" argument. While insisting he never changes his story, of course. 🤣
I say... "government or scientific sources. I'm done with your excuses. Provide sources of evidence that is either governmental or scientific. Preferably both. So, if you could you would have by now. You're just making excuses and telling lies because you don't have your evidence. So, provide evidence or stop making the claims. It's not that hard."
Directly under that comment.
" I said I had asked you what sources you'd accept."
I say... " I told you three times already. Direct government sources or scientific sources. Stop making excuses. Words from Donald Trump's mouth does not count as a source. The man has literally created a new job description at every local news agency in the country to track the amount of Lies that he tells on a regular basis. Straight from Donald Trump's mouth is not a government Source backed up by data. Nice try though. Government Source numbers."
" Donald Trump is the president. You know the president is in the government right? So you want government sources but only the government sources you agree with? Huh?"
This whole entire time I am asking for gov data. The actual facts and figures. But this one has trouble understanding the difference between someone saying something and something actually being true and backed up by hard facts and data that can be proven. See is there on his side and they just say something then it's automatically true to him.
This goes back and forth for a little while. But you get the picture.
Donald Trump is apparently the only government Source he is willing to give. And just what he says. So at one point I go fine. You want to use Donald Trump is a source and he gave his sources when he was giving this information, then just go to the source is he named and give me that. After saying that he got all quiet about Donald Trump being a source.
1
-
@Andrew Rosenthal Giant list of a week's worth of crazy logic, lies and delusions. All the reasons, anyone who comes here, shouldn't take this crazy, BEYOND blindly partisan, lying and clearly delusional person seriously. Basically a list definitively and proving that this person has absolutely no credibility and that all of that is of their own doing.
1. Lets begin with the first crazy, shall we!
The original poster.
" Delusional people tend to believe in what they're doing."
This is where the Wonder leaps of logic begins. "
This struck entirely too close to home for this delusional person. 🤣 cuz then we get this Wonder leap of logic...
"
"By that logic every person ever would be delusional. Lin-manuel Miranda sure believe in making Hamilton, so you're saying he is delusional."
No, crazy! That is entirely not what that means. 🤣 at the very most, that means that delusional people believe in what they're saying just as much as non delusional people. But I understand why you cannot tell them apart! 🤣
I simply tried to explain to Crazy, to check the sentence descriptors. Which began my trip down the magical Rabbit Hole of this delusional persons crazy mind. Cuz, their response was...
" clearly I'm the one who does understand logic as I am the only one giving any actual arguments. If you had any you'd give them as well so you're admitting you have none."
Signaling to me, clearly from the jump, this person wasn't going to use actual truth. So I went to work. 🤣
""There is some of that crackerjack "logic" again. That is why I told you to look at the descriptors. Now stop your Wonder leaps of nonsensical "logic" and maybe I'll stop embarrassing yourself. ... Or not lol 🤣"
At which point he just tried doing something for which that became a theme for him later. Repeating the same thing over and over again and hoping that would somehow magically manifested into existence.
" you didn't just prove what I said so you don't have any argument against baby. Sounds like you're the one who's wrong."
" still don't disprove me"
" no it's not my saying things that makes it true. The fact that their true makes them true. I just happened to also be saying them. But me saying them isn't what makes them true."
👆 we will also discover later event that was also a delusion of his. Because in many instances but it'll literally all he offers in the way of proof. Just repeating it over and over and over again hoping that it will magically manifest it to be true.
Did I mention during this whole first exchange, crazy here is doing the exact same crazy with like two other people?. I'm a bit masochistic so I kind of stuck around for a lot longer than I should have but they realized crazy was crazy a while ago and don't enjoy screaming into the wind as much as I do. 🤣
@Andrew Rosenthal 2. I tell, #CrazyBYNature over here, that Joe Biden won. Which is the rest begins! 🤣
"👉The way the numbers came out was impossible"👈
This part is important because later on in the back and forth, he would insist this is not about the numbers. He would also insist he doesn't change his story. Except this was his original argument.
Going on later to elaborate about these numbers that later on will become absolutely pointless, because he keeps insisting it's not about the numbers and the data after he knew he couldn't provide proof of that.
" in Pennsylvania are there was 1.8 million mail-in ballots sent out in 2.5 million ended up being counted."
" these numbers were not mistakes and there was no debunking of them or explanation for them"
" those are 100% the objective truth of what really happened as reported by the Pennsylvania state government themselves"
After reading this comment I would literally go to find the Pennsylvania Government website where all of this is and told him to show me that. I found it and linked it for him. At which point he told a lie about how they had taken them down.
The number isn't there anymore."
This portion is important for later on. Pretty much the Crux of one of the biggest lies. Later on he would insist that this was not about the data. He started doing so because I kept asking him for proof of the data. Proof of these numbers.
In the same original statement he also elaborated about these "numbers".
" they have expert statistician jobs getting sworn testimony under penalty of perjury who say that."
Where is this testimony and where are these statisticians? No one will ever know. 🤣
" because it's not about the data of. It's about the breaking of the constitution in the counting of the ballots that's making the ballots in ballot."
" I never changed my story and I didn't lie about anything."
" Biden should have gotten a lot of mail-in votes but not the extreme amount he got. With the amount left to be counted left in Pennsylvania the amount Biden was behind he would have needed an extreme irregularity that could only come from fraud to catch up let alone win in Pennsylvania"
But it's so not about the numbers. LOL
3. Now there was these silly lie about asking me a question then insisting I didn't answer it even if I did answer it.
"What could they present to you that you would say is proof?"
Two comments down from the comment that asked that question, I replied,
but just for s** and giggles What would be proof?
"Every state has at least five different self check programs operating within the electoral system of that state. All the numbers have to line up to a certain degree in all five to certify the election. What would make it not true is as someone had proof, didn't just say, but had proof that those numbers don't line up. This is not what's happening. People lie all the damn time. There are over a million poll workers every four years during the presidential election. There's over a hundred thousand polling places. Getting a fraction of them to lie for you because they're a salty about their guy not winning, not that hard. Switching up the numbers and providing proof that that happened, very hard. Our election system has a myriad of self-checks. Even the recounts came back with the same numbers.
But I'll ask you the same question you asked me, since you're not going to not answer my original one. What would convince you that Joe Biden won legitimately?"
Then we get " You didn't answer it whether you say you did or not."
The truth was I did answer it and in great detail, as you can see. However he didn't have any good responses for it so he tried to pretend it wasn't there. Cuz that's what crazy people do.
4. Then there was the Epic Saga of dodging giving actual data to back up his claims. Going on forever insisting that , after asking me what sources I would believe and then insisting that I wouldn't believe any sources, me telling him that either government or academic sources were fine about a million times. Then he switch to the ONLY government sources that he would provide was Donald Trump's word.... and because I wasn't willing to take that, from a President Who Lies as much as he breathes, I clearly won't accept any Source. This was all an attempt to not have to admit that he didn't have any proof. Then when that was clearly not going to fly, he switched to the," it's not about the data or the numbers" argument. While insisting he never changes his story, of course. 🤣
I say... "government or scientific sources. I'm done with your excuses. Provide sources of evidence that is either governmental or scientific. Preferably both. So, if you could you would have by now. You're just making excuses and telling lies because you don't have your evidence. So, provide evidence or stop making the claims. It's not that hard."
Directly under that comment.
" I said I had asked you what sources you'd accept."
I say... " I told you three times already. Direct government sources or scientific sources. Stop making excuses. Words from Donald Trump's mouth does not count as a source. The man has literally created a new job description at every local news agency in the country to track the amount of Lies that he tells on a regular basis. Straight from Donald Trump's mouth is not a government Source backed up by data. Nice try though. Government Source numbers."
" Donald Trump is the president. You know the president is in the government right? So you want government sources but only the government sources you agree with? Huh?"
This whole entire time I am asking for gov data. The actual facts and figures. But this one has trouble understanding the difference between someone saying something and something actually being true and backed up by hard facts and data that can be proven. See is there on his side and they just say something then it's automatically true to him.
This goes back and forth for a little while. But you get the picture.
Donald Trump is apparently the only government Source he is willing to give. And just what he says. So at one point I go fine. You want to use Donald Trump is a source and he gave his sources when he was giving this information, then just go to the source is he named and give me that. After saying that he got all quiet about Donald Trump being a source.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Andrew Rosenthal Giant list of a week's worth of crazy logic, lies and delusions. All the reasons, anyone who comes here, shouldn't take this crazy, BEYOND blindly partisan, lying and clearly delusional person seriously. Basically a list definitively and proving that this person has absolutely no credibility and that all of that is of their own doing.
1. Lets begin with the first crazy, shall we!
The original poster.
" Delusional people tend to believe in what they're doing."
This is where the Wonder leaps of logic begins. "
This struck entirely too close to home for this delusional person. 🤣 cuz then we get this Wonder leap of logic...
"
"By that logic every person ever would be delusional. Lin-manuel Miranda sure believe in making Hamilton, so you're saying he is delusional."
No, crazy! That is entirely not what that means. 🤣 at the very most, that means that delusional people believe in what they're saying just as much as non delusional people. But I understand why you cannot tell them apart! 🤣
I simply tried to explain to Crazy, to check the sentence descriptors. Which began my trip down the magical Rabbit Hole of this delusional persons crazy mind. Cuz, their response was...
" clearly I'm the one who does understand logic as I am the only one giving any actual arguments. If you had any you'd give them as well so you're admitting you have none."
Signaling to me, clearly from the jump, this person wasn't going to use actual truth. So I went to work. 🤣
""There is some of that crackerjack "logic" again. That is why I told you to look at the descriptors. Now stop your Wonder leaps of nonsensical "logic" and maybe I'll stop embarrassing yourself. ... Or not lol 🤣"
At which point he just tried doing something for which that became a theme for him later. Repeating the same thing over and over again and hoping that would somehow magically manifested into existence.
" you didn't just prove what I said so you don't have any argument against baby. Sounds like you're the one who's wrong."
" still don't disprove me"
" no it's not my saying things that makes it true. The fact that their true makes them true. I just happened to also be saying them. But me saying them isn't what makes them true."
👆 we will also discover later event that was also a delusion of his. Because in many instances but it'll literally all he offers in the way of proof. Just repeating it over and over and over again hoping that it will magically manifest it to be true.
Did I mention during this whole first exchange, crazy here is doing the exact same crazy with like two other people?. I'm a bit masochistic so I kind of stuck around for a lot longer than I should have but they realized crazy was crazy a while ago and don't enjoy screaming into the wind as much as I do. 🤣
@Andrew Rosenthal 2. I tell, #CrazyBYNature over here, that Joe Biden won. Which is the rest begins! 🤣
"👉The way the numbers came out was impossible"👈
This part is important because later on in the back and forth, he would insist this is not about the numbers. He would also insist he doesn't change his story. Except this was his original argument.
Going on later to elaborate about these numbers that later on will become absolutely pointless, because he keeps insisting it's not about the numbers and the data after he knew he couldn't provide proof of that.
" in Pennsylvania are there was 1.8 million mail-in ballots sent out in 2.5 million ended up being counted."
" these numbers were not mistakes and there was no debunking of them or explanation for them"
" those are 100% the objective truth of what really happened as reported by the Pennsylvania state government themselves"
After reading this comment I would literally go to find the Pennsylvania Government website where all of this is and told him to show me that. I found it and linked it for him. At which point he told a lie about how they had taken them down.
The number isn't there anymore."
This portion is important for later on. Pretty much the Crux of one of the biggest lies. Later on he would insist that this was not about the data. He started doing so because I kept asking him for proof of the data. Proof of these numbers.
In the same original statement he also elaborated about these "numbers".
" they have expert statistician jobs getting sworn testimony under penalty of perjury who say that."
Where is this testimony and where are these statisticians? No one will ever know. 🤣
" because it's not about the data of. It's about the breaking of the constitution in the counting of the ballots that's making the ballots in ballot."
" I never changed my story and I didn't lie about anything."
" Biden should have gotten a lot of mail-in votes but not the extreme amount he got. With the amount left to be counted left in Pennsylvania the amount Biden was behind he would have needed an extreme irregularity that could only come from fraud to catch up let alone win in Pennsylvania"
But it's so not about the numbers. LOL
3. Now there was these silly lie about asking me a question then insisting I didn't answer it even if I did answer it.
"What could they present to you that you would say is proof?"
Two comments down from the comment that asked that question, I replied,
but just for s** and giggles What would be proof?
"Every state has at least five different self check programs operating within the electoral system of that state. All the numbers have to line up to a certain degree in all five to certify the election. What would make it not true is as someone had proof, didn't just say, but had proof that those numbers don't line up. This is not what's happening. People lie all the damn time. There are over a million poll workers every four years during the presidential election. There's over a hundred thousand polling places. Getting a fraction of them to lie for you because they're a salty about their guy not winning, not that hard. Switching up the numbers and providing proof that that happened, very hard. Our election system has a myriad of self-checks. Even the recounts came back with the same numbers.
But I'll ask you the same question you asked me, since you're not going to not answer my original one. What would convince you that Joe Biden won legitimately?"
Then we get " You didn't answer it whether you say you did or not."
The truth was I did answer it and in great detail, as you can see. However he didn't have any good responses for it so he tried to pretend it wasn't there. Cuz that's what crazy people do.
4. Then there was the Epic Saga of dodging giving actual data to back up his claims. Going on forever insisting that , after asking me what sources I would believe and then insisting that I wouldn't believe any sources, me telling him that either government or academic sources were fine about a million times. Then he switch to the ONLY government sources that he would provide was Donald Trump's word.... and because I wasn't willing to take that, from a President Who Lies as much as he breathes, I clearly won't accept any Source. This was all an attempt to not have to admit that he didn't have any proof. Then when that was clearly not going to fly, he switched to the," it's not about the data or the numbers" argument. While insisting he never changes his story, of course. 🤣
I say... "government or scientific sources. I'm done with your excuses. Provide sources of evidence that is either governmental or scientific. Preferably both. So, if you could you would have by now. You're just making excuses and telling lies because you don't have your evidence. So, provide evidence or stop making the claims. It's not that hard."
Directly under that comment.
" I said I had asked you what sources you'd accept."
I say... " I told you three times already. Direct government sources or scientific sources. Stop making excuses. Words from Donald Trump's mouth does not count as a source. The man has literally created a new job description at every local news agency in the country to track the amount of Lies that he tells on a regular basis. Straight from Donald Trump's mouth is not a government Source backed up by data. Nice try though. Government Source numbers."
" Donald Trump is the president. You know the president is in the government right? So you want government sources but only the government sources you agree with? Huh?"
This whole entire time I am asking for gov data. The actual facts and figures. But this one has trouble understanding the difference between someone saying something and something actually being true and backed up by hard facts and data that can be proven. See is there on his side and they just say something then it's automatically true to him.
This goes back and forth for a little while. But you get the picture.
Donald Trump is apparently the only government Source he is willing to give. And just what he says. So at one point I go fine. You want to use Donald Trump is a source and he gave his sources when he was giving this information, then just go to the source is he named and give me that. After saying that he got all quiet about Donald Trump being a source.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Andrew Rosenthal Giant list of a week's worth of crazy logic, lies and delusions. All the reasons, anyone who comes here, shouldn't take this crazy, BEYOND blindly partisan, lying and clearly delusional person seriously. Basically a list definitively and proving that this person has absolutely no credibility and that all of that is of their own doing.
1. Lets begin with the first crazy, shall we!
The original poster.
" Delusional people tend to believe in what they're doing."
This is where the Wonder leaps of logic begins. "
This struck entirely too close to home for this delusional person. 🤣 cuz then we get this Wonder leap of logic...
"
"By that logic every person ever would be delusional. Lin-manuel Miranda sure believe in making Hamilton, so you're saying he is delusional."
No, crazy! That is entirely not what that means. 🤣 at the very most, that means that delusional people believe in what they're saying just as much as non delusional people. But I understand why you cannot tell them apart! 🤣
I simply tried to explain to Crazy, to check the sentence descriptors. Which began my trip down the magical Rabbit Hole of this delusional persons crazy mind. Cuz, their response was...
" clearly I'm the one who does understand logic as I am the only one giving any actual arguments. If you had any you'd give them as well so you're admitting you have none."
Signaling to me, clearly from the jump, this person wasn't going to use actual truth. So I went to work. 🤣
""There is some of that crackerjack "logic" again. That is why I told you to look at the descriptors. Now stop your Wonder leaps of nonsensical "logic" and maybe I'll stop embarrassing yourself. ... Or not lol 🤣"
At which point he just tried doing something for which that became a theme for him later. Repeating the same thing over and over again and hoping that would somehow magically manifested into existence.
" you didn't just prove what I said so you don't have any argument against baby. Sounds like you're the one who's wrong."
" still don't disprove me"
" no it's not my saying things that makes it true. The fact that their true makes them true. I just happened to also be saying them. But me saying them isn't what makes them true."
👆 we will also discover later event that was also a delusion of his. Because in many instances but it'll literally all he offers in the way of proof. Just repeating it over and over and over again hoping that it will magically manifest it to be true.
Did I mention during this whole first exchange, crazy here is doing the exact same crazy with like two other people?. I'm a bit masochistic so I kind of stuck around for a lot longer than I should have but they realized crazy was crazy a while ago and don't enjoy screaming into the wind as much as I do. 🤣
@Andrew Rosenthal 2. I tell, #CrazyBYNature over here, that Joe Biden won. Which is the rest begins! 🤣
"👉The way the numbers came out was impossible"👈
This part is important because later on in the back and forth, he would insist this is not about the numbers. He would also insist he doesn't change his story. Except this was his original argument.
Going on later to elaborate about these numbers that later on will become absolutely pointless, because he keeps insisting it's not about the numbers and the data after he knew he couldn't provide proof of that.
" in Pennsylvania are there was 1.8 million mail-in ballots sent out in 2.5 million ended up being counted."
" these numbers were not mistakes and there was no debunking of them or explanation for them"
" those are 100% the objective truth of what really happened as reported by the Pennsylvania state government themselves"
After reading this comment I would literally go to find the Pennsylvania Government website where all of this is and told him to show me that. I found it and linked it for him. At which point he told a lie about how they had taken them down.
The number isn't there anymore."
This portion is important for later on. Pretty much the Crux of one of the biggest lies. Later on he would insist that this was not about the data. He started doing so because I kept asking him for proof of the data. Proof of these numbers.
In the same original statement he also elaborated about these "numbers".
" they have expert statistician jobs getting sworn testimony under penalty of perjury who say that."
Where is this testimony and where are these statisticians? No one will ever know. 🤣
" because it's not about the data of. It's about the breaking of the constitution in the counting of the ballots that's making the ballots in ballot."
" I never changed my story and I didn't lie about anything."
" Biden should have gotten a lot of mail-in votes but not the extreme amount he got. With the amount left to be counted left in Pennsylvania the amount Biden was behind he would have needed an extreme irregularity that could only come from fraud to catch up let alone win in Pennsylvania"
But it's so not about the numbers. LOL
3. Now there was these silly lie about asking me a question then insisting I didn't answer it even if I did answer it.
"What could they present to you that you would say is proof?"
Two comments down from the comment that asked that question, I replied,
but just for s** and giggles What would be proof?
"Every state has at least five different self check programs operating within the electoral system of that state. All the numbers have to line up to a certain degree in all five to certify the election. What would make it not true is as someone had proof, didn't just say, but had proof that those numbers don't line up. This is not what's happening. People lie all the damn time. There are over a million poll workers every four years during the presidential election. There's over a hundred thousand polling places. Getting a fraction of them to lie for you because they're a salty about their guy not winning, not that hard. Switching up the numbers and providing proof that that happened, very hard. Our election system has a myriad of self-checks. Even the recounts came back with the same numbers.
But I'll ask you the same question you asked me, since you're not going to not answer my original one. What would convince you that Joe Biden won legitimately?"
Then we get " You didn't answer it whether you say you did or not."
The truth was I did answer it and in great detail, as you can see. However he didn't have any good responses for it so he tried to pretend it wasn't there. Cuz that's what crazy people do.
4. Then there was the Epic Saga of dodging giving actual data to back up his claims. Going on forever insisting that , after asking me what sources I would believe and then insisting that I wouldn't believe any sources, me telling him that either government or academic sources were fine about a million times. Then he switch to the ONLY government sources that he would provide was Donald Trump's word.... and because I wasn't willing to take that, from a President Who Lies as much as he breathes, I clearly won't accept any Source. This was all an attempt to not have to admit that he didn't have any proof. Then when that was clearly not going to fly, he switched to the," it's not about the data or the numbers" argument. While insisting he never changes his story, of course. 🤣
I say... "government or scientific sources. I'm done with your excuses. Provide sources of evidence that is either governmental or scientific. Preferably both. So, if you could you would have by now. You're just making excuses and telling lies because you don't have your evidence. So, provide evidence or stop making the claims. It's not that hard."
Directly under that comment.
" I said I had asked you what sources you'd accept."
I say... " I told you three times already. Direct government sources or scientific sources. Stop making excuses. Words from Donald Trump's mouth does not count as a source. The man has literally created a new job description at every local news agency in the country to track the amount of Lies that he tells on a regular basis. Straight from Donald Trump's mouth is not a government Source backed up by data. Nice try though. Government Source numbers."
" Donald Trump is the president. You know the president is in the government right? So you want government sources but only the government sources you agree with? Huh?"
This whole entire time I am asking for gov data. The actual facts and figures. But this one has trouble understanding the difference between someone saying something and something actually being true and backed up by hard facts and data that can be proven. See is there on his side and they just say something then it's automatically true to him.
This goes back and forth for a little while. But you get the picture.
Donald Trump is apparently the only government Source he is willing to give. And just what he says. So at one point I go fine. You want to use Donald Trump is a source and he gave his sources when he was giving this information, then just go to the source is he named and give me that. After saying that he got all quiet about Donald Trump being a source.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Dirk Diggler But first... I feel like I need to explain how adults swing.... It will save time.
If you make a claim, you better be prepared to back it up. Otherwise it will be mocked as lies and assumptions.... Which is what it will be. So... If you can't back it up, I suggest you not bring it up. It's not gonna go well for you, if you do.
When it gets to the point that you have no argument left and therefore revert to childish insults, that you think are a way more clever then they actually are... You've already lost. So I would suggest you walk away with what's left of your dignity and self respect. Though.. I doubt you will.
If you try and lie to me or about me, your going to be really embarrassed. So I will first give you an opportunity to admit the LIE. If you choose not to... Which many do, that's not going to go well for you either.
If you can't answer or keep trying to ignore on topic and substance based questions, they will be repeated as many times as it takes. Which eventually will show that you're not able to answer those questions. So either way you're going to answer them.
Last one... grammar Nazi BS will be mocked as such. I used talk text a lot and I don't always spell check because, well, I have a f**** life. I read everything back and if I can read it then you can figure it out.
Now that you have your fair warning, show me what you got. Except maybe a little less childish posturing. It just makes you look silly.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Dirk Diggler If Anyone, but especially Donald Trump, guess not Avail themselves of the resources available to them, in order to do their jobs, on a consistent basis, to the best of their ability, then they should no longer have said job. In his particular case, it would be things like refusing to take the daily intelligence briefings and not checking information before speaking as the current leader of our country. Which has and does give him no excuse to consistantly make false claims, whether intentional or just willful ignorance at work. Such things have and will continue to effect his multi-pronged job performance in negative ways, such as, relations with foreign allies and adversaries, the basic knowledge of what is going on in the world and in the country that he now governs and even occasionally has him doing horrid things, such as, making war widows cry because he didn't bother to learn they're dead soldiers name before calling them.
Now stop making excuses and argue that premise.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@birddog7492 Of course they do. They are the experts. Data is what they do. How do you think they can say that it will do little to nothing to solve the problem and cost to much?
I'll have to find the report but I believe the number is correct. It will only slow people who are trying to cross illegally, on average 9.2 min. Our southern border is to large to have people manning the whole thing, all the time. There are payrolls, but on average, they can only cover one portion, every 40 min. That would also only be for 37% of entries as well. Most come in by boat, plane or cross through the Canadian border.
They get behind better border security. They just don't get behind the wall. It costs to much. It won't help nearly enough. Mexico was supposed to pay for it. Not our military.... And all the bills they have offered has not addressed the humanitarian crisis down there right now. Dems have put up their own bills also. They are willing to address the issue. Just not waist time and money like that, just so Trump can get re-elected by half way, keeping a campaign promise that was never a good idea in the first place.
As for adding money to the budget... 27% of military households with more than 1 child are on food stamp programs. He added the money for that wall that will not work but not for them?
What he has done, is lied to get re-elected, so he wont be charged when he gets out of office. What he has done, is not have Mexico pay for it, like he said he would. What he has done, is perpetrate the longest government shutdown in modern history, had government workers lining up in food pantries and losing their homes and having that all before nothing in the end, all so he could get this done, then made it all for nothing, by caving.
Most drugs also come in through other means. There are actually not that many drugs that are being hoofed across the desert. That's just inefficient. He is playing you.... Like I said. You shpuld look into the numbers of all of this. Once you do that, you could see what I mean.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Danny G But should you though? 🤣 I know you can try and make a childish jome out of my user name... And it doesn't really matter... Cuz like I said, you've already discredited yourself... But should you, as a grown ass man, make a childish parody of my user name... Probably not... especially when you ended that sentence with suggesting that I'm acting like a bully. I'm not sure you know what the meaning of that word is.... 🤣 ....
As far as not caring about being right or wrong and wanting to know if you are, that's great news! I can totally work with that! 😁
Lets start with that very claim. " all I'm interested in is reality and being knowledgeable. "
Your words... Well... They tell a different story.
" the Democratic party and the liberal media have turn the government into a complete joke and the entire world can see it except for them because they're blinded by arrogance and spite."
So... What part of "reality" was that statment from? You know this about everyone else in the world and therefore you can speak for them?
Next... " They quite literally made up the Russian collusion."
Really? Okay, well... Then that should be very easily reference the source you got that from then, correct? I mean... You had to get that from somewhere. So it should be fairly simple to tell us where you got it from?
And... " even further the Democrats were the ones colluding against Trump."
Same coin different side... Show me? Once again, if it's true, shouldn't be that hard for you to prove it, correct?
" If anyone actually believes it this time after what they've done they'd have to be the most gullible group of morons alive. "
False dichotomy number two. Own that shows has your massive insecurities about arguing your own point. You, for some reason, find it necessary to set up a set up a situation, as to where, if they don't agree with your point of view then they're idiots. It's transparent lazy logic.
" it's clear as day and they're lying and making up another farce, a political play and betraying the American people."
Good news again. If its clear as day, you will have no trouble showing us proof if that claim! We will be here waiting at the edge of our seats. 😉
Then there is, the transcript being "the only piece of evidence that matters".
And why is that exactly? Because it makes it easier for you to argue your point that way? Because if you pay attention to all relevant information, hit points in the opposite direction of where you're trying to go with this? But wouldn't you need all relevant information to come to the best rational and logic based opinion possible?
And... " what else is new, a damn using condescension instead of facts to attempt to discredit someone."
I actually agree with you that it's a waste of time for someone else to try and discredit you. You're doing that just fine by yourself.
" I mean go ahead and make me look stupid with facts, and not the ones you regurgitate from liberal media,"
Except... You don't seam to know how simple declarative statements and problem-solving work. See when you make a claim, the onus is on you to back it up. Why? Because it doesn't make sense to ask someone to prove you wrong about something, that you have yet to prove to be true. Balls in your court. You can either pick it up or show everyone how uncoordinated and lazy you are. That's entirely up to you. 😜
... " you people on the other hand get force-fed your b***** and regurgitate it, then only care about winning an argument, or engaging with someone to try and make them look stupid. Which good luck you're not very good at it, especially with your attempt at flaunty words while you mean while using correct grammar. "
So... First... To qualify the first bit of vast you would have to actually know us, at least enough to know where we get our information. Yeah... Not so much.
Next... And this is going to be quite funny for a multitude of the reasons. One being, I'm a bit lazy with my grammar on here. Some people tend to comment on it , using it to both insult and distract from their lack of information. Which is what I usually tell them. However, in your case... See... this is why I keep telling you I don't have to discredit you. You do it all by yourself. Cuz my grammar maybe bad but it's not nearly as bad as the grammar and spelling you just used to try and tell me I had bad grammar. 🤣🤣🤣👇👇👇
"You people 👉comma here👈 on the other hand 👉comma here👈 get force fed 👉force-fed not force fed👈 your b***** and regurgitate it, then only care about winning an argument, or engaging with someone to try and make them look stupid. Which 👉comma here👈 good luck 👉 period here 👈 you're not very good at it 👉 period here 👈 Especially with your attempt at flaunty 👉 so flaunty is not actually a word 👈 words while you mean while 👉 while you mean while... Do what now? 🤣 👈 using correct grammar. "
Here is a better version, for you to use in the future, So you don't embarrass yourself like this anymore.
"You people, on the other hand, get force-fed your bullshit and regurgitate it, then only care about winning an argument, or engaging with someone to try and make them look stupid. Which, good luck! You're not very good at it. Especially with your attempt at flaunting words while you use incorrect grammar."
My gift to you! 🤣
It may not be perfect but it's certainly better than what you provide. 🤣
Ya know what I love? You guys always trying to talk about how we're so triggered but for some reason you guys are always the one playing victim. the big bad Democrats are always picking on you, aren't they....
And the last bit is what we've come to expect from you. Someone doesn't agree with your point of view, so you have to childishly insult them to make yourself feel better. Reality isn't where you live. Sorry! 😉✌
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Lou Hayhurst What in the world are you talking about? It was less then an hour and I think... Your not getting the reference. 🤣
" Decades of criticism about Baltimore but now it's racist when a white president does it? "
I find it Oh So Funny that you guys always try and find a million ways to say or imply how stupid we are, then choose to willfully be ignorant of all relevant facts, when it comes to forming your own opinions. Cuz there is ignorant and then there is willfully ignorant. Ignorant is relatively easy to fix. Willfully ignorant... On the other hand.... That's just someone choosing to be stupid, on a regular bases, because they don't want to deal with the truth. They just want their preconceived notions parotid back to them.
See... Willfully ignorant ( and massively insecure ) people need to constantly reiterate that, they are the smart ones, and anyone who doesnt agree with them are, obviously, stupid.
" hahaha!"
"Are you "special"?"
" I wonder in the future when you Google "pretty" words you at least spell them correctly."
You might as well have saved yourself some future carpal tunnel, and, instead, just go get, "I have a tiny penis tattooed on your forehead". 🙃
Then, if it wasn't crystal clear already, you have to further deflect from your lack of proper context, by making a ton of baseless assumptions, about someone, you don't even know. Which is a form of desperation, that you would not have to resort to, if you had played it straight from the jump.
" Wing nut"
" extreme lefty"
"I've managed to get the entire Democratic agenda down because it's so simple. Attack Trump!!!"
" I also know that somehow I'm second place to a hitler-loving, racist, pedophile, baby murdering, warmonger, seven-year-old toddler, sexist, KKK member, white supremacist, Russian spy Antichrist."
" I will accept us without any self evaluation because I know Trump is "not" a symptom of a country that has forgotten the will of its people."
" These same people are "not" thinking about their own families and perhaps their savings or things like mutual funds or Roth IRAs."
" They "are" always supremacist you obviously worship the devil. And the "devil" is Donald Trump."
"How am I doing so far?"
Why... Your doing GREAT! at giving a perfect example of someone who has no actual argument, and therefore has to set false dichotomies, name call, make baseless assumptions, dance around and incessantly babbel about nonsense, all with the hope that no-one notices that you've said little to nothing of substance.
ANNNDDDDD.... Now we move on to the fabricated / twisted right wing talking points, portion of the script. After all... You guys always have to be the poor, helpless, angelic, victims. 🙄
" fabricated border crisis"
" my tax dollars paying for transgender men getting abortions"
" legal repercussions for using the wrong pronouns"
" paying for illegal immigrants"
" accepting unlimited genders"
" Jussie Smollett"
"The Russian collusion hoax"
" keeping the Mexican cartels/ drug trade /human trafficking in business"
"the end of all religion"
" the acceptance of socialism "
" rainbow flag"
You might actually want to try and think for yourself, every once and a while. It can be quite refreshing. 🤓
SoOoOo... I'm guessing you thought if you threw enough BS to the wall... At least a few would stick? Sorry for you.😄 Deflection doesn't actually work on me. Especially not this SpaZzZMonster, ADHDesk, Thorazine resistant form of it. Cuz.... Wow! Dude! It's like I just read an HD depiction of your brain melting. 😳
You guys really can't handle people calling you out on your false narratives.... Can ya... 🤣
Little tip for the future though... If you can't make your argument, using all relevant material, if you have to ignore facts, in order to continue believing what you wanted to from the beginning, the argument is probably not worth making. 😜✌
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@bradynlotterman8164 Yes... It's been acknowledged at nauseam by the other guy, by Me, by CNN by, by bunch of other people in this comments section, that they should have gotten the other people out before they pulled the troops out. I kind of get why they didn't. It would have signaled the Taliban, and they would have attack the troops, but at least then the troops would have been able to defend themselves. Most of these people we are trying to pull out are interpreters, with no combat training and their families. It was a bad call doing it this way!... But... As for being self sufficient.... They left them with enough food, shelter and weapons to sustain them for a good long while, we have spent the last 20 years helping them set up infrastructure, carve out safe zones, etc. The Afghan army dropped their weapons and fled, first thing. There is nothing they could have done about that. They had everything they needed to fight.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
William Campbell Na! I take childish insults, in lieu of, substance based political discourse, as... Shockingly enough... childish insults, in lieu of, substance based political discourse.... will you go ahead and keep trying to make up a, as far as you know, fictitious husband, of mine, to feel sorry for. I understand it's all you have to work with. Whatever you need to tell yourself, sweetness! 😁✌
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
William Campbell THE LIST OF EVIDENCE OF HIS INSULTS TOWARDS PEOPLE, IN WORD FOR WORD QUOTES, STRAIGHT FROM HIM, THAT HE IS TRYING TO IGNORE BECAUSE HE MADE THE MISTAKE OF CALLING THEM FACTS AND NOW HE CAN NOT PROVE IT! 👇😁
"List of your "not insults" just on this thread.
Which, ironically and mostly consist of you making massive assumptions about people you don't know, and then calling them facts... As if you say it enough, it will magically become true....
"👉Most people👈 can't think for themselves and need to be told what to do" That is a stupidly large term, you could not come close to proving... Which makes it an insult and not a fact.
" go back under your Bridge" Now this comment was made in response to me telling you, that you where TFG, after you suggested that America should be a dictatorship.
" I don't mind helping out people who are weak and scared." Cuz, you must be "weak and scared" If you listen to medical professionals and science about the largest worldwide pandemic we've had in over a hundred years? You are either mistaking common sense with weakness and fear... Or you're trying to insult her. Neither make you look good.
" you have lost your mind." I'm curious... How do you know that? Because I don't agree with you? Are you so insecure about your own argument that you have to insult anybody who doesn't agree with it? Are you a doctor? So... How would you go about proving that "fact"?
" I hope you're not married cuz if so I feel sorry for your husband having to come home to a close-minded argument everyday" you're excuse for that was "concern for another human being"... a person you have no clue whether they exist or not. So that certainly cannot be called a fact. Just a childish insult.
" you're cute when you're mad probably the only time you are" Now... Why would you bring a superficial appearance into this? How does that support your argument in any way? What does that have to do with the damn thing other than you trying to be a smart-ass? Not fact... especially since you were doing what you said you don't do, which is make an assumption. This time about my mood. Hypocrisy
So... Be my guest... Go and prove each one of those are facts and not childish insults? We will be waiting. 😁✌"
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
William Campbell Last year, there was 39,000,000 to 59,000,000 people in the world that caught the flu.
24,000 to 62,000 of them died due to complications from the flu.
IN THE WHOLE WIDE WORLD, IN A YEAR!
In the last 6 months 14,684,381 in the world caught Covid 19.
608,487 have died due to complications from covid-19.
IN 6 MONTHS
62,000 DEAD from the flu In 12 months
608,487 DEAD from Covid 19 in 6 months
Which makes even the highest estimate of the flu's fatality rate per year, in the whole world 0.10%
Covid 19s death rate stands at 4.14% in half that amount of time.
https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden/preliminary-in-season-estimates.htm
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
William Campbell So... For when you delete that comment... YOU SAID...
" people die from the flu every year and nobody freaks out over it and now people want to turn covid-19 and to a political pandemic shame on those who do"
Then I said....
"Last year, there was 39,000,000 to 59,000,000 people in the world that caught the flu.
24,000 to 62,000 of them died due to complications from the flu.
IN THE WHOLE WIDE WORLD, IN A YEAR!
In the last 6 months 14,684,381 in the world caught Covid 19.
608,487 have died due to complications from covid-19.
IN 6 MONTHS
62,000 DEAD from the flu In 12 months
608,487 DEAD from Covid 19 in 6 months
Which makes even the highest estimate of the flu's fatality rate per year, in the whole world 0.10%
Covid 19s death rate stands at 4.14% in half that amount of time.
https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden/preliminary-in-season-estimates.htm"
Then he said
"Everybody seeing how she did not deduct all the salsa side cuz it deaths from her delusional stats. This is what Donald Trump means by fake news"
Then I said
" Prove it? 😁✌
" all of the falsified covid-19 death"
1
-
1
-
1
-
William Campbell Going to get around to proving your claim about the "inflated" covid numbers anytime soon? Or are you just going to keep DESPERATELY trying to get me off the subject? 😁👇
So... For when you delete that comment... YOU SAID...
" people die from the flu every year and nobody freaks out over it and now people want to turn covid-19 and to a political pandemic shame on those who do"
Then I said....
"Last year, there was 39,000,000 to 59,000,000 people in the world that caught the flu.
24,000 to 62,000 of them died due to complications from the flu.
IN THE WHOLE WIDE WORLD, IN A YEAR!
In the last 6 months 14,684,381 in the world caught Covid 19.
608,487 have died due to complications from covid-19.
IN 6 MONTHS
62,000 DEAD from the flu In 12 months
608,487 DEAD from Covid 19 in 6 months
Which makes even the highest estimate of the flu's fatality rate per year, in the whole world 0.10%
Covid 19s death rate stands at 4.14% in half that amount of time.
https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden/preliminary-in-season-estimates.htm"
Then he said
"Everybody seeing how she did not deduct all the salsa side cuz it deaths from her delusional stats. This is what Donald Trump means by fake news"
Then I said
" Prove it? 😁✌
" all of the falsified covid-19 death"
1
-
1
-
1
-
William Campbell Lord! Now he can't read any more! 😂 "Last year, there was 39,000,000 👉to👈 59,000,000 people in the world that caught the flu.
Going to get around to proving your claim about the "inflated" covid numbers anytime soon? Or are you just going to keep DESPERATELY trying to get me off the subject? 😁👇
So... For when you delete that comment... YOU SAID...
" people die from the flu every year and nobody freaks out over it and now people want to turn covid-19 and to a political pandemic shame on those who do"
Then I said....
"Last year, there was 39,000,000 to 59,000,000 people in the world that caught the flu.
24,000 to 62,000 of them died due to complications from the flu.
IN THE WHOLE WIDE WORLD, IN A YEAR!
In the last 6 months 14,684,381 in the world caught Covid 19.
608,487 have died due to complications from covid-19.
IN 6 MONTHS
62,000 DEAD from the flu In 12 months
608,487 DEAD from Covid 19 in 6 months
Which makes even the highest estimate of the flu's fatality rate per year, in the whole world 0.10%
Covid 19s death rate stands at 4.14% in half that amount of time.
https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden/preliminary-in-season-estimates.htm"
Then he said
"Everybody seeing how she did not deduct all the salsa side cuz it deaths from her delusional stats. This is what Donald Trump means by fake news"
Then I said
" Prove it? 😁✌
" all of the falsified covid-19 death"
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@googleuser9383 Well... That is some one sided craziness.
The average cost of living for a 4 person family in America is about $4,000. Sense the early 70s Reps have been blocking minimum wage increases to match American workers productivity and cost of living. Considering worker productivity alone...If the min wage had kept up with worker productivity today, the min wage would be around 15$ an hour. In other words... We have been working harder but not getting paid what we should for it. Instead, the right gives tax cuts to big biz and deregulated vital sector's. Now, they are bitching about the $600 unemployment during the worst pandemic in over 100 years, is to much. We get the choice to either go to work when it's not save and possibly bring the sickness home to our children... Or... Sit at home and starve until we get put out on the street for not being able to pay our bills.... All because the reps think $100 a month over JUST the cost of living in America per month, is to much... And all of it being our money, that we worked for, in the first place.... And... Of course... They want to protect big Biz, while they are at it.... That same "big biz" money, the Dems want going to the state and local gov, so we can get testing, and other resources to get us through this, so we can get back to work. So we can save American lives... So we can stop the spread of this pandemic. Those are the "stupid demands" you are referring to.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@augustsaintmichael3634 You seem to be using a lazy logic tactic of calling provable fact, "feelings" when you can't defend in any other way.
These examples, of on camera acts, which... Again... Are only a few of many, are not my "feelings". Which is why I gave you examples of ON CAMERA ACTS. I understand you need to call them that, because you FEEL like you can't find a better way to dismiss them, but that doesn't actually make it true... But lets see if you can prove your allegation about me, shall we?
How is, disrespecting troops and their families on camera, a feeling of mine?
How is the countless examples of Trump lying, on camera, being fact checked and then lying about the lie, the next day, ALSO ON CAMERA, my feelings?
How is Trump promising life saving aid to Americans (during the pandemic and before) and not deliver... Then blame the people who needed it, my feelings?
How is Trump threatening to cut off life saving aid, made up of their own tax dollars, from states that need it, until they do what he wants them to do, again, on camera, my feelings?
1
-
@augustsaintmichael3634 I don't like Trump... But, for some reason, you are willing to give "these total strangers" the benefit of the doubt why they are doing what they do... But I state facts and get accused of them being feeling, just because I'm not a Trump fan?
In your example of you voting, Did I out right say you where a bad person for voting for him?
Did I completely right you off because of it, or did I say "in that moment" you where setting empathy and knowledge aside, to contribute to that person giving that kind of behaviour?
If I was really all up in my feels, would I have not just, outright, written you off as the devil, for that act?
Did I not explain, using provable fact, why that would be setting aside that part of yourself in that moment?
Did I not say damn my opinions?
Do you not, also, have the ability to set your emotions aside to make a logic and reason based argument, based on fact?
And why would you accuse me of not having that ability, right after I demonstrate it?
Could it be because you are in your emotions a little, because I'm not agreeing with you?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ranbirrandhawa9736 Nope... I go by facts. Sorry....
The Trump administration ripper there kids from they parents, literally went to court to argue how things like regular showers, beds, basic medical care, soap and three meals a day, where not basis necessities. They stuck children in cages, had them sleep in concrete floors, let children sit in their own filth and gave them medal blankets in crammed areas to spend their days and nights in.
The Obama administration used the same areas to hold children who came to the borders without adults, to hold them in for less then 48 hours, many leaving same day, while they found homes and beds for them, while they search for family members.
Try getting all the facts, before you try and point fingers away from your people.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
AlphaMax Male As an example of what you claimed to be "empirical evidence", you claimed you were tracking a number of "celebrities" early on in the pandemic, and used the "oh so scientific method" of not seeing them sneeze, afterword, to suggest they where lying. Then, when provided with a detailed list of celebs that got covid 19, and asked you to find and point out the celebs, YOU CLAIMED, you had been tracking, you ghosted the question. Infact, this would mark the 4th time I have brought it up sense, and still nothing.
https://www-vulture-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.vulture.com/amp/article/famous-people-celebrities-with-coronavirus.html?amp_js_v=a6&_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQHKAFQArABIA%3D%3D#aoh=16231763076539&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&_tf=From%20%251%24s&share=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.vulture.com%2Farticle%2Ffamous-people-celebrities-with-coronavirus.html
1
-
AlphaMax Male Now... As I have stated, I believe you are lying. About several things, but in particular, your educational background. I believe you are doing so, in order to try and give your words, more weight... Hoping that would be enough to not have to provide evidence of your other claims.
This is why. 👇
1. You have randomly added to and contradicted yourself on your educational background. Claiming, at first, only claiming to have a "PhD 👉program👈 (for some strange reason) with a graduate degree in math and physics".
Also claiming that one "does not need" to know " about the mechanism" for analyzing data. Essentially, claiming that one does not need to know the method of arrival of said data, in order to understand the data. However that is such basic science, they teach that in high school biology classes. So how do you have a PhD and Grad degree and not know that?
You then claim to be a "scientist" and "expert on the history of science", much later.
2. You have made several claims that do not align with your claims of higher education in any of the fields you claim to have that education in.
You attempt to use a weighted coin experiment to equate it with a complicated and ever changing virus strain. Something you should have known, didn't come close to a good comparison, if you understood what you claim to, due to your "educational background".
You claim to only be arguing debate ability, later on. Yet you began your comments on this thread with definitive statements. Declaring the virus and response was "overblown".
And, as I mentioned above, claiming that one does not need to understand the method, in order to understand the data.
You tried to give an example of all the "state's following almost opposite approaches all ending up with the same data". Generalizing and leaving out massive amounts of data and timeline considerations, someone who is a scientist and expert in the history of science, would have reflexively considered.
You have claimed that a mathematics PhD "Trump's all other specialists degrees". When that is, not at all, how that works. It wouldn't even be something you would make some sort of context out of, due to the vast differences in educational branches.
You have also made several claims and, when asked to provide proof of these claims, you'll be either ignored the request or attempted to imply that I was somehow in the wrong for asking for this proof. Not very scientific.
I'm sure there are more but I have ran out of time for the moment. However, my many examples are plenty.
That would be me presenting evidence of why I have come to the conclusion that you are lying about your educational background.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@you457wx7 Did you skip the whole first part? Saying things over and over again.. Is not going to make the law go away. Irregardless of what he might have heard, he obviously did not have proof. The only way you even come close to having a point, is if you disreguard a huge hunk of relivant info.
*The held money
*Him being his political opponent
*The convenient timing of him asking only when fighting was his political opponent and not when the investigation was actually opened in the first place
*Him lying about talking about Biden on the phone call, on camera
*Trump putting the call in a storage place that it would not have normally gone into, and did not qualify for, in an attempt to keep it secret
*Trump and his administration attempting to keep the Whistleblower report away from Congress, even going so far as to try and claim executive privilege
*Then only finally releasing the information after his own party turned against him
*Trumps attempt to keep witnesses from testifying to congress, that later gave incriminating testimony
*Attempting to keep evidentiary documents from Congress... Text message conversations
Just a few off the top of my head. ....
You ignoring all of that, does not show his innocent. It just shows your confirmation bias.
Legal experts have suggested that he has potentially broken at least 4 laws.
There are rules you have to follow when there is an investigation. Like... You can't break laws while attemting to "investigate". That is where things lile probable cause comes from. Also... Conflict of intreast.
Also, Biden... Not the front runner. Hopefully... Not ever going to be... That still doesn't excuse Trumps actions.
Not sure why you are trying to convince me that Biden is shady.... 1... I'm not his fan... 2... That does not give Trump the right to disreguard the law.
Even if you are an actual investigater, you have laws and regulation you have to follow. Which is why I pointed out the 2 different ways he could of had the investigation, without the law breaking.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@you457wx7 Actually... Not so much... the reason I said that construction jobs were done on a local level... Is because they are. Can President Obama's stimulus package give us an infusion of Cold Hard Cash do our local economies oh, yes. Can he then Force local government to spend it on things like infrastructure? Nope... It should have... It should have created those jobs... but this is a democracy. It's not a dictatorship.
The area I live in is actually a pretty good example of this. I live around the Shreveport Louisiana area. It has literally been almost 20 years since Road repair and things like water Pipelines had been maintained or replaced. It got so bad that the federal government had to come in and force our local government to repair the water pipelines just this last year, because our water was starting to look like Flint Michigan... And one of our main bridges was about to collapse.... So basically what happened was the federal government gave Shreveport and Bossier Louisiana an influx of money emergency and then sent people down from the federal government to make sure that money went to water pipelines and road construction. ( made the news a few times, if ya wanna look it up ) Which is why I have been dodging Construction everywhere all damn near. One of my jobs is I'm a Rideshare driver.... But it took them 20 years to do that. Because we live in a democracy and a lot of things run off of local government. So unless things get really bad, our federal government's not going to come in and try and tell her local government what the hell to do. In my area the reason it was getting really bad was because our elected leaders we're finding a variety of different ways to pocket the money. Not a big shocker over here.
Point being... You are trying to Blame President Obama for respecting our democracy. Except, he can bring a fish to water, but you can't make it drink.
Another good example of this is Obamacare. It allowed to shoot a large Fusion of cash into things like Medicaid and Medicare. In order to get this cash and update our system and put it to work for the people, local government would have had to of accepted it. Except stupid ass Republican petty ass holes all over the country thought it was more important to give President Obama the middle finger ( because they lost the Obamacare vote ) then it was to help their people and they would not accept the damn money. That also happened with my local government. sorry, that one was a little extra sassy. That just pisses me off. Lol
Now if you want to talk about jobs that President Obama was wrong about, you can talk about manufacturing jobs. He said on multiple occasions that manufacturing jobs weren't coming back. Trump got that done to a certain extent.... and when I say certain extent, I mean to an extent that definitely matter to a whole lot of people. That wasn't me trying to take anything away from what he did. Just, there were a lot of other factors.
But... Overall job growth has been on a steady decline since he took office. The trend that Obama Started With low unemployment and more job growth has slowed on the unemployment and started to reverse on the job growth. Now it's not a whole bunch on the unemployment, which is why you have so many Republicans siting unemployment numbers and completely ignoring the job growth number.... but just like giving Trump the credit for the manufacturing jobs, you have to give President Obama the credit for beginning the overall job Trend. Which began and continued, steadily from the moment that stimulus package that you were talking about went through.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@you457wx7 And you forgot to respond to this earlier...👇
"Did you skip the whole first part? Saying things over and over again.. Is not going to make the law go away. Irregardless of what he might have heard, he obviously did not have proof. The only way you even come close to having a point, is if you disreguard a huge hunk of relivant info.
*The held money
*Him being his political opponent
*The convenient timing of him asking only when fighting was his political opponent and not when the investigation was actually opened in the first place
*Him lying about talking about Biden on the phone call, on camera
*Trump putting the call in a storage place that it would not have normally gone into, and did not qualify for, in an attempt to keep it secret
*Trump and his administration attempting to keep the Whistleblower report away from Congress, even going so far as to try and claim executive privilege
*Then only finally releasing the information after his own party turned against him
*Trumps attempt to keep witnesses from testifying to congress, that later gave incriminating testimony
*Attempting to keep evidentiary documents from Congress... Text message conversations
Just a few off the top of my head. ....
You ignoring all of that, does not show his innocent. It just shows your confirmation bias.
Legal experts have suggested that he has potentially broken at least 4 laws.
There are rules you have to follow when there is an investigation. Like... You can't break laws while attemting to "investigate". That is where things lile probable cause comes from. Also... Conflict of intreast.
Also, Biden... Not the front runner. Hopefully... Not ever going to be... That still doesn't excuse Trumps actions.
Not sure why you are trying to convince me that Biden is shady.... 1... I'm not his fan... 2... That does not give Trump the right to disreguard the law.
Even if you are an actual investigater, you have laws and regulation you have to follow. Which is why I pointed out the 2 different ways he could of had the investigation, without the law breaking."
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@you457wx7 and you forgot this again... For the third time now... It's almost like you don't wamt to have to address the subject for some reason. 😉✌
👇
"Did you skip the whole first part? Saying things over and over again.. Is not going to make the law go away. Irregardless of what he might have heard, he obviously did not have proof. The only way you even come close to having a point, is if you disreguard a huge hunk of relivant info.
*The held money
*Him being his political opponent
*The convenient timing of him asking only when fighting was his political opponent and not when the investigation was actually opened in the first place
*Him lying about talking about Biden on the phone call, on camera
*Trump putting the call in a storage place that it would not have normally gone into, and did not qualify for, in an attempt to keep it secret
*Trump and his administration attempting to keep the Whistleblower report away from Congress, even going so far as to try and claim executive privilege
*Then only finally releasing the information after his own party turned against him
*Trumps attempt to keep witnesses from testifying to congress, that later gave incriminating testimony
*Attempting to keep evidentiary documents from Congress... Text message conversations
Just a few off the top of my head. ....
You ignoring all of that, does not show his innocent. It just shows your confirmation bias.
Legal experts have suggested that he has potentially broken at least 4 laws.
There are rules you have to follow when there is an investigation. Like... You can't break laws while attemting to "investigate". That is where things lile probable cause comes from. Also... Conflict of intreast.
Also, Biden... Not the front runner. Hopefully... Not ever going to be... That still doesn't excuse Trumps actions.
Not sure why you are trying to convince me that Biden is shady.... 1... I'm not his fan... 2... That does not give Trump the right to disreguard the law.
Even if you are an actual investigater, you have laws and regulation you have to follow. Which is why I pointed out the 2 different ways he could of had the investigation, without the law breaking."
1
-
1
-
@you457wx7 ok... No... this is not how this is going to work. I have addressed every single thing that you have brought up. I have done so in detail. I will also do so for all the new stuff in these new comments but not until you give me some reciprocation.
I don't make excuses or blanket statments to wash try and dismiss your points... You don't to do so with me. This is the 4th time I am posting this. You can respond AND THEN we can move on.... Or this can turn into a whole different kind of interaction. Your choice. 👇
"Did you skip the whole first part? Saying things over and over again.. Is not going to make the law go away. Irregardless of what he might have heard, he obviously did not have proof. The only way you even come close to having a point, is if you disreguard a huge hunk of relivant info.
*The held money
*Him being his political opponent
*The convenient timing of him asking only when fighting was his political opponent and not when the investigation was actually opened in the first place
*Him lying about talking about Biden on the phone call, on camera
*Trump putting the call in a storage place that it would not have normally gone into, and did not qualify for, in an attempt to keep it secret
*Trump and his administration attempting to keep the Whistleblower report away from Congress, even going so far as to try and claim executive privilege
*Then only finally releasing the information after his own party turned against him
*Trumps attempt to keep witnesses from testifying to congress, that later gave incriminating testimony
*Attempting to keep evidentiary documents from Congress... Text message conversations
Just a few off the top of my head. ....
You ignoring all of that, does not show his innocent. It just shows your confirmation bias.
Legal experts have suggested that he has potentially broken at least 4 laws.
There are rules you have to follow when there is an investigation. Like... You can't break laws while attemting to "investigate". That is where things lile probable cause comes from. Also... Conflict of intreast.
Also, Biden... Not the front runner. Hopefully... Not ever going to be... That still doesn't excuse Trumps actions.
Not sure why you are trying to convince me that Biden is shady.... 1... I'm not his fan... 2... That does not give Trump the right to disreguard the law.
Even if you are an actual investigater, you have laws and regulation you have to follow. Which is why I pointed out the 2 different ways he could of had the investigation, without the law breaking."
1
-
1
-
@you457wx7 😁 Here! Let me try again.. See if you can see the info this time.... I mean... Unless there is some reason you are trying to ignore the info intentionally, because you can't defend the premise, when addressing that info? That wouldn't be the case, would it? Cuz, that would be kinda silly, considering it was about the original premise and all... 🤔👇
"Did you skip the whole first part? Saying things over and over again.. Is not going to make the law go away. Irregardless of what he might have heard, he obviously did not have proof. The only way you even come close to having a point, is if you disreguard a huge hunk of relivant info.
*The held money
*Him being his political opponent
*The convenient timing of him asking only when fighting was his political opponent and not when the investigation was actually opened in the first place
*Him lying about talking about Biden on the phone call, on camera
*Trump putting the call in a storage place that it would not have normally gone into, and did not qualify for, in an attempt to keep it secret
*Trump and his administration attempting to keep the Whistleblower report away from Congress, even going so far as to try and claim executive privilege
*Then only finally releasing the information after his own party turned against him
*Trumps attempt to keep witnesses from testifying to congress, that later gave incriminating testimony
*Attempting to keep evidentiary documents from Congress... Text message conversations
Just a few off the top of my head. ....
You ignoring all of that, does not show his innocent. It just shows your confirmation bias.
Legal experts have suggested that he has potentially broken at least 4 laws.
There are rules you have to follow when there is an investigation. Like... You can't break laws while attemting to "investigate". That is where things lile probable cause comes from. Also... Conflict of intreast.
Also, Biden... Not the front runner. Hopefully... Not ever going to be... That still doesn't excuse Trumps actions.
Not sure why you are trying to convince me that Biden is shady.... 1... I'm not his fan... 2... That does not give Trump the right to disreguard the law.
Even if you are an actual investigater, you have laws and regulation you have to follow. Which is why I pointed out the 2 different ways he could of had the investigation, without the law breaking."
1
-
@you457wx7 Gee! I still can't see any of it! 😁 Maybe we are both having the same problem now?😁 Cuz, it seams like you haven't been able to see this one of mine, sense the beginning! 👇👇
"Did you skip the whole first part? Saying things over and over again.. Is not going to make the law go away. Irregardless of what he might have heard, he obviously did not have proof. The only way you even come close to having a point, is if you disreguard a huge hunk of relivant info.
*The held money
*Him being his political opponent
*The convenient timing of him asking only when fighting was his political opponent and not when the investigation was actually opened in the first place
*Him lying about talking about Biden on the phone call, on camera
*Trump putting the call in a storage place that it would not have normally gone into, and did not qualify for, in an attempt to keep it secret
*Trump and his administration attempting to keep the Whistleblower report away from Congress, even going so far as to try and claim executive privilege
*Then only finally releasing the information after his own party turned against him
*Trumps attempt to keep witnesses from testifying to congress, that later gave incriminating testimony
*Attempting to keep evidentiary documents from Congress... Text message conversations
Just a few off the top of my head. ....
You ignoring all of that, does not show his innocent. It just shows your confirmation bias.
Legal experts have suggested that he has potentially broken at least 4 laws.
There are rules you have to follow when there is an investigation. Like... You can't break laws while attemting to "investigate". That is where things lile probable cause comes from. Also... Conflict of intreast.
Also, Biden... Not the front runner. Hopefully... Not ever going to be... That still doesn't excuse Trumps actions.
Not sure why you are trying to convince me that Biden is shady.... 1... I'm not his fan... 2... That does not give Trump the right to disreguard the law.
Even if you are an actual investigater, you have laws and regulation you have to follow. Which is why I pointed out the 2 different ways he could of had the investigation, without the law breaking."
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
W TF? 👈👈👈 Everyone! Let me tell you a funny little story about why I call 👈👈👈 this guy, page 117. Keeping it short...
WTF claim them evil Dems do bad shit.
I ask where he is getting it from.
WTF claims the Mueller report.
I say quote it in the Mueller report.
WTF refuses to but claims its on page 117 volume 2 of the Muller report.
I, big geek🤓 that I am, look it up. Turns out, not only was it not there but there was not even a reference to a Dem AT ALL on the page that he spacifically pointed to.
At witch point... Our dear, lying, stupid friend, WTF, is struck with a sudden bought of 3rd grade denial. Putting his hands over his eyes and proclaiming," if I don't see it, then it's not there!"
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@scotp5592 @Scotp
1. Electorally, Trump was losing election night.
2. Trump had a partial lead in 3 swing states. All with less then 50% of the vote, per states, being counted.
3. Donald Trump actively discouraged his voters to vote by mail.
4. Long before Donald Trump even thought about running for president, it has been a practice in this country that Democrats vote early and Republicans vote on Election Day. In this election, with covid-19 and mail-in ballots to help contain the spread of the virus, more people voted by mail than ever.
5. In almost every state but two, you must count the day in ballots before you count the mail-in ballots.
6. No MSM declared Biden the winner until the third day.
7. Even in states that are historically red, Joe Biden surprisingly came really close to taking them from Donald Trump. Texas being a very good example.
8. Mail-in ballots are not a scheme. There is no evidence there was a scheme of mail-in ballot fraud.
9. In the past 20 years, or five presidential elections, the amount of proven mail-in ballot fraud in America as I reached out to about twenty-six votes a presidential election.
10. 5 States have done strictly mail-in ballots for the last 17 years with no mail-in ballot fraud.
11. Mail-in ballots have been widely prevalent in every election since the beginning of World War I.
12. Thus far, in this election, every claim of mail-in ballot fraud has been unsubstantiated.
13. The mainstream media is merely reporting the news. Which is that Donald Trump both lost the Electoral College and the popular vote by quite a bit. 31 out of the 33 lawsuits filed in different states have provided absolutely no proof of voter fraud whatsoever and have been summarily dismissed by 31 different judges. Which also means they're not going to a supreme court because they weren't found enough to have evidence to go to a trial phase.
14. And, of course, Donald Trump, a notorious liar, would claim that if he did not win the election then it was rigged. That doesn't actually make it true.
15. Every president who won the election, has gone through a period of being president elect. Pretending that position doesn't exist, also doesn't make it go away.
And finally, you have proven nothing. Try again
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@timmyormsby1468 Sure! We can give those examples....
1. During a press conference, in all seriousness, turning to a doctor and claiming " they where looking into" light rays and cleaners for the inside of someones body and that same doctor saying that wasn't happening directly after... And then the next day trying to claim that to be sarcastic and a joke, to see what people would do. Which is either a straight out lie or majorly unconscionable at a time like this.
2. And I had actually already gave you on in the other examples. Cuz, how are you going to shut down the Border and then a few hours later hold a rally with tens of thousands of people all squash together in a belt thing, after being briefed by experts multiple times about that risky Behavior right now?
3. Stating on camera that if states need ventilator is in PPE equipment all I have to do is call them and ask... And then a short time later announce that states would have to buy their own. Forcing them into a situation to be competing against each other for Vital life-saving equipment during a major World ride Health crisis.
4. On camera, and multiple different venues and on multiple different occasions playing down the impending pandemic and then once it finally became undeniable claiming that he "felt it was a pandemic before it was called the pandemic" and that "all you had to do was look at other countries".
5. Early March he claimed on several different occasions and again in several different ways, that everything would testing is going smoothly and anybody that needs a test can get one and that the tests are perfect and beautiful. The same week his health and human services secretary had to walk that back and told everyone that you may not get a test unless a doctor or public health official prescribes to test and that's just our medical system in the United States.
6. Claiming multiple times that the virus is being contained and predicting that it will disappear one day like a miracle. This happening at a time when numbers were skyrocketing and Peaks were at their worst. Also claiming that numbers are very substantially going down during that time. That's not being helpful or hopeful. That's simply lying.
7. Trump making claims that the number of people who died of the flu last year was a false number or a lie. Going so far as to tweet on March 9th, that 37000 Americans died from the flu in america and it averages between 27000 and 70000 per year. That nothing is shut down in the economy goes on... Ironically the numbers that were incorrect, were his. 34200 people died last year of the flu, all year in the whole world. Not America. This forced medical experts to go back out and correct this. Giving me information that 0.1% of people who get the flu die from it.
8. Trump making several comments towards claims that warm weather will kill covid-19. That needs no further explanation. That's insane. He also used miracle in that too.
As before.. There are plenty more examples.
1
-
@timmyormsby1468 Trump: We bought a tremendous amount of … hydroxychloroquine, which I think is, you know, it’s a great malaria drug. It’s worked unbelievably, it’s a powerful drug on malaria. And there are signs that it works on [coronavirus], some very strong signs. And in the meantime, it’s been around a long time, and also works very powerfully on lupus. So there are some very strong, powerful signs, and we’ll have to see. Because again, it’s being tested now, this is a new thing that just happened to us, the invisible enemy, we call it.
… It’s a very strong, powerful medicine, but it doesn’t kill people. We have some very good results and some very good tests. You’ve seen the same test that I have. In France, they had a very good test. But we don’t have time to go and say, gee, let’s take a couple of years and test it out. And let’s go and test with the test tubes and the laboratories. We don’t have time. I’d love to do that.
fact check: It is true that hydroxychloroquine is a drug shown to be effective at treating and preventing malaria, as well as lupus.
There is conflicting evidence as to whether hydroxychloroquine, or hydroxychloroquine combined with azithromycin, is effective at treating coronavirus symptoms. All the studies of the drug are small, and none are definitive. One French study seemed to show hydroxychloroquine is effective at reducing the amount of virus in Covid-19 patients. But a small randomized study in China appeared to show that patients who took the drug did not benefit substantially compared to patients who didn’t use it.
1
-
@timmyormsby1468 Trump: I’m not a doctor. But I have common sense. The FDA feels good about it. As you know, they’ve approved it, they gave it a rapid approval, and the reason [is] because it’s been out there for a long time, and they know the side effects and they also know the potential.
STAT: The Food and Drug Administration has not approved hydroxychloroquine, or any other drug, as a coronavirus treatment. The FDA has, however, issued an emergency use authorization for the drug.
In press releases, the FDA has stressed that “there are no currently approved treatments for COVID-19.” However, the agency says both hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine phosphate “have shown activity in laboratory studies against coronaviruses,” referring to a broad category of illnesses known as coronaviruses, not the 2019 strain that causes Covid-19. A number of federal agencies are currently working to facilitate clinical trials to determine whether or not the drug is effective.
1
-
@timmyormsby1468 Trump: If you have no signs of heart problems, the azithromycin, which will kill certain things that you don’t want living within your body — it’s a powerful drug — if you don’t have a problem, a heart problem, we would say, let your doctor think about it. But as a combination, I think they’re going to be, I think there’s two things that should be looked at very strongly.
STAT: Trump has touted using hydroxychloroquine in combination with azithromycin (sometimes sold as Z-Pak), though he has cautioned that Americans with heart conditions should not use the azithromycin.
Cardiotoxicity, or damage to the heart, is a rare but documented side effect of hydroxychloroquine even when taken on its own. Trump is correct that azithromycin can be particularly dangerous for people with heart conditions, but it’s misleading to suggest that hydroxychloroquine alone doesn’t carry side effects.
“Both chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine can have side effects related to abnormal heart rhythms,” said Sunil Parikh, a Yale University physician and epidemiology professor. “While the incidence of cardiac side effects is low for each of these drugs, they can be significant, particularly since those individuals presenting with severe Covid-19 may have underlying comorbidities or drug-drug interactions that can place them at higher risk.”
1
-
@timmyormsby1468 Trump: We have purchased and we have stockpiled 29 million pills of the hydroxychloroquine, 29 million. A lot of drugstores have them by prescription — and they’re not expensive. Also, we’re sending them to various labs, our military, we’re sending them to the hospitals, we’re sending them all over.
STAT: Trump is mostly correct, but the units were donated by drug companies, not purchased by the federal government, and he’s actually underselling the number: It’s 31 million doses, not 29 million. Sandoz, the generic subsidiary of Novartis, donated 30 million doses of hydroxychloroquine sulfate to the Strategic National Stockpile last month, and Bayer donated another 1 million doses of hydroxychloroquine phosphate.
1
-
@timmyormsby1468 Trump: What do you have to lose? And a lot of people are saying that, and are taking it. If you’re a doctor or a nurse, a first responder, a medical person going into hospitals, they say taking it before the fact is good.
STAT: Given the surge in eBay sales of chloroquine phosphate, and the anecdotal reports in Arizona and Nigeria of patients poisoning themselves by self-administering chloroquine formulations, there’s concern throughout the public health community that Trump’s exhortations to try the drug could do more harm than good. Of course, Trump isn’t encouraging self-medication, telling Americans instead to “go through your medical people.”
So what do the medical people say? Jeremy Faust, an emergency physician at Harvard Medical School and Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston, has attempted to caution against the idea of hydroxychloroquine as a preventive medication. He tweeted Sunday: “Patients with lupus, arthritis, other conditions are already on hydroxychloroquine. And we are diagnosing them with Covid-19 LEFT AND RIGHT.”
1
-
1
-
1
-
@timmyormsby1468 Trump: We passed something I’m very proud of, it’s called “right to try.” For 45, 50 years, they’ve been trying, it makes so much sense. … So a person would be diagnosed terminally ill from something. And in the old days, meaning before a year ago, they would say, “Do you think I could try this pill, this whatever, this medicine, that’s testing so well?” “No, you can’t do that. You can’t do that, under no circumstances.” They’d leave for Asia, they’d leave for Europe — if they had money. If they had no money, they’d go home and die with no hope.
STAT: Trump signed so-called right-to-try legislation into law in May 2018. But Trump is dramatically overselling its impact. Long before Trump signed that law, the Food and Drug Administration had established a clear, well-defined pathway for helping terminally ill Americans get access to unapproved, still-experimental treatments, and approved roughly 99% of those “compassionate use” requests. More than 30 states had also passed legislation similar to the 2018 law before the federal legislation advanced. Few patients have publicly announced that they’re pursuing unapproved drugs through the new pathway, though it’s unclear exactly how many have taken advantage of the new law.
Trump’s comments on the right-to-try legislation are telling, however. The president has made his broader philosophy clear, arguing that terminally ill patients should be given access to drugs almost regardless of potential consequences, since they’re likely to die if a dramatic intervention isn’t undertaken.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ben73010 Well... Now that my power is back...
You have no bases for claiming fake news. You simply don't want to believe it.... None the less... This girl plays with live ammo.
This summery includes links to all correlating info... Which includes but not limited to...
His super sketchy past with AIDS research and crazy Christian theories, and acts in regards to those beliefs. Like leaving AIDS infected US Troops to die after using them as human guinea pigs for a super sketchy AIDS cure... And the crazy amount of money, he is making right now.... And his contradicting of what Trump was saying partly through the pandemic... And so forth.
"On 21 May 2020, The Atlantic magazine reported on the intentional conflation of the viral and antibody testing results that the CDC, under Redfield's leadership, has been compiling data on since the beginning of the year. This conflation of the tests' results has led to misrepresentations in the media and in public opinion of the current state of the virus's spread. Several states have now also adopted this approach for reporting on the number of tests given and their results, and they've used those faulty, unscientific statistics to aid in the planning for reopening their states."
Redfield wrote the introduction to a 1990 book, "Christians in the Age of AIDS," co-written by Smith, in which he denounced distribution of sterile needles to drug users and condoms to sexually active adults, and described anti-discrimination programs as the efforts of "false prophets."
In the 1980s Redfield worked closely with W. Shepherd Smith, Jr. and his Christian organization, Americans for a Sound AIDS/HIV Policy, or ASAP. The group maintained that AIDS was "God's judgment" against homosexuals, spread in an America weakened by single-parent households and loss of family values.
Redfield's early engagement with the AIDS epidemic in the US in the 1980s and 90s was controversial. As an Army major at Walter Reed Medical Institute, he designed policies for controlling the disease within the US military that involved placing infected personnel in quarantine and investigating their pasts to identify and track possible sexual partners. Soldiers were routinely discharged and left to die of AIDS, humiliated and jobless, often abandoned by their families.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_R._Redfield?wprov=sfla1
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ben73010 My claim... In your words...
" Trump is subverting the CDC."
ME... Source links and quoted material. 👇
"You have no bases for claiming fake news. You simply don't want to believe it.... None the less... This girl plays with live ammo.
This summery includes links to all correlating info... Which includes but not limited to...
His super sketchy past with AIDS research and crazy Christian theories, and acts in regards to those beliefs. Like leaving AIDS infected US Troops to die after using them as human guinea pigs for a super sketchy AIDS cure... And the crazy amount of money, he is making right now.... And his contradicting of what Trump was saying partly through the pandemic... And so forth.
"On 21 May 2020, The Atlantic magazine reported on the intentional conflation of the viral and antibody testing results that the CDC, under Redfield's leadership, has been compiling data on since the beginning of the year. This conflation of the tests' results has led to misrepresentations in the media and in public opinion of the current state of the virus's spread. Several states have now also adopted this approach for reporting on the number of tests given and their results, and they've used those faulty, unscientific statistics to aid in the planning for reopening their states."
Redfield wrote the introduction to a 1990 book, "Christians in the Age of AIDS," co-written by Smith, in which he denounced distribution of sterile needles to drug users and condoms to sexually active adults, and described anti-discrimination programs as the efforts of "false prophets."
In the 1980s Redfield worked closely with W. Shepherd Smith, Jr. and his Christian organization, Americans for a Sound AIDS/HIV Policy, or ASAP. The group maintained that AIDS was "God's judgment" against homosexuals, spread in an America weakened by single-parent households and loss of family values.
Redfield's early engagement with the AIDS epidemic in the US in the 1980s and 90s was controversial. As an Army major at Walter Reed Medical Institute, he designed policies for controlling the disease within the US military that involved placing infected personnel in quarantine and investigating their pasts to identify and track possible sexual partners. Soldiers were routinely discharged and left to die of AIDS, humiliated and jobless, often abandoned by their families.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_R._Redfield?wprov=sfla1 "
YOU.... Wiki and atlantic are bias or not reliable...
ME... Okay... Well... Then adhere to the same standard that you, yourself, set for me by proving the Atlantic is bias and Wiki is not reliable. Also, if you have such a problem with my sources... Give me some you would, meet your standard?
Have not yet once answered that question...
YOU... Look over here... And saying thing does make them real...
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@craigconway6048 " they know there is no way to check if all those ballots are legitimate"
"First of all, it’s illegal, so anyone fraudulently casting a mail ballot is risking prison and fines. The same goes for stealing ballots, which are only sent directly to identified voters.
In addition, in most states, if a voter contacts an election official to report that a requested mail ballot has not been received, 👉👉it can be tracked through an individualized bar code that allows officials to identify and cancel a stolen or lost ballot and send a new one.👈👈
State laws vary on who may assist voters in delivering their ballots, but regardless of the rules, most voters will rely on someone they deem trustworthy to deliver a ballot for them. 👉Further, the voter must seal the ballot in a provided ballot return envelope, which is specifically intended to prevent tampering.👈
👉Many states require the voter to identify in writing his or her designated agent for return of the ballot or require the individual who delivers the ballot to sign the outer return envelope.👈
In many states, identification of the person providing a voter with assistance allows investigation of suspicions, and harsh penalties will be imposed if the assister engages in misconduct."
You need practice less emotion and more facts.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@tilebyjames Goodness! Do you like.... Ever look things up before you make points, to... Ya know... Double check? Cuz you really, REALLY should, to avoid things like what's fixing to happen. 😁 👇
Lets go back to the numbers, shall we! 😁
As of TODAY... 90,689 people have died just in the United States, in a span of less than 5 months. Last year, or in a span of 12 months, 38,800 people died in the United States for car wrecks.
Car crashes = 38,800 in 12 months
Covid 19 = 90,689 in 5 months
Also... Btw.... They are cars! They serve a convenience purpose for some and a vital purpose for others. What purpose does covid-19 serve? You really have to get better at your analogies if you're going to keep on insisting that I'm the one that is being unreasonable here. 🤣
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Notawoketard 3 things...
1... Show me one city burn to the ground? Being overdramatic to the point of lying, does nothing for your point.
2.... this is a great opportunity to teach you guys how to actually handle a situation like an adult. Though the majority of protesters were non-violent, those that were violent are wrong for it and should be put in jail. That includes vandalism and looting, as well.
Now that I have addressed that subject instead of trying to deflect from it, like you did, and I used accurate context in order to do so, like you did not, I will also bring up a question about that very same subject. Why is the only thing you guys ever want to talk about when you talk about black lives matter protest, is the violence, instead of the point of them? And I asked that because, the reason they were damn near a year along and all over the country with Millions participating is because that's literally what it took to get anyone to pay attention to police openly murdering black people in the street on a regular basis in this country for decades now. Literally nothing else worked. Every single time everybody did exactly what you were doing. Ignoring the actual context and complaining about the method. Or, in better terms, ignoring me actual illness and only trying to treat one of the symptoms. Then b****ing about why it keeps happening.
3. You know why nobody takes you seriously when you gripe about this stuff? Because you're feigning outrage and you really don't care. If you actually cared, you would care no matter who was doing it. You only care when it's the opposition. So, start holding your people to the same standard then come talk to me about mine.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@HamhocksUnlimited Did you just seriously made an argument that I hide behind facts? I mean... Really, Dude?
Yes, sweetheart, I require facts, proof and evidence before I believe the guy on the internet. I also tend to require reason and logic. Which is why I tend not to believe Mass complicated conspiracy theories. Occam's razor, sweetheart.
If you can understand why I'm not just going to randomly believe the guy on the internet, I've never met in my life, I don't know what to tell you.
I base my opinion off of what can be proved in at the time. Not a cherry-picked version of it but the full context of it, as well. If the context changes or more facts are presented, I change that opinion to reflect that. That is how logic operates and that is how I operate. If that is not how you operate, than you do you, BUT painting backs and proof as some kind of Dodge, does not reflect well on your reasoning skills.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Yep... There are Trump trolls....
- Callously and inaccurately quoting death rate numbers. US 3.55%
- They all have "breathing problems", all the sudden... Because... screw all you other people's lives and not having irreparable lung damage because, when I go to the grocery store the mask is itchy.
- People die of other NON-CONTAGIOUS things, so who cares if previous non/wrongly treated pandemics, of this contagion magnitude, have literally whipped out half the worlds population before. Don't they know that me and my husband have drinking at bars to do, and little Johnny simply MUST have his 7th B Day Party at chucky cheese!
- Clearly, if you don't blindly follow Trump in everything you do, you are a Never Trumper. Oh... Wait... I forgot... You actually voted for him last time... Well... Well... Well... I "clearly" wasn't talking about you. Even though I was just responding to what you just said... But now presented with inconvenient facts I have to quickly change my narrative, because this one isn't working for me anymore.
- TRUMP 2020... Despite all logic, fact and reason, that I need to ignore, in order to continue to say that.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@brentharrington8134 " okay to date fewer than 60,000 people under 50 with covid have died" 👈 This is statistically flat-out wrong. Not just because you got the numbers way wrong but because you didn't even use the statistical measurements that the scientific Community use in order to judge this.
As of Jan 21st 2022
0-17 years 727
18-29 years 5,241
30-39 years 15,432
40-49 years 37,038
50-64 years 159,077
65-74 years 193,857
75-84 years 217,741
85 years and older 219,280
Which is roughly 200,000 if the dead are under 60. Which is around 23% of the 866,000 Americans that have died.
727 of which are children
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@brentharrington8134 by the way where did you get that statistic that only 60,000 people under 60 years old have died from covid? Cuz it wasn't the CDC.
As of Jan 21st 2022
0-17 years 727
18-29 years 5,241
30-39 years 15,432
40-49 years 37,038
50-64 years 159,077
65-74 years 193,857
75-84 years 217,741
85 years and older 219,280
Which is roughly 200,000 if the dead are under 60. Which is around 23% of the 866,000 Americans that have died.
727 of which are children
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@brentharrington8134 by the way where did you get that statistic that only 60,000 people under 60 years old have died from covid? Cuz it wasn't the CDC.
As of Jan 21st 2022
0-17 years 727
18-29 years 5,241
30-39 years 15,432
40-49 years 37,038
50-64 years 159,077
65-74 years 193,857
75-84 years 217,741
85 years and older 219,280
Which is roughly 200,000 if the dead are under 60. Which is around 23% of the 866,000 Americans that have died.
727 of which are children
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@btredinger no no... You're not going to be putting words into my mouth sweetie. My opinion on the Steele dossier is that it is irrelevant. Why? Because it's not relevant. Right-wing propaganda brought it up, still brings it up and blows it up on a regular basis because some of the things in there were proven not to be true. Here's the thing though, it doesn't matter.
In the Russia investigation, in the Mueller report, it was used one time and in a way that makes it irrelevant. The FBI through the Steele dossier and with a bunch of other evidence in order to get the first wiretap warrant on Carter Pages office. The fisa warrant. This was back when they had no reason to doubt the information. As soon as there was reason to doubt it, they took it out of the evidence to get the next nine fisa warrants. All mine were approved. Which memes that the Steele dossier didn't matter. The next nine fisa warrants were approved with the remaining information, by seven different judges. Which meant they would have gotten the first one anyways. As far as where the investigation went, as soon as they found out some of the stuff in the dossier was not credible, it no longer even almost had any dictation of where the investigation went.
As I have said, the only reason you guys are hanging on to it like a last straw ditch efforts at ass raising is point of view, is because some of it wasn't true. Yet none of you seem to ever mention its relevance.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Sigkim Well... There is the run away option. As you stated. Which is sometimes the smarter thing to do. Even with a gun. Considering, statistically, two people firing in a store full of people is more likely that you will hit an innocent bystander then it will you hitting the other gunmen. Lord knows they have plenty of human Shields, to.
You could also stay and hide. Call the police and help them to know what they are walking into.
You could also try and talk to him. Preferably behind a barrier of some sort.
Also, if you have self defense training, there are a multitude of things you could do to defend yourself, without a gun. They train for that all the time.
However, ultimately, the absolute smartest thing to do is run away if you can get away. Which of these dozen-or-so people in the store, just proved.
On a side note, the way that you interact with people that don't necessarily agree with you, mostly comes off as pointless posturing and insecure. Maybe you should look into that.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@elizabethstanley7137 " Donald Trump was a very successful president"
Because of Donald Trump's tragic handling of the pandemic the last year-and-a-half he was in office, he had half the country out of work for almost a year. While trying to sell us snake oil cures for covid. None of which he took when he got sick. Refusing to set an example and wear a mask for the first 5 months of the pandemic. Defunding the refilling medical stockpiles, forsake the states to literally go into a bidding war against each other for American lives.
He got us into the only kind of war that literally nobody in history has ever won on either side. A trade war. One that cost us long-term hundreds of billions of dollars for which the "New Deal" he made, does not cover.
He pulled us out of basically every good deal that Obama got us into. For no good reason... Other then to say it was a "bad deal" and lying about what was in them. When we all know it was bc of his jealousy over him. The Iran Nuk Deal, Paris climate accords, etc...
The only reason he couldn't get rid of ACA and take affordable health care away from 100s of millions of Americans is because he never bothered to come up with a healthcare plan to replace it. Remember? It was always coming in 2 weeks... That and a final brave act from a war hero.
Turning the situation at our border into a scene from the boy of the Striped Pajamas. Kids in cages... And all you cult followers can say about it is, "well, who built the cages?".... Who the F cares? Get them out. This is not who America is supposed to be. All the wild tried to clear this has nothing to do with raised with the old Lee border he ever cared about was the southern border which is literally only 22% of the illegal immigration issue. Except almost everybody else that was cubby good from the other ports of Entry happened to look more like him. Then there is "the wall" that was never going to slow anyone down and would only cost us more money, cuz Mexico was not paying for it.... That one ended up putting hundreds of thousands of gov workers out of a job for almost 6 months, having them stand in bread lines and loose their homes. All for him to fold, make all that sacrifice for nothing and then try and take the money from our military families. Still to never get a wall up.
Going on a crazy deregulation party. Taking protections away from from the enviroment, workers, public edducation, etc... All while cashing big biz checks.
Adding trillions to our national debt, while promising to lower it.
Budding up to dictators and despots while alienating our long-term allies
Just to name a few.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Jay Chan I know you have nothing else to say, sweetheart! 😂 You guys always run from THOSE SCARY FACT THING! 😯😂😏
"Just a few Econ lies Trump has told you, that you ate up, without even looking.... But first... Where I got it all from. The list itself... this is important because it's a list of falsehoods by political officials about the economy. It has 13 pages. Everyone else (Dems, Reps, Ind +, btw. Obama and Harris is even on there twice.) has a lie here and there. Maybe one or 2 other people had more then 1 lie per page.... Your boy... Well... He has no less then 3 lies per page, on all 13 pages. Proven falsehoods.... all about economy. 6 on page 1, 6 on page 2 and 7 on page 3. Yet some how, ppl like you still swallow everything he says and you think we are the ones who are misguided. Look for yourself. 😁
https://www.politifact.com/subjects/economy/statements/byruling/false/?page=1
Now... Just a few of them. A few lies of many lies Trump tells about the economy, you tout. 😁
https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2019/aug/22/donald-trump/donald-trump-incorrect-us-dollar-strongest-its-eve/
https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2019/may/14/donald-trump/does-china-mostly-pay-us-tariffs-rather-us-consume/
https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2019/jan/04/donald-trump/no-usmca-trade-deal-wont-pay-border-wall-despite-d/
https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2018/sep/24/donald-trump/did-nafta-kill-millions-jobs-donald-trump/
https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2018/jul/02/donald-trump/donald-trump-base-describing-gdp-growth-his-watch/
https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2018/jul/02/donald-trump/donald-trump-wrong-mercedes-bmw-import-cars-us-mil/
https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2018/mar/09/donald-trump/donald-trump-wrong-about-wage-trends/
https://www.politifact.com/missouri/statements/2017/dec/15/donald-trump/trump-misses-mark-missouri-unemployment-rate/
https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2017/aug/17/donald-trump/donald-trump-says-wages-havent-gone-long-time-s-wr/
https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2017/jul/27/donald-trump/its-false-trump-achieved-historic-increase-defense/
https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2017/may/26/donald-trump/did-donald-trumps-trip-create-or-save-millions-job/
https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2017/apr/04/donald-trump/donald-trump-flubs-how-unemployment-calculated/
https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/sep/27/donald-trump/donald-trump-my-trans-pacific-partnership-oppositi/
https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/sep/27/donald-trump/donald-trump-talks-about-his-finances-first-presid/
https://www.politifact.com/iowa/statements/2016/aug/31/donald-trump/donald-trump-explains-why-hillary-clinton-wants-sh/
https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/aug/04/donald-trump/ama-trump-exaggerates-youth-unemployment/
https://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/statements/2016/mar/30/donald-trump/donald-trump-wrong-about-wisconsins-effective-unem/
https://www.politifact.com/virginia/statements/2016/mar/21/donald-trump/donald-trump-says-virginia-winery-largest-east-coa/
https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/mar/11/donald-trump/no-gdp-growth-not-zero-trump-says/"
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
J Haj Wow! That is a big ole assumption about my character, you just made there, with no basis behind it.
Did I mock or laugh or point or anything like that? No! I did see that you said that you are in a different country and am bilingual, myself. My first language being English. So when I speak Spanish to native speakers, I sometimes get the male/female or plural wrong, without knowing it. I didn't know if you knew or not, so simply said, that you must have meant assuming. That way, you could fix it and wouldn't have to catch s*** from others about it. All the rest is your bruised ego, over something you should not be insecure about, considering how few people in the world are bilingual.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
My ❤, and I'm sure many others, go out to these families!
I don't know, guys... I mean... What American civilian needs an assault weapon? And why? We have children teach us what we should already known. We have dead bodies dropping everysay, on American soil, showing us what we should of already seen. My son did active shooter drills, last year in school. He was in the second grade. He goes back to school in 3 days. Why should your right to own a weapon of war, come before parents right to send their child to school, without fear of getting that phone call or news report? Why is every parent, right now, today, not marching on Washington, or to there local government officals office, demanding that something be done? Why didn't the yesterday? Or last week? Or last month? Or last year? What are we doing to our children? To their future?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
news now hampton roads I sure can.
The Nazis aimed not at separation, but extermination. This is true, but only beginning in 1941. Before that, the used immigration as their method of removing Jews, and camps to encourage this immigration. Child detention centers, some of which where once the Chinese concentration camps, in America, during WW2, in an attempt to discourage immigration, is now a factor... and certainly her sure American Immigration policy is designed to keep out a certain group of people, much as the Nazis to remove a group already there.
Trump, as a presidential candidate explicitly made appeals to violence during his campaign.
Trump's well documented use of dehumanizing language is another clear similarity to the early stages of Nazi rule. He caters to a particular demographic of unhappy voters, as did the Nazis. After all, his "America First" rally cry was the motto of Nazi friendly Americans in the 1930s.
Nazis literally descended on Charlottesville, while screaming, "blood and soil", the same racist slogan as their counterparts in Germany.
The recent executive order making administrative law judges political appointees subject to executive power cannot be seen as anything less than an attempt to bring the courts in line with the administration's political ideology. The Nazis called it coordination, as they sought to co-op government and private organizations.
John Fitzgerald, a GOP Congressional candidate in California, stated live on the radio that," everything we've been told about the Holocaust is a lie." He went on to receive 23% of the primary votes cast, making him the official Republican candidate of the House of Representatives. The GOP endorsed him, then retracted that endorsement. This is not an isolated event. An Illinois, Holocaust denier Arthur Jones won the Republican primary for the State House. The most prominent conservative Challenger for Republican Paul Ryan's house seat from Wisconsin is a white nationalist an anti-semite. In short, actual Nazis are running for office in America and some are winning.
I could go on. Read your history. Nazi Germany did not become what it did with a snap of a finger. It happened slowly and by degrees.
And that's not even touching on the human hunting parties that are being glorified right now, by the president of the United States. I wonder how many of those people that they're going to try and Round Up are going to be any thing other than brown.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@aaronjacobs4900 I already did... Your ignoring it. That's why you tried moving the goal post and arguing symamtics. You said... " There is not one word from either party that addresses financials in that call."
Your words, correct?
I provided you with the part of the conversation right before Trump asks for a "favor". I highlighted the parts about money. Did I not?
Sanctions... " International sanctions are political and 👉economic👈 decisions that are part of diplomatic efforts by countries, multilateral or regional organizations against states or organizations either to protect national security interests, or to protect international law, and defend against threats to international peace and security.[1][2][3][4] These decisions principally include the temporary imposition on a target of 👉economic👈, trade, diplomatic, cultural or other restrictions (sanctions measures) that are lifted when the motivating security concerns no longer apply, or when no new threats have arisen."
Ukraine Pres... " the united States is doing quite a lot for Ukraine."
What are we doing for Ukraine? It ain't rocket science.
And then there is the one you mentioned... " great support".
Except using the whole sentence clears the "support" up a bit. " I would also like to thank you for your great support in the area of defense." Tell me, what are we doing for them in the "area of defense"?
Money... Money money... All day long. So.... Your statment was a lie.
The conversation was in reguards to current issues. Not history. What indicated to you that it was about the past with Europe? He was obviously fluffing Trump's ego. Cuz the UK gave them more then we did. The difference between sanctions in military Finance is irrelevant.
Ukraine knew about the money on hold before the call. Why you think it's even almost possible that Ukraine would take a full month to realize that the money had not shown up when it was supposed to, is beyond me. We are not talking chump change or patty cake here. Especially as desprate as they where for the money.
Other parts your missing... And intentionally flat out ignoring I will say again. Trump put the phone call in a top-secret server, which did not qualify as and was not the normal placement. He called on his executive power to try and keep the Whistleblower complaint from Congress. He lied several times, back and forth in a 48 hout period about did he hold the money, did he not... But if he did , it would be totally fine because the UK needs to give their fare share and that's why he did it. Except that didn't make any sense either because the UK gave way more then we did.
So if everything was just sunshine and roses, why would they of done all that to keep the call secret and the report secret?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@tukolo5408 Prison reform was all sides... Bipartason. Low unemployment is simply not as much as it is made out to be on his part. Job growth rate has been steadily decreasing since he took office. The reason that unemployment is low was a trend starting way back in the beginning of the Obama Administration. But also something he chooses to take full credit for. So I'll give him credit for the little bit that he helped on that, once he gives everybody else the credit they deserve on it. He dropped the mother of all bombs in his first 3 months, for no good reason and against his generals advice and due to his lies and unwillingness to admit it, he has gotten us in a needless war with Iran.
Did he cheat the election? Which one? The one coming up or 2016? The one coming up... Yes. Blackmailing a foreign power to investigate his political opponent in the race, is absolutely doing that. Doing it right after Mueller testified shows just how little respect he has for the democracy that he is running.
Russians messing with the ballots is not the only way to sway an election. The russians attacked out democracy and Trump asked them to do it. They broke the law, in attempts to get him elected. That is no small thing.
The dems and the media are not lock step. And what they are that way on... Did anyone ever consider that it had anything to do with both parties, as well as a big chunk of the voting public thinking that the things that 45 does are crazy, selfish, corrupt and a myriad of other things. All comes razor dictates that being the simplest answer. All of these people were saying, hey this guy is doing all this messed up stuff. So maybe the answer is, hey this guy is doing all this messed up stuff.
See... That's what you see.... I see them finally getting off their butts and doing what they should have done before. Holding him responsible for his actions, should not hinge on electability. Also... In no way... Has any sitting president in the past 60 plus years ever been considered the underdog when they are going for thwir second term. Thats just silly. Poles say his base is shrinking. Even here and other comment sections... The only ones left defending him are the die hards. Farmers are turning on him, rep Congress members as well.
Ive told you why he should be impeached. President and it just generally what is supposed to happen when a president abuses his office like this.
CNN and others had Hillary winning weeks before the election. Not days. That's a misknomer...
Healthcare and reparations? The health care is for all Americans as a right and not a privilege for the wealthy well it bankrupts the rest of us. The immigrants that would get it are the ones that are detained. If they want to save money on that healthcare, its a real easy solution. Stop feeding the prison industrial complex by keeping them longer than they need to be there before they are deported, and get some damn judges in there. You won't have to worry about any kind of major Healthcare going to them if they did that.
I don't know what the hell you're talking about reparations for illegal immigrants?
I haven't seen that to be the case... But unless you are inciting violence or shouting fire in a crowded building when there isn't one, yeah, everybody should get just saying what they want.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@tukolo5408 Yes.. Prison reform was bipartisan. That's what I was saying. Trump is part of that bipartisan. I thought bipartisan would be enough. I wasn't taking anything away from him on that. In fact, I'll give you one you didn't list. His education secretary was trying to cut funding for Special Olympics and he overrode her. Now he did hire her in the first place but there was not a way he could of known she would try and do that and when she did, he stopped her.
Yes... The economy is party him. Its also not all good. Like tax cuts for the rich and the massive and dangerous deregulations that he had to put fours in order to get the economy that way.... Again... I'm looking at all relevant material on subject by subject.
I have issues with cherry pickers. Those are the people that usually just want one thing to be a certain way and only choose to look at the information that has that specific outcome. that doesn't make they're out come true, though. It just means they want to be right. They're not interested in the facts. If they were they would use all relevant material to come to a conclusion.
The right to try... Well... Its over all good. Well, it leans more good than bad. These people are desperate and are looking for Hail Marys. If I was in that situation and I was going to leave this world and leave my son, I'd try anything to stay a little longer. The only part of that that gives me kind of an icky feeling is there is a reason that we have our medicine or drugs go through such strenuous trials before giving them to people. Then again, at the same time, it's the individual's life and their choice. So, like I said, I fall on the side of right to try. I would never want anybody to stop me from trying whatever I could and I don't think I have the right to ask someone else to do that either.
He has so much media on his side. You can't claim that the entirety of the media is against him. Democrats and liberals, sure. The democrat-leaning news networks. Sure. But not all of it. Also, he holds the office.
We may not agree on a lot of those, but I don't think you're crazy. You presented yourself very well, respectfully and articulately. We just have a difference of opinion. Though, there is a whole lot of people out there who thinks all the things that he does is crazy and Occam's razor dictates that maybe he's just crazy. Not you but him.
1
-
1
-
@aaronjacobs4900 Now... Correcting his reading...
1. So this guy keeps saying that the quid pro quo or the blackmail wasn't possible because they didn't know the ad was on home during the conversation. He's provided nothing to substantiate that. He just keep saying it. The requirement that does need to be met however for a charge of blackmail or extortion would be a judge's ruling on whether the information he was trying to get was of any value and how much it would be worth. Which would be something that would happen in court. That would be the only barrier to an extortion or a blackmail if this was a regular person.
2. What also happened between those 48 hours that he's talking about and yet another example of him not holding true to not being bias, Trump Giuliani and bar went back and forth a couple of different times lying about whether the money was on hold, then it wasn't on hold then if it was on hold it would be totally fine. There was also a claim of executive privilege put on it at the beginning of those 48 hours. Another thing he doesn't mention is all the Republican lawmakers coming out and saying that that was an okay. His own party turned against him because they refused to release the report to Congress. With pressure from that and the media he finally decided to try and get ahead of the story. I guess he just forgot that though.
3. Well... he's just setting up a false dichotomy there. Either you agree with me or you're not being intellectually honest.except to be plain ole honest, we do what? That's right! Consider all relevant material. Not just what fits what he has already decided to be true. And if you haven't noticed the pattern.. If it doesn't fit but just wont let him forget it, he just makes some stuff up. Like Trump had every right she just delete the call and not save any of it and you can totally do that with all of them no matter what. Except the presidential records act what has something different to say about that.
Now... This is what happened with the report before it was released. Trump can his lawyers produce a statement part of which said, " have the right to withhold such Communications for foreign leaders from lawmakers and the public as classified or otherwise privileged." Now why would that of been released before the report? I wonder? 😉 since then and when it happened, many legal analysts have said, " we can't say that executive privilege and control over classified information is going to be used to Shield the president from his duties to comply with federal law." - Claire Finkelstein does facility director of the center of ethics and the rules of law at the University of Pennsylvania Law School. " that's just a sort of complete abuse of office." Plus... we certainly know this wasn't the first time Trump and his justice department have refused to comply with lawmakers requests. The Whistleblower filed the report Wes the Inspector General who has deemed it both "credible" and "urgent". Usually these complaints are supposed to be forwarded to the intelligence committee is within 7 days. The office of legal counsel, of course, stopped this. The inspector-general who deemed it urgent and credible has to this day objected to that decision. And stated," the president of the United States solicited a foreign government to conduct an investigation of a political adversary in a manner that could have subverted the Integrity, yet again, of our Democratic process is abhorrent." He's also mentioned several times that this could discourage further whistleblowers. It is important to know. That the office of legal counsel is essentially the brain of the justice department and the administration more broadly, issuing opinions on some of the thorniest legal questions that agencies might have faced. But the offices lawyers are not neutral parties, like judges. Their guidance Austin seeks to facilitate the goals of the administration.
Another important thing to consider. well the president could generally invoke presidential Communications privilege to keep secret his talks with foreign leaders, his publicly acknowledging the conversation could complicate that. If Trump was invoking privilege merely to keep secret an inappropriate request of a foreign leader it could be interpreted dad he has abused his power. David Kress, and a former justice department National Security official said that while case law on the issue was murky, the justice department would be on terribly weak ground if Trump was pressing his counterpart on Biden. That's not classified, and it's the core of what's wrong here.
4. He should not of done what he did but you insist on defending and excusing it, while claiming no bias.
BTW,
If there was nothing to hide in that transcript, in that call, if they thought nothing was wrong with it, why would they go to all of those links to try and keep that conversation and The Whistleblower report out of the hands of Congress?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@aaronjacobs4900 SoOoOo... Lets do this... Sense this isnstarting to waist my time... Which is partly my fault, cuz I should have stuck to my original tactic of just giving proof of your claims being wrong. Back to smarter, not harder.
Your claims and proof they are wrong.
1. " There's not one word from either party that addresses financials in that call. 0."
"I did talk to Angela Merkel and I did meet with her. I also met and talked with Macron and I told them that they are not doing quite as much as they need to be doing on the issues with the 👉sanctions. They are not enforcing the sanctions. They are not working as much as they should work for Ukraine.👈 The sanctions they refer to are FINANCIAL sanctions on Russia, from The UK and Canada. It could only be that because those are the only type sanctions against Russia at this time, from those 2 countries.
"It turns out that even though logically, the European Union should be our biggest partner but technically the United States is a much bigger partner than the European Union and I’m very grateful to you for that because the United States is doing quite a lot for Ukraine. Much more than the European Union especially when we are talking about 👉sanctions against the Russian Federation.👈 which is confirmed in this comment. Russian financial sanctions.
👉I would also like to thank you for your great support in the area of defense.👈 The support that Ukrain is recoeving from us is money to buy the Javelins, among other things, from us, using the financial aid that was on hold at the time. Asking about buying these things is asking for the money to be taken off of hold. So they can do so.
"👉We are ready to continue to cooperate for the next steps. specifically we are almost ready to buy more Javelins from the United States for defense purposes.👈" which is further illostrated here, naming the Javelin and commenting that it's from defense.
2. That Ukraine was not aware of the hold on the money until after the call. A full month after, infact.
- the Trump Administration initially told Congress it was releasing the age to Ukraine on February 28th. It repeated that assertion to Congress again on May 23rd. Whene the second deadline came and went, the hold became public knowledge, due to the Congress, who had approved the aid, wondering why the money was still being held up. Which means, there was one deadline for the money TO BE RELEASEED TO TGE UKRAINE on Feb 28th, which was not met. Then another on May 23rd. SoOoOo.... If for no other reason, unless the entire Ukraine gov was living under a rock the time, by May 24th, Ukraine knew about the aid being on hold. If checking their bank accounts and not seeing it there after the first deadline, was not enough. Now I could be mistaken... But isn't May 23rd and fed 28th before July 25?
3. " Objectively, does the EU pull its weight in support of Ukraine, no."
Your own words prove you wrong here.
"The u.s. does not get us more overall Aid, what is the largest contributor of military aid, "
If you would like a more specific number... The European union and European financial institutions have contributed more than 16.4 billion dollars in Grants and Loans to Ukraine since 2014. European countries have contributed an estimated two-thirds of all of the aim to Ukraine since Russia annexed Crimea in 2014. " according to the organization of economic cooperation and development, the EU institutions top the oecd's list of the top 10 donors of official development assistance to Ukraine, with 425.2 million dollars contributed on average for 2016 and 2017. The US was second with 204.4 million dollars in assistance.
4. Innocent until proven guilty applies even if one is not charged with a crime.
" How do you take an innocent until proven guilty standard, which never takes into account interpretation, and decide the guilt of someone based on nothing but interpretation?"
"You Don't invoke innocent until proven guilty, that is the default legal standard. You must not understand that innocent people do not have to be exonerated it is not how this works."
The universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 11, states " Everyone 👉charged with a penal offence👈 has the right to be Presumed Innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defense"
5. Your continued insistence that the only thing that mattered was to transcript.
" what was the whistleblowers complaint? Abuse of power during a phone call. What information is needed to understand the complaint. The words of said conversation. So I'm exactly the right amount of concerned only on the transcript. It's the definition of this entire discussion."
Except... Not so much. You're once again trying to set up a false dichotomy and "framing" to boot. The transcript is a major part of this situation but not all of it.
- time of the first deadline on the money... Feb
- time of the second deadline of the money... May
- moving the call to a server intentionally, that it would have otherwise, not gone in.
- documented attempts at claiming executive privilage.
- breach of normal protocol in regards to the Whistleblower report and where it will go or not go
- Trump back and forth lies about the hold.
- The White House lawyers releasing statements saying that they were in their rights to withhold the report from Congress using executive privilege
May have forgotten 1 or 2 but that's enough to show that the transcript is not the only relevant piece of information.
1
-
@aaronjacobs4900 6. So....there where a lot of these but to list them all would take forever. So, I'm just gonna give you 1 example of you assuming things I've said or couldn't saw, in order to validate your point of view.
" If what you're saying was true, you could outline what Financial sanctions were being discussed, but you can't."
This was very curious. Cuz... If you look, the comment where you asked me to do just that is 2 above this one....
" If you're correct, please explain the specific Financial sanctions in regards to EU and Ukraine are being discussed here. Please. I'm genuinely asking you to inform me."
With no comment from me in between those 2. Which meant, you asked the question, INSISTED you where being genuine and then proceeded to assume I could not answer that question, just below it. Even though I had not replied at all.
7. " There's no qualification for where the president's saves private phone calls for foreign leaders. Presidents have 100% control over their Communications with other leaders, it would have been within his right as the executive and chief to burn the phone calls if you want it. There's absolutely no responsibility or obligation to share them with the public."
Let's educate you on the presidential records Act of 1978. This is an act of Congress of the United States governing the official records of presidents and vice-presidents created or received after January 20th 1981, and 👉mandating the preservation of all presidential records👈. Enacted November 4th, 1978 the pra charged the 👉legal ownership of the official records of the president from private to public👈.
Wrong again. Bob! 😉✌
8. " this situation would not legally qualifies blackmail or extortion technically, I was just avoided correcting you or someone else in the chain who described it as such for the sake of argument. Extortion and blackmail have certain elements of exchange that need to be met And this is not meet them."
Legal experts have explained that you are wrong. I am not one. So I choose to listen to them.
Blackmail - a threat to report or testify against a person for violation of federal law, or a demand of money or 👉something else of value👈, is considered a federal crime.
Now...i never used extortion. So that's moot.
Basiclly legal experts have argued that the Crux of the charge of blackmail would be a judge's ruling on whether the information that Trump got from Ukraine was of significant value. Last time I checked... Your not that judge or a judge at all. So you can not make that determination.
9. " There's no high crime or misdemeanor that establishes grounds for impeachment."
This is more arrogance on your part. Which lends credibility to my guests. You're not biased towards Trump, but you are biased about needing to be right and forming your opinions around that assumption. What makes you think you're the one that gets to determine that? Do you have any particular experience in the field? Are you a member of Congress? Have you already gone through the proceedings of finding out whether there has been an unimpeachable offense? So how do you know there's no high crime or misdemeanor?
10. " The contents of transcript can only be read as persuading someone if you don't care about the actual definition of pressure at all. The call may have included inappropriate elements, but pressure was not one, if you're intellectually honest. "
Here is your false dichotomy. I have not only told you but I have proven to you that the Ukraine president knew about the hold on the money Before the phone call. You continue to ignore it and Act like it's not there because you seem to think your argument would fall apart if you did not. And you're right. So... It's accept those terms, that framing of things, so that you wont see the "pressure" or you're not intellectually honest. in other words, accept my interpretation of the facts in whole and ignore all else or you're not being honest.
11. " now in this situation last less than two days before he provides the information, which you also classified as "so much effort to cover it up" no matter what he does or how long it takes information to come to light he is Implicated in some cover-up effort."
Yet another exampme of you being dishonest about what I have said, in order to validate your own point of view. It's super easy to prove as well. Using yours and my words. You got "so much effort to cover it up" from a comment I made where I listed other things that you left out in that 48 hours. You then made a comment going point by point on each of those.
"Yeah... I know. I'm saying you're only interested in talking about the transcript of this specific case. When there is other facts to consider. You can whataboutism all you want. It doesn't make it not true.
1 the freezing of the money
2 the implied blackmail in the phone call to get a foreign country to investigate his political adversary
3 the intentional placing of the record of this phone call in a top secret server for which it did not qualify
4 the abuse of executive power as an attempt to keep the whistleblowers report from Congress
5 the back-and-forth lying on camera, of trump saying he didn't put the money on hold, but he did put the money on hold, but he didn't put the money on hold, but if he did put the money on hold it would totally be okay probably.
So, yes. You're ignoring other things on purpose. You're also ignoring this question that I've asked almost every time."
Only skipping the last one where you just got that quote from me.
"If there was nothing to hide in that transcript, in that call, if they thought nothing was wrong with it, why would they go to all of those links to try and keep that conversation and The Whistleblower report out of the hands of Congress?"
In my words "why would they go to 👉all of those things👈 to try and keep that conversation and The Whistleblower report out of the hands of Congress?" I was clearly refering to the list of things on the same comment that I just listed. which you obviously understood when you had replied before Because you went point-by-point trying to refute that comment. Now you're trying to take it out of context and say That it was just about the 48 hours. Your lying.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@aaronjacobs4900 2. That Ukraine was not aware of the hold on the money until after the call. A full month after, infact.
- the Trump Administration initially told Congress it was releasing the age to Ukraine on February 28th. It repeated that assertion to Congress again on May 23rd. Whene the second deadline came and went, the hold became public knowledge, due to the Congress, who had approved the aid, wondering why the money was still being held up. Which means, there was one deadline for the money TO BE RELEASEED TO TGE UKRAINE on Feb 28th, which was not met. Then another on May 23rd. SoOoOo.... If for no other reason, unless the entire Ukraine gov was living under a rock the time, by May 24th, Ukraine knew about the aid being on hold. If checking their bank accounts and not seeing it there after the first deadline, was not enough. Now I could be mistaken... But isn't May 23rd and fed 28th before July 25?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@aaronjacobs4900 11. " now in this situation last less than two days before he provides the information, which you also classified as "so much effort to cover it up" no matter what he does or how long it takes information to come to light he is Implicated in some cover-up effort."
Yet another exampme of you being dishonest about what I have said, in order to validate your own point of view. It's super easy to prove as well. Using yours and my words. You got "so much effort to cover it up" from a comment I made where I listed other things that you left out in that 48 hours. You then made a comment going point by point on each of those.
"Yeah... I know. I'm saying you're only interested in talking about the transcript of this specific case. When there is other facts to consider. You can whataboutism all you want. It doesn't make it not true.
1 the freezing of the money
2 the implied blackmail in the phone call to get a foreign country to investigate his political adversary
3 the intentional placing of the record of this phone call in a top secret server for which it did not qualify
4 the abuse of executive power as an attempt to keep the whistleblowers report from Congress
5 the back-and-forth lying on camera, of trump saying he didn't put the money on hold, but he did put the money on hold, but he didn't put the money on hold, but if he did put the money on hold it would totally be okay probably.
So, yes. You're ignoring other things on purpose. You're also ignoring this question that I've asked almost every time."
Only skipping the last one where you just got that quote from me.
"If there was nothing to hide in that transcript, in that call, if they thought nothing was wrong with it, why would they go to all of those links to try and keep that conversation and The Whistleblower report out of the hands of Congress?"
In my words "why would they go to 👉all of those things👈 to try and keep that conversation and The Whistleblower report out of the hands of Congress?" I was clearly refering to the list of things on the same comment that I just listed. which you obviously understood when you had replied before Because you went point-by-point trying to refute that comment. Now you're trying to take it out of context and say That it was just about the 48 hours. Your lying.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@tukolo5408 I agree with both of those. Media being powerful and tribalism. Though I do have a firm practice of checking facts that are given to me by any form of news media, before I start speaking on them. I wish more people had that practice.
I wouldn't completely agree that CNN and MSNBC sensationalize has a lot of what he does. At most, I would say some. He has from the beginning and will continue to shoot himself in the foot, in that manner, most of the time. Though I don't argue that there is corruption on both sides. I just feel like, more on our side, we choose to take responsibility for our leaders who are corrupt and we tried to get rid of them more. I personally don't want dishonesty and Corruption leading my way. It's been my experience on the Republican side that they will defend an excuse that action by their leaders all day everyday because they want to be right more than they want the truth.
I don't remember that thing with Pelosi and the mainstream media happening. I'm not doubting it. I just don't see it as necessarily, nefarious. More as, she made a suggestion and they thought it was a good idea.
Fox... For sure! As soon as he's not good for business, he'd be gone. Agree
That's not true. I'm a Democrat and I don't think that. I want my ideas challenged. If they don't stand up to basic scrutiny then I need to re-evaluate my position.
So the healthcare for undocumented people was in reference to the ones we are holding in the detention centers. If we are going to hold them for long periods of time we should take care of them. We're not doing that right now and America should be better than that. If you're not going to treat them like human beings then send them back right away.
Reparations, is not so much an unpopular issue as it is tenuous and hard to quantify to millions of people. Basically the argument is due to the circumstance that African-Americans began in, in this country, they are now more likely to be poor, go to jail, commit crimes, go to jail for crimes they didn't commit... And less likely to seek higher education, contribute in major ways and whatnot. It's basically the argument that everybody started the race at the starting line, but due to our abuse, negligence and downright in human behavior, African Americans started their race with 50 lb weights attached to their ankles. And people feel like there's a direct correlation with that and how the African-American has progressed to today. It's legally feasible to make a good case for that in a court. It would just be a long and complicated process.
Healthcare for all and not just those that can afford it should be an inalienable right. The number one cause of bankruptcy in America is Healthcare cost. Children should not be dying in America because their parents can't afford the astronomical medical bills brought on by the corrupt drug companies and health institutions, or health insurance companies. Other major countries in the world have figured out how to make Healthcare a right and not a privilege for those who can afford it. We should have led that fight and we need to catch up.
Gun confiscation is a misnomer to a certain extent. That's what the right screams every time the left wants Common Sense gun regulations. The amount of guns that we have in this country has a direct correlation with the last decade-and-a-half of progressively more often mass shootings. At the same time, we're not trying to take your guns away. When people say that I always ask them to name two or three or four politicians that have ever said that. It's just not true for 99.9% of us.
- autos... Are quite simply, weapons of war and have not buisness in general population. That's why people aren't alowed tanks or land mines, granades and what not.
- if you are in the military or a police officer (my parents where both) you have to take an annual proficiency exam in order to carry your gun in public. People without that training should at least have to demonstrate in some form or manner that they are capable of handling a firearm in public in a responsible manner if they intend to practice open carry.
- we need to close the private seller loophole. The one that most people think is the Gun Show loophole.
- if you have been diagnosed with a severe mental illness, to the point that you cannot responsibly handle your own finances, then you shouldn't be able to have a gun.
- we need to educate on gun safety
- we need to study the cause and effect of all these mass shootings
- there needs to be a strong push for mental health evaluations, for registered gun owners
These are not taking guns away. It's reasonable regulations.
Abortion up to birth is also not a thing. Again... Right wing scare tactics again. Even the gov that said something lile that (can't remember his nmae) on that radio show, was taken out of context. He use to be a doctor and was answering a medical question with medical facts. Not giving an opinion.
Every dem, including myself, that I have ever heard of, basiclly has this opinion about abortion. It should be rare. Very rare. If someone was to put up a bill that limited aborting to first trimester for rape, incest and life of the mother/child and second trimester in terms of life of the mother/child. We would support it. Everything after that is personal responsibility. When people try to demonize me for being pro choice, and call me a baby killer... Intend to point out the other ugly side. The one they dont think of. If abortions was deemed illegal tomorrow, there would come a time when a 12 year old child who's been raped gets pregnant and then is forced to carry that child to term and forced to give birth to them... That is only 1 of the horrific sanarios that could happen. Abortion is a hard issue. Bottom line... I would never do it... But that is the chpice I make with my body. I have no right to force someone to do that with theirs.
I also don't agree with your assessment that we want to punish them for voting for someone we don't like. Being on the other side of it... Is just exceedingly frustrating to see you guys back him as he dismantles our democracy and does so in such a Brazen way. He is obviously corrupt. He is obviously lying to everyone almost every single day and you guys act like it's us for pointing it out. You're shooting the messenger. If there was any real unbias opinion on your side... We would not have to find ourselves explaining all the time, news media and all, that what he is doing, how he is acting and what he is saying, is not good on so many different things. it's not about punishing you. It's honestly that were flummoxed upon the realization that we have to make the case for most of these things to you guys. Its so obvious. Or it should be.
I can Guarantee you Republicans are not less combative than Democrats. I've already told you that is silencing the right voices is happening, I do genuinely think that's b***** and needs to not happen. And I would stand with you on that. Any day of the week. No matter what..... There is no "but" that comes after that. With that being said, I'm in the youtube comment section every day.... Almost. Giving opinions that you guys don't like. On a daily bases I am threatened, insulted, called a race tratior because my son is mixed... I hear calls for war, violance, rape and all manner of other things. I even have a guy who right now who is threatening to put a collar on me and chain me in his basement... All of which go against the guidlines of these platforms. That has a lot to do with those people disapearing. Just look at almost every thread on this platform, on your side. I'm, by no means, calling us perfect. Myself included.... But your far from angels on that side.
1
-
@tukolo5408 I don't think your wrong... Or like any of that... Just... One sided. As I'm sure I am as well. Thought I do try and see the other side. especially with decent and respectful people like you, calmly trying to illustrate your point. I try to find things we can agree on with you guys. There can be a middle ground.
Noone is advicating for non-citizens to vote in our elections. a lot of the things that you say or right wing propaganda. Look, you seem reasonable and so I would implore you to do your research on these things and see how true they are before you swallow them whole. I do the same thing on my side. I don't comment on every video on CNN or MSNBC. Sometimes I even argue against what they're saying Because I've researched it and I've gone in and check their facts. They certainly don't get everything right all the time. and at the end of the day I'm more interested in the truth than I am about being right or wrong. because I can work with the truth. Even if it goes against what I thought was true. If I know there's truth and that truth is a particular problem then I'm better equipped to fix it... Ya know.
Voting age... Hmmm... Can I say that I am undecided on that one? I see almost even positives and negatives on both sides. There's a reason that we don't allow teenagers to drink or smoke. It's literally that their brains aren't done growing and the part of their brain That needs to be developed to do that is one of the last ones to finish growing. insurent, they're not really good at decision-making and considering all the consequences of their actions. They're impulsive. At the same time, they're inheriting this from us, this country, this world. so part of me says, why shouldn't they get a say in what they're going to have to deal with in the future? Ya know? I go back and forth.
Though, they don't all think the world is going to end in 12 years. Come on now. Not only could you not qualify that statement... It's an Oversimplification of the actual problem. And climate change is a problem. And it should be understood correctly or not Flippantly tossed to the side. Come on now.
On some I think you're wrong, on others I don't. As I've laid out. as for winning until the next election, I understand why that would make more sense. in a political one side winning kind of way. Here's the thing though, I don't want Mike Pence To become the de facto president. What I'm more concerned about is our democracy though. The precedent it would set. Of having a president, tried to interfere in our electoral process in order to get himself re-elected to office And using his position and power to do so. if we don't challenge that, what we're saying to every president from now on, Democrat or Republican is all you have to do in order to steal the next election and ask for another countries help in doing so by leveraging them with American tax dollars, is to do so about a year before the election happens. Cuz, that way, its more politically expedient to just wait for the next election. that thinking is not good for either side.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@girlonfire00net Let me tell you a story. We live in Louisiana. My brother is Army National Guard. 36 hours after his first year-long deployment Hurricane Katrina hit New Orleans. That is 36 hours with his three year old little girl. His unit and 2 other local units were the closest and so they got sent to help with disaster relief. I don't know if you remember back that far but shortly after they got there and the governor declared martial law there were several different new stories about how the soldiers were going power-mad and doing all kinds of craziness. Removing people from their homes by force and whatnot. Not once, that I saw, did they mention that they had to because even though their houses were not underwater they literally had the corpses of their neighbors washing up in their backyards, in an area without running water, electricity or emergency assistance. Because they were painted so badly, on what little off time they had, some people, some local and some not, took two following them around and harassing them. Some peaceful protesters but some not so much. Some got physical with them. Because of this, some of the soldiers in my brother's unit took to getting physical right back with them. I'm not sure I would have reacted any differently. They had just gotten back from being halfway across the world, getting shot at every day for an entire year, away from their loved ones and now they get sent to go help people and have the people they are trying to help attack them. After a few days of this things got very contentious there. As you can imagine. Since the soldiers were still soldiers they could not directly attack somebody without provocation. A lot of them started standing in front of these people long enough, hoping that they would do something. Something that would allow them to do something back.
One day my brother and his unit Commander are walking back from lunch at one of the dining facilities and he sees a group of soldiers standing at rest in front of a group of protesters. He stands there and watches for a while. These protesters are saying all manner of shity things to them. I mean things like, how they were f**** these soldiers wives when they were away, that their kids were glad they were gone, that they were traitors and so on and so forth. Then a protester runs up to the group with this box. That got my brother's attention because he didn't know what was in the box. It turns out it was a box filled with American flags and those long-armed lighters that you use to light a fireplace. I don't have to spell out what happened next. This got the best of 2 of these soldier's. They jumped out from the unit and started swinging on these 2 guys who where close to the front. The other guys from the unit didn't swing or anything but they also didn't stop them. My brother and his unit commander rush over and his unit commander starts yelling. The 2 stopped of course. They where apparently not to far gone enough to not respect the rank. Even though they where a different unit. If you where army, you know that doesn't matter anyways. One of the protesters that got hit, starts yelling about charges and the other was pretty quiet but still pushing against my brother who was standing in front of the protesters at this point, holding them back. The unit commander has the 2 soldiers stand at attention. My brother told me the hard part was seeing the soldiers cry as they stood there. He knew the situation. He knew they had screwed up. He also knew what they had gone threw. The part he said supprised him was what he didn't know but had found out later about the protesters. They where 2 medical discharges from the Army. Those where the ones burning the flags. Both with obvious and diignosed PTSD. One had also lost a leg (which they didnt notice at the time because he had a prostetic and pants on). They had both also lost a lot of friends.... Road side bombs was one of the ways how. There where a few more but I can't remember those. Needless to say, these 2 guys where really messed up. It didn't help that they had just been fprced out of their homes by fellow soldiers because of the hazardous conditions in the area. My brother found this all out because he was the one who had to do the paper work for the report that had to be filled after the incident. They told him they had lost to much to be assaulted for exercising the rights the fought for. They said they lost to much to lose their homes. They said they had families and asked what they where supposed to do?
A few months after he got home, we had taken to having all these long talks. We are 15 months apart and so have always been close. He had brought back up this situation at one point. He said, after all that he had been through and seen... One of the hardest thinks for him was not being able to give those 2 soldier protesters an answer to the question they asked him. He told me that if burning that flag and yelling was what they needed to do, then he basically could not fault them for it. They faught and almost died for that right. He didn't agree with what they where doing. He hated it because he knew what those units down there in Katrina had just came from and what they where going through then but they did all that for a reason. Because if it wasn't for a reason then what was it for?
Look, didn't mean to get all deep on you or anything. I just saw you came back with a more level head and some respect. So I thought you would be open enough to catch a point.... And that poimt is... We all have reasons.... For doing what we do. What seams like madness to one person, is just what another needs to hold on a little longer to themselves and all they know. It doesnt excuse anything are make things right or wrong but in a country that prides itself on the freedom that it offeres to its people, and as long as it not hurting anyone else... Then isnt it reasonable enough to have understanding with one another before there is judgment?
Thanks for the prayers and your service.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@luckyluc25 SoOoOo... Actually one was already investigated... Not by us... which is what could have happened if Donald Trump wanted to do anything other than just get dirt on his political opponent in the next presidential election. He could have either asked for the investigation before Biden became in his political opponent or he could have had the justice department, for which he is the head, open an independent investigation, had them work with the Ukraine government and then have them come to an independent conclusion. He did none of those things. If he had done either of those things or even both of those things, the Democrats wouldn't have a leg to stand on when it comes to impeachment. He didn't care weather Biden broke the law or not. He wanted dirt. He wanted to interfere in the next presidential election, like you tried to do in the last one....
Oh... And I noticed you didn't answer my question.... If you think Biden doing that is wrong then you must thing Trump is, as well, correct?
You find who's being investigated curious. The rest of us can't help to have a little curiosity about the fact that you guys keep bobbing and weaving when addressing Trump's illegal actions and trying to put them off onto Biden. All you want to talk about is Biden. To me, it makes more sense to focus on the bigger issue. You know, the guy with more power and influence at the moment.... But fine... You wanna talk about both... We can talk abput both but you don't seam to want to do that. Which is why most of us just see this as some b***** diversion tactic. We bring up Trump you scream Biden. We make the comparison you ignore the question.
So why don't you stop worrying about the media and what it's doing or not doing and start paying attention to your own actions. The whole premise was about Trump but you don't want to mention him. You want to talk about Biden this and Biden that. If you want to talk about hypocrisy, look in the mirror.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Marc Johansson SoOoOo... Here is the problem with your argument... 1... You would have to do a couple things first...
- you would need to assume we, as a hole, operate on some kind of hive mind and that there is some kind of nation wide conspiracy
- you would have to overlook the inherent bias in your statment by putting the entirety of one side in the and completely ignoring the other
- you would have to ignore a ton of corroborating evidence
And 2... well, that's just simply Occam's razor. From what you're saying to be true, you would have to, as I said earlier, Institute some kind of Nationwide conspiracy among leftists and the media, ignore all relevant information about the situation, as well as, Trump's past history and actions which show he's a shady dude, if I'm being nice about it. When the simplest answer is, Trump did something bad and now they're investigating it because he got caught. Occam's razor...
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@michaeld9682 Well thank you gor being willing to admit that. I don't like everything Biden does either. I did vote for him over Trump. For instance, I understand the border is the bane of every presidency and he is certainly doing a better job than Donald Trump but we're in no position to take in that many people right now. From any border. We're still battling through it and trying to recover ourselves. I hate they have it worse but it's like any parent has to learn. You have to take care of yourself in order to take care of the children. We just need to find a better solution. I'm not saying leaving them out in the cold but... Ya know...
As for Trump. ... His policies are not as you describe... I'm afraid. I understand that in politics is always about the compromise. You're not going to always get anything you want. Most of the time you're not going to get everything you want either. However, there's a difference between that and doing real farm with your policies.
As I mentioned... The border... Trump's border policy was simply inhumane. I agree that we have to find a better solution for our Southern border issue... ripping families apart, putting children in cages or losing them in a broken Foster system, is so far from a solution to any of this.
Before coronavirus we had another shutdown. One where all are government workers were losing their homes and standing in bread lines for nothing. All for a while, our experts in engineering and econ told us would only slow ppl from crossing for an average of 9 min. Billions just to make it and that's not even mentioning the man power it would take to man it and maintain it. For it to even work for those nine minutes, we would have to move tripled the Border Patrol. As of right now we only have enough officers to patrol a section of the border every 35 minutes. It was never going to work and he didn't even care about it until 2 years in. When he realized he wasn't going to get the funding to even start building it, he decided to go after the money for other government workers and their families to get it. But before that he ended up caving and opening up the government again. Meaning all those government workers went through all that for nothing. Also he could look like he was keeping his promise come election time.
No one in our written history has ever won a trade war on either side. Go check. While he was absolutely right about China's intellectual property rights theft problem, there was a reason no other president took that step. They knew that we would lose more money then we could ever gain back with a new deal with China. Which is exactly what happened.
Another policy of defunding the med stock piles literally had deadly consequences for hundreds of thousands of Americans.
Then there's the tax cuts. Mostly benefited by the 1%. The 1% got huge tax cuts that were permanent and the rest of us got okay tax cuts that had a clock on it.
And this one literally has too much context to it to go into any part of it but the crazy amount of deregulations he put into practice.. it's not something that gets talked about much but it's something that will do probably the most harm. His deregulations further allowed big companies to pollute the planet without health and safety checks and balances. They took a big hit on workers rights. They also shifted even more money from public schools, which didn't have anywhere close enough to begin with, two private schools thanks to everyone's favorite jackass Betsy DeVos..... To name a very few.
As for Israel, again, there was a good reason why no other president did that. Recognizing Mecca as the Israeli capital, and therefore choosing a slide, was only ever going to bring more damage and not just to the Palestinians. Though they faced the brunt of it. And also not just in their country. The Palestine government is refining nuclear weapons as we speak and Israel has the backing of Russia. It did nothing but escalate the problem. If you remember right almost right after that they had the gas attacks. Chemical weapons is a new step for both sides.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@jayhawk4578 Na! I've decided not to be the definition of insanity, I'm afraid. You have demonstrated multiple times, at this point, that your just going to make things up, and pretend, because you said it, it makes it real, anyways. Just like your going to ignore talking about the comparisons to Donald Trump, like the plague. I'm betting it's because you didn't hold him to that same standard you're trying to hold President Biden... so, I tell you what, you keep making up childish and silly insults and we'll just keep getting s*** done.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@kimihitothegreat6396 The tax thing isn't a law of any kind. It is simply every person that has one for that office, being the highest office and most powerful office in the land, has given their tax returns. This is because they find it necessary to show that they are not bought and paid for it where have ulterior motives, or are shady in any real way. All he offers are lies and excuses about his tax returns. He went from, I'll release them as soon as I get them together, to being audited and my lawyers say not to release when it's being audited, then lawyers came out and said that's not a thing, then he went to it's just plain stupid to release your taxes when you're being audited and I get audited more than anyone else in the entire world, then just passed his first year as president it all the sudden turned into nobody cares about my tax returns other than the fake news media. For me... That's a lot of dancing to get around doing somethingnhe said he would and that everyone else has. There is a reasonable argument for seeing presidential candidate tax returns, and to get out of it he is lying, moving the goalposts, changing a story and deflecting. At some point the American people need to Institute Occam's razor. Also.... There are no appropriate authorities for running for government. You are elected. The veting process is running... Is making your case to the American people. Why get them? We have a right to know that whoever sits in that office does not have a shady history. Transparency in gov.
That is a fare point... Some could use what they have to do bad things... But that does not nigate the necessity of the American people to have a presidential candidate and eventually a president that they can trust. That position holds a great deal of power over all of us. Not to mention... If we just didn't do common sense things, simply because someone might do something bad with the results of that, later.... We would never do anything.
I'm not a big Clinton fav, honestly. She, herself is shady. For more then just those emails. Plus... She never offerend anything other then platitudes and I'm not him. That is exactly why she lost. The American people are sick to death of status quo. As we should be. We need to demand more from our leaders. All we keep doing is lowering the bar. That doesn't get us anywhere good.
Thanks... I appreciate your point of view. I even somewhat get all these crazy Trump supporters claims of beating a dead horse, sometimes.... Just everytime I do something like... Watch the news and go, "Come on guys! I know you need to report on Trump but let's talk about something else for a min." He does some more stupid and potentially illegal stuff... Its like... Damnit man! Ya know... 😆
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@kaybel5104 Yeah... Sorry... Wrong again, Bob! 🤣
"The House brings impeachment charges against federal officials as part of its oversight and investigatory responsibilities. Individual Members of the House can introduce impeachment resolutions like ordinary bills, or the House could initiate proceedings by passing a resolution authorizing an inquiry. The Committee on the Judiciary ordinarily has jurisdiction over impeachments, but special committees investigated charges before the Judiciary Committee was created in 1813. The committee then chooses whether to pursue articles of impeachment against the accused official and report them to the full House. If the articles are adopted (by simple majority vote), the House appoints Members by resolution to manage the ensuing Senate trial on its behalf. These managers act as prosecutors in the Senate and are usually members of the Judiciary Committee. The number of managers has varied across impeachment trials but has traditionally been an odd number. The partisan composition of managers has also varied depending on the nature of the impeachment, but the managers, by definition, always support the House’s impeachment action."
And so now your argument isn't they aren't doing it the way that they're supposed to, but they're just not doing it to your liking.... and yet again, you are also shockingly, disregarding all I'm Trump's actions and putting this on the other side....
Lets see... why would the house Democrats be choosing not to let his lawyers in the room... Hmmm.... Lets think about that.... well, if I had a choice to do one or the other and both would be perfectly legal, and then I had a guy who's been trying to obstruct the process in a variety of different ways, from the jump, while being super disrespectful and childish... trying to curtail witness statements, trying to block other Witnesses, refusing to release documents that were subpoenaed.... I'm not sure I would be feeling like I really need to do anything extra for him either. It's called actions have consequences. Maybe if you took off those partisan blinders and actually tried to get an objective view of both sides, you wouldn't have to ask such silly questions. 😉✌
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@wolfman9959 "In April 2010, the FDA sent Buttar a warning letter for illegally marketing unapproved topical creams as drugs via his websites, YouTube videos, and radio appearances. FDA inspections also revealed that Buttar's company, V-SAB Medical Labs, had not complied with good manufacturing practices and that its products were "adulterated" according to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.
In 2011, as a result of the disciplinary action in North Carolina, the Hawaii Medical Board denied Buttar a medical license.
In 2019, the North Carolina Medical Board disciplined Buttar after receiving two complaints. In one case, a physician was worried that Buttar's treatment of a cancer patient hindered appropriate treatment and increased the patient's pain and suffering. In the other case, Buttar admitted that his personal relationship with the parent of a young patient constituted a boundary violation. Buttar and the Medical Board settled the complaints in a Consent Order that included a reprimand and a requirement to take courses in ethics and record keeping. Buttar acknowledged that his conduct constituted "unprofessional conduct including, but not limited to, departure from or the failure to conform to the ethics of the profession." Additionally, regarding the cancer patient, Buttar acknowledged that his documentation of care "failed to conform to the standards of acceptable and prevailing medical practice"."
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Progressive_Canadian 👈 Keep in mind this fit of his, is all bc I made the bold claim that it was wrong to, 👉both👈, shoot children with drones (What the OG commenter brought up), and chase them down with horses, while using reins as whips (What the video was about). Instead of it being an either-or scenario. 😵Crazy!😵 I know...
However, you can tell, he knows it's a bad argument, bc is you scroll up, you will notice that he 👉deleted👈 his original comment.
People like 👆this👆 are a poor imitation of what us, on the left, actually stands for. 🙄
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Progressive_Canadian 👈 Keep in mind this fit of his, is all bc I made the bold claim that it was wrong to, 👉both👈, shoot children with drones (What the OG commenter brought up), and chase them down with horses, while using reins as whips (What the video was about). Instead of it being an either-or scenario. 😵Crazy!😵 I know...
However, you can tell, he knows it's a bad argument, bc is you scroll up, you will notice that he 👉deleted👈 his original comment.
People like 👆this👆 are a poor imitation of what us, on the left, actually stands for. 🙄
1
-
1
-
@Progressive_Canadian 👈 Keep in mind this fit of his, is all bc I made the bold claim that it was wrong to, 👉both👈, shoot children with drones (What the OG commenter brought up), and chase them down with horses, while using reins as whips (What the video was about). Instead of it being an either-or scenario. 😵Crazy!😵 I know...
However, you can tell, he knows it's a bad argument, bc is you scroll up, you will notice that he 👉deleted👈 his original comment.
People like 👆this👆 are a poor imitation of what us, on the left, actually stands for. 🙄
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@derekwang7330 So here is another... Posting some full context quotes separately from the article, encase it gets deleted for the link.
"Second, “human life” implies individuality, which is also not consistent with scientific observations. In the clinical practice of IVF, we often speak of preimplantation embryos as individual entities, with distinct qualities like a specific genotype (mosaicism notwithstanding), and morphologic and developmental characteristics. But at the same time we realize that each of the totipotent cells that comprise these embryos is, at least theoretically, capable of producing a complete new individual. Indeed, multiple individuals can arise from the implantation of a single embryo, as in the case of identical twins. Therefore, we know that the preimplantation embryo is not actually an individual. The preimplantation embryo is essentially an aggregate of stem cells, which has the potential to produce a pregnancy, including placental and fetal tissues, assuming that it successfully implants in a receptive endometrium. It is only after implantation that the early embryo can further differentiate into the organized cell groups that enable the developing conceptus to progress further in embryonic and eventually fetal development."
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@derekwang7330 2. Which is when I moved on to an embryologist. Who is both a scientist and a doctor. So I have no clue what you're talking about how all these people aren't doctors.
I gave you the article again and where it came from. I also quoted specific sections out of it.
For which mostly ignored. Which is a habit you have had for quite a while. Ignoring things you can't argue against.
As per your definition or wherever you got that from. Of course a human embryo is a human embryo. That doesn't make it a human being. Embryos and people are different In A Million Ways. Many of which I have already stated and you have already ignored.
and forgot to post this a bit ago. 👇
"a zygote (a single-celled embryo)"
Not a human being. This is its classification in scientific terms.
@Derek Wang So here is another... Posting some full context quotes separately from the article, encase it gets deleted for the link.
"Second, “human life” implies individuality, which is also not consistent with scientific observations. In the clinical practice of IVF, we often speak of preimplantation embryos as individual entities, with distinct qualities like a specific genotype (mosaicism notwithstanding), and morphologic and developmental characteristics. But at the same time we realize that each of the totipotent cells that comprise these embryos is, at least theoretically, capable of producing a complete new individual. Indeed, multiple individuals can arise from the implantation of a single embryo, as in the case of identical twins. Therefore, we know that the preimplantation embryo is not actually an individual. The preimplantation embryo is essentially an aggregate of stem cells, which has the potential to produce a pregnancy, including placental and fetal tissues, assuming that it successfully implants in a receptive endometrium. It is only after implantation that the early embryo can further differentiate into the organized cell groups that enable the developing conceptus to progress further in embryonic and eventually fetal development."
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
👆 Let me tell you a little story about this guy.
So I'm am a Lib Dems... But... I also feel like it's important to give equal opportunity critiques. On our side of the isle I do it to be constructive. You know... Give these right wing trolls less to aim at.
Anywho... Exactly what I was trying to do with this one the other day. They had asked this right winger, who said that there were more gang related shootings then there were mass shootings, to give examples. Then, in the very next sentence, of the same comment, he decides to pretend the guy couldn't answer the question, all so he can say, "I told you so!", in the third and final sentence.
Turns out, pretending, for this one, would be a running theme, cuz after I pointed out how that was obv not cool, this one looses his s*** for about a day and a half.
First trying deflection to the other guys comment and how that some how justified his actions. Then, when it was clear I wasn't biting on the deflection, he moved to childish insults and personal attacks. When that didn't have the desired effect he tried to insist that bc no one else in the thread had come to my defense (or his, btw) that this meant that he was clearly right. At which point I simply pointed out that maybe it was bc no-one was listening to the exchange. After that, all the sudden he had a curiously timed like on his comments. Then he finally addressed his actions, but tried to pawn it off as him being "confident". At which time I pointed out why even the request for examples was a bad idea... And gave him 4 better ones.
It's clearly silly, bc gang shootings aren't exactly hard to find in America, unfortunately.
I told him...
"You SOULD HAVE called him out for deflecting to Whataboutism. You should have asked if that makes any of the kids who die in mass shootings any less dead. You should have told him that, on average, there is at least one mass shooting a day in america and has been for over a decade now. You should have told him it's the difference between one or 2 dead at a time and 12."
Then I told him to stop liking his own posts.... Which was a mistake on my part bc it gave him the opportunity to deflect to that, instead of addressing his own flawed argument.
He went on to insist he did not.... And that it was all a big coincidence. In order to prove this, he tried to like all his comments... Hoping that I wouldn't think of ppl having multiple accounts on here.
You can guess how well that went at this point.
So... After that, I was just "crazy". Which is what I thought was going to be the end of it, right.... Because, on this channel, someone randomly trying to imply that you're "crazy" after their argument isn't going so well, usually means they're scraping the bottom of the proverbial Barrel.... But... Not this one. No! This had long sense become about his ego at this point.
So... Next thing I know a "new guy" pops up! One that Sports strikingly similar cadence and spelling and grammar errors as he had, conveniently agreeing with everything he said and claiming to be the one who liked his comments. Mind you, not going any reasoning behind it, even when asked, but, still, nevertheless, completely agreeing with every single thing he had said. It turned out there "was" someone who was hanging on our every word. 😂
... But it doesn't stop there. No! This guy stop talking to me, and then precedes to have a whole conversation with the other guy, about me and how "wrong" and "crazy" I am. Again... No reason why... I'm just "wrong" and I'm just "crazy".
Finally, he uses that as an excuse to save face and run away.
So, if you've gotten this far and your one of us... you should know that this guy isn't. He doesn't actually care about any of the issues. He acts like much of the right wing trolls that come here. He doesn't actually care about anything he's saying so much as he just wants to be right, even when he's wrong. He isn't one of us. He is just sad.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@issuesthatmatter2825 to be clear, we're talking about man-made climate change. See the majority of it is CO2 gases being released into the air and our world is adaptable to a certain level of those. They've always been there. Some of them even helped a great deal. However, people are producing so much excess CO2 that the Earth's environment and its Cycles are not prepared to handle that. It's raising our temperatures, creating more mass weather events, melting are ice caps, which is producing way too much water in our oceans, sea levels Rising, oceans temperatures are heating up, decreased snow coverage, declining Arctic sea ice, ocean acidification... look, you seem to put a high price on survival and being able to live off of nature. I would think that you would be very concerned about this and want the truth Based on data. So I would encourage you to speak it all out. It's out there.
If you claim they're all these climate scientists that agree with you, why can't you name them? Seriously, please just look this stuff up. Think of it as a survival assignment. It's important for our kids Futures and our grandkids.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@UCDEX1RMdaribyhIxb-YCL7A 👈 This is also a clear example of a Trump troll, lying about there identity, political affiliation and circumstance, in order to seem more credible. An easy tell is them randomly mentioning they are "not" a trump supporter and they are, in fact, black, as and, out of nowhere, overcompensation for nothing that was brought up. Also, the need they feel to villainize "liberals". Also, their need to defend Trump's racism, while bringing up me being white.
"Ms. House Keeping"
"Good people on both sides"
People who live in Africa all live in "huts" and all have "AIDS".
"I wouldn't trust blacks with my money"
" Pocahontas"
" kung flu"
To name ONLY a few
This person is clearly lying about who they are. I have ran into quite a few of these. At least this one didn't lie about there military service. Still... I don't get their mindset. It, like, never crosses their mind that if they have to lie about so much, to validate what they want to be true, doesn't that already show them that it's not?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Dermahon13 only a few from before he was in office.... To show the decades of history.
I generally give people these at first. Mostly because they are all before presidency became a factor.
Trump's real estate company tried to avoid renting apartments to African Americans in the 70s and gave preferential treatment to White, according to the federal government.
Trump treated black employees at his casinos differently from whites, according to multiple sources. A former Hotel executive said that Trump criticized a black accountant," black guys counting my money. I hate it. I think that the guy is lazy. And it's possibly not his fault, but laziness is a trait in Blacks."
In 1989, Trump took out ads in the New York newspapers urging the death penalty for 5 black and Latino teenagers accused of raping a white woman in Central Park. He argue that they were guilty as late as October 2016, more than ten years after DNA evidence had exonerated them.
In 1989, on NBC, Trump said, " I think sometimes a black may think they don't have an advantage or this and that. I've said on one occasion, even about myself, if I were starting off today, I would love to be a well-educated black, because I really believe they do have an actual advantage."
He spent years suggesting that the nation's first black president was born not in the United States but in Kenya.
In the 1990s, Trump took out advertisements alleging that the "Mohawk Indian record of criminal activity is well-documented." At the time he was fighting competition for his casino business.
In a 1993 radio interview, he suggested that Native Americans in Connecticut were faking their ancestry. "I think I might have more Indian blood than a lot of the so-called Indians that are trying to open up the reservations."
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Dermahon13 Actually, I gave you the unemployment growth numbers from his 👉2nd term👈. After the recession was over, and had been 👉for 3 years👈. A little over 3 years. Considering Obama pulled us out of the Great Recession in 7 months. Which is certainly nothing to scoff at.
And I wasn't trying to say anything, hun. I was just giving you a hard data, at that point. In fact, I don't like speculating. I don't like doing it and I don't like others doing it either. Especially when debating. A valid point was rarely made, when saying, "This is what's going to happen". So I don't know if manufacturing would have come back..... Maybe. He did save the auto manufacturing industry in his first term, but he also had the House in Senate majority at that point. In his second one, Rep Congress would not let him do almost anything. Though, I don't like to guess, an education one would be, only if the Dems got the House and Senate back. But, like I said, take that with a grain of salt, considering term limits and the fact that your scenario would never happen in real life.
I actually did not forget African American, Asian, Hispanic or women. I did give you the data for all metrics being a an historic low. I mearly acknowledged that it's a five-man relay race and you seam to only be giving credit to the guy who passed the finish line. That is inaccurate.
Also, I would argue that Obama should get full credit for that job peak during his terms, because, after all, he was thw one who got out out of the Great Recession. He had farther to go and a herder job to do, considering. Like I said, 5 man relay race. Not a sprint.
Its also only fair to to recognize the extremely obstructionist Republican House and Senate, that occurred during his second term. Obama had to take his name off of several bills during his second term, in order to get them passed. One of the most notable being, the second 911 responders bill. Which still had to have a Financial cat put on it, for the Republicans to pass it. So if we're being fair, that needs to be a consideration, as well.
Wait, how did he mess it up and then fix it? He did not put us in the Great Recession. That was Bush.
Also, you're only focusing on unemployment rate and not job growth.
They all did their part. Not just Obama, BTW. I'm says, all of them, as far back as Reagan. Trump's presidency certainly did not happen in a bubble. It is very disingenuous to a true reading of all the facts, to say that it did. That would be dismissing a lot of work, that even the Rep presidents did, before Trump.
Your arguing with facts and numbers. Which isn't advised. It sounds a bit partisan, as well. I have my opinions but I am trying not bias myself, by giving you the full reading of the facts and data. Even though, I'm not a fan of Trump, Obvy. I'm also not trying to take anything away from him.
1
-
@Dermahon13 No... Under the contracts, that where instituted in basic lease and renting agreements, at that time, you have to demonstrate that their rental price would be only 40% or less, of the persons personal monthly income. So if he would have sited that in his book keeping, they could have dismissed the claim in court for that reason. Which would have cut the legs out from under the lawsuit, if it had not been 40% or less of their monthly income. Because then they would have been covered under Fair renting practices.
They also found out, during the lawsuit, that the African American people that Trump and his father did went to, were marked in the books. They all had the letter "B". No others had those markings. Trump senior and their bookkeeper at the time, testified that the "B" meant black. The book keeper also testified that it was put there, per Trump senior and Trump juniors instruction.
Also, every one that had the "B" marking, where charged more for similar units, then anyone else. They lost the discrimination lawsuit, in part, because of all of this. You should really go look it up. It's pretty crazy.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Dermahon13 Yeah... I'm going to call BS on those.
You can't first say that Trump was the first president to go into office supporting the lgbtq community and then plane that it's totally cool that he discriminated against transgender members already in the service. Transgender men and women are part of that lgbtq community.
Also, you are correct. Barack Obama did change his mind in office. He admitted that he was wrong, which is more than we can say for Trump on anything, and then not only did he do that but he put all his weight behind getting gay marriage passed in the entire country. So not only did he man up and admit that he was wrong oh, but he also admirably did whatever he could to fix it. That's not something that should be scoffed at.
As for transgender military service people, that's the other BS I'm going to call. There are transgender service members right now that has gone overseas and been in combat. They've passed all the tests that all the other soldiers pass, they've served and fought for our country. They've drugged people off the battlefield. They lost their lives protecting their fellow soldiers. That alone proves you're, somewhat, small-minded comment wrong about them. They've been doing it forever now. They deserve more respect than that.
I've also heard that argument about how it's not okay to have the military pay for your transition. Here's my rebuttal, if it was cancer, or they broke their leg, or they had PTSD, would you be so outraged at the military paying for their medical treatment? Its a medical condition. When you sign up to serve, with all that doing so entails, one of the things you get back for doing so, is your medical needs get taken care of. That should apply to all, across the board.
BTW, I absolutely follow facts and science. I just choose to follow and pay attention to all of that. Like the multitude of scientific studies that claim that transgender people have the hormone levels and hormone types of the opposite sex. They show that even though you have external genitalia that contradicts you being one sex, inside, when it comes to types of hormones types, hormone levels and brain processes, shows you're a different sex.
Science also tells us that the entirety of the lgbtq spectrum is found in species other than our own. Which proves that it is a natural occurrence. There have been many new studies on transgenderism since the scientific Community stopped labeling it as gender dysphoria. All of which point to these people living a life, in a body, that they don't belong in. That's not an easy thing to live with. If you're going to choose to do that and also serve our country, fight and die for us, the very least we can do, is treat them with some respect.
1
-
1
-
@Dermahon13 no. It's not the same. Obama got us out of the recession. He did that work. That's why they're started to be more jobs. He didn't just sit back and do nothing. He pulled us out of that recession. He did so in 7 months.
Trump has not gotten us more jobs. He's lowered unemployment, again through the relay race. But lower unemployment and job growth are two different metrics.
Your scenario does not hold water. Of course Trump's going to do it faster. He has a shorter distance to cover.
The GDP is a good example of that. GDP numbers and GDP growth are two different metrics as well. GDP is what the number is at. GDP growth is how far you had to travel between the last number and the number you have now. When Obama entered office, during the recession, which again he pulled us out of, the GDP was -2.5 %. By the end of his first year he had pulled that up to + 3.9%. Which makes his GDP growth rate 6.1%. When Trump entered office the GDP was 1.8%. After his first year it went up to 2.2%. Which made his GDP growth rate, 0.4%. Now I will say that he is picking up the pace in his second year because this last years GDP was 3.9% and the year before, it was 2.2%. Which now makes his GDP growth rate, 1.7%.
And Obamas growth rate did slow throughout his term because of the small boom bust cycle we had to go through in order to get us through the Great Recession.... But it wad always pretty respectable.
The point being, your using the recession as the reason why you shouldn't pay attention to his numbers, but the recession is exactly why you should pay attention to his numbers being the highest. He had farther to go and he got us out of the Great Recession. The numbers are higher for him because he did the work and had more work to do then Trump did.
For example... in February 2009, Congress approved Obama's 787 billion dollar economic stimulus package. It cut taxes, extended unemployment benefits and funded Public Works projects. The recession ended in July 2009 when GDP growth turned positive. In just seven months, the American Recovery and restoration Act comped 241.9 billion dollars into the economy. That increased growth to a robust 3.9% rate by early 2010.
Obama also bailed out the US Auto industry on March 30th, 2009. The federal government took over General Motors and Chrysler and saved 3 million jobs. It forced the companies to become more fuel efficient and therefore more globally competitive.
He also regulated the big Banks. In July 2010, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform Act improved regulation of 8 area is that led to the financial crisis. The Consumer Financial Protection Agency reduced harmful practices of credit cards and mortgages. The financial stability oversight Council regulated hedge funds and banks that became too big to fail. The volcker rule banned Banks from risking losses with their depositors money. Dodd-Frank clarified which agencies regulated which banks, stopping Banks from cherry picking their regulators.
Dodd-Frank directed The Securities and Exchange Commission and the commodity Futures Trading Commission. These regulated the riskiest derivatives, like credit default swaps and Commodities Futures. Dog Frank also asked the SEC to recommend how the credit rating agencies, like Moody's and Standard & Poor's, could be improved
In 2010 he cut taxes. In December 2010, Obama and Congress agreed upon additional stimulus in the form of an 858 billion dollar tax cut. It had three main components, a 350 billion dollar extension of the Bush tax cuts, a 56 billion dollar extension of unemployment benefits, and a 120 billion dollar reduction in workers payroll taxes. Business has received 140 billion dollars in tax cuts for a capital Improvement and 80 billion dollar in research and development tax credits. The estate tax was Exempted up to five million dollars and there were additional credits for college tuition in children.
So you saything that he just stood in the rain and just got wet, is simply untrue. He did the work and had farther to go, in order to get to a similar place.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Dermahon13 so, you're making a common mistake in understanding taxes in America and how they work. My mom happens to be the lead tax professional into separate states. Louisiana and Texas. I also worked for H&R Block for 6 years. The reason we do tax rate and not dollar rate is because of income fluctuation. If we said everybody had a set amount that they had to pay into the government every year, like a dollar amount. Period. Let's say that amount is, $2,000. .. One percenters would scoff at that and be like whatever I spend more money than that before breakfast. But the bottom 85% of Americans cannot survive a sudden life event that would cost more than $800 to fix, without getting into more trouble. Also America would go broke. So we set the taxes at a tax rate. Which you mentioned. So they pay equivalently what everybody else pays, depending on how much wealth they have. This makes sense for a lot of reasons. The rich use up more resources through their companies, they make more money, they also, often don't pay a living wage to their employees. I, personally would be fine with the rich getting there taxes cut even a little more if they started paying their employees, voluntarily, a living wage.
The richest 1% of Americans own 35% of the nation's wealth. The bottom 80%, (I think I said 85 before. I was mistaken), own just 11% of the nation's wealth.
In the fifties and sixties when the economy was booming, the wealthiest Americans pay their top income rate of 91%. Today the top income rate is 43.4%. The richest 1% pay an effective federal income tax rate of 24.7% back in 2014. Someone makes an average of $75,000 is paying a 19.7% rate.
In 2009 the average federal income tax rate of the richest 400 Americans was just 20%. Taxing investment income at a much lower rate than salaries and wages are taxed loses 1.3 trillion dollars over 10 years.
1470 households reported income of more than 1 million in 2009 but paid 0 federal income tax on it.
CEOs of major corporations are nearly three hundred times more than an average worker.
The largest contributor to increasing income inequality has been changes in income from capital gains and dividends.
The top 1% also have many more tax loopholes in order to pay way less than the percentage is, then the average middle to lower class worker.
One of the worst things that trumps tax cut did, was getting rid of the tax credit for teachers buying school supplies. Instead of cutting education funding for our children, we should ask millionaires to pay a tax rate at least as high as their secretaries. Which as of now, they do not. And once again, the top 1% CEO makes 300 times more then that secretary. She pays a higher tax rate though.
Just cutting 1/4 of the rich loopholes that the middle-class don't have access to would basically allow us to fund things like Medicare and the VA, it would allow us to make sure every child in America got a quality education, it would allow us to make sure every American gets the health care they deserve, it would do all of those at the same time, as well as do things like fun the space program properly.
So when you're talkin about the 1%, you have to take a lot more factors into your thought process then the average American taxpayer.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Dermahon13 sweetheart, we are absolutely going through climate change in a big horrible way with a multitude of examples. I'm going to watch the video but whatever that video says is not going to outweigh the 99.9% of climate scientists saying this is happening. The only ones that are saying that it is not are the ones that are getting paychecks from Big Oil. The experts say this is happening in this is why. You pay attention to science right? You stated that earlier. Then I assume you know how rare it is for that percentage of Any Given field to come to a consensus on anything. Yet they all have done it for climate change. The scientific Community is damn near just as dysfunctional as Congress but they all got together and said," Naa! This s*** is happening." NASA is also jumping in that pool.
- 99.9% of climate scientists agree that climate warming Trends over the past Century are extremely likely due to human activities, and most of the leading scientific organizations worldwide has issued public statements endorsing this position.
- the current warming trend is a particular significance because of it is greater than 95% possibility to be the result of human activities since the mid-20th century and proceeding at a rate that is unprecedented over decades to Millenia.
- Earth orbiting satellite and other technological advances have enabled scientists to see the big picture, collecting many different types of information around our planet and its climate on a global scale. This body of data, collected over many years, reveals the signals of a changing climate.
- the heat-trapping nature of carbon dioxide and other gases were demonstrated in the mid-nineteenth century. Their ability to effect the transfer of infrared energy through the atmosphere is the scientific basis of many instruments flown by NASA. There's no question that increased levels of greenhouse gases must cause the Earth to warm in response.
- ice cores drawn from Greenland, Antarctica, and tropical Mountain glaciers show that the earth's climate response to changes in greenhouse-gas levels. Ancient evidence can also be found in tree rings, ocean sediments, coral reefs and layers of sedimentary rock. This ancient or paleo climate, evidence reveals that current warming is occurring roughly 10 times faster than the average rate of Ice Age recovery warming.
Signs...
- Global temperature rise
- warming oceans
- shrinking ice sheets
- glacial retreat
- decreased snow cover
- sea level rise
- declining Arctic sea ice
- increase in extreme weather events
- ocean acidification
https://climate-nasa-gov.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/climate.nasa.gov/evidence.amp?usqp=mq331AQMmAH3zKeWkfPAlbAB&_js_v=a2&_gsa=1#referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&share=https%3A%2F%2Fclimate.nasa.gov%2Fevidence.amp%23referrer%3Dhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Dermahon13 it wasn't our money. The money you were talking about that Iran got. All we did was release the hold on the bank account that they had with their money in it. They didn't get a cent from us. Because we did that, for the very first time in our long history with them they followed our rules to a T. Along with the UN to verify it.
And of course they're going to build nukes now. In good faith they cooperating fully with the deal that was set forth which one's confirmed by the UN. Then Trump goes and lies about Iran, the UN says no that's not what's happening, but he still uses it as the reason to pull out of the deal that was working. They weren't making nuclear weapons. They were making power. Trump lied on them.
Those facilities were back when they were making that stuff. They had stopped and it those programs were not secret because it was in the deal. The UN and the US went in and inspected on a regular basis.
Why else would our allies, be backing Iran? Are long-standing allies are in the UN backing Iran. Say that out loud. Why would that be happening? why would our long-standing allies be backing a country like Iran? Why would they feel that they need to do so to the extent of sanctioning trump and America in the UN? I mean, it's Iran. Crazy vicious dictator Colt country that treats their women like s*** and makes little boys in the soldiers. Everything most of these countries are appalled by, yet they're still backing them on this. The global leaders are still giving evidence at the un to show that Trump is lying about them. Every time America went over to Iran to do these inspections, several Alder representatives from the countries that are in the UN went with them. They had the same data and collected it at the same time. Yet their data says something completely different than what Trump is saying. They have the evidence to prove that he lied. If every other country in the world backing I ran against America wasn't enough already.
All those other consequences that you are listing are effects from Trump lying on them. Of course that's going to happen now. Of course Iran's going to say fuk it we did everything we could and this guy is still acting like an ass and lying on us. Why the hell am I not do what we want now.
The part you're not paying attention to is all that stuff they can do with the money now and trade, they gave all that up to make a deal with us. The only reason they have all that back is because of Trump's actions.
The deal was temporary because Congress wouldn't approve. Also it covered the span of a decade. A decade in which they were doing a damn good job of being completely transparent and showing us that they were serious about that deal and if Trump hadn't gone in there and mess that up, then the next time they had to start renegotiating the deal, they would have been in a stronger position. because they had a decade worth of trust built up. That's why I ran was going to follow the deal. It was going to be renegotiated. They were going to have a better bargaining position. I'm not under the impression that they were doing it to be good or turn over a new Leaf or anything like that. It's Iran. They were doing it for self-interest but they were doing it.
And there's something to be said for the only country in the world that has ever used a nuke on civilian population, deciding that they're the ones that get to decide who has nuclear weapons in the world and who does not, being majorly hypocritical. I've never thought we were the ones that needed to do that.
They were allowed to enrich uranium to a certain point. That was one of the main functions of the inspectors from the US and the UN. There is a point that you can enriched uranium to create nuclear power and a point where you can enrich uranium to make nuclear bombs. All the tests that the UN had said that they were only reaching the levels to create nuclear power.
It was a good deal. A good deal does not entail that we get everything we want and the other side gets nothing. Considering the long history America and Iran has with broken promises towards each other they gave up a lot to make this deal with us and to follow it to a T. It was working. The only reason it stopped working was Trump started lying on them so that he could pull out. Which put us on a global scale in a weaker position by the way. Because now not only can they speculate that Trump lies to the other world leaders, they have actual proof of it now. now they have proof that America can't be trusted under this president.
I'm sorry but he led with his ego and messed this thing up good and proper.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Dermahon13 her story was not b*******. Kanvanagh, did it and had done similar things to other girls who also came up and told their stories.
So here's the thing about me that you don't know, I'm an abuse and a rape Survivor. More than half of my life was spent that way. I'm 35 now. I also volunteer at a woman's crisis center because of my history and the training I had to take to be able to volunteer there.
Look, BS stories about abuse and sexual assault could not possibly piss you off more than it does me. There have been times that I have talked to women who have coming to the center and after talking to them about things me and the other volunteers knew they were lying. They wanted us to take a statement and file a report so there could be records for the police. That's part of what we do. We knew this because there are markers. Markers we learn from our training and from our personal experience. Some common ones are...
- younger victims rarely report the incident at the time. It's unfortunate but it's true. I did the same thing.
- when a victim describes their story, they go through levels of Detachment as they go along. That's why when you hear them described it you'll hear them Focus on, what you would consider to be, small mynute details and almost not talk about the actual event, the penetration. That's a common symptom of the level of shock your body goes into in order to protect your mind.
- most commonly there's an outcry witness, if not immediately then within the first couple of months or years later.
- your body can go back into a State of Shock giving a certain trigger even years after the incident. That's happened to me as well.
- there are often micro expressions that you exhibit with your body. These are extremely hard if not impossible to duplicate. Shaking your head at certain points, crossing your arms and protecting your body, lowering your head, closing your eyes, your body recoiling, leaning back instead of forward, unknowingly going into defensive stances.
- feeling a sense of Shame while speaking on the matter, even though your head knows it wasn't your fault.
- it being easier to write write it down or have somebody bring up the subject then it is to outright start talkin about it. To this day it's difficult for me to just start talking about it. Cuz think about it, how do you just bring that up? You're always worried about the reaction of the other person. If they bring it up first or if you're writing it down and you don't have to see their reaction then it makes it a little safer. It's the shame Factor. You are terrified of other people's reactions.
Those are just a few that I saw in the Doctors reactions and claims. Could you do me a favor? Go look at her testimony. Have that list I just gace you in mind and watch for the signs. You already think its not true. So you gonna be able to really tell if they are there or not. Because you're not going to be looking to confirm them.
I understand you're on the other side of the spectrum on this, but you've shown me to be logic based and even somewhat reasonable. So maybe consider that the reason you believe that and only focus on the things that prove that in the case, is because you had to experience the other side of that. Which is f*** up by the way. Like I said, you could not possibly be more pissed at women that do s*** like that then people like me are. That ex of yours is crazy and a horrible human being for doing that. She's Not Just disrespecting you but she's just respecting every single woman who is actually suffered through that kind of thing.
But for a true rape Survivor, not believing them, is just about the worst thing you can do to them, aside from the actual assault. I'm sure you can see that.
1
-
@Dermahon13 Lol! Yeah... I just kinda went down the list and hoped I didnt miss something. Lol
Yeah I don't know what was going on with those crazy people. Ireland and England just needed to have a Kumbaya moment. Lol and they all really need to get through this damn brexit thing. cuz it's kind of starting to bomb us out over here. LOL
Apollo 11? IDK, I like to see the other side of things. So I guess it could be argued. On the basis of the standards of society at the time. Back then into this day you tend to get most your astronauts from the Air Force. Back then not a whole lot of officers were women or people of color and you had to be pretty high-ranking to become an astronaut. So I guess that would kind of be there argument... But really that's just based on the time that it was. And it's not like there weren't huge steps taken towards correcting that and in the last couple of decades. The Space Program in America now is massively diverse. There will always be racial and sexual divides in America but you know give people credit for the work they've done, you don't have to bring up old s*** all the time. If we're not repeating those mistakes now, then move on with your life. That would be the only reason you would look at mistakes in the past, is to make sure we didn't happen to do them in the future. With the Space Program we're not doing that. There are women and people of color all over NASA now.
You mentioned the space program and it made me think of my little boy. His name is Gabriel and he is 8. Sense he was little, he was sure he wanted to be an astronaut and a YouTuber. Apparently both at the same time. But a specific kind of astronaut. He wants to fly the ships. One point when he was smaller, he started talking about how he wanted to pop wheelies in space. He was so disappointed when I had to explain to him how you kind of float and glide in space and there's not really anything you can pop a wheelie off of. 😂 He is such a science nerd though. He makes us watch every SpaceX test live. He actually understands pretty well about what they're doing. He loves the idea that they're trying to make space travel affordable for everybody by making reusable Rockets. He was super excited when they cracked the technology about a month ago and got all the Rockets to come back and land. It's pretty cute! 😊 personally, I told him that off planet was too far away from mommy and that if he did that that he had to take me with him. Which I think is completely reasonable and no one can convince me otherwise.😉 lol
Idk, something like you mentioned, I see as identity politics but some things may be that also... But at the same time, and as I have said before, are things we need to call out by its proper name in order to begin fixing. I don't see every little thing as sexist or racist or bigoted, like a lot of right-wingers try to paint people like me. Is it fits the definition though, the actual definition, then it should be called such in any scenario or under any subject and even if it makes people feel uncomfortable. Cuz that's how we change it. That's how we make things better. Denying that it exists because it may fall under the realm of identity politics does not make a whole lot of sense to me. I do see a lot of people on my side of the Divide labeling people and things incorrectly though. Usually for devices purpose.
And if you think you're passionate about identity politics oh, you should see me when I go after bullies. That's my identity politics. Which in what we were just talking about, people Miss labeling other people in a negative way, and in order to bring shame upon them, is exactly what that is. That is bullying. If your point is valid then it will stand alone without any of those childish bullying tactics. If it is not then it will fall as it should, but you're not going to go around bullying people into believing what you want them to. You're certainly not going to get me to shut the hell up about it. I don't give a damn what side you're on. You're acting like an ass clown I'll tell you you're acting like an ass clown. Bullies get me real ignorant real quick. LOL
1
-
@Dermahon13 Why? Why shouldn't transgender people be in the military? You do know they already are? You do know they're transgender service members, serving our country right now? You do know they fought and died for us already? You do know they've saved other soldiers lives?
And absolutely women should be on the battlefield. I don't think the strict standard of 50/50 should apply. That's silly. It regardless of whether you are a man or a woman, if you can pass the test and the training, the same test and training that every other Soldier has to to be able to participate, then you should be out there. That's the only fair way to do it.
Well then you have to take that credit away from Trump because he's discriminating against transgender.
I give Obama the credit because he did not only say he's for or against something, like Trump, he took action. Actions speak louder than words. Obama evolved his opinion on gay marriage and then he went out there and helped get gay marriage passed in the entire country during his term. He put his money where his mouth was. Changing minds and hearts is how we make things better. That shouldn't be scoffed at.
Sweetheart, we've been talking long enough for you to know that I'm pretty blunt and straightforward. If I thought you were a bigot or closed minded oh, I would have said so. I think you can be a little overly stubborn despite the evidence and a little hypocritical at times but not bigoted her closed-minded. And we can all be a little stubborn and hypocritical at times.
The transgender suicide rate is high and it's because of how people treat them, by large part. The other part... Is living every day of your life and a body that you don't feel like it is your own.
K... Well... First... slavery is a hell of a standard dude...
Second... you should look up some of the scientific studies on the self. As in yourself and how your own personal identity is so vital to you doing everything. It's a vinyl to everybody's overall Mental Health.
Also, comparing slavery to transgenderism, is a little like apples and oranges babe. Slave masters over a pretty short. Of time developed a very efficient system for getting slaves to do what they wanted them to do. Brainwashing, dominance training and letting them have families. That way they had something to hold over them. That's why more than half of the slave suicides happened on the boats on the way over. It was before a whole lot of their conditioning set in. It's just not comparable to modern-day transgenderism.
I thought you said that you cared about science in fact? These are scientific studies. If you ignore some and only pay attention to the others because they fit your preconceived notions, that's not scientific at all.
Estrogen and testosterone have a lot to do with what makes men, men and what makes women, women. Again, you're claiming to go by science but you're denying the science of sexual hormones? That's like basic science sweetheart. Men have naturally high levels of testosterone and women have naturally high levels of estrogen. And transgender women, those who are born with men genitalia, they have naturally high levels of estrogen and not testosterone. The same is true for transgender man. Those who are born with women genitalia, have naturally high levels of testosterone. Also their brain functioning is different. Women and men have different kinds of brain functioning. Transgender have been found to have the opposite sex brain functioning. External genitalia is not the only Factor when it comes to determining someone sex. Men and women have many differences in their body from each other. Inside and outside. That's why women tend to be smaller built. As I believe you mentioned earlier when we were talking about women on battlefields. So you recognized already that men and women have different characteristics more than just what genitalia they have. You can't just throw that to the side and dismiss that now because it doesn't fit your argument. At least you can't do it with out looking like you have one standard for one thing and another for another.
Also, refusing to recognize scientific studies about gender identification in other species, does not make it go away. Plus, you're smarter than that. Go do some studying on it first at least please?
Also mutation is just a word in science to describe what we know to be a standard and the diversion from that. Our standards can change though, as we gain more knowledge and understanding about the world around us. Science is evolving. That's a fundamental part of science. There are zillions of examples of this in history and science. We thinks things are one way oh, then we find another way and then we find another way after that. science has never been something you can box in that way. there is over reaching without evidence oh, but that's where the term scientific theory comes in. Scientific theory is different than regular Theory. there is a higher standard of evidentiary studies that needs to be met before you can call something a scientific theory.
I'm not suggesting that science is not factual. I'm suggesting that you are not looking at all of the science available and only looking at that which fits your preconceived notions. There are plenty of papers done by people who aren't lgbtq. But even if that it wasn't true, is scientific protocols were observed, recorded and met, it would not matter whether they where LGBTQ or not. That does not automatically dismiss the study. Especially if they used all scientific protocols.
and sorry but I'm going to speak my mind, whether you like it or not. I wouldn't expect any different from you.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@juliosuave8028 So... I thought you said you provide facts? Not cherry picked twisted data that conveniently gives you an argument?
What you call, my "claim" is easily proven to be facts.... And not claims. Infact, you can find it under the "Unborn victims of violence Act". Which is why I kept saying "unborn". Because that's literally what the law calls it.
Next, you tried to mention a percentage of states that recognizes the crime, EXCEPT... You conveniently left out the part that I mentioned in the act, that states that the only way they are charged with these things is they are considered to be homicide or feticide. Not manslaughter. Which... Is what you are conveniently forgetting, is part of what you claimed to be "facts".
Another part that you conveniently left out, is the fact that all of these crimes under this act, in every state has a viability clause. Meaning it depends on is The Unborn is developed enough to be able to survive outside the womb without the mother.
As far as your "mental gymnastics" claim, about it not being manslaughter but being life in another context, again... Has to do with viability. Which goes goes back to my original question that you and almost everyone else keeps avoiding.
You have no functioning brain outside of the womb are you considered alive? The answer to that is no. Which again you don't want to have to say because it kind of destroys your point of view. Meaning, not until a certain point into gestation and growth inside a womb is something we would call alive in any other circumstance. Until that point, it is not alive. Which means if the mother dies before this point,, or in some states, before the point of viability, it cannot be charged as even homicide or feticide. Why? Because that involves killing something that was never alive in the first place.
It's really not that hard to understand. No gymnastics are involved. It's just something you're choosing to pretend you're ignorant about so you still have a point.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Why? Because we are choosing to focus on a problem you don't want us to, for way longer then you think we should?
Sean Reed, US military Vet, 21
Steven Demarco Taylor, 33
Ariane McCree, 28
Terrance Franklin, 22
Miles Hall, 23
Samuel David Mallard, 19
Stephon Clark, 22
Finan H. Berhe, 30
I guess their lives don't matter.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@XxILiveForYouXx Go back and read what your last comment said... And the ones before that and then tell me this has nothing to do with your ego.
Even outside of trying to insist something is fact, that hasn't happened yet (twice), you implied multiple times that if you watch a certain program that you can't think for yourself, as, you, yourself, watch them and am more then capable of forming an independent thought.... But to you... Its, "stop watching things that don't specifically go with my opinion on the future and only listen to me, the guy on the internet, you've never met in your life, as I try and predict the future.
This is nothing but ego for you.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ferry602 Yeah... Sorry... You've stumbled upon a forum that doesn't just accept Russian propaganda, just bc they said so.
After the iron curtain fell, and russia no longer controlled all those other countries, those countries where actually able to decide things for themselves. You guys seem to be under the impression that after those countries left the USSR on their own, that you still got to tell them what to do, despite them being sovereign country is able to decide their own Fates. Just like each one of them have every right to apply to join NATO, if they do choose to.
NATO has not moved to any border of Russia. The countries that where there, stayed there. There are not troops of bases massing at Russia's borders brandishing NATOs patches. No one is building massive missile silos and pointing them at Russia from any of these countries. They simply chose to join an international alliance. One that has a history of only firing back when provoked.
NATO was formed in part to deal with Russia and the USSR. After that was handled, they went on to unite the world... Ya know... Instead I was going around and spreading conspiracy theories and picking fights with everyone, then making up a reason for it later.
The US didn't make Russia invade Ukraine and start mass raping, torturing and murdering ppl. That was Russia. Also... The US is only 1 member pf NATO.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Blank Thanks for showing who you are, yet again.
I'm going to go back to the substance. You can read this and interpret it as you please, you can respond as you please.
Yes! There is a difference between "detention" and these camps. Making that comparison is massively out of touch. Applying for asylum is legal... And needed for the hell most of these people are coming from. They should not be treated like criminals, caged, seperated, been put in unsanitary living conditions, with improper healthcare and children dying of what started as a common cold... They should not have to worry about having their children lost in a system that took them from them. These people are here for help. They should not have to choose between treated like less than human or living in hell with their kids. This is not what america should be. Immigrants built this country... Its survives off the backs of these people and has in a variety of ways, sense it began. They come in, we help them get on their feet and then them and their families contribute to this country for generations to come. That is the case... More times then not. Thats who we are. That is why asylum is legal.
Now... You can make shitty remarks, stupid insulta that don't matter anyways, because I don't know you... So what does it matter what you think about me... Its not like its going to effect my life. It just makes you feel better... And that shouldn't be something that makes you feel better. .... Or you can man up and participate in civil discourse. Up to you.
1
-
@Blank I'll be right here, till your done.
Thanks for showing who you are, yet again.
I'm going to go back to the substance. You can read this and interpret it as you please, you can respond as you please.
Yes! There is a difference between "detention" and these camps. Making that comparison is massively out of touch. Applying for asylum is legal... And needed for the hell most of these people are coming from. They should not be treated like criminals, caged, seperated, been put in unsanitary living conditions, with improper healthcare and children dying of what started as a common cold... They should not have to worry about having their children lost in a system that took them from them. These people are here for help. They should not have to choose between treated like less than human or living in hell with their kids. This is not what america should be. Immigrants built this country... Its survives off the backs of these people and has in a variety of ways, sense it began. They come in, we help them get on their feet and then them and their families contribute to this country for generations to come. That is the case... More times then not. Thats who we are. That is why asylum is legal.
Now... You can make shitty remarks, stupid insulta that don't matter anyways, because I don't know you... So what does it matter what you think about me... Its not like its going to effect my life. It just makes you feel better... And that shouldn't be something that makes you feel better. .... Or you can man up and participate in civil discourse. Up to you.
1
-
1
-
1
-
Fionabuster D. Nothing you're saying is wrong, in a way. Which is why its disappointing that you presented it as you did. One of the biggest reasons everything that happens, just gets slid past, is because people almost always tries to deflect from that current issue at hand, to their own personal cause.... What they want... Or even away from what they don't want to address. If you had addressed the primary issue, the, for lack of a better term, wrong of it, and who is doing it, in a clear and direct manner, you would not of heard Boo from me. You skipped an important step. It is important to call out the injustice that is happening today and who is doing it. No matter what side... As you pointed out.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@rileyfair5 👈 This one here has dodged 1 question this entire time, using many common right wing tactics, suited towards only seeing information or points of interest that fit a particular narrative. Forcing them to surrender their morals and common sense, in order to do so.
* Lying
* Pretending they don't understand
* Making claim after claim, they can not back up when challenged to do so
* Consistently the person asking them for that evidence are doing things, they, themselves are doing... And, yet again, not being about to provide evidence of this, when challenged
* Attempting to divert and deflect from the evidence challenges
* Childish name calling
* Pretending to ask for context, they don't really want
And on and on... Not realizing they discredit themselves along the way.
Point being, when you come across people like this, your goal shouldn't be to convince them of anything. Just to discredit them past the point that anyone can take them seriously anymore. They will always help you with this. They won't always turn themselves inside and out not answering that one fact based question. All you have to do is find that one fact-based question, they can't just credit and you won't let them run away from. Eventually, them not answering it, answers it anyways.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Tommy Thompson Okay... But... Just remember... You asked for it...
1. " according to CNN it's all the Trump supporters getting it because they didn't get the shot" 👈 Provide proof that CNN, as a company, or multiple representatives claimed that " all the Trump supporters getting it now because they didn't get the shot"?
2. " So what's the difference between now and when Trump was POTUS?" Well... That should be fairly obvious. You gave your answer in the question. Donald Trump, his administration and many in the GOP downplaying the severity of covid-19, trying to sell America multiple snake oil cures before the vaccine came out and his overall lackadaisical example of not taking the whole thing seriously enough. Not that all the people who have not gotten the vaccine we're Trump supporters.... But if you put enough misinformation out there with enough people believing it, there is bound to be a bunch of people questioning it or maybe even just procrastinating moreso on it. The current leader of our country wouldn't even go public about getting his own vaccine, at the time. Not to mention... there was a six-week Gap between the vaccine rollout and President Biden taking office. We are not talking about a whole lot of time there either. People deciding not to get it then maybe it had absolutely nothing to do with Donald Trump or which administration was in power. Yet you're trying to passive-aggressively equate them all together.
3. " Blame has been shifted to the States now that Joe is POTUS whereas it was all Trump's fault before" 👈 this is another blatant over-exaggeration for lack of a better argument. It's also An intentional mischaracterization. President Biden is not downplaying or sugarcoating the pandemic. He does not feel the need to paint a Rosy picture. When it's bad, he says it's bad. It regardless of knowing that the right-wing are going to try and spin it. When there is a problem with the state, he says there is a problem with the states. For instance, data shows that my state of Louisiana is less than 30% vaccinated period as to where States like Washington, California or New York have vaccination rates that are much higher. We no longer have a president who is playing fast and loose with American lives. The important part is to recognize the problem areas and address them. That is what I'm responsible president and a responsible adult would do.
4. " Remember those ventilators Democratic states needed but didn't." 👈 No... We don't. If you're referring to back its beginning of the pandemic when it turned out our national stockpiles had been defunded by Donald Trump, which sent our state's into a bidding war against each other for literal American lives... as I stated, I live in Louisiana. At one point, during the initial outbreak, Louisiana had the highest infection rate in the world. It was that state they said that was the worst just under New York for months on end. I also happen to be a Rideshare driver. All but medical workers, and mandatory service workers basically stayed inside for almost 4 months. I would drive medical personnel back and forth from the hospital's all day everyday. They would get in my car and breakdown. I literally had to pull over, climb in the back and hold their hands or give them hugs on more than a dozen occasions. Most of the time what they were so upset about was not having what they needed to save these people's lives. Having to decide who to Let Die. Others were worried about their safety and the safety of their families. On the way to their homes talking about how they didn't know if they were going to come back the next day because they weren't being protected at work. Tons getting in my car with big boxes of trash bags, Saran Wrap and duct tape.
5. " Democrats make everything political" 👈 I forget... Was it Democrats or Donald Trump that called the severity of covid-19 a democratic hoax, while privately admitting to downplaying the pandemic?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@richardgreene6810 Rep "security" laws... Support voter suppression in a multitude of ways.
First, they make it a requirement in the majority of states to be actually out of the state in order to vote with an absentee ballot.
Then they require a (in most states) 6 to 6 or 7 to 7 voting time period on a weekday, when most people are working.
Then they take poling places and ballot boxes out of districts that need more and not less, effectively making the lines longer. Often times hours longer.
And now they are trying to demonize mail in ballots, with no proof of fraud to do so... and five states doing strictly mail-in ballots for the past decade without anyone worrying about it before now.
So... Basically... hardworking, taxpaying American citizens have to chance the lines not being to long for them to be able to practice their constitutionally protected right to vote for their leaders, either, an hour in the morning before they have to go to work, the 30 min to an hour they get for lunch during work (for which you don't want people to hand them Pizza and water, apparently), or the hour after they get out of work... before, either, they have to go to work, go back to work or the polls close, in order to vote... Oh... And these Ballot Boxes and pole closures always conveniently seem to happen in majority-minority or democrat strong districts... But... Yeah... it's just about "security" and totally "not" about voter suppression.
Did I mention all the gerrymandering? The only reason you can't see the problem is because you don't want to.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@thescribe5494 I follow your train of thought right up until the Donald Trump thing. You're suggesting that's the only reason. I've been in the YouTube comments section enough to know that people are salty for all kinds of crazy reasons. Some don't even like Donald Trump. They just don't like to be wrong. Even like on the smallest craziest thing. Unfortunately the YouTube comment section is flush with megalomaniacs. Lol.... your assumption is that that is the only possible scenario. It's simply not.
As for me... I'm not an orange man bad... Gilr... I don't like a lot of what he does... But that has almost all to do with the stupid ways he goes about things. That doesn't however mean I think he does everything wrong. For instance... There was a bipartisan criminal Reform Bill that he had a big part in. His secretary of education was going to cut funding for the Special Olympics. Yes he hired her butt he could have had no way to know that she was going to do that and as soon as he found out he stopped it. He even had a decent point about China and intellectual property rights. He just went about it in a really stupid way. Why... No-one... No-one..... Wins a trade war. Today it came out that China and US finally came to some kind of agreement. How this is some kind of victory for Trump. It's not. Why? Because did everybody just think that the people who we sell our goods and services to we're just going to sit around and wait for us to work out our s***? Cuz they didn't. They found other sellers. Most of what we lost during this trade war is never going to come back. At least not in our lifetime. That's why nobody wins a trade War. And all this guy knows how to do is wave his big stick around. Except that doesn't work well with a country that is probably the best in the world at playing the long game. Like I said, a lot of my disagreements with him is about the stupid ways he goes about doing s***.
You mentioned socialism. But here's the thing people don't understand about it... Socialism, communism, democracy, oligarchy, dictatorship, monarchy... You know what all these things have in common? They are all systems of operation. Systems of operation are not good or bad. It is all in the hands of the user. So when one says they have a problem with one of those forms of government AKA systems of operation, they're really saying they have a problem with the way certain people or one person are using that system of operation. Socialism as an example... We have socialism in this country right now that no one has complained about for a very long time. Are local police, local fire men, are local ambulance services, Social Security and more are all socialist programs. Except the way they have that socialist program working it benefits people. that is exactly why it's dangerous Just to dismiss an idea just because someone said it was socialist. You have to listen to the details. Weigh the pros and cons. Get ahold of all relevant information and then make an educated opinion on it. In this day and age saying something is socialist is just a catch-all, for the far-right to demonize something. the left has their catch alls as well. like way too many of us use racism as a platform for a way too much. which is dangerous because there is honest to God racism.
I'm not projecting anything. You came at me like a smart-ass and for some reason singled me out. I'm a give what I take kind of girl. If you want to come at me like an adult I'll come at you like an adult. If you're going to be an a**** I can be a b****. It's that simple. Sorry, but you were an a******. It's not about projection. It's simply that.
As I have demonstrated above, I am more than capable of being reasonable and having substance base conversations. I just choose to do that with people that choose to do that with me. now, I am an adult and I choose my own actions. Is it a little petty of me to Act in the same way that people act towards me? Sure probably. .. but we're all adults or we should be And you have recourse if you don't like how I'm acting.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Doug A As for when and where it took place... Laid that out for you already as well... But so you better understand.
After The Whistleblower and their report about the July 25th phone call hit the news and Trump went on camera denying that he had even brought up Joe Biden in the conversation, the transcript of the July 25th phone call was released. At least an edited version of it. In this edited version he still committed a crime. That one isn't bribery... And God knows what's in the unedited version. .. the moment he asked the president of Ukraine to announce that he was investigating his political opponent he committed a campaign-finance violation. The facts of when and where the money was released, multiple secondhand witnesses to the quid pro quo Trump's willingness to potentially commit obstruction in order to stop people who are actually on the call from testifying... a metric ton of shady behavior in order to hinder the investigation which would include but would not be limited to Trump ordering the transcript of the July 25th phone call to be put in a top secret classification for which you would not normally go and did not qualify for, his attempts to discredit The Whistleblower despite not knowing who this person is, Trump seemingly being uninterested in an investigation into Ukraine and the bidens until Joe Biden became his political opponent, to this day not ordering the justice department to actually do the investigation into the bidens, and on... And on and on.
The key to proving bribery is to establish that there was corrupt intent. One of the many examples of this is something that everybody gets wrong. Trump didn't ask for the investigation. He asked for the announcement of an investigation. Which clearly shows he wasn't actually interested in the investigation, so much as derailing his political opponents campaign because of the announcement. This is also proven out by the fact that, as I said, to this day, there has yet to be an investigation opened into the bidens from our justice department.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ekleko1 The transcript shows him breaking the law.
This is the law... Look it up if you don't believe me. I copied it verbatim... Campaign finance law states: “It shall be unlawful for a foreign national, directly or indirectly, to make a contribution or donation of money or other thing of value, or to make an express or implied promise to make a contribution or donation, in connection with a federal, state, or local election.”
If he wanted the Biden's investigated instead of just trying to get dirt on him for the election he could of done 1 or both of 2 different things, that would have given the Dems no leg to stand on. He could have asked for the investigation back when all the supposedly happened with the Biden's and before it was closed AND before he became his political opponent in a presidential campaign.... Or/And He could of had the Justice department, of which he heads, start an independent investigation, having them work with it independent of him, having them work with Ukraine independent of him and having them come to an independent conclusion.
He did niether. He chose to break the law. The whistle blower has yet to be proven wrong. 😉✌
1
-
@ekleko1 Interesting... Cuz, quite a few Justice Department Vets seam to think your Wrong....
https://www.npr.org/2019/10/05/767261398/trumps-ukraine-call-might-violate-election-laws-but-no-one-s-enforcing-them
https://time-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/time.com/5686104/trump-ukraine-call-impeachment-offense/?amp_js_v=a2&_gsa=1&=true&usqp=mq331AQCKAE%3D#aoh=15708413365006&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&_tf=From%20%251%24s&share=https%3A%2F%2Ftime.com%2F5686104%2Ftrump-ukraine-call-impeachment-offense%2F
https://www.rollcall.com/news/whitehouse/trump-ukraine-call-legal-debate
https://amp-businessinsider-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/amp.businessinsider.com/laws-trump-could-have-broken-ukraine-whistleblower-case-2019-9?amp_js_v=a2&_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQCKAE%3D#aoh=15708413365006&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&_tf=From%20%251%24s&share=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.businessinsider.com%2Flaws-trump-could-have-broken-ukraine-whistleblower-case-2019-9
For instance, this one 👆 from Biz Insider. 👇
"
Justice Department veterans say Trump could be accused of breaking 4 laws in the Ukraine whistleblower scandal
Sonam Sheth Grace Panetta
Sep 27, 2019, 4:57 PM
President Donald Trump steps off Air Force One after arriving at Andrews Air Force Base, Thursday, Sept. 26, 2019, in Andrews Air Force Base, Md. Trump had spent the week attending the United Nations General Assembly in New York. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci)Associated Press
On Thursday, the House Intelligence Committee released an explosive whistleblower complaint from an intelligence official accusing President Donald Trump of "using the power of his office to solicit interference from a foreign country in the 2020 US election."
By pressuring Ukraine's government to investigate his political rivals - and possibly using taxpayer-funded military aid as leverage - Trump may have also violated federal laws.
"The conduct discussed in this complaint is so direct that it's striking," said Elie Honig, a former federal prosecutor from the Southern District of New York who specialized in organized crime.
In all, former prosecutors told Insider, there are at least four areas where Trump could face legal jeopardy: violating federal campaign finance laws, bribery, misappropriation, and conspiracy.
On Tuesday, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi formally launched an impeachment inquiry into Trump over his conduct with Ukraine.
Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories.
On Tuesday, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi formally launched an inquiry into impeaching President Donald Trump based on his conduct during a July phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.
The phone call, and the actions of Trump and those around him before and after the conversation, are the subject of an explosive whistleblower complaint an intelligence official filed against Trump in August, which was released by the House Intelligence Committee on Thursday.
The complaint accused Trump of "using the power of his office to solicit interference from a foreign country in the 2020 U.S. election" during the call.
Trump ordered his administration to withhold a nearly $400 million military-aid package to Ukraine days before the phone call.
While the White House's publicly-released notes of the call show the US president made no direct mention of offering aid in exchange for Zelensky's assistance in probing former Vice President Joe Biden, they confirm Trump brought up how the US does "a lot for Ukraine" right before asking Zelensky to do him a "favor" by investigating Biden and discrediting the former special counsel Robert Mueller's Russia probe.
Read more: 2 key facts refute Trump's conspiracy theories about the Ukraine scandal
The House of Representatives doesn't need to prove that a president committed a crime outlined in the federal code to pass articles of impeachment. They instead impeach based on whether the president committed "treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors" as outlined in Article II, Section 4 of the US constitution.
But Justice Department veterans say that by pressuring Ukraine's government to investigate his political rivals - and possibly using taxpayer-funded military aid as a leverage tool - Trump may well have violated a number of federal laws.
"The conduct discussed in this complaint is so direct that it's striking," said Elie Honig, a former federal prosecutor from the Southern District of New York who specialized in organized crime. "You have the President of the United States in direct communication - some might say collusion - with the president of Ukraine."
In all, former prosecutors told Insider, there are at least four areas where Trump could face legal jeopardy."
Maybe you shpuld take your own advice about education. I would suggest you start by looking up a little thing called confirmation bias. it means you're only seeking out information that Only confirms you're already decided conclusion. Try proving yourself wrong. That is, if you feel like your opinions can stand up to scrutiny... 😉✌
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ekleko1 As for High crimes and misdemeanors... You don't understand what that means either. Your cherry picking out of Article 2. Again.
"High crimes and misdemeanors" is a phrase from Section 4 of Article Two of the United States Constitution: "The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, 👉or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors👈."
"Since 1386, the English parliament had used the term “high crimes and misdemeanors” to describe one of the grounds to impeach officials of the crown. Officials accused of “high crimes and misdemeanors” 👉were accused of offenses as varied as misappropriating government funds👈, appointing unfit subordinates, not prosecuting cases, not spending money allocated by Parliament, promoting themselves ahead of more deserving candidates, threatening a grand jury, disobeying an order from Parliament, arresting a man to keep him from running for Parliament, losing a ship by neglecting to moor it, helping “suppress petitions to the King to call a Parliament,” granting warrants without cause, and bribery.[9] Some of these charges were crimes. Others were not. 👉The one common denominator in all these accusations was that the official had somehow abused the power of his office and was unfit to serve👈.[citation needed]"
"The Judiciary Committee's 1974 report 👉"The Historical Origins of Impeachment" stated:👈 "'High Crimes and Misdemeanors' has traditionally been considered a 'term of art', like such other constitutional phrases as 'levying war' and 'due process.' The Supreme Court has held that such phrases must be construed, not according to modern usage, but according to what the framers meant when they adopted them."
As for your behavior... Well... It's clearly posturing to cover up insecurities.
This is the law... Look it up if you don't believe me. I copied it verbatim... Campaign finance law states: “It shall be unlawful for a foreign national, directly or indirectly, to make a contribution or donation of money or other thing of value, or to make an express or implied promise to make a contribution or donation, in connection with a federal, state, or local election.”
Here os your issue... Your ego is having you try to make yourself out to be some kind of legal expert... When you are clearly not. That is what makes you so desperate to shove words into my mouth. If all you can do is try to set up Paper Tigers to tear them down, maybe consider you're not the best at arguing this. Cuz here's the thing, High crimes and misdemeanors refers back to the founders. Courts have held it up to be what it was then. Particularly misdemeanors could not be what they are today because misdemeanors was not even a legal term in that day. There are four judges have ruled that it could not possibly mean the misdemeanor that we are talking about. Here's where your problem comes in, even if a president does not break any law, which this one has, due to the plane reading of high crimes and misdemeanors from the founders, he or she could still be impeached. Which is not a problem for me anyways. Because he clearly broke laws. You trying to minimize the laws that he broke doesn't mean they're not broken. Neither does all you're pointless posturing.
I mean... Does this usually work for you? You just try and Bully everybody into agreeing with you... And hope they don't look to closely at what your actually saying? Using cherry picked data, false dichotomies and silly posturing? Does this really work on people... Cuz, its kinda boring me. Just sayin...
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ekleko1 👈FOR ANYONE NEEDING TO KNOW if this guy is credible, read this 👇 and then all of that 👆. It will become very clear, very quickly! 😉✌
😁 Yep.... That is what I thought. You have ABSOLUTLY NOTHING to substantiate all the craziness you are talking about. All you have are baseless assumptions, paper 🐅s, false dichotomies, posturing and comments filled to the brim of crazy claims that you could not possibly qualify. 👍
Only proven by YOU not even attempting to prove all the words you have been trying to put into mouth, are things that I actually said or even implied. All you would have to do is scroll ☝ and quote me for those... And still nothing. 🙈
- that I said something along the lines of the president has to consider politics when conducting foreign business
- and I think President Obama is some kind of Black Jesus
Those to should of been super easy, right? All you have to do is scroll ☝ and quote me. Still nothing... It's almost like you are completely full of shit, or something! 😁
At this point, and for the duration of you not providing any PROOF for your claims, this will be your standard message response for everything you say. For the reason that, I need no more then to point out your inability to qualify your statments, to point out that you are simply not credible and should not be listened to. Once I saw all the lies you had been telling about easily verifiable, fact based subjects, my goal fpr this conversation shifted from debate, to providing ACTUAL PROOF that you where incorrect and then showing that you could not provide PROOF TO the contrary. Thus... Discrediting you. SoOoOo.... Thanks for playing and please seek help! Good day! 😉✌
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ekleko1 Oh... Look... More childish posturing and deflection. I'm shocked! 🙈 Clear signs of desperation! 🙉 Yeah, you can find a million ways to call me a boo boo head all you want. It's not Canada flag from the fact that all you're doing is babbling along. You can't bait me into talking about all this other stuff. What would be the point? You think that all you need to do to show that what you're saying is true, is say it enough times. Except no matter how many times I say Santa Claus is real, I'm still not going to have a jolly fat dude climbing down my chimney on Christmas Eve. So, since you seem so sure that you are right, you can share where you got your information from and prove your claims or you can continue to dance around and think it's not super transparent. Either way works out for me. Cuz I know you don't have any proof at this point. The blind man down the road knows you don't have any proof that this point. You continuing to childishly insult me, set up Paper Tigers, make excuses and divert from the fact that you can't prove what you're saying to be true, as I have, is just going to show everyone how lacking in credibility, what you say, is. As for winning, I don't have to win. I barely have to try it this point. Your discredit in yourself. SoOoOo... Have fun with that... I guess! 😉✌
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ekleko1 Her! Felt like having someone elses words would help you understand better!
"The phone call, and the actions of Trump and those around him before and after the conversation, are the subject of an explosive whistleblower complaint an intelligence official filed against Trump in August, which was released by the House Intelligence Committee on Thursday.
The complaint accused Trump of "using the power of his office to solicit interference from a foreign country in the 2020 U.S. election" during the call.
Trump ordered his administration to withhold a nearly $400 million military-aid package to Ukraine days before the phone call.
While the White House's publicly-released notes of the call show the US president made no direct mention of offering aid in exchange for Zelensky's assistance in probing former Vice President Joe Biden, they confirm Trump brought up how the US does "a lot for Ukraine" right before asking Zelensky to do him a "favor" by investigating Biden and discrediting the former special counsel Robert Mueller's Russia probe.
The House of Representatives doesn't need to prove that a president committed a crime outlined in the federal code to pass articles of impeachment. They instead impeach based on whether the president committed "treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors" as outlined in Article II, Section 4 of the US constitution.
But Justice Department veterans say that by pressuring Ukraine's government to investigate his political rivals - and possibly using taxpayer-funded military aid as a leverage tool - Trump may well have violated a number of federal laws.
"The conduct discussed in this complaint is so direct that it's striking," said Elie Honig, a former federal prosecutor from the Southern District of New York who specialized in organized crime. "You have the President of the United States in direct communication - some might say collusion - with the president of Ukraine."
In all, former prosecutors told Insider, there are at least four areas where Trump could face legal jeopardy.
Illegally soliciting campaign help from a foreign government
The most obvious way in which Trump could have violated the law is by soliciting material campaign aid from a foreign government, which expressly violates the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971.
Trump's conduct with Ukraine isn't the first time he's been accused of violating campaign finance laws to help him win an election. He was named as an unindicted co-conspirator, listed as Individual-1 in court documents, in the case against his former personal attorney Michael Cohen.
In August 2018, Cohen pleaded guilty to eight federal charges in the Southern District of New York including charges of tax fraud, bank fraud, and violating federal campaign finance law by making a contribution to the Trump campaign in the form of a $130,000 hush money payment to porn star Stormy Daniels - far over the legal campaign contribution limit of $2,7000 - to buy her silence on an alleged affair she had with Trump.
Bribery
The second area of potential legal liability for Trump relates to his request that Zelensky do him a "favor" right after mentioning how the US "does a lot for Ukraine," and more importantly, after Zelensky raised the issue of US military aid right before Trump requested he investigate Biden.
Justice Department veterans say Trump could be accused of breaking 4 laws in the Ukraine whistleblower scandal
Sonam Sheth Grace Panetta
Sep 27, 2019, 4:57 PM
President Donald Trump steps off Air Force One after arriving at Andrews Air Force Base, Thursday, Sept. 26, 2019, in Andrews Air Force Base, Md. Trump had spent the week attending the United Nations General Assembly in New York. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci)Associated Press
On Thursday, the House Intelligence Committee released an explosive whistleblower complaint from an intelligence official accusing President Donald Trump of "using the power of his office to solicit interference from a foreign country in the 2020 US election."
By pressuring Ukraine's government to investigate his political rivals - and possibly using taxpayer-funded military aid as leverage - Trump may have also violated federal laws.
"The conduct discussed in this complaint is so direct that it's striking," said Elie Honig, a former federal prosecutor from the Southern District of New York who specialized in organized crime.
In all, former prosecutors told Insider, there are at least four areas where Trump could face legal jeopardy: violating federal campaign finance laws, bribery, misappropriation, and conspiracy.
On Tuesday, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi formally launched an impeachment inquiry into Trump over his conduct with Ukraine.
Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories.
On Tuesday, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi formally launched an inquiry into impeaching President Donald Trump based on his conduct during a July phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.
The phone call, and the actions of Trump and those around him before and after the conversation, are the subject of an explosive whistleblower complaint an intelligence official filed against Trump in August, which was released by the House Intelligence Committee on Thursday.
The complaint accused Trump of "using the power of his office to solicit interference from a foreign country in the 2020 U.S. election" during the call.
Trump ordered his administration to withhold a nearly $400 million military-aid package to Ukraine days before the phone call.
While the White House's publicly-released notes of the call show the US president made no direct mention of offering aid in exchange for Zelensky's assistance in probing former Vice President Joe Biden, they confirm Trump brought up how the US does "a lot for Ukraine" right before asking Zelensky to do him a "favor" by investigating Biden and discrediting the former special counsel Robert Mueller's Russia probe.
Read more: 2 key facts refute Trump's conspiracy theories about the Ukraine scandal
The House of Representatives doesn't need to prove that a president committed a crime outlined in the federal code to pass articles of impeachment. They instead impeach based on whether the president committed "treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors" as outlined in Article II, Section 4 of the US constitution.
But Justice Department veterans say that by pressuring Ukraine's government to investigate his political rivals - and possibly using taxpayer-funded military aid as a leverage tool - Trump may well have violated a number of federal laws.
"The conduct discussed in this complaint is so direct that it's striking," said Elie Honig, a former federal prosecutor from the Southern District of New York who specialized in organized crime. "You have the President of the United States in direct communication - some might say collusion - with the president of Ukraine."
In all, former prosecutors told Insider, there are at least four areas where Trump could face legal jeopardy.
Illegally soliciting campaign help from a foreign government
The most obvious way in which Trump could have violated the law is by soliciting material campaign aid from a foreign government, which expressly violates the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971.
Trump's conduct with Ukraine isn't the first time he's been accused of violating campaign finance laws to help him win an election. He was named as an unindicted co-conspirator, listed as Individual-1 in court documents, in the case against his former personal attorney Michael Cohen.
In August 2018, Cohen pleaded guilty to eight federal charges in the Southern District of New York including charges of tax fraud, bank fraud, and violating federal campaign finance law by making a contribution to the Trump campaign in the form of a $130,000 hush money payment to porn star Stormy Daniels - far over the legal campaign contribution limit of $2,7000 - to buy her silence on an alleged affair she had with Trump."
1
-
@ekleko1 "Bribery
The second area of potential legal liability for Trump relates to his request that Zelensky do him a "favor" right after mentioning how the US "does a lot for Ukraine," and more importantly, after Zelensky raised the issue of US military aid right before Trump requested he investigate Biden.
Read more: The notes on Trump's call with Ukraine's president hint at a quid pro quo over investigating Joe Biden's son
"From a criminal law point of view, that looks like a quid pro quo," said Patrick Cotter, a longtime former federal prosecutor who was part of the team that convicted the Gambino crime family boss John Gotti.
"And under federal law, that could open Trump up to allegations that he committed the crime of bribery by offering one thing in exchange for another, and doing so for his own personal benefit and not the country's."
Misappropriation
Third, Cotter said, if Trump "in fact used government funds for his own gain, then there is a very strong argument that there is a theft of taxpayer money, or misappropriation, taking place."
Cotter added that it's possible Trump "misappropriated $400 million in taxpayer money, and instead of using it for government purposes, he stole it to potentially pay a bribe. People go to jail every day in this country for doing that, and it looks like that's what Trump tried to do."
Conspiracy
Last, if Giuliani, Barr, and other officials were involved in Trump's efforts, as the complaint alleges, that would raise questions about a potential criminal conspiracy.
"That would include anybody who was part of these transactions," Cotter said. "The key legal concept behind a conspiracy is that everybody in the conspiracy is responsible for everybody else's actions."
Giuliani is mentioned 31 times in the whistleblower's complaint, and the document described him as a "central figure" in Trump's effort. It said Attorney General William Barr "appears to be involved as well."
The complaint added that Trump referred "explicitly" to Giuliani and Barr as "his personal envoys on these matters" while speaking to Zelensky.
Giuliani's involvement in the Ukraine scandal also undercuts the central premise of the president's defense: that his conversation with Zelensky related strictly to government business and to Trump's interest in rooting out corruption in Ukraine.
The complaint paints an intricate portrait of "the fact that Giuliani was driving a lot of this and doing the legwork for Trump" in Ukraine, Honig said. "But why would a private citizen - not an employee of the United States - be involved in this unless he was working for the personal, political benefit of his client, Donald Trump?"
https://amp-businessinsider-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/amp.businessinsider.com/laws-trump-could-have-broken-ukraine-whistleblower-case-2019-9?amp_js_v=a2&_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQCKAE%3D#aoh=15710079450202&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&_tf=From%20%251%24s&share=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.businessinsider.com%2Flaws-trump-could-have-broken-ukraine-whistleblower-case-2019-9
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Baracus Obamus Now lets see the comparison your trying to make about BLM protests and Jan 6th.
Jan 6th - a bunch of right-wingers storming the capital
BLM protests - groups that destroyed people's businesses, set cars on fire, murdered cops and terrorized innocent people.
But your "not" trying to downplay Jan 6th.
Reality
Jan 6th - A coordinated force, who knew the layout of the private portions of the building, stormed the capital, breaking and entering, vandalizing, terrorizing, committing assault on police officers, erecting gallows, spraying chemicals and planting bombs.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Baracus Obamus What part don't I understand? The part where you are trying to equate a half a dozen black lives matter protesters, calmly walking into the gallery, social distancing standing 6 feet apart and chanting for a bit, exchanging a few harsh words between a few people and then walking out peacefully, with, 100s of ppl storming the DC capital, who had planted Bombs the night before, carrying weapons, dragging police officers out and beating them, breaking in doors and windows, constructing a working Gallows and chanting hang Mike Pence, chasing police, preying chemicals at police, throwing more then just words at police, vandalizing the chamber and offices.... Having people afraid for their lives cowering in offices and under chairs of a very real threat, barricading themselves in, being under siege for more than three hours and having the National Guard have to come in.... you're ridiculous
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@El Donaldo LMAO! Is that right, Mr. Legal Guru? Cuz the law doesn't seam to agree with you. 🤣👇
"Despite conflicting signals coming from Washington, the question remains: Did President Trump violate campaign finance laws by asking the Ukraine president to investigate Joe Biden?
Campaign finance expert Trevor Potter, who is president of the nonpartisan Campaign Legal Center, says the answer is clear — yes, he did.
Campaign finance law states: “It shall be unlawful for a foreign national, directly or indirectly, to make a contribution or donation of money or other thing of value, or to make an express or implied promise to make a contribution or donation, in connection with a federal, state, or local election.”
Potter says the president’s call violates this rule and serves as a “classic case” of a candidate illegally requesting help from a foreign government.
“The president, who is a candidate and has a campaign, asked a foreign government — which is included in the definition of a foreign national — for a favor, for help in a way that would benefit his campaign, harm his opponent,” he says. “And that would fit within the ban on soliciting foreign national contributions or taking anything of value.”
An investigation into Joe Biden conducted by the Ukrainian government qualifies as a “thing of value” contributed by a foreign entity, he says."
https://amp-wbur-org.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/amp.wbur.org/hereandnow/2019/10/09/trumps-biden-ukraine-illegal?amp_js_v=a2&_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQCKAE%3D#aoh=15737147745950&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&_tf=From%20%251%24s
Maybe you should spend less time pretending like you know the law, and a little longer studying it! 🤣
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Josh Gibladar Tactics you have tried to use, in order to justify not being able to back up your claims.
1. The constant insistence that it is some how my job to prove the claims that you have made, by searching massive databases, with not even 1 specific. No names. No page link to even 1 case. Just the claim they are there.
"Treasury.gov
Just go there and read."
"Only a shill wouldn't go there."
"I have already given you enough"
"If you wont look, then by all means follow the pedophiles!"
"I gave you the link to Treasury.gov"
" Here just look up human trafficking"
" You can't type human trafficking??"
" you're wasting more energy with blah blah blah when you could just go and look."
" I already gave you enough. If you won't go look then by all means follow the pedophiles"
" still not looking. Do you even know what the Department of Treasury is?? Or is that their website is treasury.gov"
Again... All you gave was... "treasury.gov" and "type human trafficking".... For all of your claims.
2. The setting up of a multitude as false dichotomies.
" We have been replacing our party. How's yours doing? Same people? Or replacing them with worse?"
As if those where the only 2 options.
Me - who are you replacing them with?
You - people who aren't pedophiles.
In this particular false dichotomy you decided it was a good idea to imply that every Republican that is leaving is a pedophile, while giving no names and providing no evidence for such.
" Only shills wouldn't go look."
In this false dichotomy you're trying to guilt me into doing your homework. Blatantly saying that if I don't then I must be a shill. Again, providing no proof off such claim. Also, no alternative explanation. Even though at this point I had expressed the alternative explanation more than a few times.
" If you won't look then by all means follow the pedophiles!!!"
In this false dichotomy you've decided to get really desperate and set it up as to if I don't do your homework for you to prove your claims then I'm following around pedophiles... Which.. Yeah... that's a special form of desperation.
There are more but your excuses list is running long already. To boil down your false dichotomy craziness, if I don't do your homework for you, if I don't agree that a bunch of no named Democrats are all pedophiles, Epstein was murdered and a bunch of other silly nonsense you said actually happened, then I'm a million bad things. Including but not limited to a pedophile follower, a shill... I believe it was brainwashed at some point. In short, I'm absolutely wrong and bad if I don't agree with everything you say.
3. The other constant insistence being that you've given me everything I need to find proof for your claims... even though I have asked you for specifics on a multitude of different occasions and all you do is excuse why you're not giving them. The two things you have given and the only two things you have given. Let's review again.
" Treasury.gov" massive government data site. No specifics.
Look up "human trafficking". For what? Because if I eventually search that massive topic that I'm bound to find some Democrats that are pedophiles? Of course I will. What do you think that means? You can't even give me one name. and how in the world are you trying to connect being a Democrat with being a pedophile because some Democrats happen to be pedophiles? Republicans happen to be pedophiles too. I don't think that just because there were Republican, there going to be a pedophile. Liking some Twisted way those two are connected. That's crazy. if I look hard enough I'm sure I'm going to find some Amish people who are pedophiles. Does that mean all Amish people are pedophiles? What do you honestly think you have there?
1
-
Josh Gibladar List of questions you are running from and specifics you refuse to provide.
First... Your idea of evidence again.
Treasury.gov
Look up human trafficking
Me - Who are you replacing them with?
You - People who aren't pedophiles.
No names or specifics once again. Even though I asked a direct question.
Me - And where you seriously thinking that was going to work? You- Here! Go read the entire treasury site. No specifics, No reference on what to look for or even... Idk... Links to pages. Just go read the Treasury site! 🤣
Me- OMG! Then you could totally direct me to the links for the pages on the Treasury website that says all this! You could Totally give me quotes from the sites that you already know, sense you found all this out already!
Me - Bottom line... If you "KNOW" this info, then you would have no trouble giving the page link to where the evidence is that you saw. If you can not, which is more and more apparent, then nut up and say so. 😉✌
Me - And I will be more than happy to go look as soon as you stop giving me vague Notions... over thousands of pages a government websites to look through and just link me the page or pages that you have already found this information on. Unless, of course, you never did find the information and you were trying to send me down a crazy ass rabbit hole with no bottom, instead. Now you wouldn't be trying to do that, would you?
Me - or, you can explain why it's so difficult for you to go back and look at the pages that you found this information on already, copy and paste the link here and prove me wrong?
Me - 1300 pages and all you can remember from them is Human Trafficking... Yeah... That isn't fishy! 🤣🤣🤣
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Josh Gibladar Tactics you have tried to use, in order to justify not being able to back up your claims.
1. The constant insistence that it is some how my job to prove the claims that you have made, by searching massive databases, with not even 1 specific. No names. No page link to even 1 case. Just the claim they are there.
"Treasury.gov
Just go there and read."
"Only a shill wouldn't go there."
"I have already given you enough"
"If you wont look, then by all means follow the pedophiles!"
"I gave you the link to Treasury.gov"
" Here just look up human trafficking"
" You can't type human trafficking??"
" you're wasting more energy with blah blah blah when you could just go and look."
" I already gave you enough. If you won't go look then by all means follow the pedophiles"
" still not looking. Do you even know what the Department of Treasury is?? Or is that their website is treasury.gov"
" I gave them all. You just won't look."
Again... All you gave was... "treasury.gov" and "type human trafficking".... For all of your claims.
2. The setting up of a multitude as false dichotomies.
" oh by the way, while you're dealing with me and this waste if time! Because a real person would have at least looked. And come back with, I can't find it. Or a what am I looking for."
You mean... Kinda like me saying about 9 times now to give me links to specific pages and you gonna have he give me more than vague innuendo? well that false dichotomy got shot down quick! 🤣
" do you really want 1500 individual links? Freaking insane!"
I'm really sure I said about 4 or 5 times now that I just needed the start of 1. Not 2 or 3. Just 1. And Cintas one is an update to the last you have also already read the list of things you could give me that I made down below and another comment. I've gotten none of those either.
" We have been replacing our party. How's yours doing? Same people? Or replacing them with worse?"
As if those where the only 2 options.
Me - who are you replacing them with?
You - people who aren't pedophiles.
In this particular false dichotomy you decided it was a good idea to imply that every Republican that is leaving is a pedophile, while giving no names and providing no evidence for such.
" Only shills wouldn't go look."
In this false dichotomy you're trying to guilt me into doing your homework. Blatantly saying that if I don't then I must be a shill. Again, providing no proof off such claim. Also, no alternative explanation. Even though at this point I had expressed the alternative explanation more than a few times.
" If you won't look then by all means follow the pedophiles!!!"
In this false dichotomy you've decided to get really desperate and set it up as to if I don't do your homework for you to prove your claims then I'm following around pedophiles... Which.. Yeah... that's a special form of desperation.
There are more but your excuses list is running long already. To boil down your false dichotomy craziness, if I don't do your homework for you, if I don't agree that a bunch of no named Democrats are all pedophiles, Epstein was murdered and a bunch of other silly nonsense you said actually happened, then I'm a million bad things. Including but not limited to a pedophile follower, a shill... I believe it was brainwashed at some point. In short, I'm absolutely wrong and bad if I don't agree with everything you say.
" Your defense of staying ignorant is interesting"
Except, as I have stated a ton of time now is... if you want give me something to go on more than a huge government page with thousands of pages to look through, I will be more than happy to go there. Which should be very easy for you considering you have already seen this evidence And so you know exactly what page to start me on and send me the link for. Unless you don't?... Ya know... That is! 🤣
3. The other constant insistence being that you've given me everything I need to find proof for your claims... even though I have asked you for specifics on a multitude of different occasions and all you do is excuse why you're not giving them. The two things you have given and the only two things you have given. Let's review again.
" Treasury.gov" massive government data site. No specifics.
Look up "human trafficking". For what? Because if I eventually search that massive topic that I'm bound to find some Democrats that are pedophiles? Of course I will. What do you think that means? You can't even give me one name. and how in the world are you trying to connect being a Democrat with being a pedophile because some Democrats happen to be pedophiles? Republicans happen to be pedophiles too. I don't think that just because there were Republican, there going to be a pedophile. Liking some Twisted way those two are connected. That's crazy. if I look hard enough I'm sure I'm going to find some Amish people who are pedophiles. Does that mean all Amish people are pedophiles? What do you honestly think you have there?
4. Continuously trying to discredit me because you can not provide the evidence that you claim to have.
" do you really think that psychobabble means anything"
4. Fortune telling! 🤣
" You do know when Trump wins the next election your world ends.
" AJ bar is going to serve all those sealed indictments before Trump takes his next oath of office."
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Yep... There are Trump trolls....
- Callously and inaccurately quoting death rate numbers. US 3.55%
- They all have "breathing problems", all the sudden... Because... screw all you other people's lives and not having irreparable lung damage because, when I go to the grocery store the mask is itchy.
- People die of other NON-CONTAGIOUS things, so who cares if previous non/wrongly treated pandemics, of this contagion magnitude, have literally whipped out half the worlds population before. Don't they know that me and my husband have drinking at bars to do, and little Johnny simply MUST have his 7th B Day Party at chucky cheese!
- Clearly, if you don't blindly follow Trump in everything you do, you are a Never Trumper. Oh... Wait... I forgot... You actually voted for him last time... Well... Well... Well... I "clearly" wasn't talking about you. Even though I was just responding to what you just said... But now presented with inconvenient facts I have to quickly change my narrative, because this one isn't working for me anymore.
- TRUMP 2020... Despite all logic, fact and reason, that I need to ignore, in order to continue to say that.
1
-
The interview was a little over 16 min long.
- 30 sec of Intro/Trip and queen🇬🇧
- 50 sec on the whether that day🌈
- 3 sec shy of a full minute (57 seconds) on the Vets and WW2🇺🇸
- 2 min and 25 sec Lying about NATO falling apart, on Theresa May and how he saved NATO and made everyone pay.🤥
- 2 min and 45 sec on how the tariffs that he put dow are everyone else's fault but his, lying about Border Patrol numbers, invasion and general fear mongering about brown people🤥
- 2 min 5 secs of him childishly trashing Nancy Pelosi, Robert Mueller and the justifiably respected Democrat prosecutors on his team. Also, lying again about the findings of the Muller Report.🤥
- 1 min 30 sec Lying about Joe Biden, the reason for his GDP and putting words in the mouth of all American farmers.🤥
- 20 sec bragging about how he is holding everyone up so he can do an interview with Fox News. Then another 5 sec on Laura ingraham's ratings 🙄
- 1 min 20 sec about Russia, China and a trade deal. Also, "Witch Hunt", lying about numbers again (Stock Market) and talking shit about Hillary Clinton because he still can't get over the fact that he lost the popular vote 🙄🤥
- 1 min 25 sec being asked about what he can do to unite the country and deciding the best way to do that is to talk more shit about people. At some point deciding to become a $5 a pop mall fortune teller about Mexico and using the usual hypocrisy on deals when talking about China 🙄💩🙄
- 35 sec on✌, military building, 💰, brag, brag, brag, Iran, brag, brag, brag, China again, brag, brag and brag.🙄
- Just over 1 min about fist bumping with the Queen of England, brag, talking with her, complementing her and thankfully the end!🙄💩🙄💩🙄💩🙄💩
Sorry about the sassy pants in the middle and twards the end. It was starting to be like audio water torture up in here. 😢
Try again
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@TheDiamond2009 False assumptions
1. " Take this story, for instance, what thought is it enforcing in your mind."
2. " most on hero will swallow it, hook, line and sinker"
3. " Credibility is lost, I'm afraid, referring to the capital attack as a coup d'etat. "
4. " left-wing indoctrination"
5. " you maybe you assuming I'm American and a Republican"
6. " CNN viewers, yet again, lapping up a story about how stupid Trump supporters are"
7. " if I explained it to them, it would go over their heads"
8. " CNN and other left-leaning channels have taught you to hate Trump since 2016 and you've taken the bait, hook, line and sinker."
9. " you think that everything those told you about him being a white supremacist and far-right is true because they've told you"
11." I've never heard such utter nonsense in my life. This demonstrates the levels of indoctrination fully and adequately."
12. " you've been told a lie and you've gobbled it up."
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@julzee111 "Trump’s repeat falsehoods included his assertions that some Democratic-led states allow babies to be executed after birth, that every legal scholar and everybody in general wanted Roe v. Wade overturned, that there were no terror attacks during his presidency, that Iran didn’t fund terror groups during his presidency, that the US has provided more aid to Ukraine than Europe has, that Biden for years referred to Black people as “super predators,” that Biden is planning to quadruple people’s taxes, that then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi turned down 10,000 National Guard troops for the US Capitol on January 6, 2021, that Americans don’t pay the cost of his tariffs on China and other countries, that Europe accepts no American cars, that he is the president who got the Veterans Choice program through Congress, and that fraud marred the results of the 2020 election."
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Steven It was pretty cool! But I got sure didn't go to the front, like I use to at concerts. Way to crazy up there. Lol
I don't have a husband. Single mom. Just me, my 9yo son, Gabriel, our cat and dog.... But his daddy does take care of our son for insurance. For me, Uber Lyft and doordash offers good coverage. Which I found out when a lady totalled my car 3 years ago. Whatever their Inc didn't cover, mine did. From a new car to med bills to prescriptions to money for down time and a rental car. The most I had to come out of pocket for was a bottle of Tylenol.
While I'm use to and appreciate that whole wanting to take care of us thing... Bc I live down south... I'm to independent for that, I think. I didn't use to be... But sense I had my son... If I don't know... Like at all times... That I could hold me and my little boy down in every way I needed to, if everyone in my life where to fall off of the face of the earth tomorrow, I'm just not okay. So... Even if it wasn't cheeper to go through his dad for inc right now, I could still afford it.... But I know your sentiment is coming from the right place. So I'm not mad at you. 😉
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@AnimaMea1111 1. "You think". I don't think. I demonstrated. Take ownership.
2. You are still changing the subject, in an effort to avoid addressing the point I made about Biden over all leading by example, in regards to CDC social distancing guidelines. Giving him due credit for that.
3. Executive orders do not have the weight of a law. The primary reason being that the next president can come in and completely reverse all of the last president's executive orders. Not to mention, executive orders have restrictions because this is not a dictatorship or a monarchy. They can also be overturned in Congress given the proper amount of support. There's something the founders put in the Constitution for short-term and or emergency use. As for the legal punishment... It depends on the order. Baring being over turned, they are legally binding. This particular order does not seem to have any primary consequence, other than being written up to the Better Business Bureau.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions/2021/01/20/executive-order-protecting-the-federal-workforce-and-requiring-mask-wearing/
4. State mandates are different. He did not put those in place. So you can not hang that on him.
5. As I explained, in detail, I am more then happy to speak on other subjects. What I am not willing to do is allow those other subjects to be a deflection from points.
5. I'm fine with facts. As long as we consider all relevant facts and not just cherry-picked ones. That's how you get the full context of a situation. If he honestly sign that order and then didn't social distance or wear a mask shortly after doing so, that was wrong. It however does not negate the entirety of his actions regarding CDC guidelines and safety since this pandemic began. Which is what you are trying to do. It also does not hang state regulations and punishments, of which he has no power over, on his head. His own executive order that you are talking about has no legal recourse or fine. I linked it above. You can go look yourself.
6. As for constitutional rights... You might want to take a look at the Constitution under state of emergency.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@RCJH2022 Look...you can keep trying to make this about me bc you tried to present a cherry picked version of science and got called out on it, but all I'm gonna keep doing is pointing out the failures in your arguments. Of which, there are many. Especially when you keep trying to show words into my mouth, so you have something to argue against.... But you do you... Boo
You want the data on the cluster formations, what causes it? Thank you for proving the entirety of my point aboutyou cherry-picking things. When you originally went to go make your argument 💥causation💥 should have been the very 💥first thing💥 you looked up when you saw the numbers. Except you didn't want to know that, huh? You wanted to pair it back and narrative about it. A narrative you would not bother to check, yourself.
As for knowing, it's basic science on this matter. The reason they know is because it's settled science. Settled science that you keep ignoring so you can keep having an argument. Except you're ignoring how vaccines work. Which is why you can't name a vaccine that didn't have breakthrough infections.
CDC
"As a virus replicates, or makes copies of itself, it is normal for small changes, or "mutations," to occur. A virus with one or more mutations is then considered a variant of the original."
How we know clusters produce variants?
Bc if you get a vaccine you are way less likely to contract covid and if you do get it it's way less severe. Including being way less contagious.
CDC
Most people who get COVID-19 are unvaccinated. However, since vaccines are not 100% effective at preventing infection, some people who are fully vaccinated will still get COVID-19. An infection of a fully vaccinated person is referred to as a “breakthrough infection.”
If you were less likely to contract covid and therefore it is less likely to spread, what are the chances of clusters forming that form variants? Are they less or more likely?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@edidiongntiokiet7572 Ya know what makes you guys look really silly... Like... A lot? Having to make assumptions about people you don't know, in order to validate your point of view. Never really getting that, if you have to do that, to make your point of view make sense, maybe it just doesn't make sense.
You asked a question and then decided to answer it for me.... But since there was a ? in front of it... I'll answer it anyway. I don't wear partisan blinders. Trump derangement syndrome is a silly term that people come up with to dismiss people criticizing all the crazy stuff Trump does. It's lazy logic. It also shows you can't argue the premise.
If we get enough evidence to show that Biden did anything inappropriate in regards to his son, they should pursue charges and he should be tried for it in a court of law.
Unlike you guys, I don't care if they have a d or an r in front of their name. I want them doing their damn job. I want them representing the people of this country, which is what they were elected to do. What they were given power to do. And anyone who is not doing that, and is instead, being self-serving and corrupt, should be bounce the hell out of that office that they hold.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@identity7782 Let me be very clear... I, unlike you, apparently, don't care if somebody is a Republican or a Democrat. If you break the law, you break the law. If there is enough evidence to bring up charges against Joe Biden, which hasn't been true so far, I don't mind at all if he goes to jail if he broke the law....
You, are cherry-picking facts. Everything Trump has done is excusable but let's throw Biden on the sacrificial altar. Trump shook down the country of Ukraine. Because if all he was doing was telling another country that someone might have broken laws, why would he withhold that countries funding 2 days before making the phone call? Why would he lie about withholding the funding but then say that it was totally okay if you did? Why would he lie about Europe who gave them more funding that America has? Why are you ignoring the fact that Joe Biden is not only another politician, he's his opponent in the next presidential election? Which makes him doing what he did treason, blackmail and attempted conspiracy.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Lao Tzu I code, create graphics... Book covers are my Fav. I have a tablet with S pen and really high GB space. It comes with me when I do my 3 other jobs. So I can do all 4 at the same time. I am a freelance graphic designer/coder, Uber Driver, Lyft Driver and do instacart delivery. I am also a single mom to a very active 10 year old boy. In other words... I do plenty of physically demanding things. All day, everyday. I just also happened to multitask like a superhero because I have ADD. I ONLY tell you this to illustrate the Very Incorrect assumptions you just made about me, a total stranger, based on the single piece of info I gave you about me, being that I am a coder. Off of that one piece of info, you made up several things about me.
1. I don't do or have never done physically demanding jobs.
2. I was trying to explain to you the difference between capitalism and socialism.
3. I don't know what hard work is.
4. Because I know about computers, I can't also know about hammers on mallets.... or know the difference between a Phillips head or flat head screwdriver.
5. That because I'm a millennial, I'm a spineless sellout.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Lao Tzu I code, create graphics... Book covers are my Fav. I have a tablet with S pen and really high GB space. It comes with me when I do my 3 other jobs. So I can do all 4 at the same time. I am a freelance graphic designer/coder, Uber Driver, Lyft Driver and do instacart delivery. I am also a single mom to a very active 10 year old boy. In other words... I do plenty of physically demanding things. All day, everyday. I just also happened to multitask like a superhero because I have ADD. I ONLY tell you this to illustrate the Very Incorrect assumptions you just made about me, a total stranger, based on the single piece of info I gave you about me, being that I am a coder. Off of that one piece of info, you made up several things about me.
1. I don't do or have never done physically demanding jobs.
2. I was trying to explain to you the difference between capitalism and socialism.
3. I don't know what hard work is.
4. Because I know about computers, I can't also know about hammers on mallets.... or know the difference between a Phillips head or flat head screwdriver.
5. That because I'm a millennial, I'm a spineless sellout.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@bigfred0997 Trump shut down out going travel to China. Not incoming for US citizens.
That same day, even though it had already began to spread, which he new because he had already had a briefing on it, he threw a big old Trump rally, despite in that breathing them telling him that was a very bad idea.
Instead I'm spending three and a half years filling up our somewhat depleted stock piles for emergency situations, Trump decided to send each state into a bidding war for a life-saving medical supplies against each other. Then blame Obama for it.
Even though Obama last ham an expertly researched step-by-step plan to deal with an outbreak or pandemic that he completely ignored because it was Obama.
He is constantly, as the leader of our country, sending out right lies and mixed messages to the American people, despite having the best expert advice.
He is literally attacking that expert advice and treating those experts like they are his political enemy in a dirty election site by doing Oppo research on them and releasing it to the Press.
It took him over 45,000 Americans dying and over six months to endorse wearing a face mask in public.
He's held a multitude of rallies, while rally against protests.
And, oh yeah, he's the leader of the country right now. Is he didn't want the responsibility of the good and the bad when it comes to that job, he shouldn't have ran.
Those are just a few examples of how this has Donald Trump's fault.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@s 👈 So, not only is this a complete deflection from the substance of the subject, but it is also a total fabrication. Gratefully, one we see less of not that President Elect Biden has been elected, but there are a few of these guys around. They try and claim they where Dems, because they think it will give their words more weight. The reason this doesn't work is 2 fold.
1. Independence and the Democratic Party are not the cult of personality that the Republican party has become, in large amounts. They're making the mistake of assuming everybody operates like them.
2. Every single time you get them talkin, all you hear, as far as the eye can see, is right-wing talking points. Usually far right-wing. We require provable fact, and do not assume that things are true with out them.
It's an old trick, we all know. They take a tiny half-truth I'm tried to tell a big lie at the tail end of it. Pointing to links and claiming, evidence.... But almost always.. If you think about it for more then 2 seconds, you can tell it doesn't make sense.
Like with this one. What's except for a moment that his Claim about Chris Cuomo is completely true. Piggybacking off of that oh, he's trying to claim that he switched his entire party over because one public democrat said something. He's throwing out the baby with the bathwater in a huge way. It simply doesn't make sense.
What you're also going to see, is this copied and pasted it on a million different comment threads.
This is all just an elaborate attempt at an old game called, shoot the messenger.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
But to truly answer the question you posed... Because the bible is totally cool with killing babies. Even the one out of the womb.
God wants you to be happy to dash babies against the rocks.
I have always thought this was the worst verse in the bible, and my opinion remains unchanged.
"O daughter Babylon, you devastator! Happy shall they be who pay you back what you have done to us! Happy shall they be who take your little ones and dash them against the rock!"(Psalm 137:8–9 NRSV)
God was not merely saying that regrettable collateral damage might occur during wartime. He said believers should be happy — some translations say "blessed" — to kill innocent babies of those who are keeping you from worshipping your own god.
A daughter is burned as an acceptable sacrifice to God.
General Jephthah made a vow with God in order to defeat the enemy. When Jephthah won the war, God received his hundred pounds of flesh.
"And Jephthah made a vow to the Lord: 'If you give the Ammonites into my hands, whatever comes out of the door of my house to meet me when I return in triumph from the Ammonites will be the Lord's, and I will sacrifice it as a burnt offering.' . . . When Jephthah returned to his home in Mizpah, who should come out to meet him but his daughter, dancing to the sound of timbrels! . . . After the two months, she returned to her father, and he did to her as he had vowed." (Judges 11:30–39 NIV)
After burning his daughter, Jephthah was rewarded with a prestigious judgeship and was later buried with honor.
God destroys the fetuses of those who do not worship him.
This is not the only feticidal passage in the bible, but it is the worst:
"You shall acknowledge no God but me. . . . You are destroyed, Israel. . . . The people of Samaria must bear their guilt, because they have rebelled against their God. They will fall by the sword; their little ones will be dashed to the ground, their pregnant women ripped open." (Hosea 13:4, 9, 16 New International Version)
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Bublito 1. Provide proof that party affiliation is not in history books when teaching it?
2. I hope they do. And I hope they give the full context of it so we don't have anymore willfully ignorant, cherry picking, oblivious to the point, crazy people, like you.
3. This was before the party flip. Based on the platforms that both sides home today, back before the party flip, Jim Crow, the Civil Rights Movement, the southern strategy, the New Deal and President Johnson, the Dixiecrats would have had the same platform as modern-day Republicans.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@jonjones9554 So.... I am usually not the grammar Nazi kinda girl... But at léast put some punctuation in there and whole sentance. I have no idea about most of what your trying to say.... I'll do my best though...
Actually... He can't none of us can. Everyone of us have limitations on our rights, under the law. Weather I agree with some of them or not. Like in some states, including the one I am currently living in, you can't call a police officer a name, like asshole or something. They can arrest you for assault. (Don't agree with that one.) You can phrase it in the form of a question, though. You also can't yell fire in a crowded building, when there isn't one. (Agree)
Even if your president, you can't be heard planning with a foreign adversary to influence a presidential election. That would be conspiracy and treason under American law. Do you know how many people are sitting in jail right now because they admitted to a crime, when a police official was listening in, with a wiretap, that they got the warrant for from a judge?
Nixon and Watergate, prove your theory wrong.
Also, you shouldn't want him to. You really want a president to have that much power? Irregardless of the president. Where they can just be able to rig the American election and compromise our democracy by working with a foreign adversary?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@scottcomstock4964 I think you must be confused. I said, "Prove it". Not make your source (Judicial Watch) an organization that has been proven wrong more times then I can be bothered to count. They are tabloid journalism and all that video did was just so one of their people saying words. If all I had to do to make something true, was just say it out loud, I'd be chilling on a crystal clear beach, on my private estate on mars, being served Mai Tais by Xavier the sexy pool boy. Alas... Not so much...
It does explain your mindset and need to assume thing about me, to make your "argument" solvent. And your need to assume anything about the reasoning why a whole states voter registration program did or did not do a damned thing. Cuz, I don't even have to look that one up, to know you just made up that they did ANYTHING because they didn't want to " face the humiliation"... Because there is no way in hell they came out and made that statement.
If you want proof, you need court documents, in this case. Not just the filings, but the rulings. Which there will be if there was a legal settlement made. You won't find one.... Because that is NOT why voters where removed... Nor where they removed completely. NOWHERE does it say these voters where "dead" or under age. Either you made that up, or they made that up and you believed them because you wanted it to be true. The case was for "inactive" voters. Voters who had not voted in a while... Basically. They where NOT automatically removed. In fact, they where not removed AT ALL. They were moved to an inactive file. Which meant all these people had to do to re-up the registration was update their voter information or confirm that that voter information was still valid. Every County sent out voter registration cards that year and if you either did not return your voter registration card or didn't vote in the next election, you got put in the inactive file. Considering how many people live in California and that less than 50% of the American population votes on a regular basis, this proves NOTHING and you got all the goddamn details wrong. Like... BAD WRONG!
https://www.factcheck.org/2020/04/trumps-latest-voter-fraud-misinformation/
https://www.politifact.com/personalities/judicial-watch/
https://www.factcheck.org/tag/judicial-watch/
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Report, record and ignore.
He has done 👇this👇 to 👉MULTIPLE PPL👈. 3 other then me, that I have found, thus far. He is a Crazy Stalker guy, with multiple accounts. (Mr. E & Fk_YT_ are 2 of them.)
If you talk him into a corner, he will insist its your fault, then start following you 👉EVERYWHERE👈, trying to insist that you are both in some kind of crazy contest, where he makes up all these crazy rules. All the while insisting that every one of his crazy actions are your fault. Including him following you everywhere.
He will also go on forever about his "will power" and his 👉ABSOLUTE OBSESSION👈 with last words, which will also... You guessed it... Be your fault, as well. All the while, trying SUPER HARD to act all "unbothered".
It's all super disturbing.
If you don't believe me, go look for those names up top and observe his interactions. They are not hard to find.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The interview was a little over 16 min long.
- 30 sec of Intro/Trip and queen🇬🇧
- 50 sec on the whether that day🌈
- 3 sec shy of a full minute (57 seconds) on the Vets and WW2🇺🇸
- 2 min and 25 sec Lying about NATO falling apart, on Theresa May and how he saved NATO and made everyone pay.🤥
- 2 min and 45 sec on how the tariffs that he put dow are everyone else's fault but his, lying about Border Patrol numbers, invasion and general fear mongering about brown people🤥
- 2 min 5 secs of him childishly trashing Nancy Pelosi, Robert Mueller and the justifiably respected Democrat prosecutors on his team. Also, lying again about the findings of the Muller Report.🤥
- 1 min 30 sec Lying about Joe Biden, the reason for his GDP and putting words in the mouth of all American farmers.🤥
- 20 sec bragging about how he is holding everyone up so he can do an interview with Fox News. Then another 5 sec on Laura ingraham's ratings 🙄
- 1 min 20 sec about Russia, China and a trade deal. Also, "Witch Hunt", lying about numbers again (Stock Market) and talking shit about Hillary Clinton because he still can't get over the fact that he lost the popular vote 🙄🤥
- 1 min 25 sec being asked about what he can do to unite the country and deciding the best way to do that is to talk more shit about people. At some point deciding to become a $5 a pop mall fortune teller about Mexico and using the usual hypocrisy on deals when talking about China 🙄💩🙄
- 35 sec on✌, military building, 💰, brag, brag, brag, Iran, brag, brag, brag, China again, brag, brag and brag.🙄
- Just over 1 min about fist bumping with the Queen of England, brag, talking with her, complementing her and thankfully the end!🙄💩🙄💩🙄💩🙄💩
Sorry about the sassy pants in the middle and twards the end. It was starting to be like audio water torture up in here. 😢
Good god! They know genius. Thats what happened. Watch the whole interview.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@travisjohnson7065 3. " doesn't depend on motor function or any other ability" 👈 Consciousness is not an ability. It's the difference between us and meat and bone covered common house plant.
You chose to focus on "basic motor function" because you thought you had a better argument there. Cherry picking my words won't work, though.
Yes, you can have Consciousness without basic motor function. You can even have Consciousness without the ability to feel.
However, you cannot have Consciousness with out a working and switched on brain.
You know who has all three of those, though, right? The mother. The one you keep forgetting about. Which is why abortion should be their choice. They're the ones that have to suffer all the consequences of that choice, in terms of mother and fetus.
Now, if you would have made the argument that it's not just between the fetus and the woman, and added the third party in there, I wouldn't have disagreed with you in that. Men for sure get a raw deal in that. Especially if the man wants to keep the baby in the woman does not.
It's half his DNA. Men should get a say. However, they should also be held to the same standard.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@travisjohnson7065 12. " if abortion wasn't wrong in the first place, you wouldn't need to make excuses for it and try to balance it out with something you perceived as more wrong on the other side. " 👈 You really just keep getting worse.
The same could be said about you. You could be excusing the enslavement of women into being Walkin talkin human incubators and that being their primary purpose. Except I would never tell you that you're making an excuse because what you're doing and what I am doing is arguing two different points of one debate. In fact, you trying to call my points excuses and yours actual arguments only shows and insecurity on your part for the arguments that you are trying to make. So how about we don't do that anymore.
At no point did I say one was more wrong or less wrong than the other. You just made that up. What I was articulating is that both sides have detrimental consequences and only looking at 1 is a false narrative. It's a false narrative because these things really happened in life.
Unfortunately, child abuse is a thing. So is child sexual assault. So is children getting pregnant. So is back-alley abortions. So is women dying while giving birth. None of that is an excuse or a diversion. It's simply another aspect that you don't want to pay attention to. It's a reality that doesn't fit your narrative.
"4 million women who give birth in the US annually, over 50,000 a year, experience "dangerous and even life-threatening complications."
...
Maternal Mortality Is Rising in the U.S. As It Declines Elsewhere."
Especially with the statistical reality of women giving birth and it endangering or taking their lives and the US. I don't know how you can just dismiss that. It's to the tune of 50,000 women a year and Rising. Which accounts for God knows how many children growing up without their mothers. Including children who were already born.
That's not even considering all the women in countries that don't have ready and available modern medicine. If women in the US have modern medicine available to them and they're still dying from birth 50,000 a year... what do you think that they do death rate is for those women in less developed countries?
Again, the reason I say you don't care about the women is because you keep dismissing their reality and their existence and their life.
The alleged force is forcing them to carry a child and give birth when there's another option that might not worth in their current child, for the very slim chance that the mother and child would die anyways... or even just a mother.
As for your "1 in 5000"... We have 166.7 million adult women in this country. Even giving your conservative number, that's 33,340 women a year.
What in the world gives you the right to dismiss those women's lives so easily while trying to Virtue signal about saving life?
1
-
@travisjohnson7065 13. " There's no such thing as forcing nature to take its course" 👈 Ummm... Yeah... There is. In fact, I can personally attest to that.
I have a 10 year old son, named Gabriel. He likes to be called Gabe, but I'll probably call him Monkey until the day I die. He's fixing to be 11 in less than a month, actually. His due date was Nov 8th. He didn't want to come out. He ended up being born Nov 22nd, only after 12 hours of 👉induced👈 labor, I had not even dilated has a centimeter. After not dilating and my due date being two weeks prior, they had to do a C section, or it was risking mine and his life. There was nothing natural about it. My body wasn't functioning the way that it was designed. We both could have died if we had waited much longer. Mine and my son's case isn't at all unusual, either. You have any idea how many babies are born by C-section nowadays? Sometimes nature fails you. If I had relied on nature that day, my geeky/sporty sweet but stubborn little boy wouldn't be turning 11 in 24 days.... And I might not be there to see it happen.
Nature doesn't always get it right.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@travisjohnson7065 Let me tell you what's happening right now.... While fully realizing you wont listen....
In your life, a person or ppl taught you these points and questions that you keep reciting. They where convincing to you, at the time, bc you didn't bother to think to hard on them. Except what they FAILED to teach you ( probably intentionally ) was critical thinking skills and the courage to question anyone and everyone's faulty logic, by using a full and accurate accounting of facts on a given subject.
Also, your bruised ego is a little bit in playing now.
Bc of all of this, you are stuck reciting the same faulty logic, yourself now. It's all you have left, and all your willing to do... This is where you are with the both of us...
However, if you wanted to step away from that and list failed cycle, all you have to do is start questioning what people taught you. Stop being afraid to challenge it and make sure when you do you have a full and accurate accounting of the facts. Then form your, now, educated opinion off of that.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@travisjohnson7065 Sometimes... Forcing children to be born is a cruelty beyond measure. Every situation is different. Which is why, its not your right to make that decision for them.
"In May 2016, Erika Christensen obtained an abortion at 32 weeks of gestation after it was discovered that her fetus was suffering from an affliction that resulted in an inability to swallow in the womb and, consequently, an inability to breathe once born. The condition was deemed “incompatible with life”; the baby would either die during birth, or “would live for only a short time before choking to death” (Christensen also suffered from a medical condition that made delivering a baby dangerous). Christensen and her husband opted for termination, “knowing immediately it was the most humane possible conclusion to this pregnancy”. Because abortion after 24 weeks was still illegal in New York during this time, Christensen traveled to Colorado to obtain the abortion, at a price of over USD 10,000 [5].
In 2015, Jennifer Gorman discovered at her 21-week ultrasound that her fetus had severe spina bifida “in the cervical region of the spine. Her spinal cord was completely exposed just below her skull”. Had the fetus survived birth, she would have been permanently quadriplegic and attached to a colostomy bag and feeding tube and would have been severely cognitively disabled. Gorman and her husband agreed to a termination, where the baby’s heart would be painlessly stopped in the womb and her body delivered the next day. Gorman writes that “every last tear I cried came from a place of grief. Not one of those tears ever came from a place of guilt. I made the only decision I could. I made the only decision that was right for me, right for my family, and right for my daughter. It is my belief, if she did have a soul, the only kind and merciful thing to do was to release her from a body that would never, ever work” [6].
Emily Rapp writes about her experiences parenting her now deceased son Ronan, who succumbed to Tay–Sachs disease at 3 years old in 2013: “Ronan died when he was nearly 3 and he weighed 11 pounds. He was so emaciated that we had to be careful when we moved him that we did not dislocate his shoulders or hips. His eyes were fixed, every bone on his face visible. He died in the middle of the darkest, coldest night of mid-winter” [8]. Rapp unapologetically admits that:
“If I had known Ronan had Tay–Sachs… I would have found out what the disease meant for my then unborn child; I would have talked to parents who are raising (and burying) children with this disease, and then I would have had an abortion. Without question and without regret, although this would have been a different kind of loss to mourn and would by no means have been a cavalier or uncomplicated, heartless decision. I’m so grateful that Ronan is my child. I also wish he’d never been born; no person should suffer in this way—daily seizures, blindness, lack of movement, inability to swallow, a devastated brain—with no hope for a cure. Both of these statements are categorically true; neither one is mutually exclusive.”
Gary Comstock echoes a similar sentiment after his newborn son, Sam, suffocated to death in his arms. Sam was born with trisomy 18, and his brain was unable to regulate his lungs, leaving him with an inability to breathe on his own. Comstock and his wife chose not to abort the pregnancy. Once Sam was born, they decided to remove all life-sustaining treatment and allow their baby to die in their arms. After watching his infant son struggle to breathe, his chest convulsing and his body turning limp, for twenty minutes, Comstock writes about how he and his wife rocked Sam’s body for hours after he died. In hindsight, Comstock writes that he now believes that “you should not have let your baby die. You should have killed him” [10].2
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@travisjohnson7065 You continuing to pretend things don't exist doesn't actually make it true. You insisting that bringing a child to term is always the moral thing to do, is contradicted by these cases that you just ignored on purpose, and it's not even the first time. Which would only lead us to conclude that you really don't care about these children. You just care about being right, even if your wrong. Your just using them.
@Travis Johnson Sometimes... Forcing children to be born is a cruelty beyond measure. Every situation is different. Which is why, its not your right to make that decision for them.
"In May 2016, Erika Christensen obtained an abortion at 32 weeks of gestation after it was discovered that her fetus was suffering from an affliction that resulted in an inability to swallow in the womb and, consequently, an inability to breathe once born. The condition was deemed “incompatible with life”; the baby would either die during birth, or “would live for only a short time before choking to death” (Christensen also suffered from a medical condition that made delivering a baby dangerous). Christensen and her husband opted for termination, “knowing immediately it was the most humane possible conclusion to this pregnancy”. Because abortion after 24 weeks was still illegal in New York during this time, Christensen traveled to Colorado to obtain the abortion, at a price of over USD 10,000 [5].
In 2015, Jennifer Gorman discovered at her 21-week ultrasound that her fetus had severe spina bifida “in the cervical region of the spine. Her spinal cord was completely exposed just below her skull”. Had the fetus survived birth, she would have been permanently quadriplegic and attached to a colostomy bag and feeding tube and would have been severely cognitively disabled. Gorman and her husband agreed to a termination, where the baby’s heart would be painlessly stopped in the womb and her body delivered the next day. Gorman writes that “every last tear I cried came from a place of grief. Not one of those tears ever came from a place of guilt. I made the only decision I could. I made the only decision that was right for me, right for my family, and right for my daughter. It is my belief, if she did have a soul, the only kind and merciful thing to do was to release her from a body that would never, ever work” [6].
Emily Rapp writes about her experiences parenting her now deceased son Ronan, who succumbed to Tay–Sachs disease at 3 years old in 2013: “Ronan died when he was nearly 3 and he weighed 11 pounds. He was so emaciated that we had to be careful when we moved him that we did not dislocate his shoulders or hips. His eyes were fixed, every bone on his face visible. He died in the middle of the darkest, coldest night of mid-winter” [8]. Rapp unapologetically admits that:
“If I had known Ronan had Tay–Sachs… I would have found out what the disease meant for my then unborn child; I would have talked to parents who are raising (and burying) children with this disease, and then I would have had an abortion. Without question and without regret, although this would have been a different kind of loss to mourn and would by no means have been a cavalier or uncomplicated, heartless decision. I’m so grateful that Ronan is my child. I also wish he’d never been born; no person should suffer in this way—daily seizures, blindness, lack of movement, inability to swallow, a devastated brain—with no hope for a cure. Both of these statements are categorically true; neither one is mutually exclusive.”
Gary Comstock echoes a similar sentiment after his newborn son, Sam, suffocated to death in his arms. Sam was born with trisomy 18, and his brain was unable to regulate his lungs, leaving him with an inability to breathe on his own. Comstock and his wife chose not to abort the pregnancy. Once Sam was born, they decided to remove all life-sustaining treatment and allow their baby to die in their arms. After watching his infant son struggle to breathe, his chest convulsing and his body turning limp, for twenty minutes, Comstock writes about how he and his wife rocked Sam’s body for hours after he died. In hindsight, Comstock writes that he now believes that “you should not have let your baby die. You should have killed him” [10].2
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@fortisfortunaadiuvat9262 Then I asked you a similar question, and all the sudden, you ghosted. And still are trying to pretend its not there right now. 😁 But here it is AGAIN anyways... Just encase you "missed it"! 😁
"My turn... Sense you seam to have such an issue with the actions of the Dem leaders, so early on, in regards to C19, then I'm assuming you would also have an issue with all the mistakes the right has made all throughout? Such as...
- All the Fourth of July celebrations and Trump rallies without social distancing or masks being worn?
- Trump refusing to Institute an already step-by-step laid out plan in the event of a pandemic to minimize spread and loss of human life, simply because the Obama Administration was the one that came up with it?
- Trump trying to blame the Obama Administration completely for the stockpiles of medical equipment needed during a pandemic not being refilled when he had three and a half years to do it?
- It taking Trump six months and 145,000 Americans deaths, for him to endorse wearing a mask in public, like the experts have been advising for a long time before then, and then flipping on that two days later?
I'll Wait thank you"
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@defiance1790 😂 So...
1. "If a virus can you take in an adult, why would you not think it could mutate in a child?" Now... Don't lie because it will make you look silly as hell when I quote your own comment back to you ( fair warning )... But... Was that your point? Or was there more to your original clam, that your conveniently leaving out? Like, maybe the part where you claimed that because children under 12 can get it that it will bread and mutate uncontrollably either way, anyways?
2. "I'll admit, I don't know of any sources that claimed the specifics of the virus mutating within children, but I can't even find one that talks about the virus mutating in adults" 🤦 Yes you can.... it's called the 💥Delta💥 strain.
3. Children are different than adults, correct? Mostly in the form of being underdeveloped in certain areas because they're not done growing. Because of this outside forces which would normally do one thing two adult bodies does a different thing to child bodies. Which is why the original strain that spread across America barely got any kids sick, let alone wound them up in the hospital. Which is also why less than 1% of the deaths in America due to covid-19 are from children. Delta, 👉THE MUTATION👈, is changing that. However, it's not about children versus adults. If adults (or people over 12) are getting vaccinated and the only ones unvaccinated that are getting sick are children under 12, large clusters, 👉which are vital to mutation👈 cannot form. Unless you are aware of some Podunk town in Texas somewhere where everybody is under the age of 12? This is why you should stop pretending you know what you're talkin about. I certainly don't. I don't claim to understand a whole crap-ton of this but I do know what medical experts are telling me, on mass. So if you want to go on about common sense, how about that common-sense. How about you actually listen to the medical experts and stop pretending you are one, so you can make an excuse for your selfish and s** behavior?
4. Delta also isn't the only variant. There have been several reports of less contagious and less widespread variants of covid-19 popping up in large cluster cities since the beginning of the pandemic. They pop up and large cluster cities because that's where a crap ton of infected people are.
5. So let's review...
first you claimed, several times that if children under 12 could not be vaccinated as of yet then covid was going to spread uncontrollably anyway.
Then, you tried to change your story and tried to make this about adults versus children and then insisted that it was my job to prove your claim after I asked you to provide three medical experts who share your original claim.
Then you try to pretend you spoke for every Frontline doctor in America... twice...
And now it's back to your false premise of children versus adults and you pretending you haven't heard of any variants or mutations.
All of which just so you don't have to admit that you can't find three doctors that agree with your original statement because you know it's full of s***
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@defiance1790 Whatever you need to tell yourself, Boo Boo Kitty. You keep running, trying to ignore, excise away, twist words, straight out lie, deflect from and call me a communist, in order to not have to admit you can't answer 2 simple questions about your own claims... And all because you wont man up and admit when your wrong.... but, then again, if you did that, what excuse would you have for being selfish and shity... So... Ya know...
1
-
1
-
1
-
@defiance1790 Whatever you need to tell yourself, Boo Boo Kitty. You keep running, trying to ignore, excise away, twist words, straight out lie, deflect from and call me a communist, in order to not have to admit you can't answer 2 simple questions about your own claims... And all because you wont man up and admit when your wrong.... but, then again, if you did that, what excuse would you have for being selfish and shity... So... Ya know...
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
T Tullock as for which one of us are acting more and less like an adult, it's probably not the best comment you could have made. Glass houses, sweetheart. Glass houses...
And really, you are seriously gonna talk about jumping and twisting in a comment where your jumping and twisting subjects? Are you trying to make it easy on me?
Best part... My point from the start, still stands. When was the last time you heard Donald Trump talking about a country, a city or any kind of general area, that's main population is white, in a negative context? Hell! The only white people he does attack are Democrats and those that dare to disagree with his point of view. The majority of the time he just attacks people who have a different skin tone than him. Most of them being politicians or world leaders. Do you know the ratio of people of color v white people in just America's governing body? 79% of them are white. Yet, for "some reason" the majority of people, the president attacks, and on the regular, fall under that left over 21%. What a coincidence. The only one twisting things, are people like you. We just keep pointing out facts and you keep calling it fake news, because you don't want to acknowledge all relevant material. If you did that, then you couldn't argue the point you're trying to argue. You couldn't hold up your victim flag.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
T Tullock My turn... I will be linking all the info at the bottom.
"Non-Hispanic whites totaled about 197,285,202 or 60.7% of the U.S.population."
Only when you add mixed race people, do you get the 76.9% number. Which most Gov stats do differentiate. Meaning they give both numbers . Which I tend not to do because it doesn't make sense to me, honeslty. My son is mixed race. Caucasian and African American. He has my skin tone and dimples but everything else is his daddy. They always try and put him in school as Caucasian. I always have to correct the paperwork. He is both. Mixed. They default any mixed people who are part white to white. They are not.
So that would make the mixed population 16.2%.
Just Hispanic and African American are 30.5% of the population.
Now, this is from the second link... The 2010 census.
"52.2 mil ppl, or 21.3% of the population is on some form of gov assistance. Usually monthly. On short term program use (which is where you guys get your numbers from) 41.6% of African Americans, 17.8% of Hispanic and 17.8% white. Its also... Some of the first numbers, that the Gov sites give you, because they messure by month.
But... When you get into the weeds, you find the long term program use. Meaning, the people who are on these programs for a long time. Which they categorize as being anywhere longer than 37 months. So over 3 years... That's when the numbers flip. Most polls, like for article and such, are for current numbers, and they go to the short term use numbers, for that reason. Which actually makes, you guys getting confused about it, understandable.... Of I'm being fare.
The third link, shows the long term, or over 37 month user demo..... The second link... Census... Shows it a little twards the bottom, also. Not the whole pic though. Given the total number of white nun Hispanic inrolled in assistance for over 37 months, 43.2%.... Blacks, 17.9% and Hispanic 22.1%
Once you get into wealth distribution and collage education and education assistance programs, as compared to ethnicity, things get even more interesting and you start to wonder why those minority numbers aren't higher than they really are.... If you wanna go really deep in the F'ed up rabit hole, you should get into ethnicity as compared to criminal acts and sentance terms. I can give you links for those also, if your interested?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_ethnicity_in_the_United_States#Black_and_African_Americans
https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2015/cb15-97.html
https://www.nap.edu/read/9719/chapter/8
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/10310529/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/10310529/
1
-
1
-
T Tullock "My pointless to dispute someone else who said white people use way more welfare than blacks."
Yeah... I know... You where disputing me. I said that. Except, I did NOT say "blacks". I said, than anyone. You tacked on the "blacks" after looking up the data. Odd timing. 🙄
Either way, you would not get an accurate reading without looking at all the data, on all the races. Black and white ppl are not the only ones who live in America. This is the shady tactic you guys use the most. Cherry pick only the data that fits what you already thought was true and ignore any other prevalent data. If your argument is valid, then you should be able to argue it using all pertinent information. If you can't do that, then don't argue that.... and I said this earlier. Cherry-picking data, in order to paint a false and negative image out of a minority group, is exactly what race is do. It's exactly what white nationalist do on a daily basis. If you don't want that tacked on to you, stop doing that.
Throwing out random facts, without giving context, is, at best, being disingenuous and trying to set up a false dichotomy. In order to be able to see the bigger picture, you need more than one little fact bite. For instance, minorities are more likely to get longer sentences for the same crime. They are also more likely to be convicted of a crime they did not commit. I'll just proportionate to the amount of minorities in the country. Minorities are also disproportionately more likely to be born into poverty. They are also more likely and disproportionately to be turn down for Grants are scholarships. With just those little bit of extra relivant info and it starts to paint an entirely different picture.
You can call me ignorant as many times as you want. I'm the one choosing to look at all relevant data to better understand a situation, and you're the one ignoring it. You're the one being willfully ignorant.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ronbloomberg Well... I don't think that is true... There is a difference between thinking somebody is wrong for their opinions and thinking they're stupid. I actually live in the land of Republicans. The Deep South Bible Belt of Louisiana. Most wouldn't guess it, but my entire family, most of my friends and acquaintances voted for Donald Trump in 2016. They are Republicans. I am the lone lib. I'm also a single mother to a beautiful 10 year old mixed race little boy, and an atheist. So You can imagine... I'm use to arguing opposing view points. Though... I'm a liberal Democrat because I agree with the fights they choose in the platforms they hold, for the most part.
I believe...
No American should die from being too poor to live in this country.
We can both recognize and illegality of people coming across our borders illegally, while at the same time recognizing their lack of choice and treating them like human beings
That a living wage should match the inflation and worker productivity growth in this country. If you work hard and do your part, you deserve to earn a living wage.
That abortions should be legal, safe and very rare.
That our servicemen and women should be treated with the level of respect that they deserve for putting their lives on the line for us, at all times.
Thoughts and prayers just simply Aren't Enough when our children, when my child, is doing active shooter drills twice a month at school.
That minorities live a completely different life in America than Caucasian people, often worse... For a varsity of reasons and that it should not be ignored, placated or tossed aside. We should do better.
That it is no one's business who someone loves, who they marry or who someone is, as long as it doesn't hurt anybody.
That my grandchildren will have a vastly reduced quality of life if we don't pull our heads out of our asses and get serious about killing the planet.
However, I realized the need for fiscal responsibility. I just think it should be across the board and not the lower and middle-class taking all the hits all the time.
There's no part of me that wants to take away anyone's freedom. Silencing the voice of your opposition is just chickenshit.
It's just, as polarized as this country is right now, the only way I see it getting better is if we base our opinions and our actions on a phone and accurate reading of facts.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@jamison1323 You say I'm brain washed... But you keep spitting up these talking points.
Who says we should not catch and detain border jumpers?
Who says, we should just release them?
All of them. That's why you can't name any that say they want open borders. 😉✌
There is a difference between wanting open borders and wanting people to be treated like they are human beings and not demonized.
Yeah... I said that. I said Obama put up fencing. As well as fixed some existing fencing. I'm saying your hearsay about one portion of the border is anecdotal at best. That's what you keep skipping over, and on purpose.
Obama wanted a wall and I don't know what I'm talking about? Okay... If that's true then it should be easy to prove, right? So show me something? Him saysing that? Press release? Bill? Something to prove that your not just making more inaccurate claims?
It does hurt us... But its funny how we always go after the poor imigrants, who are also just struggling to feed thwir families but never the people that hire them.... Ya know... Like Donald Trump?
Also, the majority of illigals, trafficking and drugs come in through a combo of Planes, northern border and boat... So why not focus on those as well?
Once again... Who said there was 11 mil?
And... Tell me... Oh wise one... if illegals don't turn to report, because.... you know... they're illegal, how can either claim to have an accurate number?
Btw, what do border experts and Structural Engineers say about putting a wall on the southern border?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@jamison1323 BTW, YOU FORGOT ABOUT ALL OF THIS.
"BTW, why is everybody focusing on these poor immigrants just trying to feed themselves and their families I'm not on the companies that hire them instead of American workers? You know, like Trump?"
"About the wall and what experts actually say.
"The experts say you can do border security without a wall, which is wasteful and doesn't solve the problem,” Schumer added."
https://www-cnbc-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.cnbc.com/amp/2019/01/24/experts-say-trumps-border-wall-will-take-longer-than-he-claims.html?amp_js_v=a2&_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQA#referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&_tf=From%20%251%24s&share=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.cnbc.com%2F2019%2F01%2F24%2Fexperts-say-trumps-border-wall-will-take-longer-than-he-claims.html
https://www-pbs-org.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.pbs.org/newshour/amp/nation/trump-says-walls-work-its-much-more-complicated?amp_js_v=a2&_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQA#referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&_tf=From%20%251%24s&share=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.pbs.org%2Fnewshour%2Fnation%2Ftrump-says-walls-work-its-much-more-complicated
https://beta-washingtonpost-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/beta.washingtonpost.com/politics/2018/12/11/trumps-arguments-necessity-border-wall-have-already-been-broadly-debunked/?amp_js_v=a2&_gsa=1&outputType=amp&usqp=mq331AQA#referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&_tf=From%20%251%24s"
"Who is talking about texas?
That's all you know because that's all you want to know. The things you thing you know... You do not.
Unemployment is a trend in the plus column that began under Obama. Job growth has actually slow down under Trump.
Wage Rising is flat-out wrong.https://www-chicagotribune-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.chicagotribune.com/business/ct-biz-fact-check-trump-rising-wages-20180207-story.html?amp_js_v=a2&_gsa=1&outputType=amp&usqp=mq331AQA#referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&_tf=From%20%251%24s&share=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.chicagotribune.com%2Fbusiness%2Fct-biz-fact-check-trump-rising-wages-20180207-story.html
Most people don't understand the difference between GDP and GDP growth. GDP growth is the important one and everybody thinks the GDP is, who doesn't know nothing about it. It's not that hard either. GDP is the number that it's at, GDP growth is the amount that it has grown from the last measurement.
Obama's first year in office, he took us out of the Great Recession, after the stimulus package. Which took the GDP from -2.5 % to + 3.9% in his first year in office. With a much harder row to hoe. Cuz great recession. Which made his GDP growth, 6.4%.
Trumps first year, No Recession... He started with +1.8%. At the end of his first year it went to 2.2%. Which made his growth 0.4%. Hid growth did slightly better in his second year going from 2.2% to 3.9%. Which took his Growth to 1.7%. He had to dangerously deregulate a ton of stuff to get there, job growth still slowed from the trend Obama set and his growth got no where near Obama.
You are dramatically misinformed"
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@jamison1323 and dont forget about these... While your at it.
@XxClickBait HostagexX BTW, YOU FORGOT ABOUT ALL OF THIS.
"BTW, why is everybody focusing on these poor immigrants just trying to feed themselves and their families I'm not on the companies that hire them instead of American workers? You know, like Trump?"
"About the wall and what experts actually say.
"The experts say you can do border security without a wall, which is wasteful and doesn't solve the problem,” Schumer added."
https://www-cnbc-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.cnbc.com/amp/2019/01/24/experts-say-trumps-border-wall-will-take-longer-than-he-claims.html?amp_js_v=a2&_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQA#referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&_tf=From%20%251%24s&share=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.cnbc.com%2F2019%2F01%2F24%2Fexperts-say-trumps-border-wall-will-take-longer-than-he-claims.html
https://www-pbs-org.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.pbs.org/newshour/amp/nation/trump-says-walls-work-its-much-more-complicated?amp_js_v=a2&_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQA#referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&_tf=From%20%251%24s&share=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.pbs.org%2Fnewshour%2Fnation%2Ftrump-says-walls-work-its-much-more-complicated
https://beta-washingtonpost-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/beta.washingtonpost.com/politics/2018/12/11/trumps-arguments-necessity-border-wall-have-already-been-broadly-debunked/?amp_js_v=a2&_gsa=1&outputType=amp&usqp=mq331AQA#referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&_tf=From%20%251%24s"
"Who is talking about texas?
That's all you know because that's all you want to know. The things you thing you know... You do not.
Unemployment is a trend in the plus column that began under Obama. Job growth has actually slow down under Trump.
Wage Rising is flat-out wrong.https://www-chicagotribune-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.chicagotribune.com/business/ct-biz-fact-check-trump-rising-wages-20180207-story.html?amp_js_v=a2&_gsa=1&outputType=amp&usqp=mq331AQA#referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&_tf=From%20%251%24s&share=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.chicagotribune.com%2Fbusiness%2Fct-biz-fact-check-trump-rising-wages-20180207-story.html
Most people don't understand the difference between GDP and GDP growth. GDP growth is the important one and everybody thinks the GDP is, who doesn't know nothing about it. It's not that hard either. GDP is the number that it's at, GDP growth is the amount that it has grown from the last measurement.
Obama's first year in office, he took us out of the Great Recession, after the stimulus package. Which took the GDP from -2.5 % to + 3.9% in his first year in office. With a much harder row to hoe. Cuz great recession. Which made his GDP growth, 6.4%.
Trumps first year, No Recession... He started with +1.8%. At the end of his first year it went to 2.2%. Which made his growth 0.4%. Hid growth did slightly better in his second year going from 2.2% to 3.9%. Which took his Growth to 1.7%. He had to dangerously deregulate a ton of stuff to get there, job growth still slowed from the trend Obama set and his growth got no where near Obama.
You are dramatically misinformed"
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@kriptikful Oh... My timeline is just fine... Thanks! 👇 the first case had already hit America. And 3 days before the World Health Organization issued a global Health Emergency. Which, again, Trump took serious enough to try and block people from Coming to America but not serious enough to cancel a pact Trump rally 4 hours later.
January 21 — CDC Confirms First US Coronavirus Case
A Washington state resident becomes the first person in the United States with a confirmed case of the 2019 novel coronavirus, having returned from Wuhan on January 15, thanks to overnight polymerase chain reaction testing. The CDC soon after deploys a team to help with the investigation, including potential use of contact tracing.
January 31 — WHO Issues Global Health Emergency
With a worldwide death toll of more than 200 and an exponential jump to more than 9800 cases, the WHO finally declares a public health emergency, for just the sixth time. Human-to-human transmission is quickly spreading and can now be found in the United States, Germany, Japan, Vietnam, and Taiwan.
February 2 — Global Air Travel Is Restricted
By 5 pm on Sunday, those en route to the United States have to have left China or they can face a 2-week home-based quarantine if they had been in Hubei province. Mainland visitors, however, will need to undergo health screenings upon their return, and foreign nationals can even be denied admittance. Other countries beginning to impose similar air-travel restrictions at this point include Australia, Germany, Italy, and New Zealand.
February 3 — US Declares Public Health Emergency
The Trump administration declares a public health emergency due to the coronavirus outbreak. The announcement comes 3 days after WHO declared a Global Health Emergency as more than 9800 cases of the virus and more than 200 deaths had been confirmed worldwide.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Dark Knight Well... First... I have no desire to " convince" you of anything. It would be a waste of my time. Kinda like screaming into the blind wind. Your lies need to be corrected, however. So others don't begin to believe them.
Yours are easy though. Its speculation at best. Incomplete ones, at best. If you have to leave pertinent info out of your argument, you are simply not arguing the point on its merits and if you can not argue something... Or really anything on its merits, then you should not be making it.
For example...
You left out that Dems are not "pushing" for illegal immigrants to vote. Most just are not spending their time stopping them from voting in small school bored type elections. They are focusing on other things. Bigger things.
Your also attempting to make a lazy argument by claiming that all or most Dems are pushing for things because 1 or 2 said or did something that you don't like.
Your leaving out that most Dems say that its not a good idea to "abolish ICE", and those that think it should be, have presented bills or ideas that have other branches taking over their duties or even just flushing out the ICE officers with histories of abuse and neglect.
I haven't heard of one talk about abolishing Homeland Security and I make it a point to be well informed. So your going to have to show me that one, before I believe you.
Sanctuary cities are for those populations who believe on mass that, being illegal is not a good enough reason to treat people like they matter less than other human beings and so they can get basic human services, without constantly living in fear for themselves and their children. Which I don't think is to much to ask. No one should be forced to surrender their humanity, either willingly or otherwise. They also would not have to exist if people stopped treating them like they don't matter as a human being because they are not here legally.
Very few places in America have the DL bills passed. Those that do have provisions on the cards, that mark them as not of this country. It helps them to be able to contribute and makes sure that people who are getting in cars, know how to drive them first. Which as a single mother and rideshare driver, I, most certainly, appreciate!
The healthcare they are referring to is for the ones we have detained. Which, if we are going to lock them away, we should take care of their basic needs, because this isn't the dark ages and we are not monsters.
1
-
Dark Knight What strikes me first, is your claims of my evidence, when you have provided none, yourself. Second... Love people who talk abput common sense, when basic common sense dictates that one considers all info and then make a determination on a subject, or do you not agree with that common sense? And why?
Video of not just this clip of over crowding and concreate floors, dirty half starved people with lack of room to even lay down and sleep, pwople who got out of there telling the same or similar stories of the treatment by yhe hundreds, actual officials quiting thwir jobs because of the treatment they saw and government officials coming out and recognising some of these problems before excusing them or passing the blame. Even Trump himself.
BTW, whats your evidence to not believe this again? I have seen none.
Also, last time I checked... Your not the king. So I'm not sure why you think, you get to decide what is and is not "enough".
On AOC, here we go not considering all the evidence again. Just enough to confirm what you have already decided is right. 15 years ago now, we have already past the point of being able to reverse all of the damage we have done to the earth. 98% of climate scientists have been saying for all of that time, that signs point to us being the cause, that we would experience more frequent severe weather events, overflowing oceans, bigger and longer heat waves, ice cap melting and loads more. Guess what? All those things have happened. She didn't say the world would end in 12 years. Life as we know it will change in a very drastic way. It's already been going on.
AOC is not the only one who has been in the or down there. She is just the most notable, of late. The ones who have spoken out the mpst and been down there the most, are the lawyers for these people. Who have all confirmed all of mine and your examples and then some.
Do you know the definition of concentration camp? If you actually did, then you would not be mocking the phrase.
Again... You have yet to show anything other then some Rep talking points. So I'm not sure what you think has been "debunked"? Unless your talking about the video of that guard, in an empty bathroom, with the coolers and toilet. Some how you thing this guard saying, look we have a cooler over here.... Means that? I don't think so.
Its not my evidence. Its evidence that os out there for everyone. Or to those that actually choose to be objective enough to see it.
And again... Are you under the impression that I have to prove anything to you? Your not special dude. You don't decide anything for anyone else. Get over yourself.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Yep... There are Trump trolls....
- Callously and inaccurately quoting death rate numbers. US 3.55%
- They all have "breathing problems", all the sudden... Because... screw all you other people's lives and not having irreparable lung damage because, when I go to the grocery store the mask is itchy.
- People die of other NON-CONTAGIOUS things, so who cares if previous non/wrongly treated pandemics, of this contagion magnitude, have literally whipped out half the worlds population before. Don't they know that me and my husband have drinking at bars to do, and little Johnny simply MUST have his 7th B Day Party at chucky cheese!
- Clearly, if you don't blindly follow Trump in everything you do, you are a Never Trumper. Oh... Wait... I forgot... You actually voted for him last time... Well... Well... Well... I "clearly" wasn't talking about you. Even though I was just responding to what you just said... But now presented with inconvenient facts I have to quickly change my narrative, because this one isn't working for me anymore.
- TRUMP 2020... Despite all logic, fact and reason, that I need to ignore, in order to continue to say that.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@a.i4639 But before I move on to your second comment and your links, which I will look at and pick apart... If needed... Because, like you, I do my research, as well... But... I want to give you an out first. It is this... 👇
I'm not here to convince you of a thing. That would be pointless. You have chosen to believe what you want, despite an accurate and full accounting of facts telling you something else. You wont change. You have chosen what you want, over what is true. You should always chose truth... But... Because you have not... I will tell you what will happen... I will read and pick apart your "evidence", as I have said, I will present the facts between the "research" you have chosen to show me, and think you are so clever at doing so.... Then I will formulate questions about those facts, to ask you, and when you can't answer them, and try to divert from them, I will continue to ask them. Only now, I will point out, everytime, your inability to answer them, as well. You will will use every tactic you can think of, to get me to stop asking you that question, that, if answered honestly, will dismantle the point you where trying to make. It will not work.... We will keep going like this, until the thread runs out or until you provide some face saving tactic that you have decided in your mind, allows you to finally run out of the situation, you have gotten yourself in by chosing want over truth... Because, I am not here to change your mind.... I am here to destroy your credibility and expose your faulty logic... And I am good at what I do. Now... Is that the journey you would like to take with me? Or.....
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@billboon He....
-Had a 33 page laid out plan to contain a pandemic and America, just exactly like covid-19 and chose not to use it because the administration who commissioned it was Obama.
-Decided it wasn't important to refill the medical stockpiles for 3 and 1/2 years.
-Tried to pretend for two and a half months that covid-19 has magically gone away.
-Tried to sell American citizens multiple snake oil cares, taking none of them when he actually got sick.
- Left each state to fend for themselves and forced them into a bidding war against each other, we're literally American lives.
-Called the severity of the worst worldwide pandemic in over a hundred years a democratic hoax.
-Tried to take millions of Americans Healthcare away during the world worldwide pandemic in over a hundred years.
-Made multiple false claims about how it would all just go away by several different dates and got every one wrong.
-Threw multiple large rallies and celebrations with little to no social distancing, instead of setting an example and using a coded safe campaign plan, like President elect Biden did.
-Suggested on a regular basis that we should stop testing for the virus only so the numbers would go down and he would look better.
-Spread false propaganda about covid-19 no worse than the flu.
-Claimed that 99% of all covered cases are totally harmless.
-Discouraged his supporters from listening to the medical experts.
-Constantly lied about our fatality rate.
-Playing on racial tensions, tried to blame Mexico for covid-19 in America, with absolutely nothing to back it up.
-Threatened to defund our already strapped public education system in an effort to try and force children to go back to school when it wasn't safe and no one had a national plan.
-Handled the pandemic so poorly that it crippled our economy and put 9 million people out of work, into a housing crisis and wondering how they were going to feed their children.
-Claims, on multiple occasions, that covid-19 was merely being overblown because of the election in America. Despite the virus being all over the world.
-Lied about Google engineer is building a website to help Americans determine whether they need testing for the coronavirus and to direct them to their nearest testing site.
-Claimed to put a ban on travel from China, but after doing so nearly, 40,000 people travelled from China to the United States under his ban rules.
-Claimed this kind of pandemic was something nobody thought could happen, when experts both inside and outside the federal government sounded the alarm many times in the past decade about the potential for a devastating Global pandemic.
And on... and on... And on....
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@MalleusDei275 👉 Source 👉 Politifact 👉 The legitimacy of the Jan. 6 committee, explained
This is only a small portion of the article that will make you look silly as hell.... You should really read the whole thing!
👇👇Are ya ready, Tender Butt? 👇👇
Initially, Democrats and some Republicans wanted to create an independent commission, modeled after the one that investigated the 9/11 terrorist attacks. That proposed panel would have been made up of retired public officials, military leaders, and academics, rather than sitting members of Congress. The idea was to insulate the panel’s investigation as much as possible from the partisan fray.
The bipartisan commission would have included 10 members. House and Senate leaders for the Democratic Party would appoint the commission chair and four other members, while the Republican leaders would appoint the vice chair and four other members.
The day before the House voted on the legislation, Trump came out in opposition to it and called on Republicans to "not approve the Democrat trap of the Jan. 6 Commission," arguing that it amounted to "more partisan unfairness." House Republican leaders joined Trump in opposition. Despite this, the House passed the legislation, with universal support from Democrats and the backing of 35 breakaway Republicans.
But the Senate killed the commission idea after Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., came out against it, effectively ending any hope that the bill could get the 60 votes needed to overcome a filibuster.
Democratic leaders’ plan B was to establish a congressional select committee — a time-limited panel with a specific investigative charge. This could be accomplished by the House on its own; a simple majority in the House would carry the day.
"Our bipartisan, good-faith proposal was met with a filibuster," House Homeland Security Chairman Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., said at the time. "Now that Senate Republicans have chosen to block the formation of an independent commission, it falls to the House to stay the course and get the answers they deserve."
On June 30, 2021, the House approved creation of the Select Committee to Investigate the Jan. 6 Attack on the United States Capitol. The resolution passed by a 222-190 margin. Once again, Democrats were unified in support, but the number of Republican votes in favor withered to two: Reps. Liz Cheney of Wyoming and Adam Kinzinger of Illinois.
Under the resolution, "the Speaker shall appoint 13 Members to the Select Committee, 5 of whom shall be appointed after consultation with the minority leader."
This is where matters got even more convoluted. House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., presented Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., with a slate of five nominees to the panel. Pelosi responded that she had no quarrel with three of them: Republican Reps. Rodney Davis of Illinois, Kelly Armstrong of North Dakota, and Troy Nehls of Texas. But she drew the line at two of McCarthy’s picks: Indiana Rep. Jim Banks, who was tapped for the panel’s ranking member slot, and Ohio Rep. Jim Jordan. Pelosi maintained that Banks and Jordan were too closely tied to Trump to help carry out a credible investigation.
After Pelosi rejected Banks and Jordan, McCarthy retracted all five of his nominations, including the three that Pelosi had said she’d accept. "Speaker Nancy Pelosi has taken the unprecedented step of denying the minority party's picks for the Select Committee on January 6," McCarthy said at the time. "This represents an egregious abuse of power and will irreparably damage this institution."
But Pelosi had one last move. She proceeded to name the two Republicans who had voted to establish the committee — Cheney and Kinzinger — as members, joining seven Democrats. This produced a committee that was bipartisan, but excluded lawmakers who Democrats believed could be tempted to use the panel as a platform to justify the actions of Trump and his allies, rather than investigate them.
1
-
@MalleusDei275 AND what did the courts say about this? This! Right here! 👇
Why do critics say the panel is illegitimate?
In a lawsuit, the Republican National Committee argued that there were several problems with the formation of the committee.
First, rather than 13 members, as set out in the resolution, the panel ended up with only nine. Second, the panel has no "ranking member," as had been called for in the resolution. And third, the Republicans on the committee were not ones recommended by the Republican leader, McCarthy.
On May 1, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled that none of these concerns were enough to stop the committee's work. The ruling was made by Timothy J. Kelly, a Trump appointee.
Kelly wrote that concern over the numerical divergence was "not an unreasonable position,’" but he added that the court "must give ‘great weight’ to the House’s own actions," including two occasions in which House Republicans failed to challenge the committee’s underlying legitimacy before casting votes related to the committee.
The House has also argued that there’s precedent for a committee with incomplete membership: a 2005 House panel to investigate the government response to Hurricane Katrina consisted of 11 Republicans and zero Democrats. (Ironically, at the time, Pelosi, then the House minority leader, called the panel a "sham" and refused to name committee members.)
As for the question of a ranking member, Kelly concluded that Cheney, as the panel’s vice chair, fulfilled the same function as a ranking member even if her title was different. And on the question of McCarthy’s lack of input, Kelly pointed to the resolution’s requirement that the speaker needed only to engage in "consultation" with the minority leader.
"To ‘consult’ with Minority Leader McCarthy, all Speaker Pelosi had to do was ask for his ‘advice or opinion,’" Kelly wrote. "There is no dispute that she did. That she did not accept all his recommendations, and that Minority Leader McCarthy then withdrew all his recommendations, does not mean that Speaker Pelosi failed to consult with him."
Another broad complaint in the lawsuit is that the committee’s actions are not advancing a valid legislative purpose.
This argument didn’t fly with Kelly, either, who noted the committee’s purpose was to investigate if legislation is necessary "to avert a future Jan. 6-style attack." He reasoned that the committee need not commit to specific legislation in advance of starting its work, since possible legislation could easily emerge once the committee’s efforts were under way.
Kelly’s decision was in line with an earlier decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. In December 2021, a three-judge panel ruled against Trump’s attempts to block the National Archives from turning over presidential correspondence and documents to the Jan. 6 committee.
The appeals judges wrote that there are "few, if any, more imperative interests squarely within Congress’s wheelhouse than ensuring the safe and uninterrupted conduct of its constitutionally assigned business."
Further bolstering the House panel’s case is that a month later, the Supreme Court denied a motion by Trump to overturn the appeals court decision.
The collective result of these court decisions, Robenalt said, is to show that "the committee was properly authorized and that Congress has the power to investigate for valid legislative purposes."
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Stoney47 What I like about the comment you just made, is it is so clearly you using bad logic and assumed answers to convince yourself, you are right. It's like a damned timeline of it.
1. Completely ignoring every single one of those examples that I gave you and then offered to back up with proof.
2. Going back to your obviously go to argument of what about the ones that died during these five-month period under Joe Biden. Again, intentionally and completely ignoring the entire year before that would Donald Trump.
3. Then trying to flip your onus onto me, claiming that I should blame President Biden for those deaths. Nevermind it's not a light switch. Never mind that the death rate and the infection rate has Teddy been going down since Biden took over.
4. Then assuming my answer was what you wanted it to be... But in the form of a question, that wasn't really a question. Because you go on to argue that I'm wrong because of, it right after. That's called setting up a paper tiger.
5. At which point you feel comfortable enough to try and take the onus of the entire year of the pandemic off of Trumps shoulders, but you're feeling super insecure about it so you have to name call, like a child, it right in the middle. Doing so by implying some kind of bias against Donald Trump, ironically, considering the Democratic bias you clearly have and demonstrate in the sentence.
6. Then and with one last posturing childish insults... because you're clearly insecure about the logic and validity of the previous sentence, as you should be.
It's a timeline of you clearly trying to convince yourself of your confirmation bias and not doing a great job of it. You don't believe any of this crap you're saying. You just want to. Nothing can be Donald Trump's fault and you can't possibly be wrong.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@gelmann2 He also.... got us into this situation in the first place.... you don't get to take credit for trying to come in at the last hour and claim victory because you said one thing one time about the situation that you helped create.
-Had a 33 page laid out plan to contain a pandemic in America, just exactly like covid-19, and chose not to use it because the administration who commissioned it was Obamas.
-Decided it wasn't important to refill the medical stockpiles for 3 and 1/2 years.
-Tried to pretend for two and a half months that covid-19 had magically gone away.
-Tried to sell American citizens multiple snake oil cures, taking none of them when he actually got sick.
- Left each state to fend for themselves and forced them into a bidding war against each other, for literally American lives.
-Called the severity of the worst worldwide pandemic in over a hundred years, a democratic hoax.
-Tried to take millions of Americans Healthcare away during the worst worldwide pandemic in over a hundred years.
-Made multiple false claims about how it would all just go away, by several different dates, and got every one wrong.
-Threw multiple large rallies and celebrations, with little to no social distancing, instead of setting an example and using a covid safe campaign plan, like President elect Biden did.
-Suggested on a regular basis that we should stop testing for the virus, only so the numbers would go down and he would look better.
-Spread false propaganda about covid-19 being no worse than the flu.
-Claimed that 99% of all covered cases are totally harmless.
-Discouraged his supporters from listening to the medical experts.
-Constantly lied about our fatality rate.
-Playing on racial tensions, tried to blame Mexico for covid-19 in America, with absolutely nothing to back it up.
-Threatened to defund our already strapped public education system in an effort to try and force children to go back to school, when it wasn't safe and no one had a national plan.
-Handled the pandemic so poorly that it crippled our economy and put 9 million people out of work, into a housing crisis and wondering how they were going to feed their children.
-Claimed, on multiple occasions, that covid-19 was merely being overblown because of the election in America. Despite the virus being all over the world.
-Lied about Google engineers building a website to help Americans determine whether they need testing for the coronavirus and to direct them to their nearest testing site.
-Claimed to put a ban on travel from China, but after doing so nearly, 40,000 people travelled from China to the United States under his ban rules.
-Claimed this kind of pandemic was something nobody thought could happen, when experts both on inside and outside the federal government sounded the alarm many times in the past decade about the potential for a devastating Global pandemic.
And on... and on... And on....
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@acetech8642 Unity... Unless...
You feel that you should retain the rights over your own body.
You feel that reasonable gun regulation is not totally insane, and or taking everybody's guns away.
You I think it's none of anybody's business who anyone else loves or marries.
You think being transgender doesn't actually make you a pedophile.
You think that minorities should be treated as equals in modern day Society.
You think it's a bad idea to turn in our Humanity card when it comes to border patrol.
You think giving people a living wage to match the progressing inflation and worker productivity, is generally a good idea.
You think climate change is real because 99% of all climate scientists told you it was.
You've actually read the Constitution and and therefore know that wearing a mask covering in a national state of emergency is not actually taking your rights away from you.
You feel bad having a majority population of ignorant people is a bad thing in there for think that public education should not be cut in every single budget.
You think everybody should pay the same percentage of taxes.
You think reasonable regulations are completely appropriate on things like, Pharmaceuticals, Environmental Protection, education, workers right and industrial trade.
You can see the difference between corrupt police that need to be off the forest and in a jail cell and good police officers that need to be thanked, appreciated and support it.
You think it's a bad idea to have anybody in this country be above the law.
You think that, like every other modern country in the world, Healthcare should be a right and not a privilege.
You think women should be paid as much as men for doing the same job.
You think members of the LBGTQ Community have in the past and should be able to in the future, serve our country in our Armed Forces, free of persecution.
You think people's lives are more important than property.
You think it's a bad idea to be complacent about racism and public racist figures irregardless of whether they're on your side or not.
You think African Americans being 14.3% of the American population but 26% of all officer-involved killing is an insane statistic that should be corrected immediately.
In no way will we ever agree to be unified with people who believe the world should look the way that you do. Those are the exact things we should fight against.
as I said, your sides definition of unity is agree with everything that I say and we'll be on the same page.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Steven Lindsey Next, what is my real name? How old am I? What do I do for a living? Am I married or single? Do I have any kids? What state do I live in? How about part of the country? I mean... You seam to be speculating on where I get my info. So, I assume you know who I am, right? I mean... Other wise, you would just be making assumptions that you could not possibly qualify, in order to validate your flawed beliefs, right?
I'm not sure if you have heard, but this is the information age. You can find anything online, link it, quote it and present it. SoOoOo... It seams to me... The only one who is being lazy here, about backing up what they say... Is you! 😉✌
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Kenny dark2light Yeah... It was a lazy argument the first time and didn't get any less lazy the second time. If what they are saying in this video, you keep trying to deflect from, is wrong, then prove it. Cuz, considering your response, it sounds a lot like your idea of "facts" is, like many others using that excuse.... outright dismissing, with absolutely no proof, anything that doesn't fit your narrative and only cherry-picking things that do. In order to see the truth oh, you have to look at all relevant facts. Not just those that fit your narrative. You would have a much easier time doing that if he didn't dismiss anything and everything that came out of one sources mouth, as fake without checking it. But you don't want that. You want to believe what you want to believe and fake news is a convenience of ignorance for you. Stop trying to deflect and distract from the actual message in this video because you can't just send it. No one is buying that s*** anymore.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Truth bTold Yeah... Cuz I'm the one claiming things, that I could not possibly know.... Or could it be.... That I have to be that to you, because you don't want to give your own logic, its due scrutiny and criticism?
For instance, your claim about how noone cares about black citizens being shot or killed, in cluding myself.... You know nothing about me. How could you know that? You could ask, but choose not to. It fits your argument. Better, to assume. Why are you assuming this about me, BTW?
Cuz if you asked, you would know how silly it is. You would know that I have a mixed race 8 year old boy, who is my world. You would know that his daddy is African American and my BEST FRIEND. You would know that I love his 2 younger, African American children, like they where my own, as well. You would know that because of all of that and more, I have to fear for those children and their daddy every day because we all live in the Louisiana bibble belt....
You would know all of that and more... But you don't, because your argumnent, your logic, REQUIRES you to assume things, you could not possibly know. That is what will get Trump re-elected, if anything will. His diversion tactics at there best.... Having total strangers making baseless assumptions about mass groups of ppl, they could not possibly know.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The interview was a little over 16 min long.
- 30 sec of Intro/Trip and queen🇬🇧
- 50 sec on the whether that day🌈
- 3 sec shy of a full minute (57 seconds) on the Vets and WW2🇺🇸
- 2 min and 25 sec Lying about NATO falling apart, on Theresa May and how he saved NATO and made everyone pay.🤥
- 2 min and 45 sec on how the tariffs that he put dow are everyone else's fault but his, lying about Border Patrol numbers, invasion and general fear mongering about brown people🤥
- 2 min 5 secs of him childishly trashing Nancy Pelosi, Robert Mueller and the justifiably respected Democrat prosecutors on his team. Also, lying again about the findings of the Muller Report.🤥
- 1 min 30 sec Lying about Joe Biden, the reason for his GDP and putting words in the mouth of all American farmers.🤥
- 20 sec bragging about how he is holding everyone up so he can do an interview with Fox News. Then another 5 sec on Laura ingraham's ratings 🙄
- 1 min 20 sec about Russia, China and a trade deal. Also, "Witch Hunt", lying about numbers again (Stock Market) and talking shit about Hillary Clinton because he still can't get over the fact that he lost the popular vote 🙄🤥
- 1 min 25 sec being asked about what he can do to unite the country and deciding the best way to do that is to talk more shit about people. At some point deciding to become a $5 a pop mall fortune teller about Mexico and using the usual hypocrisy on deals when talking about China 🙄💩🙄
- 35 sec on✌, military building, 💰, brag, brag, brag, Iran, brag, brag, brag, China again, brag, brag and brag.🙄
- Just over 1 min about fist bumping with the Queen of England, brag, talking with her, complementing her and thankfully the end!🙄💩🙄💩🙄💩🙄💩
Sorry about the sassy pants in the middle and twards the end. It was starting to be like audio water torture up in here. 😢
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
W TF? But seriously dude! If you have to lie this damn much, just give up. Save yourself the inevitable humiliation!
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂 " you're the one that claims to have access to and claims to have read the Mueller report." Did I now? Lmao! You know when it's a really stupid time to lie? When you can read the truth right above you. 😂😂😂 ...but feel free to look above us and please quote me where I said that. If you would like to prove me wrong. We'll be waiting again... Forever.
What I can do is quote you. Let's see here... very first comment on this thread....
" That's exactly what the Mueller special counsel investigation report said the dirty Democrats have done." - and that of course was referring to you commenting on the original thread post of, " Accuse others of what you yourself are guilty of. Trump #1 rule, taken directly from the Nazi Playbook.
Wow! You really just made yourself look dumb... Lol... "Mr. Big money company owner guy! " 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
" You asked me where I got my information from and I gave it to you."
Yet another idiotic lie. ....But again, if you would like to prove me wrong then please quote me from above where I said that? Better yet, I will just quote myself. I said ," this is why comments like that or idiotic. Please 💥quote💥 the section in the Mueller report where it says that genius? We will all be waiting.... Forever"
I even highlighted the keyword since I know you're a little slow. You're welcome! 😉
Awww! Thats cute! You couldn't come up with anything yourself, so you decided to copy my little tic tock thing. Wanna cookie? 🍪 lmao!
You know what makes your response the best ever? Your very uneducated attempt at doing what the original poster was bitching about the Trump people doing all along. "Accuse others of what you yourself are guilty of."
Did you learn that new trick right here, right now? Cuz that would be precious.😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
Okay Precious, I still have not lost hoping you. I feel like you can still redeem yourself. You just go ahead and quote me the section in the Mueller report you were talking about or you can go ahead and quote me up top where I said any of the crazy s*** you said I did. Please feel free... Waiting, Tik-Tok come on waiting, Tik-Tok, waiting... Forever
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@glycohead You made the claims... Present evidence for them. Link me some records... Or something dude. Otherwise they are just baseless claims. Otherwise... Your just saying stuff. Not saying that to be rude or anything either. Maybe you do know something I don't but I don't even trust the news without doing my own research about what they say. So if you got it, show it.
I'm not saying your like that just yet but to many people are just saying shit these days. Then assuming that becase they do, it magically makes it true. It irks me and helps noone. SoOoOo... Where did you get this from?
Yes... I do think he cleared things up. I watched it. I also checked out the records of him and everyone on his team. They all have a crazy lifetimes worth of straight forward and fair prosicution records. They are all ranked top in the US because of it. Thats why they where all picked. It wasn't about party. Like everyone claims. It's that they are litterally the best at what they do. Including Mueller.
Also there is evidence that they where straight about the way they went about everything. They where fair all around.
- Mueller could have recommended indictment of the president ( and I suspect some of this family, but I won't say for sure on that, because he did not address that ) but he did not. He did not feel it was right to do so, sense it was never going to go to court and therefore Trump was never going to be able to defend himself in a court of law against the allegations.
- at the same time he said that if he could have cleared him, then he would have.
- plus there was that time earlier in the investigation, with those 2 people on the team, doing stupid stuff on their phones while flirting. Within a day of finding out they where both gone. Just to get rid of even the appearance of impropriety
- Mueller is a straight shooter. Almost everyone on every side of the aisle, before this investigation says so. The ones that have changed their minds sense, all have a lengthy record of partisanship and lies.
"He never did his job in the first place", is simply not proven out by the facts. They prosecuted 32, I believe, people in the investigation. That alone shows he did his job but there was much more.
The press conference, much like everything else he tends to do, was direct, clear and fair.
His team, again all Rockstar prosecutors when it comes to a lifetime of integrity in their work and experience. So I take that over someone suggestion that because they lean more towards one party than another they must be bias.
It also had three Independence on there. It also had some Democrats that donated two Republicans on there. Not to mention the two bosses were both Republican. Also it does not make sense that you hold up those two agents that appeared to be partisan as reason to not trust Bob Mueller and then at the same time claimed he fired them. If he was so partisan and corrupt then why would he fire them? So your question... "do you really think he would have done that if he was impartial?" Yes. That's exactly what he would have done if he was impartial. Fire people from his team that look like they might not be. Yes absolutely. Also, you not knowing about the depth of the Mueller report is 1, mostly not on Mueller. He literally does not have control over that. Unless he would leak it or have somebody else leak it and that hasn't happened. Which is another Testament to how straightforward and fair he is.
I just don't see people attacking the Mueller team and their records as being credible because the facts simply do not bear that out, their history simply does not bear that out. It does not make sense. From unobjective standpoint oh, it just doesn't ring true.
Sorry for going on so long. There was just a lot in there that you brought up. But as I set up top, if you have proof otherwise, show it to me ? you might know things I don't.
1
-
1
-
@glycohead Okay? So I know what your claim is. I know what Barr said... Cuz I would not have said anything otherwise... I also know what Mueller directly said. You're talking about what Barr said that Mueller said. I'm talking about a direct a count of what he exactly said. Which again, he uncharacteristically came out and had that press conference to specifically clear up what bar had told everyone that he said in the report. Go look in his prosecutorial record and see how many times he's come out and talk directly to the press and not just let his work show for itself what he thinks.
When William Barr sent Congress the four Page Letter about Mueller's investigation he quoted several fragments of Mueller's report but none of the excerpts were in contacts or even complete sentences.
Barr took Mueller's words out of context to suggest the president had no motive to obstruct Justice.
Barr
" in making this determination we noted that the special counsel recognize that the evidence does not establish that the president was involved in an underlying crime related to Russian election interference and that while not determinative the absence of such evidence Bears upon the president's intent with respect to obstruction."
Mueller
Vol 2 page 157
"Obstruction of justice can be motivated by a desire to protect non-criminal personal interest, to project against investigations where underlying criminal liability falls into a gray area, or to avoid personal embarrassment. The injury to the Integrity of the justice system is the same regardless of whether a person commits and underlining wrong. In this investigation, the evidence does not establish that the president was involved in an underlying crime related to Russian election interference. 💥But the evidence does point to a range of other possible personal motives animating the president's conduct. These include concerns that continued investigation would call into question the legitimacy of his election and potential uncertainty about whether certain events such as advanced notice of WikiLeaks release of hacked information or the June 9th 2016 meeting between senior campaign officials and Russians could be seen as criminal activity by the president, his campaign or his family.💥"
Disuse of Mueller's words turn to the special counsel's meaning on its head. The brief excerpt came from a list of other possible reasons Trump might have had to raptly impede the investigation, and which Barr did not mention.
Barr omitted words suggesting that there was complicit conduct that fell short of coordination.
Barr
The special counsel's investigation did not find that the Trump campaign or anyone associated with it compromised or coordinated with Russia and its efforts to influence the 2016 US president election. As the report States " the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities"."
Mueller
Vol 1 page 1
" the investigation also identified numerous links between the Russian government and the Trump campaign. Although the investigation established that the Russian government perceived it would benefit from a trump presidency and worked to secure that outcome, and that the campaign expected it would benefit electoral E from information stolen and released through Russian efforts, the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities."
Barr took a larger passage in which the mother report suggested that the Trump campaign and the Russian government were knowingly dancing together at a distance, and then exerted a fragment to make it look like a clearer exoneration.
Barr truncated the special counsel explanation of what coordination meant and didn't mean.
Barr
" in assessing potential conspiracy charges, the special counsel also considered whether members of the Trump campaign coordinated with Russian election interference activities. The special counsel Define coordination as an agreement tactic or Express between the Trump campaign and the Russian government on Election interference"
Mueller
vol 1 page 3
" we understood coordination to require an agreement tactic or Express between the Trump campaign and the Russian government on Election interference. That requires more than the two parties taking actions that were informed by or responsive to the others actions or interest."
Barr omitted the second sentence which again emphasized that there can be a type of complicit conduct that falls short of how the special counsel Defineed coordination.
Barr omitted the reason Mueller trumpeted the thoroughness of his factual investigation
Barr
" after making a thorough factual investigation into these matters the special counsel considered whether to evaluate the conduct under Department standards governing prosecution and declination decisions But ultimately determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment"
Mueller
Vol 2 page 2
Second, while the olc option concludes that a sitting president may not be prosecuted, it recognizes that a criminal investigation during the president's term is permissible. the olc option also recognizes that a president does not have immunity after he leaves office. And if individuals other than the president committed on obstruction offense, they may be prosecuted at this time. Given those considerations, the facts known to us, and the strong public interest in safeguarding the Integrity of the Criminal Justice System, we conducted a thorough factual investigation in order to preserve the evidence when memories were refresh and documentary materials were available"
Barr did not explain that Mueller was trying to leave open the possibility that prosecutors in the future, after Trump leaves office, Couldn't look at the evidence he gathered and decide then whether to indict Trump.
Also it's not about me doing my own research. It's about you backing up the claims you made. The onus is on you to do so. Just like the onus is on me to back up any claim I make.
1
-
@glycohead Barr portrayed Mueller as encountering difficult issues in reaching a decision on obstruction
Barr
" the special counsel and therefore did not draw a conclusion one way or the other as to whether the examined conduct constituted obstruction. And sad for each of the relevant actions investigated, the report sets out evidence on both sides of the question and leaves unresolved what the special counsel abused as difficult issues Avalon and fact concerning whether the president's actions and intent could be viewed as obstruction. The special counsel states that wildest report does not conclude that the president committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him"
Mueller
Vol 2 page 2
Fourth, if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the president clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so State. Based on the facts that the applicable legal standards, however, we are unable to reach the Judgment. The evidence we obtained about the president's actions and intent presents difficult issues that prevent us from conclusively determining that no criminal conduct occurred. Accordingly while this report does not conclude that the president committed a crime, and also does not exonerate him.
Vol 2 page 8
Because we determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment, we did not draw Ultimate conclusions about the president's conduct. The evidence we obtained about the president's actions and intent presents difficult issues that would need to be resolved if we were making a traditional prosecutorial judgment. At the same time, if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the president clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state. Based on the facts the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment. Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the president committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him."
In Barr statement he did not explain why the special counsel did not make any prosecutorial judgment on obstruction Beyond a cryptic reference to what he said Mueller had described as difficult issues.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@KnowerofThings Oh.. And just another Challenge of that "lovely" logic... Are you a Holocaust denier, as well? How about ancient Rome and the Spartan Wars? What about the destruction of Pompeii?
I mean... The volcano was there... Measurements show an eruption around that time and there is a whole city filled with ashed over mummys.... But... We didn't get it on video when it actually happened... So I guess none of that matters? Right?
So... Russians took several small towns. The Ukrainians had to either take them back or or the russians where ordered to abandon them for other areas. Then Ukraine rolls in, finds mass graves of men, women and children, with their hands tied behind their backs, and shot in the head. Women and little girls showing signs of massive vaginal and anal trauma, men and women with their tongues cut out and huge chunks of flash carved out of their arms and legs... All BY THE HUNDREDS... But... They didn't think to record their war crimes, and leave the tapes for the Ukrainian troops when they got their, so according to you, it didn't happen, right? So much for that moral compass of yours.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@KnowerofThings Oh.. And just another Challenge of that "lovely" logic... Are you a Holocaust denier, as well? How about ancient Rome and the Spartan Wars? What about the destruction of Pompeii?
I mean... The volcano was there... Measurements show an eruption around that time and there is a whole city filled with ashed over mummys.... But... We didn't get it on video when it actually happened... So I guess none of that matters? Right?
So... Russians took several small towns. The Ukrainians had to either take them back or or the russians where ordered to abandon them for other areas. Then Ukraine rolls in, finds mass graves of men, women and children, with their hands tied behind their backs, and shot in the head. Women and little girls showing signs of massive vaginal and anal trauma, men and women with their tongues cut out and huge chunks of flash carved out of their arms and legs... All BY THE HUNDREDS... But... They didn't think to record their war crimes, and leave the tapes for the Ukrainian troops when they got their, so according to you, it didn't happen, right? So much for that moral compass of yours.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@KnowerofThings Oh.. And just another Challenge of that "lovely" logic... Are you a Holocaust denier, as well? How about ancient Rome and the Spartan Wars? What about the destruction of Pompeii?
I mean... The volcano was there... Measurements show an eruption around that time and there is a whole city filled with ashed over mummys.... But... We didn't get it on video when it actually happened... So I guess none of that matters? Right?
So... Russians took several small towns. The Ukrainians had to either take them back or or the russians where ordered to abandon them for other areas. Then Ukraine rolls in, finds mass graves of men, women and children, with their hands tied behind their backs, and shot in the head. Women and little girls showing signs of massive vaginal and anal trauma, men and women with their tongues cut out and huge chunks of flash carved out of their arms and legs... All BY THE HUNDREDS... But... They didn't think to record their war crimes, and leave the tapes for the Ukrainian troops when they got their, so according to you, it didn't happen, right? So much for that moral compass of yours.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@KnowerofThings The next segment appears to return to the Kramatorsk missile and is accompanied by Italian commentary, as a man—apparently a reporter—points out the "Ш91579" serial number on the shell.
While an apparent attempt has been made to replicate the BBC's branding, some of the elements do not match the original style. For example, the BBC logo does not appear from the beginning. Although it is at the top left corner, it is actually slightly lower than in the BBC News clips available on the official YouTube channel.
The location label is also misplaced, appearing along the right edge of the screen rather than at the top, as in other reports.
Other stylistic incongruities are apparent throughout the video, including the lack of background commentary, which is instead replaced by excessively long captions.
The phrasing in the captions is also suspicious, with constructs such as "Ukraine has often started using fake news" indicating that they were likely not written by a native English speaker.
The video could not be found on the BBC's YouTube channel or any other affiliated platforms. The BBC issued a statement on Wednesday exposing the video clip featuring its branding as a fake.
We are aware of a fake video with BBC News branding suggesting Ukraine was responsible for last week's missile attack on Kramatorsk train station," the broadcasting network said in a Tweet. "The BBC is taking action to have the video removed. We urge people not to share it and to check stories on the BBC News website."
1
-
1
-
@KnowerofThings To prove this point, they added that a Tochka-U missile with the number VG910840 was used by Ukraine in 2014, landing in the town of Snizhne, while also pointing out that another was documented four years later in Syria (where Russia has militarily backed President Bashar al Assad) with a serial number just 25 digits higher (VG910865).
This appears to match open source evidence from both Snizhne and Syria.
Large amounts of footage emerged from the separatist-held towns of Khartsyzk, Zuhres, Shakhtyorsk, and Torez on 8 April showing several missile launches in the minutes preceding the Kramatorsk hit from areas south of the towns. Due to limited visibility, it was not possible to determine which missiles were used, or what they targeted.
However, no footage has emerged of a launch site located south-west of Kramatorsk, whether in Ukraine-held or in Russia-held territory. This still leaves the biggest question regarding the April 8 strike on Kramatorsk station open, exactly where the missile originated.
Still, efforts to spread disinformation about the tragedy continue. Most recently, a clip distributed on social media bearing the BBC’s logo claimed Ukrainian responsibility for the missile strike on Kramatorsk railway station. The news network has clarified that it did not create the clip, which The Guardian noted was broadcast on Russian state media.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@KnowerofThings Oh.. And just another Challenge of that "lovely" logic... Are you a Holocaust denier, as well? How about ancient Rome and the Spartan Wars? What about the destruction of Pompeii?
I mean... The volcano was there... Measurements show an eruption around that time and there is a whole city filled with ashed over mummys.... But... We didn't get it on video when it actually happened... So I guess none of that matters? Right?
So... Russians took several small towns. The Ukrainians had to either take them back or or the russians where ordered to abandon them for other areas. Then Ukraine rolls in, finds mass graves of men, women and children, with their hands tied behind their backs, and shot in the head. Women and little girls showing signs of massive vaginal and anal trauma, men and women with their tongues cut out and huge chunks of flash carved out of their arms and legs... All BY THE HUNDREDS... But... They didn't think to record their war crimes, and leave the tapes for the Ukrainian troops when they got their, so according to you, it didn't happen, right? So much for that moral compass of yours.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@KnowerofThings Oh.. And just another Challenge of that "lovely" logic... Are you a Holocaust denier, as well? How about ancient Rome and the Spartan Wars? What about the destruction of Pompeii?
I mean... The volcano was there... Measurements show an eruption around that time and there is a whole city filled with ashed over mummys.... But... We didn't get it on video when it actually happened... So I guess none of that matters? Right?
So... Russians took several small towns. The Ukrainians had to either take them back or or the russians where ordered to abandon them for other areas. Then Ukraine rolls in, finds mass graves of men, women and children, with their hands tied behind their backs, and shot in the head. Women and little girls showing signs of massive vaginal and anal trauma, men and women with their tongues cut out and huge chunks of flash carved out of their arms and legs... All BY THE HUNDREDS... But... They didn't think to record their war crimes, and leave the tapes for the Ukrainian troops when they got their, so according to you, it didn't happen, right? So much for that moral compass of yours.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@KnowerofThings Oh.. And just another Challenge of that "lovely" logic... Are you a Holocaust denier, as well? How about ancient Rome and the Spartan Wars? What about the destruction of Pompeii?
I mean... The volcano was there... Measurements show an eruption around that time and there is a whole city filled with ashed over mummys.... But... We didn't get it on video when it actually happened... So I guess none of that matters? Right?
So... Russians took several small towns. The Ukrainians had to either take them back or or the russians where ordered to abandon them for other areas. Then Ukraine rolls in, finds mass graves of men, women and children, with their hands tied behind their backs, and shot in the head. Women and little girls showing signs of massive vaginal and anal trauma, men and women with their tongues cut out and huge chunks of flash carved out of their arms and legs... All BY THE HUNDREDS... But... They didn't think to record their war crimes, and leave the tapes for the Ukrainian troops when they got their, so according to you, it didn't happen, right? So much for that moral compass of yours.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@KnowerofThings Oh.. And just another Challenge of that "lovely" logic... Are you a Holocaust denier, as well? How about ancient Rome and the Spartan Wars? What about the destruction of Pompeii?
I mean... The volcano was there... Measurements show an eruption around that time and there is a whole city filled with ashed over mummys.... But... We didn't get it on video when it actually happened... So I guess none of that matters? Right?
So... Russians took several small towns. The Ukrainians had to either take them back or or the russians where ordered to abandon them for other areas. Then Ukraine rolls in, finds mass graves of men, women and children, with their hands tied behind their backs, and shot in the head. Women and little girls showing signs of massive vaginal and anal trauma, men and women with their tongues cut out and huge chunks of flash carved out of their arms and legs... All BY THE HUNDREDS... But... They didn't think to record their war crimes, and leave the tapes for the Ukrainian troops when they got their, so according to you, it didn't happen, right? So much for that moral compass of yours.
1
-
1
-
@KnowerofThings Oh.. And just another Challenge of that "lovely" logic... Are you a Holocaust denier, as well? How about ancient Rome and the Spartan Wars? What about the destruction of Pompeii?
I mean... The volcano was there... Measurements show an eruption around that time and there is a whole city filled with ashed over mummys.... But... We didn't get it on video when it actually happened... So I guess none of that matters? Right?
So... Russians took several small towns. The Ukrainians had to either take them back or or the russians where ordered to abandon them for other areas. Then Ukraine rolls in, finds mass graves of men, women and children, with their hands tied behind their backs, and shot in the head. Women and little girls showing signs of massive vaginal and anal trauma, men and women with their tongues cut out and huge chunks of flash carved out of their arms and legs... All BY THE HUNDREDS... But... They didn't think to record their war crimes, and leave the tapes for the Ukrainian troops when they got their, so according to you, it didn't happen, right? So much for that moral compass of yours.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@KnowerofThings Oh.. And just another Challenge of that "lovely" logic... Are you a Holocaust denier, as well? How about ancient Rome and the Spartan Wars? What about the destruction of Pompeii?
I mean... The volcano was there... Measurements show an eruption around that time and there is a whole city filled with ashed over mummys.... But... We didn't get it on video when it actually happened... So I guess none of that matters? Right?
So... Russians took several small towns. The Ukrainians had to either take them back or or the russians where ordered to abandon them for other areas. Then Ukraine rolls in, finds mass graves of men, women and children, with their hands tied behind their backs, and shot in the head. Women and little girls showing signs of massive vaginal and anal trauma, men and women with their tongues cut out and huge chunks of flash carved out of their arms and legs... All BY THE HUNDREDS... But... They didn't think to record their war crimes, and leave the tapes for the Ukrainian troops when they got their, so according to you, it didn't happen, right? So much for that moral compass of yours.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@KnowerofThings Oh.. And just another Challenge of that "lovely" logic... Are you a Holocaust denier, as well? How about ancient Rome and the Spartan Wars? What about the destruction of Pompeii?
I mean... The volcano was there... Measurements show an eruption around that time and there is a whole city filled with ashed over mummys.... But... We didn't get it on video when it actually happened... So I guess none of that matters? Right?
So... Russians took several small towns. The Ukrainians had to either take them back or or the russians where ordered to abandon them for other areas. Then Ukraine rolls in, finds mass graves of men, women and children, with their hands tied behind their backs, and shot in the head. Women and little girls showing signs of massive vaginal and anal trauma, men and women with their tongues cut out and huge chunks of flash carved out of their arms and legs... All BY THE HUNDREDS... But... They didn't think to record their war crimes, and leave the tapes for the Ukrainian troops when they got their, so according to you, it didn't happen, right? So much for that moral compass of yours.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@theonlychinailikeiswhite2582 Okay... The onus for providing proof that the thing one is claiming, is actually true, is on that person. Why? They should already know the truth of it, and therefore, know right where to find it, before stating it as a definitive statement. That used to be the very basic of logic. Now a days, though... We get people like yiu, who turn into poorly trained acrobatic children, when you are expected to provide that proof. In your attempts to present false narratives and place the onus on us, while trying to lobe childish insults, only highlights your inability to do so. The most obvious conclusion being, you are lying about your claim, but you really want it to be true, and are trying to get others to go along with the false premise that it is, without question, then get defensive when they do not. So,... I repeat...
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@sgt.sharky9832 second, Manafort, Stone, Flynn, Gates, Cohen, Papadopoulos, Pinedo, Patten, Craig, Weber and Podesta... Either were indicted, took deals, plead guilty, were referred for indictment by special counsel or have ongoing legal battles. All are Americans.
Maybe educate yourself on the facts of the matter before continuing to embarrass yourself some more. Just a thought.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@rogerdodger8415 In November 2017, with the administration of President Donald Trump rushing to get a massive tax overhaul through Congress, Sen. Ron Johnson stunned his colleagues by announcing he would vote “no.”
Making the rounds on cable TV, the Wisconsin Republican became the first GOP senator to declare his opposition, spooking Senate leaders who were pushing to quickly pass the tax bill with their thin majority. “If they can pass it without me, let them,” Johnson declared.
Johnson’s demand was simple: In exchange for his vote, the bill must sweeten the tax break for a class of companies that are known as pass-throughs, since profits pass through to their owners. Johnson praised such companies as “engines of innovation.” Behind the scenes, the senator pressed top Treasury Department officials on the issue, emails and the officials’ calendars show.
Within two weeks, Johnson’s ultimatum produced results. Trump personally called the senator to beg for his support, and the bill’s authors fattened the tax cut for these businesses. Johnson flipped to a “yes” and claimed credit for the change. The bill passed.
The Trump administration championed the pass-through provision as tax relief for “small businesses.”
Confidential tax records, however, reveal that Johnson’s last-minute maneuver benefited two families more than almost any others in the country — both worth billions and both among the senator’s biggest donors.
Dick and Liz Uihlein of packaging giant Uline, along with roofing magnate Diane Hendricks, together had contributed around $20 million to groups backing Johnson’s 2016 reelection campaign.
The expanded tax break Johnson muscled through netted them $215 million in deductions in 2018 alone, drastically reducing the income they owed taxes on. At that rate, the cut could deliver more than half a billion in tax savings for Hendricks and the Uihleins over its eight-year life.
But the tax break did more than just give a lucrative, and legal, perk to Johnson’s donors. In the first year after Trump signed the legislation, just 82 ultrawealthy households collectively walked away with more than $1 billion in total savings, an analysis of confidential tax records shows. Republican and Democratic tycoons alike saw their tax bills chopped by tens of millions, among them: media magnate and former Democratic presidential candidate Michael Bloomberg; the Bechtel family, owners of the engineering firm that bears their name; and the heirs of the late Houston pipeline billionaire Dan Duncan.
Usually the scale of the riches doled out by opaque tax legislation — and the beneficiaries — remain shielded from the public. But ProPublica has obtained a trove of IRS records covering thousands of the wealthiest Americans. The records have enabled reporters this year to explore the diverse menu of options the tax code affords the ultrawealthy to avoid paying taxes.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@lesgilbert50 that's a super awesome attempt to try and deflect to me in order to run away from the questions that you keep not wanting to answer, while simultaneously and hypocrisy flea talking about how I'm making so many assumptions about you.
But it's cool, let me tell you the difference between my opinion and yours. I based mine off of the evidence presented Before Me, by you. You trying mischaracterize what I say and twisted into a completely different subject because you have nothing better to say.
Which is why I haven't bothered to defend the whole racism thing until now. Cuz when you're off making all these massive assumptions about me and then whining about how I'm making assumptions about you, ironically, you're talking to a lady who has a mixed-race son and whose father is my best damn friend. You're talking about a graphic designer who lives in an Ally and who donates her time and skill to the local black lives matter group on a regular basis. The one you out of context talk about you people and how that's always about racism, you sound stupid as hell. It would actually matter in that context if we were in any way talking about the color of somebody's skin which nobody brought up until you did. The subject matter was political parties. And while some political stories do reference race, this one in no way did that. The only one trying to bring up race into this context is you and the only reason you're trying to do it is to deflect from your own stupid ass argument.
I say you're on the right because you have yet to use anything but right-wing talking points and tactics. I'm also not surprised that you're not willing to claim your party. That's nothing new here. When you guys got tired of making up excuses for Trump's latest crazy, you just stopped wanting to claim your own party so you don't have to defend it all the time. The only problem with that is you guys never stopped using all the right-wing talking points. Which is actually a bad thing for you because now you have the added argument against the fact that you're not even willing to claim your side, by default, admitting how bad you know your side is.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
hey! Sorry... Must have missed this last reply some how....
I know it can be hard. They intend to make it that way. They try to say the most outrageous thing that their conscience will allow them to, in order to bait you off of talkin about the thing that they can't win on. If you follow them down that hole, you're letting him get away with it. I've literally had these people talk about my biracial son and call him names that... If they had done so in person, I would punch them in their face. (So not that mature 😂) However... Another little trick is to call that out as the childish act it is. I usually say some thing like... "You keep calling me a boo-boo had as many times as it makes you feel better about not having an argument and I'll be over here giving you facts. Then we'll see how well that works out for us both."
Tends to make them feel silly and not go back to that line of dialogue.
Or... If you want to dismiss them outright, as the child they are acting like, take the name they called you and use it against them...
" This "adult" just called me a (or just said) "insert word here". Lets all thank him for discrediting himself for us and move on."
At the end of the day though, you just have to remember what I tell my little boy when he goes to school and he sees a bully. All Bullies we really are is just sad inside. They're just trying to make someone else feel as crappy as they do. It's our job to make sure they don't get that opportunity. That's always Trump trolls are. Grown bullies that never really grow up. I also tell him that you have to remember who you are. Them saying something doesn't make it true. If you know it to be a lie, whether it's about facts or yourself, they can say it a million times, they're not going to manifest it into reality. Mostly, just remember how much it drives them crazy to not be able to get you off of original topic that they can't defend against. They may take it and act like they're totally cool but inside they lost their minds and you can tell because they cannot stop responding.
Thank you for your kind words hun! 💜 I used to be you and I know you will get were I am because your already showing that calm, logical thought. You just have to learn to remember that in the moment. Remember that for every time they try and call you a name or make some outlandish statement, that's their desperation. You'll get there! 💜
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@jeffchandler283 Who is my source? You silly! 😁 👇
Our conversation, thus far, in order and word for word. Which, of course, demonstrates that you're the one making claims and not backing them up with sources. Then you started to try and pretend that it was me because I was asking you for your sources on the claims that you had made, to distract from the fact that you can't produce any sources yourself. Obviously proving that you are lying and... More importantly, you can't produce sources or evidence for the claims that you have made. 👇
You - apparently the Democrats don't... They are ripping it apart
Me - You guys keep saying that but we always notice that you don't bother to go into detail. Mostly because you know that if you get your argument would be shredded.
You - apparently the Democrats don't... They are ripping it apart
Me - You guys keep saying that but we always notice that you don't bother to go into detail. Mostly because you know that if you get your argument would be shredded.
You - just busy... You guys are worse if we are going to be honest..
Me - So... Excuses to why you can't back up your claim and then making another one you didn't bother to back up. Yeah... We are the ones who are "worse"... 😉✌
You - the proof is all around you...
You - #Walkaway
Me - Great! Then it should be super easy to present some! We will be waiting! 😉✌
You - you haven't backed up anything you've said... I do agree how ever that you guys are worse...
Me - SoOoOo... you're saying, you can't back up what you say, you're trying to deflect it on to me, even though I haven't said anything to you to back up and you don't understand how quotation marks work. All good things to know! All good things for you to show everybody here! 😉✌
You - where do you come up with this gobbledygook... Give me sources
Me - sources for what? You're the one making claims without a new backup or proof or sources or facts. Which is why you're desperately trying to turn this on me. So I ask again, sources for what?
You - there you go.... Still making false statements with nothing to back it up
You - still waiting on your imaginary sources
You - still not willing to produce your sources?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@jeffchandler283 Who is my source? You silly! 😁 👇
Our conversation, thus far, in order and word for word. Which, of course, demonstrates that you're the one making claims and not backing them up with sources. Then you started to try and pretend that it was me because I was asking you for your sources on the claims that you had made, to distract from the fact that you can't produce any sources yourself. Obviously proving that you are lying and... More importantly, you can't produce sources or evidence for the claims that you have made. 👇
You - apparently the Democrats don't... They are ripping it apart
Me - You guys keep saying that but we always notice that you don't bother to go into detail. Mostly because you know that if you get your argument would be shredded.
You - apparently the Democrats don't... They are ripping it apart
Me - You guys keep saying that but we always notice that you don't bother to go into detail. Mostly because you know that if you get your argument would be shredded.
You - just busy... You guys are worse if we are going to be honest..
Me - So... Excuses to why you can't back up your claim and then making another one you didn't bother to back up. Yeah... We are the ones who are "worse"... 😉✌
You - the proof is all around you...
You - #Walkaway
Me - Great! Then it should be super easy to present some! We will be waiting! 😉✌
You - you haven't backed up anything you've said... I do agree how ever that you guys are worse...
Me - SoOoOo... you're saying, you can't back up what you say, you're trying to deflect it on to me, even though I haven't said anything to you to back up and you don't understand how quotation marks work. All good things to know! All good things for you to show everybody here! 😉✌
You - where do you come up with this gobbledygook... Give me sources
Me - sources for what? You're the one making claims without a new backup or proof or sources or facts. Which is why you're desperately trying to turn this on me. So I ask again, sources for what?
You - there you go.... Still making false statements with nothing to back it up
You - still waiting on your imaginary sources
You - still not willing to produce your sources?
Me - (the point when I began this comment, that I will continue to update)
Me - 👆👆 Please continue to lie, discredit yourself and anything you might say in the future... And... Of course... Show that you can not back up your claims. It works out so well for me. 😉✌
You - you little liar..... America is going through a. Of economic growth. The likes of which we have not seen since the Reagan years... There's not a single Democrat fingerprint on this booming economy and record job growth anywhere... You guys have done absolutely nothing for the last three years and you don't deserve to get reelected... People don't walk into the voting booth and say no I'm not going to vote for a booming economy... Stop with the dog and pony show Antics... America is bored and has moved on
You - enough with you were Silly lies
You - still no sources I see... Typical Democrat Behavior
You - okay there's your last place trophy... Now go lie to someone else
Me - " America is going through a. Of economic growth, the likes of which we have never seen since the Reagan years... "
Prove it?
" there's not a single Democrat fingerprint on this booming economy and regular job growth anywhere..."
Prove it?
" you guys have done absolutely nothing for the last three years and you don't deserve to get reelected..."
Prove it?
"Stop with the dog and pony show Antics... America is board and has moved on"
Prove it?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@jeffchandler283 Who is my source? You silly! 😁 👇
Our conversation, thus far, in order and word for word. Which, of course, demonstrates that you're the one making claims and not backing them up with sources. Then you started to try and pretend that it was me because I was asking you for your sources on the claims that you had made, to distract from the fact that you can't produce any sources yourself. Obviously proving that you are lying and... More importantly, you can't produce sources or evidence for the claims that you have made. 👇
You - apparently the Democrats don't... They are ripping it apart
Me - You guys keep saying that but we always notice that you don't bother to go into detail. Mostly because you know that if you get your argument would be shredded.
You - apparently the Democrats don't... They are ripping it apart
Me - You guys keep saying that but we always notice that you don't bother to go into detail. Mostly because you know that if you get your argument would be shredded.
You - just busy... You guys are worse if we are going to be honest..
Me - So... Excuses to why you can't back up your claim and then making another one you didn't bother to back up. Yeah... We are the ones who are "worse"... 😉✌
You - the proof is all around you...
You - #Walkaway
Me - Great! Then it should be super easy to present some! We will be waiting! 😉✌
You - you haven't backed up anything you've said... I do agree how ever that you guys are worse...
Me - SoOoOo... you're saying, you can't back up what you say, you're trying to deflect it on to me, even though I haven't said anything to you to back up and you don't understand how quotation marks work. All good things to know! All good things for you to show everybody here! 😉✌
You - where do you come up with this gobbledygook... Give me sources
Me - sources for what? You're the one making claims without a new backup or proof or sources or facts. Which is why you're desperately trying to turn this on me. So I ask again, sources for what?
You - there you go.... Still making false statements with nothing to back it up
You - still waiting on your imaginary sources
You - still not willing to produce your sources?
Me - (the point when I began this comment, that I will continue to update)
Me - 👆👆 Please continue to lie, discredit yourself and anything you might say in the future... And... Of course... Show that you can not back up your claims. It works out so well for me. 😉✌
You - you little liar..... America is going through a. Of economic growth. The likes of which we have not seen since the Reagan years... There's not a single Democrat fingerprint on this booming economy and record job growth anywhere... You guys have done absolutely nothing for the last three years and you don't deserve to get reelected... People don't walk into the voting booth and say no I'm not going to vote for a booming economy... Stop with the dog and pony show Antics... America is bored and has moved on
You - enough with you were Silly lies
You - still no sources I see... Typical Democrat Behavior
You - okay there's your last place trophy... Now go lie to someone else
Me - " America is going through a. Of economic growth, the likes of which we have never seen since the Reagan years... "
Prove it?
" there's not a single Democrat fingerprint on this booming economy and regular job growth anywhere..."
Prove it?
" you guys have done absolutely nothing for the last three years and you don't deserve to get reelected..."
Prove it?
"Stop with the dog and pony show Antics... America is board and has moved on"
Prove it?
Me - Sense you have claimed that I am lying, you can feel free to go back and give your own accurate account of our conversation, thus far, but I will warn you, since you have demonstrated not to be trustworthy, I have already screen captured the entire day of the conversation, just in case you go back and try an edit your comments.
You - looks like the Democrats have really sad things up this time.... The Press wants Trump impeached even though the impeachment proceedings are not over yet... Americans according to the poles have moved on... Trump's numbers are better than they've ever been right now as we speak... He got 8% of African American votes when he was elected now he has 34%... 3 years of unhinged all black Democrats circus shows have left their party in a shambles... getting caught in that big lie about the FBI did not help either.... Lay down your Snickers bar and go Google the information I just gave you
You - wow... Still no sources?
Me - Yeah... Not sure you know that you don't make sense... The press wants Trump impeached. So the Dems, not the press... began, are collecting evidence for and are proceeding with the impeachment proceedings......? SoOoOo... That makes sense to you, how?
Me - IF ANYONE WANTS TO SEE ME PREDICT THE FUTURE... READ HERE! THEN LOOK BELOW! 😁😂😁😂
😂 And now we have come to the part of the conversation where your going to make, yet another" claim that you can't back up, I'm going to insist you do, your not going to be able to and theN your, sadly and transparently, going to try and pretend that " I'm really the one that said something and you just keep expecting me to back things up.... And I just wont." Even though I've asked you what you need me to back up and all I've got are crickets.... And it is all I will get again! 😂 Which... then is going to mean that I add your comments to my list of our conversation. 😂 Ya know... So you can stop trying to dodge the fact that you can't back up anything you say.😂
NOW EVERYONE WATCH! IM MAGIC!!!! 😁
Me - According to polls Americans have moved on you say?
EVERYONE READY??? 😁
Prove it?
Trump's numbers are better than they've ever been right now, you say?
Prove it?
He has 34% of the African American vote right now, you say? Prove it?
WAIT WAIT WAIT... HERE IS A GOOD ONE! EVERYONE WATCHING!
So you like poles and to try and blame the Dems for everything under the sun, to distract from Trump's actions... But I digress... Lets combine the 2. The last time they took a poll on the political leanings of the FBI, how many where registered Republicans and How many where Registered Dems????? Or for the situation you where referencing... I forget... Where the people in charge at the FBI at that time, Dems or Reps? Personally I don't think it matters. Even if this was flipped. I wouldn't question the Rep FBI without some serious evidence... And then I wouldn't question that whatever they did was motivated by party loyalty without a hole lot more evidence. FBI agents, like the armed forces, leave their opinions at the door most of the time. They are their, and trained to do their job. They don't often bring their personal beliefs into anything. How often do you hear Retired FBI coming out and saying anything critical about the people the worked under or even against? A few here and there over the years but most of the time.... Well... Most of the time it sounds a lot like when I ask you what I need to source! 😁
Me - AND FOR HIS FINAL ACT.. Now! You put down a candy bar ( for some reason 🤷 😂 ) and you go source my material for me! 😂😂😂
" Lay down your Snickers bar and go Google the information I just gave you."
But here is the thing... Boys and girls... If he just looked it up to put it in that comment... Why didn't he take the literal second it would take to copy and paste the source? I mean... it's almost like either doesn't have a source or he doesn't want us to know what his real source is. Personally I hope it's the second one! 😂
1
-
1
-
1
-
@jeffchandler283 Who is my source? You silly! 😁 👇
Our conversation, thus far, in order and word for word. Which, of course, demonstrates that you're the one making claims and not backing them up with sources. Then you started to try and pretend that it was me because I was asking you for your sources on the claims that you had made, to distract from the fact that you can't produce any sources yourself. Obviously proving that you are lying and... More importantly, you can't produce sources or evidence for the claims that you have made. 👇
You - apparently the Democrats don't... They are ripping it apart
Me - You guys keep saying that but we always notice that you don't bother to go into detail. Mostly because you know that if you get your argument would be shredded.
You - apparently the Democrats don't... They are ripping it apart
Me - You guys keep saying that but we always notice that you don't bother to go into detail. Mostly because you know that if you get your argument would be shredded.
You - just busy... You guys are worse if we are going to be honest..
Me - So... Excuses to why you can't back up your claim and then making another one you didn't bother to back up. Yeah... We are the ones who are "worse"... 😉✌
You - the proof is all around you...
You - #Walkaway
Me - Great! Then it should be super easy to present some! We will be waiting! 😉✌
You - you haven't backed up anything you've said... I do agree how ever that you guys are worse...
Me - SoOoOo... you're saying, you can't back up what you say, you're trying to deflect it on to me, even though I haven't said anything to you to back up and you don't understand how quotation marks work. All good things to know! All good things for you to show everybody here! 😉✌
You - where do you come up with this gobbledygook... Give me sources
Me - sources for what? You're the one making claims without a new backup or proof or sources or facts. Which is why you're desperately trying to turn this on me. So I ask again, sources for what?
You - there you go.... Still making false statements with nothing to back it up
You - still waiting on your imaginary sources
You - still not willing to produce your sources?
Me - (the point when I began this comment, that I will continue to update)
Me - 👆👆 Please continue to lie, discredit yourself and anything you might say in the future... And... Of course... Show that you can not back up your claims. It works out so well for me. 😉✌
You - you little liar..... America is going through a. Of economic growth. The likes of which we have not seen since the Reagan years... There's not a single Democrat fingerprint on this booming economy and record job growth anywhere... You guys have done absolutely nothing for the last three years and you don't deserve to get reelected... People don't walk into the voting booth and say no I'm not going to vote for a booming economy... Stop with the dog and pony show Antics... America is bored and has moved on
You - enough with you were Silly lies
You - still no sources I see... Typical Democrat Behavior
You - okay there's your last place trophy... Now go lie to someone else
Me - " America is going through a. Of economic growth, the likes of which we have never seen since the Reagan years... "
Prove it?
" there's not a single Democrat fingerprint on this booming economy and regular job growth anywhere..."
Prove it?
" you guys have done absolutely nothing for the last three years and you don't deserve to get reelected..."
Prove it?
"Stop with the dog and pony show Antics... America is board and has moved on"
Prove it?
Me - Sense you have claimed that I am lying, you can feel free to go back and give your own accurate account of our conversation, thus far, but I will warn you, since you have demonstrated not to be trustworthy, I have already screen captured the entire day of the conversation, just in case you go back and try an edit your comments.
You - looks like the Democrats have really sad things up this time.... The Press wants Trump impeached even though the impeachment proceedings are not over yet... Americans according to the poles have moved on... Trump's numbers are better than they've ever been right now as we speak... He got 8% of African American votes when he was elected now he has 34%... 3 years of unhinged all black Democrats circus shows have left their party in a shambles... getting caught in that big lie about the FBI did not help either.... Lay down your Snickers bar and go Google the information I just gave you
You - wow... Still no sources?
Me - Yeah... Not sure you know that you don't make sense... The press wants Trump impeached. So the Dems, not the press... began, are collecting evidence for and are proceeding with the impeachment proceedings......? SoOoOo... That makes sense to you, how?
Me - IF ANYONE WANTS TO SEE ME PREDICT THE FUTURE... READ HERE! THEN LOOK BELOW! 😁😂😁😂
😂 And now we have come to the part of the conversation where your going to make, yet another" claim that you can't back up, I'm going to insist you do, your not going to be able to and theN your, sadly and transparently, going to try and pretend that " I'm really the one that said something and you just keep expecting me to back things up.... And I just wont." Even though I've asked you what you need me to back up and all I've got are crickets.... And it is all I will get again! 😂 Which... then is going to mean that I add your comments to my list of our conversation. 😂 Ya know... So you can stop trying to dodge the fact that you can't back up anything you say.😂
NOW EVERYONE WATCH! IM MAGIC!!!! 😁
Me - According to polls Americans have moved on you say?
EVERYONE READY??? 😁
Prove it?
Trump's numbers are better than they've ever been right now, you say?
Prove it?
He has 34% of the African American vote right now, you say? Prove it?
WAIT WAIT WAIT... HERE IS A GOOD ONE! EVERYONE WATCHING!
So you like poles and to try and blame the Dems for everything under the sun, to distract from Trump's actions... But I digress... Lets combine the 2. The last time they took a poll on the political leanings of the FBI, how many where registered Republicans and How many where Registered Dems????? Or for the situation you where referencing... I forget... Where the people in charge at the FBI at that time, Dems or Reps? Personally I don't think it matters. Even if this was flipped. I wouldn't question the Rep FBI without some serious evidence... And then I wouldn't question that whatever they did was motivated by party loyalty without a hole lot more evidence. FBI agents, like the armed forces, leave their opinions at the door most of the time. They are their, and trained to do their job. They don't often bring their personal beliefs into anything. How often do you hear Retired FBI coming out and saying anything critical about the people the worked under or even against? A few here and there over the years but most of the time.... Well... Most of the time it sounds a lot like when I ask you what I need to source! 😁
Me - AND FOR HIS FINAL ACT.. Now! You put down a candy bar ( for some reason 🤷 😂 ) and you go source my material for me! 😂😂😂
" Lay down your Snickers bar and go Google the information I just gave you."
But here is the thing... Boys and girls... If he just looked it up to put it in that comment... Why didn't he take the literal second it would take to copy and paste the source? I mean... it's almost like either doesn't have a source or he doesn't want us to know what his real source is. Personally I hope it's the second one! 😂
You - Oh my god so now not only do you hate Trump so you hate Snickers candy bars also... Does your heat know no boundaries.... Bidens criminal confession on tape... That doesn't matter does it...
Me -👈 And ya see these silly arguments he has to reduce himself to! 😂 Kids... Stay in school and don't be like this! 😂
Me - .... Well... As far as your question... Is there anything Biden could have done that would have excused Trump from breaking the laws that he did. While serving as one of the leaders in our country?
If you answer that one correctly, then you will have the answer to the question you asked me. 😁
1
-
1
-
@jeffchandler283 Who is my source? You silly! 😁 👇
Our conversation, thus far, in order and word for word. Which, of course, demonstrates that you're the one making claims and not backing them up with sources. Then you started to try and pretend that it was me because I was asking you for your sources on the claims that you had made, to distract from the fact that you can't produce any sources yourself. Obviously proving that you are lying and... More importantly, you can't produce sources or evidence for the claims that you have made. 👇
You - apparently the Democrats don't... They are ripping it apart
Me - You guys keep saying that but we always notice that you don't bother to go into detail. Mostly because you know that if you get your argument would be shredded.
You - apparently the Democrats don't... They are ripping it apart
Me - You guys keep saying that but we always notice that you don't bother to go into detail. Mostly because you know that if you get your argument would be shredded.
You - just busy... You guys are worse if we are going to be honest..
Me - So... Excuses to why you can't back up your claim and then making another one you didn't bother to back up. Yeah... We are the ones who are "worse"... 😉✌
You - the proof is all around you...
You - #Walkaway
Me - Great! Then it should be super easy to present some! We will be waiting! 😉✌
You - you haven't backed up anything you've said... I do agree how ever that you guys are worse...
Me - SoOoOo... you're saying, you can't back up what you say, you're trying to deflect it on to me, even though I haven't said anything to you to back up and you don't understand how quotation marks work. All good things to know! All good things for you to show everybody here! 😉✌
You - where do you come up with this gobbledygook... Give me sources
Me - sources for what? You're the one making claims without a new backup or proof or sources or facts. Which is why you're desperately trying to turn this on me. So I ask again, sources for what?
You - there you go.... Still making false statements with nothing to back it up
You - still waiting on your imaginary sources
You - still not willing to produce your sources?
Me - (the point when I began this comment, that I will continue to update)
Me - 👆👆 Please continue to lie, discredit yourself and anything you might say in the future... And... Of course... Show that you can not back up your claims. It works out so well for me. 😉✌
You - you little liar..... America is going through a. Of economic growth. The likes of which we have not seen since the Reagan years... There's not a single Democrat fingerprint on this booming economy and record job growth anywhere... You guys have done absolutely nothing for the last three years and you don't deserve to get reelected... People don't walk into the voting booth and say no I'm not going to vote for a booming economy... Stop with the dog and pony show Antics... America is bored and has moved on
You - enough with you were Silly lies
You - still no sources I see... Typical Democrat Behavior
You - okay there's your last place trophy... Now go lie to someone else
Me - " America is going through a. Of economic growth, the likes of which we have never seen since the Reagan years... "
Prove it?
" there's not a single Democrat fingerprint on this booming economy and regular job growth anywhere..."
Prove it?
" you guys have done absolutely nothing for the last three years and you don't deserve to get reelected..."
Prove it?
"Stop with the dog and pony show Antics... America is board and has moved on"
Prove it?
Me - Sense you have claimed that I am lying, you can feel free to go back and give your own accurate account of our conversation, thus far, but I will warn you, since you have demonstrated not to be trustworthy, I have already screen captured the entire day of the conversation, just in case you go back and try an edit your comments.
You - looks like the Democrats have really sad things up this time.... The Press wants Trump impeached even though the impeachment proceedings are not over yet... Americans according to the poles have moved on... Trump's numbers are better than they've ever been right now as we speak... He got 8% of African American votes when he was elected now he has 34%... 3 years of unhinged all black Democrats circus shows have left their party in a shambles... getting caught in that big lie about the FBI did not help either.... Lay down your Snickers bar and go Google the information I just gave you
You - wow... Still no sources?
Me - Yeah... Not sure you know that you don't make sense... The press wants Trump impeached. So the Dems, not the press... began, are collecting evidence for and are proceeding with the impeachment proceedings......? SoOoOo... That makes sense to you, how?
Me - IF ANYONE WANTS TO SEE ME PREDICT THE FUTURE... READ HERE! THEN LOOK BELOW! 😁😂😁😂
😂 And now we have come to the part of the conversation where your going to make, yet another" claim that you can't back up, I'm going to insist you do, your not going to be able to and theN your, sadly and transparently, going to try and pretend that " I'm really the one that said something and you just keep expecting me to back things up.... And I just wont." Even though I've asked you what you need me to back up and all I've got are crickets.... And it is all I will get again! 😂 Which... then is going to mean that I add your comments to my list of our conversation. 😂 Ya know... So you can stop trying to dodge the fact that you can't back up anything you say.😂
NOW EVERYONE WATCH! IM MAGIC!!!! 😁
Me - According to polls Americans have moved on you say?
EVERYONE READY??? 😁
Prove it?
Trump's numbers are better than they've ever been right now, you say?
Prove it?
He has 34% of the African American vote right now, you say? Prove it?
WAIT WAIT WAIT... HERE IS A GOOD ONE! EVERYONE WATCHING!
So you like poles and to try and blame the Dems for everything under the sun, to distract from Trump's actions... But I digress... Lets combine the 2. The last time they took a poll on the political leanings of the FBI, how many where registered Republicans and How many where Registered Dems????? Or for the situation you where referencing... I forget... Where the people in charge at the FBI at that time, Dems or Reps? Personally I don't think it matters. Even if this was flipped. I wouldn't question the Rep FBI without some serious evidence... And then I wouldn't question that whatever they did was motivated by party loyalty without a hole lot more evidence. FBI agents, like the armed forces, leave their opinions at the door most of the time. They are their, and trained to do their job. They don't often bring their personal beliefs into anything. How often do you hear Retired FBI coming out and saying anything critical about the people the worked under or even against? A few here and there over the years but most of the time.... Well... Most of the time it sounds a lot like when I ask you what I need to source! 😁
Me - AND FOR HIS FINAL ACT.. Now! You put down a candy bar ( for some reason 🤷 😂 ) and you go source my material for me! 😂😂😂
" Lay down your Snickers bar and go Google the information I just gave you."
But here is the thing... Boys and girls... If he just looked it up to put it in that comment... Why didn't he take the literal second it would take to copy and paste the source? I mean... it's almost like either doesn't have a source or he doesn't want us to know what his real source is. Personally I hope it's the second one! 😂
You - Oh my god so now not only do you hate Trump so you hate Snickers candy bars also... Does your heat know no boundaries.... Bidens criminal confession on tape... That doesn't matter does it...
Me -👈 And ya see these silly arguments he has to reduce himself to! 😂 Kids... Stay in school and don't be like this! 😂
Me - .... Well... As far as your question... Is there anything Biden could have done that would have excused Trump from breaking the laws that he did. While serving as one of the leaders in our country?
If you answer that one correctly, then you will have the answer to the question you asked me. 😁
You - pretty clear that Nancy and the altlefters don't have any respect for the Constitution
Me - 👈 And watch this kids! And how is that? What is your proof of that again??? 😂
1
-
1
-
1
-
@jeffchandler283 Who is my source? You silly! 😁 👇
Our conversation, thus far, in order and word for word. Which, of course, demonstrates that you're the one making claims and not backing them up with sources. Then you started to try and pretend that it was me because I was asking you for your sources on the claims that you had made, to distract from the fact that you can't produce any sources yourself. Obviously proving that you are lying and... More importantly, you can't produce sources or evidence for the claims that you have made. 👇
You - apparently the Democrats don't... They are ripping it apart
Me - You guys keep saying that but we always notice that you don't bother to go into detail. Mostly because you know that if you get your argument would be shredded.
You - apparently the Democrats don't... They are ripping it apart
Me - You guys keep saying that but we always notice that you don't bother to go into detail. Mostly because you know that if you get your argument would be shredded.
You - just busy... You guys are worse if we are going to be honest..
Me - So... Excuses to why you can't back up your claim and then making another one you didn't bother to back up. Yeah... We are the ones who are "worse"... 😉✌
You - the proof is all around you...
You - #Walkaway
Me - Great! Then it should be super easy to present some! We will be waiting! 😉✌
You - you haven't backed up anything you've said... I do agree how ever that you guys are worse...
Me - SoOoOo... you're saying, you can't back up what you say, you're trying to deflect it on to me, even though I haven't said anything to you to back up and you don't understand how quotation marks work. All good things to know! All good things for you to show everybody here! 😉✌
You - where do you come up with this gobbledygook... Give me sources
Me - sources for what? You're the one making claims without a new backup or proof or sources or facts. Which is why you're desperately trying to turn this on me. So I ask again, sources for what?
You - there you go.... Still making false statements with nothing to back it up
You - still waiting on your imaginary sources
You - still not willing to produce your sources?
Me - (the point when I began this comment, that I will continue to update)
Me - 👆👆 Please continue to lie, discredit yourself and anything you might say in the future... And... Of course... Show that you can not back up your claims. It works out so well for me. 😉✌
You - you little liar..... America is going through a. Of economic growth. The likes of which we have not seen since the Reagan years... There's not a single Democrat fingerprint on this booming economy and record job growth anywhere... You guys have done absolutely nothing for the last three years and you don't deserve to get reelected... People don't walk into the voting booth and say no I'm not going to vote for a booming economy... Stop with the dog and pony show Antics... America is bored and has moved on
You - enough with you were Silly lies
You - still no sources I see... Typical Democrat Behavior
You - okay there's your last place trophy... Now go lie to someone else
Me - " America is going through a. Of economic growth, the likes of which we have never seen since the Reagan years... "
Prove it?
" there's not a single Democrat fingerprint on this booming economy and regular job growth anywhere..."
Prove it?
" you guys have done absolutely nothing for the last three years and you don't deserve to get reelected..."
Prove it?
"Stop with the dog and pony show Antics... America is board and has moved on"
Prove it?
Me - Sense you have claimed that I am lying, you can feel free to go back and give your own accurate account of our conversation, thus far, but I will warn you, since you have demonstrated not to be trustworthy, I have already screen captured the entire day of the conversation, just in case you go back and try an edit your comments.
You - looks like the Democrats have really sad things up this time.... The Press wants Trump impeached even though the impeachment proceedings are not over yet... Americans according to the poles have moved on... Trump's numbers are better than they've ever been right now as we speak... He got 8% of African American votes when he was elected now he has 34%... 3 years of unhinged all black Democrats circus shows have left their party in a shambles... getting caught in that big lie about the FBI did not help either.... Lay down your Snickers bar and go Google the information I just gave you
You - wow... Still no sources?
Me - Yeah... Not sure you know that you don't make sense... The press wants Trump impeached. So the Dems, not the press... began, are collecting evidence for and are proceeding with the impeachment proceedings......? SoOoOo... That makes sense to you, how?
Me - IF ANYONE WANTS TO SEE ME PREDICT THE FUTURE... READ HERE! THEN LOOK BELOW! 😁😂😁😂
😂 And now we have come to the part of the conversation where your going to make, yet another" claim that you can't back up, I'm going to insist you do, your not going to be able to and theN your, sadly and transparently, going to try and pretend that " I'm really the one that said something and you just keep expecting me to back things up.... And I just wont." Even though I've asked you what you need me to back up and all I've got are crickets.... And it is all I will get again! 😂 Which... then is going to mean that I add your comments to my list of our conversation. 😂 Ya know... So you can stop trying to dodge the fact that you can't back up anything you say.😂
NOW EVERYONE WATCH! IM MAGIC!!!! 😁
Me - According to polls Americans have moved on you say?
EVERYONE READY??? 😁
Prove it?
Trump's numbers are better than they've ever been right now, you say?
Prove it?
He has 34% of the African American vote right now, you say? Prove it?
WAIT WAIT WAIT... HERE IS A GOOD ONE! EVERYONE WATCHING!
So you like poles and to try and blame the Dems for everything under the sun, to distract from Trump's actions... But I digress... Lets combine the 2. The last time they took a poll on the political leanings of the FBI, how many where registered Republicans and How many where Registered Dems????? Or for the situation you where referencing... I forget... Where the people in charge at the FBI at that time, Dems or Reps? Personally I don't think it matters. Even if this was flipped. I wouldn't question the Rep FBI without some serious evidence... And then I wouldn't question that whatever they did was motivated by party loyalty without a hole lot more evidence. FBI agents, like the armed forces, leave their opinions at the door most of the time. They are their, and trained to do their job. They don't often bring their personal beliefs into anything. How often do you hear Retired FBI coming out and saying anything critical about the people the worked under or even against? A few here and there over the years but most of the time.... Well... Most of the time it sounds a lot like when I ask you what I need to source! 😁
Me - AND FOR HIS FINAL ACT.. Now! You put down a candy bar ( for some reason 🤷 😂 ) and you go source my material for me! 😂😂😂
" Lay down your Snickers bar and go Google the information I just gave you."
But here is the thing... Boys and girls... If he just looked it up to put it in that comment... Why didn't he take the literal second it would take to copy and paste the source? I mean... it's almost like either doesn't have a source or he doesn't want us to know what his real source is. Personally I hope it's the second one! 😂
You - Oh my god so now not only do you hate Trump so you hate Snickers candy bars also... Does your heat know no boundaries.... Bidens criminal confession on tape... That doesn't matter does it...
Me -👈 And ya see these silly arguments he has to reduce himself to! 😂 Kids... Stay in school and don't be like this! 😂
Me - .... Well... As far as your question... Is there anything Biden could have done that would have excused Trump from breaking the laws that he did. While serving as one of the leaders in our country?
If you answer that one correctly, then you will have the answer to the question you asked me. 😁
You - pretty clear that Nancy and the altlefters don't have any respect for the Constitution
Me - 👈 And watch this kids! And how is that? What is your proof of that again??? 😂
You - The two articles of fiction had finally been released with no questions allowed... House of Cards in front of your face... It won't be so nice to get this silly s*** in front of the Senate so it can be exposed for the Sham that it is and we can get on with the business of running the country now... Trump in 2020
You - two articles of fiction and no questions... Talk about silly
Me - Lol... Are ya ready boys and girls? 😁 Prove it!??! 😁
You really don't get it, do you... You can say whatever you like, but as long as you can't back it up, it really doesn't matter.
Me - in the meantime, if you guys are so right and we are so wrong then why are you guys always running from substance based questions?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@DEUXSantos This is why people don't get anywhere. Everytime, someone tries to say, lets get better back ground checks, or do you really need the assault rifle for "hunting", or ya know what, maybe its not the best idea to allow people who aren't all there in the head, to have a gun, someone else comes along and goes, but what if.... 🙄
So by all means, lets allow more kids to get shot in school, so you can feel like your gonna be able to take on "the man" if one day, he decided to pay you a visit.... That makes sense.
I got news for you, if that day comes, what makes you think, your 9 or stockpile of assault weapons is going to do against a tank and a well-trained army?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
sun dial Oh... Hunny Bunny! Its never gonna work out between us. Eventually I would just get bored of humiliating you, or I'd find a question to ask that you wouldn't be able to answer, or you would revert all the way back to your third grade tactics, or, who know... All of the above. Either way, it ends the same. You curled up in the corner, trying not to cry, while I wait, patiently, for you to fade into the darkness, never to be seen again. 🙃✌🇺🇸
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
sun dial I'm sorry... How am I misinformed? What the examples I gave not true in some way? Or is it possible your trying to paint me that way because you can't argue against them?
Tell you where socialism worked? Look up. As in, it's all around you. Do you enjoy your Police Department, your fire department, your Ambulance Service, how about social security, or Canada. Like the entire country.
That's why I asked you if you knew what socialism was. You clearly do not and hitting something without knowing what it is is irrational. Hitting a system of operation I'm painting it as negative or positive is not rational either. You don't know what you're talkin about and you probably shouldn't talk about something that you're not educated on.
Out of all the things you choose to point out to call President Obama the Antichrist, you're going to pick contraception? Really? Sweetheart, that's just called being a responsible and don't living in the real world. In the real world you actually cannot force anyone to do anything in America. Unless you have broken a law and have been convicted of that law you broke. You most certainly cannot do so under the guise of the government. Which means those nuns that you're talkin about, had a different option.
You mean President Obama was insisting that all people be treated equally and fairly in your place of business? That bastard.🙄
The transgender bathroom thing... Here's my question. How many instances of what you just described had been reported before or even after that became an issue? BTW, transgenderism exist to whether your bigoted ass believes it does or not.
Every time I talk to one of you guys I always get reminded of when I tell my son about bullies. I told him that bullies are bullies because they need to blame their problems on somebody else, they need to feel Superior to somebody because really they're just sad inside.
1
-
sun dial The law did not "force" them. The law said, if your going to keep doing what your doing, then you have to do this also. That also, was provide them with the option of using contraception. If the nuns didn't want to have to do that, then all they had to do was stop doing what they were doing. Let somebody else take over that job. That was that. We don't force people in America to do s*** they don't want to do. We do however enforce consequences for actions.
Look, you can keep implying that I don't know what I'm talkin about just so you can excuse the fact that I don't agree with you, but that's lazing logic. Not agreeing with your point of view is not a prerequisite for being uninformed.
The baker also was not forced to make that cake. However, in America if you are going to run a public business then you have to serve the public equally. This is not the 1950s, people don't have to ride on the back of buses anymore. They could have not served anyone or they serve everyone equally. It was not their place to judge other people. It's not yours either.
I pity your mother for raising such a small minded cretin, who can't handle someone disagreeing with their point of view. You have that tiny penis syndrome. You need for people to agree with you or you need them to be stupid. Cuz, you couldn't possibly be wrong. Heaven forbid! 😳🙄😜✌
1
-
1
-
sun dial Lmao! OMG! the desperation is just choosing off of you at this point. Lmao!🤣🤣🤣
There are a few things wrong with your theory.
1. How did I lose an argument? Because you kept saying that I was misinformed and ignorant... Because that's what anyone has to be if they don't agree with you? News flash, "professor", you're not the one that actually gets to decide any of this for anyone else. Most certainly, not on the basis that someone has a different opinion than you, so they must be wrong. Cuz it's not like you have proved your point or anything. ...
But lets do this, lets look at my cussing and name calling, beside your passive aggressively calling me stupid and bringing my son, who is an innocent little boy, into the whole thing. Which actually Falls around you passive aggressively calling me stupid....and how much you pity him. I know you were saying that to get me to react a certain way. Probably so you could do this BS, right here. So you would have a way out. 😄
So I'll put my name calling and using cuss words up against your bigotry and hatred of people you don't even know, and your use of religion to justify that bigotry and hatred. Tell me.... How many lives has cussing taken? How about name calling? Yeah... I'm pretty sure, I'm still coming out on top there. Nice try though. 😜✌
1
-
1
-
1
-
sun dial Okay... I see we are back on this again.... Alright "Professor", how about I take all the screenshots of the conversations, where you claimed you were this person, send it to the actual, heads of the department, James Potash, MD, Constantine G. Lyketsos, MD, Eric C. Strain MD, Timothy Moran, Burnett Colin MD, Robert Finding MD, Margaret Chisholm MD and Sharon Swartz MD.... Then YouTube... And lets see if we can't get your account shut down and get you sued for identity theft.... Sound good!?!?!? 😁 or do you wanna quit this crap?!??!
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@MrBillmedhurst So, this is why you're wrong. The founders set up the impeachment process to work much like a criminal case and due process, except if is it slanted in any direction, it's for the benefit of trump and not the detriment. I will explain.
- first the house members, Democrat and Republican, serve as the investigation. They gather evidence...
- then once they feel they've gathered all the evidence they can find, they turn into the grand jury and make the vote
- except, here is where it is to trumps benefit.. in both the investigation portion and the vote portion, 👉Republicans👈 get equal say and equal amount of time to ask questions and find evidence. In a regular grand jury, only the prosecutor is allowed to present evidence to the grand jury and vote to see if there is enough evidence to proceed to a trial.
- 👉What you need to be asking is why the Republicans that can be in the house impeachment hearings are not bothering to show up most of the time. If you want people in there asking questions and being able to pretend evidence, there are plenty in the house that can do that if they just show up.👈
- if the vote is made that there is enough evidence... Then it moves to the trial portion in the Senate... Where 👉Trump and his lawyers have all the rights to depose, cross-examine, present evidence, testify... Basically everything you would get at a normal trial.👈
The republicans are counting on people's ignorance about this subject. They think they can snowball people on the process because they can't defend the actual Act. Except a really clear sign that the Democrats aren't doing anything wrong in the house is that if they were, the 👉Republicans could stop the whole process by taking the Democrats to court over violations of house law.👈 It would hold the impeachment proceedings. Except they're not doing that. Just like they are not showing up to the impeachment inquiry to get there equal time to present evidence and question Witnesses. Another thing they're not doing is 👉arguing the substance.👈 The only play they feel they have is to bet on people's ignorance of the process. That should speak volumes to anyone.
1
-
@MrBillmedhurst Now... If it dies in the Senate, it wont be for lack of evidence. It will be because people are putting party before country.... Here is why....
1. Trump provides the transcript from July 25th, between him and the Ukraine president. He pressed the president to investigate allegations against his political opponent. That, in itself is a crime. If he wanted to buy items investigated without breaking the law, he had options.
🔹 he could have asked Ukraine to investigate the Biden's back when all of this happened. Which was long before Biden became his political opponent in the next presidential election.
🔹 He could have had the justice department, of which he is the head of, put together an independent investigation and have them work with Ukraine.
If he had done either or both of these things, the Democrats wouldn't have a leg to stand on for impeachment.
2. Trump lied, on camera, several times, about whether the July 25th phone call included him even mentioning Biden.
3. During that July 25th phone call he also asked the president of Ukraine to investigate a crazy de bunk'd theory that Ukraine, rather than Russia, hacked a Democratic party server in 2016.
4. Their are text messages between ambassadors who over saw Ukraine policy. The messages raise concern that Trump was withholding military Aid to Ukraine and refusing a white house meeting with the Ukraine president in order to bend the newly elected leader to his will. Even as Ukraine desperately needed the ad to fend off Russian aggression from its East.
5. Trump has also publicly called on Ukraine and China to investigate Biden, and his acting Chief of Staff, Mick Mulvaney, recently acknowledged that military aid to Ukraine was conditioned in part on whether the European allies agreed to Trump's demands.
6. Trump attempted to hide the July 25th phone call on a server that it would not have normally gone on too and did not qualify for.
7. Trump has both try to curtail witness statements and block other Witnesses from even testifying.... irregardless of congressional subpoenas.
8. He also tried to keep the text messages between the ambassadors away from the house impeachment inquiry. Also against Congressional subpoenas.
9. Trump attempted to claim executive privilege Over The Whistleblower report.
10. Several of the witnesses that have testified already, have testified to the quid pro quo.
That is just a few facts we have so far... on that evidence alone there can be at least two articles of impeachment. Abuse of power, and obstruction of Congress.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@thegoodguywins1 To be super specific it actually give the breakdown in the 6.6 million jobs added report. This is the summary of the report. I'm clearly not putting the whole thing there. However you can carry your butt over there and go look for it.
"On the last business day of February, the number and rate of job openings were little changed at 11.3 million and 7.0 percent, respectively. Job openings decreased in finance and insurance (-63,000) and in nondurable goods manufacturing (-39,000). Job openings increased in arts, entertainment, and recreation (+32,000); educational services (+26,000); and federal government (+23,000). Job openings decreased in the Midwest region and increased in the West region. (See table 1.)
Hires increased in construction (+75,000). Hires decreased in information (-29,000). The number of hires was little changed in all four regions. (See table 2.)"
It's in the Bureau of Labor Statistics
And the title you will be looking up is...
Job openings and labor turnover statistics.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@thegoodguywins1 1 from the actual report you never bothered reading. Oops!
To be super specific it actually give the breakdown in the 6.6 million jobs added report. This is the summary of the report. I'm clearly not putting the whole thing there. However you can carry your butt over there and go look for it.
"On the last business day of February, the number and rate of job openings were little changed at 11.3 million and 7.0 percent, respectively. Job openings decreased in finance and insurance (-63,000) and in nondurable goods manufacturing (-39,000). Job openings increased in arts, entertainment, and recreation (+32,000); educational services (+26,000); and federal government (+23,000). Job openings decreased in the Midwest region and increased in the West region. (See table 1.)
Hires increased in construction (+75,000). Hires decreased in information (-29,000). The number of hires was little changed in all four regions. (See table 2.)"
It's in the Bureau of Labor Statistics
And the title you will be looking up is...
Job openings and labor turnover statistics.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@thegoodguywins1 👈 the comment my b** boys, been co-opting this whole time... 👉 " jobs are plentiful, great so now we all can have two minimum wage jobs."
The comment that, my little b** boy, backed up by asking me this question. 👉" show us the nod minimal wage jobs "
And... Now... my little b** boy, wants to take two words out of an entire report, and try and pretend that, not only the person he was co-opted the question from, but him, himself, was talking about those 2 words all along... When they, infact, are a whole other sub subject.
It was the same thing he tried to do when he got caught trying to claim something stupid about what I actually said.
My poor little b** boy! 😂
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@joboygbpedwards that's kind of a complex question with a lot of answers... but I'll do my best.
First... we didn't always treat the flu the way we do now.
Second... there needs to be a recognition of the different kinds of viruses, they're infection rate, death rate and strain mutation ability. For instance, the flu has been around a long time. Even various strains of the flu tend to be very similar to each other. We have a lot of paperwork on the flu and how to handle it. Covid-19 is brand new! In other words, from the jump, we had no damn clue. You can equate it to someone who's drove in an automatic car their whole life and then we're all of the sudden Forced to only drive standards, while giving no notice, and absolutely no training to do so. You're going to be like, "well it's a car... but what the hell do I do with it... and what is this extra peddle about... And why does this gear shift not just go back and forth. " We were learning as we went. That was literally all we could do.
Third... there were a crap ton of mistakes made. There's not really a nicer way to put that. One of the biggest ones.... Take the car analogy... you're in this standard, with absolutely no clue on how to get it to work, but then somebody comes along and sees you struggling, and offers to teach you how to drive a standard. You respond with, "Na! I got this!" Why? Because the guy who's offering to help you, was told to learn how to do it by the guy that used to have your job. 🤷 On day 1 the trump administration had a 33 page detailed, and designed by experts, plan to reduce the spread of a pandemic like covid-19 in America and chose not to use it because President Obama commissioned experts to make it after H1 N1. All of these mistakes of leadership, made it worse here there it had to be... Which gave this new virus time to build, mutate and kill.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@joboygbpedwards Hundreds of thousands of Americans died alone in hospital beds, even more than that got seriously ill, the entire country closed down, half the country lost their jobs and won't be getting them back, we went into a housing crisis, people all over the country can't feed their children or put roofs over their heads, a third of the country slipped into poverty, half the hospitals in the country were overrun and you're so blindly partisan that you think the Democrats had to hype any of that up so they can win an election. The Dems won the election, partly due to Covid FOR SURE.... but not because of silly conspiracy theories that haven't held up in any Court of this land.. it's because the Republican from the Trump Administration bungled covid-19 so damn much. 60+ court cases, local, state, federal, and supreme, heard by 60+ judges, on all sides of the isle, some directly appointed by Trump, found NO evidence for mass mail in voter fraud. So... Your evidence to back that claim, would be? Or Do You expect me to prove that claim of yours for you, as well?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@joboygbpedwards Lets cut this off at the pass... Shall we.
You have made many claims. 2 of which are...
Unproven claim 1. The election was "stolen" by mail-in ballots
Unproven claim 2. Dr fauci lied.
BS response for 1. You claimed the YouTube video of a right-wing hack like Crowder playing with Google Maps and debunked video tapes, neither of which would ever hold up in court, was, somehow, proof of that. It wasn't.
BS response for 2. You keep trying to insist that it's my job to prove that claim for you. When, if you're going to make that claim in the first place, you should already have proof for it. That is, unless, you're lying and you know it. So... I say your claim, your burden of proof. Not mine.
Make as many excuses as you want to, deflect as much as you want to and lie as much as you want to my question will be the same until I get an answer.
Provide proof of your claims?
1
-
@joboygbpedwards Ah... The last refuge for the man without an argument... Childish insults... Anywho... 👇
Lets cut this off at the pass... Shall we.
You have made many claims. 2 of which are...
Unproven claim 1. The election was "stolen" by mail-in ballots
Unproven claim 2. Dr fauci lied.
BS response for 1. You claimed the YouTube video of a right-wing hack like Crowder playing with Google Maps and debunked video tapes, neither of which would ever hold up in court, was, somehow, proof of that. It wasn't.
BS response for 2. You keep trying to insist that it's my job to prove that claim for you. When, if you're going to make that claim in the first place, you should already have proof for it. That is, unless, you're lying and you know it. So... I say your claim, your burden of proof. Not mine.
Make as many excuses as you want to, deflect as much as you want to and lie as much as you want to my question will be the same until I get an answer.
Provide proof of your claims?
1
-
@joboygbpedwards 🤦 So, time stamps without links to go to, only takes you to specific parts of thw video we Re commenting under right now. You have to link the videos.
Lets cut this off at the pass... Shall we.
You have made many claims. 2 of which are...
Unproven claim 1. The election was "stolen" by mail-in ballots
Unproven claim 2. Dr fauci lied.
BS response for 1. You claimed the YouTube video of a right-wing hack like Crowder playing with Google Maps and debunked video tapes, neither of which would ever hold up in court, was, somehow, proof of that. It wasn't.
BS response for 2. You keep trying to insist that it's my job to prove that claim for you. When, if you're going to make that claim in the first place, you should already have proof for it. That is, unless, you're lying and you know it. So... I say your claim, your burden of proof. Not mine.
Make as many excuses as you want to, deflect as much as you want to and lie as much as you want to my question will be the same until I get an answer.
Provide proof of your claims?
1
-
1
-
@joboygbpedwards You're a crazy end timeser! This one of those times I'm shocked but not surprised. Either way, I'm pretty sure that one sufficiently proves how ABSOLUTELY NOT CREDIBLE you are. Not that the yards of dodging, deflecting, making excuses and outright lying, on this thread, didn't do that, but I like to leave no doubt. I'm a, do the job until its done, kinda girl. Just encase though! 😁
Lets cut this off at the pass... Shall we.
You have made many claims. 2 of which are...
Unproven claim 1. The election was "stolen" by mail-in ballots
Unproven claim 2. Dr fauci lied.
BS response for 1. You claimed the YouTube video of a right-wing hack like Crowder playing with Google Maps and debunked video tapes, neither of which would ever hold up in court, was, somehow, proof of that. It wasn't.
BS response for 2. You keep trying to insist that it's my job to prove that claim for you. When, if you're going to make that claim in the first place, you should already have proof for it. That is, unless, you're lying and you know it. So... I say your claim, your burden of proof. Not mine.
Make as many excuses as you want to, deflect as much as you want to and lie as much as you want to my question will be the same until I get an answer.
Provide proof of your claims?
1
-
@joboygbpedwards See.. Told ya he wasn't done. 😂 Lets get back to it, shall we! 😂👇
Lets cut this off at the pass... Shall we.
You have made many claims. 2 of which are...
Unproven claim 1. The election was "stolen" by mail-in ballots
Unproven claim 2. Dr fauci lied.
BS response for 1. You claimed the YouTube video of a right-wing hack like Crowder playing with Google Maps and debunked video tapes, neither of which would ever hold up in court, was, somehow, proof of that. It wasn't.
BS response for 2. You keep trying to insist that it's my job to prove that claim for you. When, if you're going to make that claim in the first place, you should already have proof for it. That is, unless, you're lying and you know it. So... I say your claim, your burden of proof. Not mine.
Make as many excuses as you want to, deflect as much as you want to and lie as much as you want to my question will be the same until I get an answer.
Provide proof of your claims?
1
-
1
-
1
-
@joboygbpedwards Lets cut this off at the pass... Shall we.
You have made many claims. 2 of which are...
Unproven claim 1. The election was "stolen" by mail-in ballots
Unproven claim 2. Dr fauci lied.
BS response for 1. You claimed the YouTube video of a right-wing hack like Crowder playing with Google Maps and debunked video tapes, neither of which would ever hold up in court, was, somehow, proof of that. It wasn't.
BS response for 2. You keep trying to insist that it's my job to prove that claim for you. When, if you're going to make that claim in the first place, you should already have proof for it. That is, unless, you're lying and you know it. So... I say your claim, your burden of proof. Not mine.
Make as many excuses as you want to, deflect as much as you want to and lie as much as you want to my question will be the same until I get an answer.
Provide proof of your claims?
1
-
1
-
1
-
@joboygbpedwards Lets cut this off at the pass... Shall we.
You have made many claims. 2 of which are...
Unproven claim 1. The election was "stolen" by mail-in ballots
Unproven claim 2. Dr fauci lied.
BS response for 1. You claimed the YouTube video of a right-wing hack like Crowder playing with Google Maps and debunked video tapes, neither of which would ever hold up in court, was, somehow, proof of that. It wasn't.
BS response for 2. You keep trying to insist that it's my job to prove that claim for you. When, if you're going to make that claim in the first place, you should already have proof for it. That is, unless, you're lying and you know it. So... I say your claim, your burden of proof. Not mine.
Make as many excuses as you want to, deflect as much as you want to and lie as much as you want to my question will be the same until I get an answer.
Provide proof of your claims?
1
-
@joboygbpedwards Whatever you need to tell yourself, little one. Now back helping you prove your lies. 😂
Lets cut this off at the pass... Shall we.
You have made many claims. 2 of which are...
Unproven claim 1. The election was "stolen" by mail-in ballots
Unproven claim 2. Dr fauci lied.
BS response for 1. You claimed the YouTube video of a right-wing hack like Crowder playing with Google Maps and debunked video tapes, neither of which would ever hold up in court, was, somehow, proof of that. It wasn't.
BS response for 2. You keep trying to insist that it's my job to prove that claim for you. When, if you're going to make that claim in the first place, you should already have proof for it. That is, unless, you're lying and you know it. So... I say your claim, your burden of proof. Not mine.
Make as many excuses as you want to, deflect as much as you want to and lie as much as you want to my question will be the same until I get an answer.
Provide proof of your claims?
1
-
@joboygbpedwards I know... I know... I'm a "Big Boo Boo Head", because you want to believe in fairy tales. Now back to you helping me prove your lying! 😁✌
Lets cut this off at the pass... Shall we.
You have made many claims. 2 of which are...
Unproven claim 1. The election was "stolen" by mail-in ballots
Unproven claim 2. Dr fauci lied.
BS response for 1. You claimed the YouTube video of a right-wing hack like Crowder playing with Google Maps and debunked video tapes, neither of which would ever hold up in court, was, somehow, proof of that. It wasn't.
BS response for 2. You keep trying to insist that it's my job to prove that claim for you. When, if you're going to make that claim in the first place, you should already have proof for it. That is, unless, you're lying and you know it. So... I say your claim, your burden of proof. Not mine.
Make as many excuses as you want to, deflect as much as you want to and lie as much as you want to my question will be the same until I get an answer.
Provide proof of your claims?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@julianpetkov8320 👈 Some ppl are just plain ole masochistic. Okay... gave you a shot stop discrediting and embarrassing yourself. Too bad you didn't take it. 👇
Timeline....
He bring up 👉"the "Russia Russia Russia" conspiracy theory.
I bring up the investigation into the "Russia Russia Russia conspiracy theory". 👉"no sooner than you're going to read Volume 2 of the Mueller report." Logical next step, I think... 🤷
He counters with this claim about what is in the Mueller Report. 👉 " Seriously? You bring up a document which state's clear that they found, "no Russian collusion". (even using quotations)
Being that I know he is lying, because I've actually studied the Mueller report. Both volumes... I ask him to give me the page it's on.
👉 "🤣 Does it? Where? What page? Quote it, or maybe just give the page number. I have a copy. I can look up the quote myself. I'll even post it.
I can always tell those who have not actually read it. 🤣
Btw, what is volume 2 about? 🤣"
At which point he disappears for 14 hours until I Puppet Master him back into the conversation with this... "Still waiting".
He then starts to try and Flip It On Me by insisting that it is somehow my job to prove his claim.
👉" You are still waiting? You still haven't produced the page number that does!"
At this point he also tries to deflect and distract onto another subject, for the first but not last time.
Which I obviously find utterly ridiculous, because I know and he knows it's not in the Mueller report. So he's basically asking me to prove his point about something I know isn't in there. Yep... That is the logic he is using... 🤦
👉"why in the world would I have to produce a page number in the Mueller report for a claim you say is in there? Nice try though. You claim the Mueller report states that there was no evidence of Russian collusion found. I'll be waiting for you to produce that page? No more desperate attempts to switch it around because you can actually find the page either. That's just sad."
But since, apparently, he has no other tools in his belt, he tries the same thing again. Claiming it's my "onus" to prove that his lie about what the Mueller report says is true. Then trying yet again to deflect to another subject.
👉" IKR, you brought it up so why would you need to provide a page reference. All you need to say is read the Mueller report and Wallah your report is made."
Except, that ridiculous assertion was June to fail. Considering he literally pretended to quote a specific phrase in the Mueller report. Which can be easily looked up by the page number. Of course it would be easy to do so if what he claimed was in there is actually in there. It's not so he has to keep dancing. And, of course, Q the second attempt at distraction and deflection to another subject. Except the time I address it.
👉"dude, you literally have no credibility as long as you keep making these silly excuses as to why you can't point out the claim you made in the Mueller report. Did I bring up the motor report? Yes. Did I make the claim that the Mueller report said there was no evidence of collusion found? No. You did that. All I'm doing is asking you to point out the page and the fact that you can't, says all we need to know. So keep referencing random s*** to try and deflect and distract but you need to know I don't get distracted. Provide proof for your claim and we can move on."
He has nowhere else to go and so is forced to keep making the same ridiculous assertion that it's my job to improve his lie about what in the Mueller report. This time citing that I'm the one that brought up the Mueller report so it's my job to prove his lie. except that's a ridiculous assertion because I'm not the one that made that claim. .. But he's desperate try and flip this on me because he knows he lied.
👉 " don't wait, read it and produce the reference page. You brought it up the onus is on you."
And then he provides a second, trying to discredit the Mueller report after trying to use it as a reference himself.🤣
So he gets another question he's going to run away from momentarily.
👉"Did I say the Muller report said it found no evidence of collusion or did you?"
And the latest golden nugget... 🤣
👉 " can you cite the page number that it did? "no" Well then why are you playing word games? Find something better to do."
As you can see, a clear representation of him being completely full of s*** and not wanting to admit it.
Let's see what funny pretzel shape he turns himself into now... In order to get out of his silly lie.😁
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@julianpetkov8320 👈 Some ppl are just plain ole masochistic. Okay... gave you a shot stop discrediting and embarrassing yourself. Too bad you didn't take it. 👇
Timeline....
He bring up 👉"the "Russia Russia Russia" conspiracy theory.
I bring up the investigation into the "Russia Russia Russia conspiracy theory". 👉"no sooner than you're going to read Volume 2 of the Mueller report." Logical next step, I think... 🤷
He counters with this claim about what is in the Mueller Report. 👉 " Seriously? You bring up a document which state's clear that they found, "no Russian collusion". (even using quotations)
Being that I know he is lying, because I've actually studied the Mueller report. Both volumes... I ask him to give me the page it's on.
👉 "🤣 Does it? Where? What page? Quote it, or maybe just give the page number. I have a copy. I can look up the quote myself. I'll even post it.
I can always tell those who have not actually read it. 🤣
Btw, what is volume 2 about? 🤣"
At which point he disappears for 14 hours until I Puppet Master him back into the conversation with this... "Still waiting".
He then starts to try and Flip It On Me by insisting that it is somehow my job to prove his claim.
👉" You are still waiting? You still haven't produced the page number that does!"
At this point he also tries to deflect and distract onto another subject, for the first but not last time.
Which I obviously find utterly ridiculous, because I know and he knows it's not in the Mueller report. So he's basically asking me to prove his point about something I know isn't in there. Yep... That is the logic he is using... 🤦
👉"why in the world would I have to produce a page number in the Mueller report for a claim you say is in there? Nice try though. You claim the Mueller report states that there was no evidence of Russian collusion found. I'll be waiting for you to produce that page? No more desperate attempts to switch it around because you can actually find the page either. That's just sad."
But since, apparently, he has no other tools in his belt, he tries the same thing again. Claiming it's my "onus" to prove that his lie about what the Mueller report says is true. Then trying yet again to deflect to another subject.
👉" IKR, you brought it up so why would you need to provide a page reference. All you need to say is read the Mueller report and Wallah your report is made."
Except, that ridiculous assertion was June to fail. Considering he literally pretended to quote a specific phrase in the Mueller report. Which can be easily looked up by the page number. Of course it would be easy to do so if what he claimed was in there is actually in there. It's not so he has to keep dancing. And, of course, Q the second attempt at distraction and deflection to another subject. Except the time I address it.
👉"dude, you literally have no credibility as long as you keep making these silly excuses as to why you can't point out the claim you made in the Mueller report. Did I bring up the motor report? Yes. Did I make the claim that the Mueller report said there was no evidence of collusion found? No. You did that. All I'm doing is asking you to point out the page and the fact that you can't, says all we need to know. So keep referencing random s*** to try and deflect and distract but you need to know I don't get distracted. Provide proof for your claim and we can move on."
He has nowhere else to go and so is forced to keep making the same ridiculous assertion that it's my job to improve his lie about what in the Mueller report. This time citing that I'm the one that brought up the Mueller report so it's my job to prove his lie. except that's a ridiculous assertion because I'm not the one that made that claim. .. But he's desperate try and flip this on me because he knows he lied.
👉 " don't wait, read it and produce the reference page. You brought it up the onus is on you."
And then he provides a second, trying to discredit the Mueller report after trying to use it as a reference himself.🤣
So he gets another question he's going to run away from momentarily.
👉"Did I say the Muller report said it found no evidence of collusion or did you?"
And the latest golden nugget... 🤣
👉 " can you cite the page number that it did? "no" Well then why are you playing word games? Find something better to do."
As you can see, a clear representation of him being completely full of s*** and not wanting to admit it.
Let's see what funny pretzel shape he turns himself into now... In order to get out of his silly lie.😁
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Kevin Soler "that white privilege" = Silly out of context assumption, your attempting to trigger me with.
"You ain't that smart" = Hilariously ironic phrasing for the statement, your attempting to get across.
"Was the party of slavery" = intentionally inaccurate historical reference to the southern Dems, more well known as the DixieCrats, who, in today's time, more accurately resemble the Rep party. Considering that is also where the majority of them went after they left. Which would be why the majority of the southern states are red now... Also... Another attempt to trigger.
"Just a few decades ago" = intentionally inaccurate timeline of events, indicating less time has passed, being that, the majority of the DixieCrats left the Dem party by the mid 60's, after Pres. Johnson legislatively ended school segregation. Putting the "decade" count at 5+ or more accurately 57 years ago. "A few" is 2 or less.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Kevin Soler 👈 Lord! 😂 This one expects me to engage in a further "debate" with him, when All he has are ridiculous and obvious lies and/or conspiracy theories... has, several times, decided it was a good idea to mock the idea of having proof of his claims.... and who has some kind of schizo ADHD thing going on right now in regards to sticking to a subject.... But... I'm copy and pasting the same thing that he can't argue against, so, in his head, I'm the most elaborate "bot" in the YouTube comment section, here "using AI technology", just to prove his crazy, lying and baseless ass is, infact, that....
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@stevenfriess9708 It's super simple to understand. The Congressional body investigate possible crimes and misconduct committed during the president's time in office. This doesn't just apply to the president either. It applies to many other nationally elected or appointed governmental figures. Such as elected Congress persons, secretaries of State, surgeon general's etc. Again, you don't get to rewrite the rules because you found your guy on the other side of them.
And this, "cuz all president was naming people employed by the government" 👈 right here, is just silly, cherry picked, desperation. It's called setting up a paper tiger so you can knock it down. You should probably not do that anymore.
Andrew silly shoot the messenger arguments don't matter either. When you run out of logical reasoning it's always about blame the media for you guys. Like they're the ones making all these people do all this stupid s**. Here's a thought. Maybe just get your people to stop doing stupid s** and hold them accountable for it when they do. Then the media will stop reporting on the stupid s*** they do.
"Why haven't they subpoenaed Trump?" 👈 Its an investigative body. They are literally investigating right now. You've had to of watched crime documentaries. You tell me, do the bring the suspect in right away, before they have evidence to put in front of them of their crime, or do they generally do the investigating and Gathering of said evidence first? Honestly these are not hard things to figure out if you want to.
"Why hasn't anyone been charged with insurrection?" 👈 Do you think the pawns Trump used to "storm the castle" that day where the organizers or leaders? They charge them with the big stuff.
What I don't get is why you guys keep trying to ask that same damn question and act like all the evidence that this was a clearly organized event magically goes away because you do. You're literally trying to defend the actions of people who were trying to overthrow your own government. All because they believed a lie.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@kennethlaw5216 I think the thing that disturbs me the most about your later comments was when you said, us all wanting a better life is the only thing we have in common with these illegals. Paraphrased of course.
That's disturbing on a couple of different levels honestly. First it's illogical. Because how do you know that? It's lazy thinking to. Hell don't even know them and I can think of a way more things we have in common with them. Most are parents, sister, brothers, aunt, uncles, grandparents, creative, hard workers, hopeful, scared, loving, want to help others. Some could be artists, inventors, Engineers, doctors, want there kids to get a good education, want to learn more themselves, love dogs, smakers, have issues, have medical conditions, speak only 1 language, want to learn more themselves.... And on and on....
Second, why does that matter? It obviously matters to you. Why is that? Why do you have to have something in common with someone to want to help them or wish them good things? Why do they have to be like you for you to care about them?
1
-
1
-
1
-
@kennethlaw5216 So that was an honest argument based on fact and logic. So for that effort I will respond. Almost all of what you said was accurate. It is about big buisness. It is about short term thinking. It is about useful pawns. The only thing that I find people like you ( smart but often to frustrated to see the whole bored ) miss is... Your manner of thinking, your overt hate for these people, and yes, your belittling of them plays right into their hands. You feel powerless to stop these currupt politicians and big biz but they know that you need to take that frustration out on someone. So they can keep doing what they are doing and you will keep doing what they want. It's those illegals! They are to blame. Not the companies that are taking just as much advantage of them ( if not more so ) as they are you. No! They are touchable. Them you can reach. Not some abstract CEO you have never and probabaly will never lay your eyes on. It's easier to hate and judge them. You just don't realize by perpetuating that irrational hate for the other, your feeding into it. Your helping those biz men to keep doing what they are doing. You actually said it yourself in this last comment....
" so when we all quit for better-paying jobs it forced them to pay more money to steal workers from other companies."
You mean to say... You came together instead of being divided and it ended up that people got paid more twards what they where worth?
I mean... It seams like you have been in this a long time sweetheart and I think you have a little bit of the fog of war going on... And that you don't really see what you say sometimes. You say your not desprate or superior...
"This clown has been here 30 years illegally and is proud of it."
You have to belittle them by calling them names without provocation. Also make assumptions about how they feel without knowing. Giving you the excuse to belittle them.
" no we are not built on illegals"
You are offended at the idea of someone not being here legally and yet still helping to build this nation you are so very proud of. Dispite the facts of the matter.
" they wanted a better life and that's the only thing we have in common with illegals "
Affirmative statment. You could npt possibly be anything like "these people". Only that one thing. No more. Which is obviously illogical. Come on now.
"( your grandfather) he didn't get handouts and send his kids to school on other legal peoples tax dollar "
In your last comment you mentioned they work. Most work very hard. They work hard dispite not getting the protections afforded to us, dispite being hated and attacked constantly because if circumstance. I'm not saying the system isn't badly broken. I'm saying they are just as much pawns in that game as you are and you hate them for it.
"Of the shithole he left"
Belittling even where they come from. Thats not even as good. Its necessary to put it down, for you. You can't think for a min that what if that was you waving an American flag in another country and it offended someone so much theybhad to tell you your home was a shithole. Wouldn't you find that offensive and unnecessary? Mostly, would you care to listen to that person's plight any more after that?
" most of these people who come here have no respect for America. Won't fight for it. They were too big of cowards to fight to save their own country. All they want is a handout."
Finding it necessary to illogically villainize them. Justifying your attacks. Knowing that you saying that can't possibly be coming from a place of logic. Cuz you don't know these people. So how could you know this? You mention schools a lot. So you know on some level they are doing it for their kids. If you had to choose between your kids staying alive and your country.... We know what we would all choose and that is the choices most of these parents have to make. They are not being cowerds. They are being whatever they have to be to keep their kids breathing. They are being parents. Any parent understands that.
This is where we get into you needlessly insulting me. Fun times.
" innocent children? Really put down the crack pipe"
Yes. Innocent children. You said it yourself right after. " the only reason they are here in the first place is because their parents broke the law and brought them here". So yes. Innocent children. No you should not feel sorry for them. We should help them. They are children and need it. Thats all anyone would need to know who had not already began seeing them as less than. If you see a child who is lost, you help them get home, if they are without food, you share yours. Because what if that was your child that was hungry and lost. Wouldnt you want someone else to help them? That's not being a bleeding heart. Thats just being a decient person. And the "crack pipe" thing. I only mention it because it is the start of you seeing me as someone you need to start bringing down. A threat of some kind. A challange to your ideas. So you have to make yourself feel above me.
" you still don't get it stupid. It's obvious you have never worked hard a day in your life. Well I'm sure you think you have but I can tell you haven't"
Now normally someone with healthy reasoning does not feel the need to belittle someone else because they simply dont agree with what they are saying. Its unnecessary because they don't need their validation. You, from this point on... Have to do it. You have to try and make me smaller some how. You have to villainize me without knowing anything about me. Make assumptions. Tell yourself a story to justify your actions. That's not logical.
" your ancestors must be so proud of you. That you turned your back on the law and Country they swore to protect."
Drastic overreaction and more villainization. You feel more threatened and so you ratchet up the story you tell yourself. I have to be all these things because I don't agree with all of what you're saying. The very core of who I am has to be bad because of that. That's not logical.
" also you notice that I said you didn't serve. You see it takes honor and patriotism to stand up for what's right"
See now I'm not perfect and thought of clapping back just then. In the end I just decided tondonwhat I'm doing now. Trying to point something out to someone in obvious pain so that maybe he could see it, address it and live a little happier. ... But the implication isn't logical, right? you don't have to have served in the military to be a patriot or to have honor. You don't I don't and nobody else does. Thomas Jefferson said dissent is the highest form of patriotism. A founding father. Being willing to point out our broken bits, dispite the hate you get fpr it, so that we can work to make it better is honorable, is patriotism. Its how we learn and grow.
So when I say your taking the wrong tactic, your angry at the wrong people and you have to make people feel smaller to make yourself feel better, these are all the completely unnecessary examples of what I mean. you're getting mad at the wrong people and just giving those people that deserve that anger what they want.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@grassmastersmith4422 Grassmaster Smith So let's break this down...
" In that case all Democrats have completely violated the Hatch Act."
Here is the problem with your argument. 1. Lets start with "all". How could you possibly know that without knowing or at least seeing all Dems do so?
2. The Hatch acts main provision prohibits employees in the executive branch of the federal government, except the president and the vice president.... Which can obviously not be all of them.
3. Those who fit that criteria should be punished irregardless of political party. I see that you were only speaking about the Democrats. I would be more than willing to prosecute democrats for that if you're willing to prosecute Republicans?
"Accusing Trump of what they have been doing all along."
1. What have they accused him of that you think he is not guilty of?
2. Trump himself accuses people all the time of things that he simply knows nothing about. So glass houses... Is all I'm saying.
3. What democrates have spacifically been guilty of the things the dems accuse Trump of?
"Democrates aren't able to survive any logical argument. They have to silence and censor their opponents to have any chance."
I would just like to remind you that I have had to inform you of basic facts about the subjects that you have brought up several times now. Simple things, that took me only a moment to look up myself. So I would assume that "logical arguments" would begin with all pertinent facts and therefore you would have shown yourself to be ill equiped for such an argument, yourself.
Also, I would remind you that the republicans have built a bad reputation for gerrymandering. Which is silencing people in the most importantent of forums. Their vote.
"I think the Democrats need to man up and show they have some plans that make sense."
Well... I have good news for you there. Many Dems have solid plans for lots of key issues. Healthcare, infrastructure, marijuana legalization, climate change, gun regulations and much more. I'd be happy to find some for you, if you would like?
" They need to be able to honestly dispute Conway."
They have, as I have already shown with the Hatch Act. Also... I should remind you that the original claim came from the Trump counsel office and the Republicans. Not the Democrates.
As for your last comment... You do understand that this accusation of Hatch Act breach did not come from the Democrats, right? It came from the Republican White House counsel's Office. That's where the recommendation of firing her over the Hatch Act came from. So the people who you characterize as trying to censor her are Trump's White House counsel.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@bradpotter6401 Yeah... Don't be making claims for which you are not prepared to back up with proof. That turns this from a fact based conversation, to one party just hurling wild speculation at the sight of no better response.
NATO has stepped in where other countries, including us, have not.
China is our economic competitor. If China was our Real Enemy they could collapse our economy, probably for good, tomorrow if they wanted. China owns over 50% of America's debt. All they have to do is call in a few markers, or stop the supply ships. America is their biggest customer. So to paint them as being against us is ludacris.
As for NATO spending...
All 30 Allies contribute to the NATO budget on an agreed cost-share formula based on Gross National Income, which represents a small percentage of each member’s defence budget. This is the principle of common funding, and demonstrates burden-sharing in action.
These few by example. Your making it sould like NATO would collapse without us. They would not. You need all the facts.
Just a few of its top earners.
United States: 3.6%
Greece: 2.4%
United Kingdom: 2.1%
Estonia: 2.1%
Poland: 2.0%
France: 1.8%
Romania: 1.8%
Latvia: 1.8%
Lithuania: 1.7%
Norway: 1.6%
It's not our "assistance". It's our obligation. One that we all uphold, in order to keep the peace. It's essentially, you mess with one of us, you mess with all of us. A strategy that has kept us out of a third world war for 87 years now.
But mostly, again you're not interested in the actions or intentions of, Vladimir Putin. He doesn't care about a peaceful resolution unless he gets to take over an entire country. He's not trying to hold on to anything. He doesn't have a hold of Ukraine. Ukraine is its own country. It's also in our defense Alliance. Meaning we defend it when people are trying to do things like invade and take it over. Just like any of these other countries would do for us. It's super easy for you to say "oh it's just Ukraine" when it's not the US. Except you would have a whole different take on the matter if it was us... and don't be deceived by Vladimir Putin. He's not attacking Ukraine to attack Ukraine. He's attacking Ukraine because he knows we have to defend it. He doesn't give a damn about Ukraine. What the hell does he get out of Ukraine?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@arcade85_ Asked, for instance, by CNBC on Jan. 22 if there were worries about a pandemic, Trump said, "No. Not at all. And — we're — we have it totally under control. It's one person coming in from China, and we have it under control. It's going to be just fine."
In February, he asserted that coronavirus cases were going “very substantially down, not up” and told Fox Business it will be fine because “in April, supposedly, it dies with the hotter weather. And that’s a beautiful date to look forward to.”
"It’s going to disappear. One day — it’s like a miracle — it will disappear,” he added on Feb. 27.
“It’s got the world aflutter, but it’ll work out,” Trump told a meeting of the National Association of Counties on March 3.
Two days before WHO’s pandemic declaration, Trump still painted a rosy picture on the coronavirus outlook. “So last year 37,000 Americans died from the common Flu. It averages between 27,000 and 70,000 per year,” he tweeted on March 9. “Nothing is shut down, life & the economy go on. At this moment there are 546 confirmed cases of CoronaVirus, with 22 deaths. Think about that!”
https://www.thedailybeast.com/trump-calls-democrats-coronavirus-criticism-a-new-hoax
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Mr. J's Educational Oasis
1. Yeah... That's what you guys said about Bernie last time, and with being funded by the people, he went from almost no chance last time, to damn near beating the Clinton money machine for the nomination.
Socialism, monarchy, Republic, Communists, dictatorship, democracy... You know what they all have in common? They are all operating systems. Putting a negative connotation on something like socialism is like saying, "I'm an Android girl, so iPhones must be evil." It's all in the hands of the user.
Maybe you should not speak on things that you, obviously, do not understand.
2. Warren has done more fighting for the people and against corruption then any other female in office.
3. Yang... he probably doesn't have the name recognition to make it, this time. He does have a lot of good Financial policies. The last two democratic presidents that were that focused on the economy, got us out of debt for the first time in over 50 years (Clinton) and pulled us out of the Great Recession in under 7 months of being in office (Obama). Both of which proceeded Republican Bush's, who got us into those messes, all the while touting fiscal responsibility. SoOoOo.... Either next time or he would make a good VP.
4. Same goes for Castro... Probably not this time... But maybe a good VP. He has the people of America in mind. All of them... And not just thpse that agree with him. Like Trump. You can see it everytime he speaks and through his positions.
5. Harris... Well she has been fighting idiots like you, all her life. I think that's why you guys have to try and minamize her all the time. Your scared.... And you should be. 😜✌
YOUR asinine assumptions about me and people like me, don't matter. Period. And they don't matter because they're wrong. Because small-minded assholes like you have to make s*** up about us in order for you to have an argument. Your the useful idiots everyone is always talking about, blurting out right wing talking points, with words you don't understand and no actual substance behind them. You have to mischaracterize us and the policies of these Democrats because you need someone to blame and because your simply not that bright, any halfway coherent politician can come along and point you in a Direction... And all the sudden, your on it like white on rice.
Run along little boy. Your not ready for the big kids table yet. 😜✌🇺🇸
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@FoxFox-lx3cv Yeah... So... I know you need to tell yourself that I'm all mad and crazy, right now, so that you can walk away from this mess you got yourself into with, at least, a shred of dignity, but here's the thing... That kinda falls under the perview of, not my problem. So, I'm gonna have to pop your little bubble and tell you that... Well... Your just not that important, DUDE! 😜✌🇺🇸
Though, I would turn the knob down on all that fundamentalist crazy talk before you make your words, your own problem, and some nice men show up to your house with some Thorazine and a brand new jacket, just for you. Cuz... That's probably not gonna go the way that you think it does. Just sayin... 😜🇺🇸🤙
1
-
1
-
1
-
@FoxFox-lx3cv SoOoOo... We are a slow learner now? Here! Once again...
You really shouldn't use words, that you clearly don't understand.
"Socialism, communism, oligarchy, monarchy, democracy, dictatorship, plutocracy...etc.... Do you know what those all have in common? They are all systems of operation. Systems of operation cannot be good or evil. That's like saying, I'm an Android girl, so iPhones must be evil. It's a ridiculous comment, which highlights the fact that you don't understand what you're saying. You don't understand that, it is in the hands of the user and not the system itself."
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@FoxFox-lx3cv But.... Sure... Lets knock these down... 1 by one.
First, jobs and unemployment have to be considered under a larger scale than the last two years. Otherwise, you're just crediting the guy who crossed the finish line for a five-man relay race. That includes disreguarding Rep. Presidents accomplishments as well, Btw. Trump didn't just shpw up one day and everything got all shiny and new. The numbers back that up. Actually the monthly job growth numbers are down from Obama.
" The U.S. Bureau of Labor announced that the economy added 224,000 jobs in June vs. expectations of 160,000 and May’s revised result of 72,000. The 224,000 is still strong, but there were revisions to April and May that subtracted 11,000 people hired in those months and government employment added 33,000. Overall private payrolls added 191,000 employees."
"The stock markets are reacting negatively due to the jobs number being stronger than expected since investors are lowering their expectations that the Fed will cut interest rates by 50 basis points later this month. "
"Over 29 months Obama added almost 1 million more jobs than Trump
Trump entered office on January 20, 2017, and starting with February 2017 he has been President for 29 months. Total job growth during that time has been 5.613 million or 194,000 per month with those results being helped by the tax cut.
Working back from January 2017, Obama’s last month in office, there had been 6.423 million jobs added or 221,000 per month. The difference for the 29 months is 810,000 more jobs or 27,000 more per month than Trump."
"Note that back in January this year the total difference was only 194,000, which means over the past five months it has increased by 616,000. And looking at the next six months with Obama’s job numbers of 188,000 to 327,000 per month, the gap should only increase and cross 1 million."
https://www-forbes-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.forbes.com/sites/chuckjones/2019/07/05/trump-is-falling-almost-1-million-jobs-short-vs-obama/amp/?amp_js_v=a2&_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQA#referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&_tf=From%20%251%24s&share=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.forbes.com%2Fsites%2Fchuckjones%2F2019%2F07%2F05%2Ftrump-is-falling-almost-1-million-jobs-short-vs-obama%2F
1
-
1
-
@FoxFox-lx3cv The US trade deficit, which Trump promised to reduce, grew nearly by 28%.
The number of people without healthcare insurance Rose by 2 million to 7 million depending on the survey.
The federal debt Rose by 1.8 trillion. Annual deficits accelerated.
Home prices rose by 22.5%
Carbon dioxide emissions Rose by 1.8%
Federal debt held by public Rose by 12.5%
Trump regularly and incorrectly brags that he's out of 4 million jobs since taking office. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the US economy added to million 188,000 jobs in 2017. Trump's first year in office. So far, it has added 1,306,000 jobs in 2018. But the economy added more jobs in every year of Obama's second term then it did in Trump's first term. This holds true when examining the average number of jobs added per month. Which Economist suggest that Trump's numbers is a continuation of an existing trend.
The unemployment rate is the best it has been in a decade, holding steady at 3.9% in August. Shortly after Trump took office in February 2017, the unemployment rate was 4.7%. It has declined at a faster Pace than the Congressional budget office predicted at the beginning of Trumps term, but the unemployment rate had already stabilized. It was ranging between 4.6 and 5% starting in August of 2015. That represents over a five-point decline since unemployment peaked at 10% in October 2009, nine months after Obama took office.
Another indicator of economic growth is the percentage of people employed during their Prime working years. In December 2009, right before the end of Obama's first year in office, 74.8% of adults between the age of 25 and 54 were employed. The years 2010 and 2011 marked the indicators low points, averaging 75.1% each year. But by the time Obama left office, but yearly average had rebounded to 77.9%. The ratio continue to climb through 2017, and averaging 78.6% for the year, and 2018 is on track to be the best year in a decade. As I said... 5 man relay race.
During the 2016 campaign, Trump said the stock markets were in a big fat bubble. Stock have been Rising steadily since March 2009. But once he took office, he was first to point out any record-setting days. Trump regularly cites data from the Dow Jones Industrial Average, a collection of 30 us Blue Chip companies. But the Standard & Poor 500 stock index provides a more nuanced data set. Comparing the S&P performance with similar markets since just before Trump took office, the S&P 500 narrowly and stout China's for the largest percentage of overall growth, while the Germany and British Markets decline. As of mid-year the Chinese and German markets had kept pace with the United States, but in recent months the US Stock Market has posted games that have put it ahead.
Wage growth is one of those instances where just because Trump repeats a statistic a lot doesn't make it accurate. Real median wages for all workers have been steadily increasing since 2014. In the last quarter of 2017, they plunged below their rate when Trump took office but have since recovered to about the same level. In other words after an initial bump, wages are basically where Obama left them.
Property has been slowly decreasing since 2010. Also, trend worthy, from the Obama years.
Business investment plunge to a low in the fourth quarter of 2005, but it rebounded in 2010. The year Obama took office. By the time trunk took office it had continued to climb steadily, gaining 2.6%. But that track with the upward momentum that started at the beginning of Obama's term.
In other words... A BIG HUNK of trumps positive numbers, began with Obama. Obama, who began his term with a recession.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@FoxFox-lx3cv You keep calling us brainwaished but you guys love to pretend that nothing happened befpre Trump took office.
"data also show that President Trump benefited from a longer-term downward trend of illegal border crossings that started during President Bush’s second term"
You wont even give other Rep presidenta cradit for anything... Guys on your side... But yeah... We are the ones who are brain washed, because we chppse to look at all relivant data. Sure. Lol
As far as illegal or undocumented immigrants paying taxes, yeah. They've always paid taxes. Taking Obama out of context, does not prove otherwise. That quote was from a statment he gave, when talking about putting up a bill that would allow dreamers to get state ids. That would alow for more job oppertunities, more stante and fed taxes and filling reterns.
Making assumptions is not an argument. Assuming that people won't applying for citizenship because they might not get it, especially on Mass, is ignorant. What do they have to lose?
Speaking of the border wall oh, you remember that one time that Trump shutdown the government for the longest it had been shut down in over 10 decades, had government workers lining up with their children in bread lines and losing their homes, and then caved and made all of that for nothing? Do you remember that?
The difference between Obama and Trump, sure, you might be able to question whether Obama did all the right things with illegal immigrants. But you know for damn sure that Trump doesn't give a s*** about them. He will take their children, hold them hostage, lose them in a system, while putting them in cages and unlocking some of them away in concentration camps in America. He doesn't give a shitt.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@erickim6533 🤣 You stop giving me so much to correct in your tiny comments and I will stop making them so long... Just a thought.
You skipped a key portion of the exam. I'm sure, on purpose, due to your inability to answer it.... Actually a few.
How do you explain getting BASIC FACTS about the Mueller Report wrong in your statments? Things you can find on the first few pages? I mean BASIC BASIC.... like bread and butter type stuff?
What evidence they found for each count or why they choose not to go after Trump?
The fact that they gave 3 different reason, and the only one you have mentioned is the one I gave you?
Why do you insist this is all somehow lazy thinking or small thinking on my part, when all I keep doing is pointing out the fact that you don't have all the facts, you keep insisting you don't need them to come to an educated opinion and you can't defend any of that in any kind of reasonable or rational manner? How does that make sense?
Here's an example (Yet another thing, you don't give.) of the not rational portions I'm referring to. You equating a movie and a book, to an investigation into the current president of the United States, for possibly colluding with a foreign adversary, and then trying to cover it up. You wanna talk about wrong thinking. ... Why in the world would you not collect all the info on that, verify what you can and THEN come to an educated opinion based on those verified facts?
And what's your explanation for the fact that at least 9 of his main staff from the campaign have been prosecuted and found guilty or taken deals? They found enough evidence for them. Also laid out in the Report you didn't bother to read.... 😉✌
1
-
1
-
@erickim6533 You do know this isn't the Trump White House, right? Continuing to repeat a lie does not actually make it true. Watch! I'll show you. 😁
Fresh from the Mueller report. The thing you keep lying on and have never read.
1. This one is particularly funny because Trump, said this in public. Their by shooting himself in the foot. Which is kind of a running theme for him and makes it all the more difficult for you to lie about.
" the presidential campaign of Donald J Trump showed interest in Wikileaks release of documents and welcome to their potential to damage candidate Clinton. Beginning in June 2016, a redacted had campaign official began to forecast that Wikileaks would release information damaging to Canada Clinton. Wikileaks first release came in July of 2016. Around the same time candidate Trump announced that he hoped Russia would recover emails described as missing from a private server used by Clinton when she was Secretary of State. Less than 24 hours after Donald J Trump made this request, they began releasing the stolen emails."
2. Documented Russian contacts with the Trump campaign and vice versa.
" in January of 2016 Trump organization executive Michael Cohen emailed and spoke about the project with the office of Russian government press secretary Dimitri PE Skov. The Trump organization pursued the project through at least June 2016, including by considering travel to Russia by Cohen and candidate Trump."
" campaign foreign policy advisor George Papadopoulos made early contact with Joseph m i f s u d, a london-based professor who had connections to Russia and traveled to Moscow in April 2016. Immediately upon his return to London from that trip, Joseph told Papadopoulos that the Russian government had dirt on Hillary Clinton in the form of thousands of emails. One week later, in the first week of May 2016, Papadopoulos suggested to a representative of a foreign government that the Trump campaign had received indications from the Russian government that it could assist the campaign through the anonymous release of information damaging to the Clinton campaign. Throughout that period of time and for several months thereafter, Papadopoulos worked with Joseph and 2 Russian Nationals to arrange a meeting between the campaign and the Russian government."
" on June 9th 2016, a Russian lawyer met with senior campaign official Donald Trump jr., Jared Kushner and campaign chairman Paul manafort to deliver what the email proposing the meeting had described as official documents and information that would incriminate Hillary Clinton. The materials were offered to Donald J Trump as part of Russia and its government support for mr. Trump. The written communication setting up the meeting showed that the campaign anticipated receiving information from Russia that could assist candidate Trump's election prospects, "
" days after the June 9th meeting, on June 14th 2016, a cybersecurity firm and the DNC announce that the Russian government hackers had infiltrated the DNC and obtained access to opposition research on candidate Trump, among other documents."
" in July of 2016 campaign foreign policy advisor Carter page traveled in his personal capacity to Moscow and gave the keynote address at the new economic School. Page had lived and worked in Russia between 2003 and 2007. After returning to the United States, page became acquainted with at least two Russian Intelligence Officers, and one of whom was later charged in 2015 with conspiracy to act as an unregistered agent of Russia. Pages July 2016 trip to Moscow and his advocacy for pro-russian foreign policy Drew media attention. The campaign then distanced itself from page and, by late September 2016 removed him from the campaign."
" July 2016 was also the month Wikileaks first released emails stolen by the Gru from the DNC. On July 22nd 2016, Wiki links posted thousands of internal DNC documents revealing information about the Clinton campaign. Within days there was public reporting that us intelligence agencies had high confidence that the Russian government was behind the theft of emails and documents from the DMC. And within a week of the release, a foreign government informed the FBI about its May 2016 interaction with Papadopoulos and his statement that the Russian government could assist the Trump campaign. On July 31st 2016, based on the foreign government reporting, the FBI has opened an investigation into potential coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the Trump campaign."
That is just a fraction of the evidence for collusion, in the Mueller report, on the first four pages of the introduction. Reading is Handy! 😁
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@erickim6533 I'm sorry... What gave you the impression I was going to answer any one of those 4 questions, when you wont answer mine?
In fact... I'll make a deal with you, you answer 4 of mime and I'll be more then happy to answer your 4?
What is the evidence that the report is a sham?
How is a multi prong, evidence based report, into weather is the current president of the United States had a foreign adversary help them get elected into office and then tried to cover it up, based on 2 years of investigation, finding a truck ton of evidence for each, that you haven't even read, in any way, equated to flat earth conspiracy theorists?
How do you explain the 9 head campaign officials, who were either indicted or took deals?
How can you keep claiming that you know what's in the Mueller report, when you willingly admitted that you have not read it?
1
-
@erickim6533 They are centered around the claims that you have made. So if they are " ridiculously convoluted", the answer to the "Why" is because you made "ridiculously convoluted" claims. Like... The Mueller investigation some how compares to the flat earth theory, or how the Mueller Report was a sham... And lets not forget the one that kicked this whole thing off.. You claiming you don't need to read the Mueller report to know what is in it. At one point, that one caused you to claim both that, the Mueller report found no evidence AND that it's a "sham".... but if the Mueller report is a "sham", does that mean there was evidence?
SoOoOo, yeah... Little boy, I'm simply inquiring about the statments that you have made. Do I think your full of shit? I think I've made myself pretty clear on that front. However, I'm actually doing the opposite of assuming. Which would be asking questions, based off of your statments, in reguards to qualifying them. You clearly can not. That's why you can't answer them. You don't want to have to admit your lying, and forming opinions off of what you want to be true, but not what actually is true... Answering those questions, would be taint amount to saying that.
Otherwise, a pompous ass, such as yourself, would have rubbed the evidence that you were right and I was wrong in my face a long time ago. You don't have it. You have nothing to back up your claims. Its not that hard to figure out.
But that's what happens when you use little boy logic. 😉✌
1
-
@erickim6533 🤣 Ya know... If your ego is that damn delicate, you might need to start exploring why, with a trained professional... Just a thought! 🤣
And I'm not "write". I'm right! 🤣
Which is why you can't answer any of the questions I've been asking! 🤣
And I think I'll stick with quantity and quality. It seems to be kicking your ass just fine.... But you should really just use one, at least! This will be way less embarrassing for you, that way. 🤣
Cuz all you got is... Blah blah blah... Excuse... Excuse... Childish insult... Excuse... Childish insult... Excuse. Comment number count this... and... Validation that... Your crazy... And... It's all a big sham... La La La... I don't want to see or hear anything that might contradict what I have already decided is true.... La La La... I can't hear you! Least we forget, right and wrong are, apparently, is determined by area code now. 😉✌
Meanwhile! I found a clip today that reminded me of you!
- No Obstruction! No Collusion!
- It didn't say that!
- Yes it did!
- Have you read the report?
- No!
- Then how do you know?
- .... Ummm.... ...... No obstruction! No collusion!
- Here! 10 different ways that Trump obstructed Justice laid out in the Mueller report. (Then she lists them)
- .... .... .... No obstruction! No collusion!
It was almost eerie! Watch! 😉✌
https://youtu.be/ggwhYNKkZxM
And of course... You keep trying to childishly insult me and I will keep showing how you can't back up your claims, by asking you questions that you cannot answer without blowing up your entire argument. 😉✌
SoOoOo.... Why can't you defend your claims about me and the Mueller Report with actual evidence? 😉✌
And... Why does your story keep changing about why you keep coming back?
What is the evidence that the report is a sham?
How is a multi prong, evidence based report, into weather is the current president of the United States had a foreign adversary help them get elected into office and then tried to cover it up, based on 2 years of investigation, finding a truck ton of evidence for each, that you haven't even read, in any way, equated to flat earth conspiracy theorists?
How do you explain the 9 head campaign officials, who were either indicted or took deals?
You really can't help yourself but come back, can you... You really can't figure out how to dig yourself out of the hole you dug with your nonsense claims. I think it's hilarious ! All I have to do is keep showing that you can't answer the questions. That's what makes silly people, like you, so easy to beat! 🤣
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@erickim6533 🤣 Ya know... If your ego is that damn delicate, you might need to start exploring why, with a trained professional... Just a thought! 🤣
Cuz all you got is... Blah blah blah... Excuse... Excuse... Childish insult... Excuse... Childish insult... Excuse. Comment number count this... and... Validation that... Your crazy... And... It's all a big sham... La La La... I don't want to see or hear anything that might contradict what I have already decided is true.... La La La... I can't hear you! Least we forget, right and wrong are, apparently, is determined by area code now. 😉✌
Meanwhile! I found a clip today that reminded me of you!
- No Obstruction! No Collusion!
- It didn't say that!
- Yes it did!
- Have you read the report?
- No!
- Then how do you know?
- .... Ummm.... ...... No obstruction! No collusion!
- Here! 10 different ways that Trump obstructed Justice laid out in the Mueller report. (Then she lists them)
- .... .... .... No obstruction! No collusion!
It was almost eerie! Watch! 😉✌
https://youtu.be/ggwhYNKkZxM
And of course... You keep trying to childishly insult me and I will keep showing how you can't back up your claims, by asking you questions that you cannot answer without blowing up your entire argument. 😉✌
SoOoOo.... Why can't you defend your claims about me and the Mueller Report with actual evidence? 😉✌
And... Why does your story keep changing about why you keep coming back?
What is the evidence that the report is a sham?
How is a multi prong, evidence based report, into weather is the current president of the United States had a foreign adversary help them get elected into office and then tried to cover it up, based on 2 years of investigation, finding a truck ton of evidence for each, that you haven't even read, in any way, equated to flat earth conspiracy theorists?
How do you explain the 9 head campaign officials, who were either indicted or took deals?
You really can't help yourself but come back, can you... You really can't figure out how to dig yourself out of the hole you dug with your nonsense claims. I think it's hilarious ! All I have to do is keep showing that you can't answer the questions. That's what makes silly people, like you, so easy to beat! 🤣
1
-
1
-
1
-
@erickim6533 🤣 Ya know... If your ego is that damn delicate, you might need to start exploring why, with a trained professional... Just a thought! 🤣
Cuz all you got is... Blah blah blah... Excuse... Excuse... Childish insult... Excuse... Childish insult... Excuse. Comment number count this... and... Validation that... Your crazy... And... It's all a big sham... La La La... I don't want to see or hear anything that might contradict what I have already decided is true.... La La La... I can't hear you! Least we forget, right and wrong are, apparently, is determined by area code now. 😉✌
Meanwhile! I found a clip today that reminded me of you!
- No Obstruction! No Collusion!
- It didn't say that!
- Yes it did!
- Have you read the report?
- No!
- Then how do you know?
- .... Ummm.... ...... No obstruction! No collusion!
- Here! 10 different ways that Trump obstructed Justice laid out in the Mueller report. (Then she lists them)
- .... .... .... No obstruction! No collusion!
It was almost eerie! Watch! 😉✌
https://youtu.be/ggwhYNKkZxM
And of course... You keep trying to childishly insult me and I will keep showing how you can't back up your claims, by asking you questions that you cannot answer without blowing up your entire argument. 😉✌
SoOoOo.... Why can't you defend your claims about me and the Mueller Report with actual evidence? 😉✌
And... Why does your story keep changing about why you keep coming back?
What is the evidence that the report is a sham?
How is a multi prong, evidence based report, into weather is the current president of the United States had a foreign adversary help them get elected into office and then tried to cover it up, based on 2 years of investigation, finding a truck ton of evidence for each, that you haven't even read, in any way, equated to flat earth conspiracy theorists?
How do you explain the 9 head campaign officials, who were either indicted or took deals?
You really can't help yourself but come back, can you... You really can't figure out how to dig yourself out of the hole you dug with your nonsense claims. I think it's hilarious ! All I have to do is keep showing that you can't answer the questions. That's what makes silly people, like you, so easy to beat! 🤣
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@erickim6533 I know.... I know... Blah... blah blah... Distract.... Deflect... Insult.... Blah.... Blah... Blah.... All to deflect from the fact that your claims, thought, opinions and ideas can not stand up to basic scrutiny, and for some reason, you can't handle that concept.
Ya know... TDS has been around long before Trump because president. It just doesn't mean what you guys think it does. It doesn't stand for Trump Derangement Syndrome. It stands for Tiny Dick Syndrome and you gotta chronic case of it.
Here is the thing though... if you need to be right, that badly, get on the right side. Make sure your opinions can stand up to scrutiny. How do you do this question mark you scrutinize them yourself first. You try and prove yourself wrong. You try and have others prove you wrong. If you or they can do it then you reevaluate.
What you don't do is spend 3 weeks of your life, in the YouTube comment section, flowndering, because you came to a conclusion that is easily picked apart and you don't want to have to admit it. If you want to be right so badly, then get right. It's that simple.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@erickim6533 I don't think your wrong... Or like any of that... Just... One sided. As I'm sure I am as well. Thought I do try and see the other side. especially with decent and respectful people like you, calmly trying to illustrate your point. I try to find things we can agree on with you guys. There can be a middle ground.
Noone is advicating for non-citizens to vote in our elections. a lot of the things that you say or right wing propaganda. Look, you seem reasonable and so I would implore you to do your research on these things and see how true they are before you swallow them whole. I do the same thing on my side. I don't comment on every video on CNN or MSNBC. Sometimes I even argue against what they're saying Because I've researched it and I've gone in and check their facts. They certainly don't get everything right all the time. and at the end of the day I'm more interested in the truth than I am about being right or wrong. because I can work with the truth. Even if it goes against what I thought was true. If I know there's truth and that truth is a particular problem then I'm better equipped to fix it... Ya know.
Voting age... Hmmm... Can I say that I am undecided on that one? I see almost even positives and negatives on both sides. There's a reason that we don't allow teenagers to drink or smoke. It's literally that their brains aren't done growing and the part of their brain That needs to be developed to do that is one of the last ones to finish growing. insurent, they're not really good at decision-making and considering all the consequences of their actions. They're impulsive. At the same time, they're inheriting this from us, this country, this world. so part of me says, why shouldn't they get a say in what they're going to have to deal with in the future? Ya know? I go back and forth.
Though, they don't all think the world is going to end in 12 years. Come on now. Not only could you not qualify that statement... It's an Oversimplification of the actual problem. And climate change is a problem. And it should be understood correctly or not Flippantly tossed to the side. Come on now.
On some I think you're wrong, on others I don't. As I've laid out. as for winning until the next election, I understand why that would make more sense. in a political one side winning kind of way. Here's the thing though, I don't want Mike Pence To become the de facto president. What I'm more concerned about is our democracy though. The precedent it would set. Of having a president, tried to interfere in our electoral process in order to get himself re-elected to office And using his position and power to do so. if we don't challenge that, what we're saying to every president from now on, Democrat or Republican is all you have to do in order to steal the next election and ask for another countries help in doing so by leveraging them with American tax dollars, is to do so about a year before the election happens. Cuz, that way, its more politically expedient to just wait for the next election. that thinking is not good for either side.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@АндрейНикифоров-н5х Your current leader used to run Russian Murder Inc (KGB). He, unprovoked, attacked our election system. He also just randomly invaded a neighboring country who's people love it's country so damn much, that all the men of those areas, from 16 to 65, are sending their women and children to safety, and picking up guns to defend it right now. Teachers and factory workers, with no military experience are putting their lives on the line for country and family. So many of them are doing so right now that, this untrained group of civilians are holding their own against the full force of the Russian military. They are doing so, while Putin is intentionally aiming for civilian populations.
Literally no other country is supporting him in this invasion. Not one. Not even China. Some how you still think all this is justified, with no evidence to back it up. You guys are on the wrong side of history.
1
-
@eby2257 Per usual, your attempt to cherry pick facts in order to write a convenient version of history, that always only blames everything on one side of the isle.
For example... You go from Bill Clinton and a nuclear disarmament deal that you left intentionally vague, to a decade later and and trying to, first, somehow blame President Obama for the Russian government and its leaders invading another country... which is just as ridiculous as people right now on the right trying to blame President Biden for Putin invading Ukraine... and then, lying about President Obama doing nothing about it.
1. President Obama, representing the US joined the UN General Assembly passing a non-binding resolution declaring crimea's Moscow backed referendum invalid.
2. President Obama implemented sanctions against the government of Russia itself and a butt ton it's countries oligarchs, personally.
2. He also encouraged the EU to suspend talks with Russia on economic and visa related matters, as well as encouraging them to sanction Russia themselves.
With that and many other countries imposing similar measures, they kept Putin from pushing any further into Ukraine.
The treaty you where referring to was a promise to defend them, if invaded or under threat. Not necessarily with the use of force. But not ruling out the use of force if needed. Why did President Obama not move directly 2 engaging in a war with Russia and try to few peaceful resolutions first? Gee... I don't know... 🤔 videos of something to do with Russia being the only country in the world with more nuclear weapons than we have and not wanting the whole world to turn into a nuclear apocalypse. "Crazy... I know."
On the other hand you make that agreement sound like America was just supposed to send half their armed forces and plant them at the border of Ukraine and Russia for eternity.
Which is the exact same thing your trying to make it sound like president Biden was supposed to do the same. Your seemingly trying to pretend that you don't know the difference between a protection treaty and their defense treaty.
At the same time trying to tout Donald Trump as some kind of leader when it comes to Russia. When all he really was was Putin's b****. That's why when it was proven that Russia interfered in our 2016 election, Donald Trump did literally nothing and then went on the world stage and took Vladimir Putin's word over his own intelligence agencies, standing right beside Putin.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@mile_high_topher 😂 To be clear... We've gone from...
What comment that I MADE?
To...
Why won't you tell me what I JUST SAID?
To...
Why Won't you tell me what "7 comments"?
To...
I'm going to ignore you telling me what "7 comments".
To...
I'm going to repeat back to you the points you made about me and try to pretend I said them first as a distraction.
To...
Why don't you stop repeating yourself, but don't, cuz I want you to repeat yourself about the thing I ignored earlier, that answered your question. 😂
To....
I said 3 and not 30, damnit! 😂
To...
I'm going to lie about answering all along and call you a Boo Boo head, to make myself feel better, while I'm at it.
To...
I'm going back to my original lie of not knowing what your referring to, even though you've already told me.
Oh... And more...
"Your a big Boo Boo head", cuz I'm apparently 3 years old.
All in 3 or 4 days 😂
That is quite the silly evolution, there, my friend! 😂 Ya know... In the future... You could have just walked away... Or taken the time to look some of this up.... Or really... Done anything besides this ridiculous 4-day face-saving grab. 😂
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ericmartin2470 Being... 2 for 2 in the misquoting AND in source of knowledge department, you thought it would be a good idea to claim to of read my comments, so that you could reference them in a negative context, yet you skipped over the evidence that I stated, and so, claimed that, " this is all the evidence there is an heresy is far from evidence. " ? 🤦
Dude... 🙄
Okay... When someone goes to trial, after being charged with a crime, and pleading innocent, one of the main factors that the prosecution uses in order to demonstrate this person is guilty of this crime, is prior Acts. History... And if Trump was on trial for saying stupid s***, the prior acts portion of the defense case, would take a month and a half to present.
Also... "heresy" is not the word you're looking for. This is the definition of the word "heresy", your trying to reference.
"opinion profoundly at odds with what is generally accepted."
Your not qualified to reference General acceptance of the 327.2 million people who live in America.
You could go with dubious, leery or even questionable. Heresy, it is not. 😉✌
1
-
@ericmartin2470 SoOoOo... are you aware that "Trump derangement syndrome", is actually, not a thing? I feel like I have to ask, because you've gotten so much wrong, so far.
It's just a lazy thinking tactic, propagated by the right, in order not to have to try too hard to defend Trumps actions. Which makes you 2 for 2 on the shoot the messenger, to avoid having to argue the premise, tactic, as well.... SoOoOo... Congrats on that, I guess... 😉✌
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ericmartin2470 If you didn't know where the quote came from, because you didn't look it up before you said it, you should not use the quote from George Strait. Which is exactly what happened. Which is exactly why you got the damn thing wrong, and it's not the only one.
" if you believe this from CNN, I have some beachfront property in Idaho to sell you. "
Cuz if you go down just a tiny bit, you would find you incorrectly quoted Vladimir Lenin. In terms of what was actually said and that Vladimir Lenin was not the one that said it. I don't blame you. I wouldn't want to quote a Nazi either, but that's what you did. Take solace in the fact that you incorrectly quoted him, but you did.
" A lie told often enough becomes the truth " -Vladimir Lenin "
This is why your a silly person. You come on here, trying to sound like you know what you're talkin about, when you genuinely don't. You think you have some piece of information that makes a difference, but you're too lazy to check it. You want to believe someone else's work. All because that person agrees with what you already think is true. Then you expect people to take you seriously. Stop being lazy when it counts, admit when you got something wrong and grow the hell up. Then maybe we will. Until then, I get to f*** with you for making all those stupid mistakes you make because you didn't do your homework.
I come across you guys every single day. You're always super afraid to challenge your own opinions. Except you never ask yourself why. You should want to challenge your own point of view. You should want to know whether it is the correct one or not. 🙄
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@2bRealist Every generation blames the younger generation. Never seaming to take resopnsibility for the examples that you set. For the things you taught us. Like... Where do you think some of us learned how to how such Reckless disregard for human life? Maybe Chinese American concentration camps in America, lynchings of African American men and raping of African American women, the Jonestown Massacre, Watergate, Lockerbie flight bombing, Rodney King, Iranian hostage crisis, Exxon Valdez oil tanker spill.... Just to name a few....
As for the drugs, that's your generation 2. Prescription and illegal. Look up the start of the US drug war and the CIA. Not to mention the FBI. But you're right about the fact that we're the ones paying for it.
Y'all love to act like we invented this stuff... it's always so much easier to blame the youth then to take responsibility for your own actions. Yet you're the ones that are supposed to be the older generation, the more wise, the adults in the room. Let that sink in.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@The_SmorgMan 1971 was certainly precedent but no more than that. It was also at a time when guns where treasured. ... But perhaps... Your right about moving on from that one. Your decent, rational and respectful. Given that, I'll be more than happy to put down the subject, with an agree to disagree notion. 😉
On the other hand... I don't really find the level of organization Oh, I thought you were referring to in the Nationwide civil revolt, to be much more likely, either. Local level or not. Right now, we can't even get behind 1 idea as a majority... Well... Actually... That's not true. There are things we majority agree with. Not a lot and that list is getting smaller by the day... But there are a few. Like Vet/Troop support, children's education... And those are the only 2 I can think of right now.... I mean... We can't even get behind a scientifically proven concept of climate change as a majority. So I just find it very unlikely that people en masse could get behind one Singular idea to that extent. Especially one that extreme. A series of drastic things would have to happen. I'm not even sure that would get it done. Especially with this culture of denial and lies that has been prevalent of late. I just really don't see it happening.
Again... I'm not saying you should. ... I think I have expressed more than enough now about how I don't think we should get all our guns taken away. You keep making comments like I do. However, our rights are not Unlimited. Yes, people are going to do bad things and when it happens on Mass and ends up taking a bunch of lives, we should figure out why, we should figure out what's going to help that not be true anymore. As long as it does not infringe on other people's needs, it should be considered at the very least. Even the founders of the country recognized that our inalienable rights should not be Limitless.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Jarrod Davis As for Joe Biden.... He was not my pick... But to say he has done nothing of value is disingenuous at best and willfully ignorant at worst.
"During his first years in the Senate, Biden focused on consumer protection and environmental issues and called for greater government accountability."
"In 1984, he was a Democratic floor manager for the successful passage of the Comprehensive Crime Control Act."
"Regarding foreign policy, during his first decade in the Senate, Biden focused on arms control issues. In response to Congress's refusal to ratify the SALT II Treaty signed in 1979 by Soviet leader Leonid Brezhnev and President Jimmy Carter, Biden took the initiative to meet with Soviet foreign minister Andrei Gromyko, educate him about American concerns and interests, and secure several changes to address the Foreign Relations Committee's objections. When the Reagan administration wanted to interpret the 1972 SALT I Treaty loosely to allow the Strategic Defense Initiative to proceed, Biden argued for strict adherence to the treaty's terms. He clashed again with the Reagan administration in 1986 over economic sanctions against South Africa, receiving considerable attention when he excoriated Secretary of State George P. Shultz at a Senate hearing because of the administration's support of that country, which continued to practice apartheid."
"In his first Senate campaign, Biden expressed support for the Supreme Court's 1971 Swann decision, which supported busing programs to integrate school districts to remedy de jure segregation, as in the South, but opposed it to remedy de facto segregation, as in Delaware. He said Republicans were using busing as a scare tactic to court Southern white votes, and along with Boggs voiced opposition to a House of Representatives constitutional amendment banning busing. In May 1974, Biden voted to table an amendment to an omnibus education bill promoted by Edward Gurney (R-FL) that contained anti-busing measures and anti-school desegregation clauses. The next day, Senator Robert Griffin (R-MI) attempted to revive an amended version of the amendment. Minority Leader Hugh Scott (R-PA) and Majority Leader Mike Mansfield (D-MT) offered to leave the text of Griffin's amendment intact but add the qualifier that such legislation was not intended to weaken the judiciary's power to enforce the 5th and 14th Amendments of the U.S. Constitution. Biden voted for this compromise, angering his local voters."
Just to name a few.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Jarrod Davis "I think any president would of had a problem with containing the virus." Well, fortunately this is the information age which means we'd don't have to thank. We can verify. That is, of course, if "we" actually want to know the truth.
South Korea (11,902 cases; 276 deaths)
New Zealand (1,504 cases; 22 deaths)
Germany (186,522 cases; 8,752 deaths)
Iceland (1,807 cases; 10 deaths)
UAE (40,507 cases; 284 deaths)
Greece (3,068 cases; 183 deaths)
Argentina (24,761 cases; 717 deaths)
To name a few.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@cockneygeezer3528 So, this is gonna jump around a bit but I wanted to start with what I had not heard before.
The Loretta Lynch thing... I hadn't actually heard that before. I'm going to have to look into that. I don't know enough about it to comment just yet. But I will do so.
As far as the rest. There where details you missed. I like details. They often make thing more clear.
bullet points
- the meeting took place on June 9th 2016. With several senior members of the Trump campaign. Donald Trump jr., Jared Kushner and Paul manafort. There were at least five others. Including the Russian lawyer with the long last name I don't feel like typing out. Lol 😜
- the meeting was arranged by Trump's longtime publicist Rob Goldstone, on behalf of his client, singer-songwriter, Emin Agalarov.
- We found out about it because Jared Kushner disclosed to the meeting in one of his revisions for his security clearance.
- Donald jr. Made several misleading statements about the meeting. Initially telling the press that the meeting was about Russian adoption.
On July 8th 2017, after news report stated that Trump jr. Knew the meeting was political, he admitted in a tweet that he had agreed to the meeting with the understanding that he would receive information damaging to Hillary Clinton, Oppo research.
- When the New York Times was about to report on emails exchanged between Goldstone and Trump jr., Trump jr. Admitted that cold stone had stayed in an email to him that the Russian government was involved and that the purpose of the meeting was to get dirt on Clinton and that the meeting concerned a Russian effort to Aid the Trump campaign.
- In early July of 2017 it was reported that Donald Trump himself drafted Trump Juniors initial misleading statement. The report was later confirmed by the president's attorneys.
- Then in July 2018, the president did not knowledge of the meeting.
Small side note... Been looking up Loretta Lynch while typing this, I can't find her. Can you show me where you got that from? I'm sure I'm just missing it.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Land of the Free 👈👈 Everyone! This is what you are going to get from this guy! 👇8 degrees of incoherent crazy babble! 👇 All the example you are going to need is 👆👆UP THERE 👆👆 Read it and fear that this crazy person my procreate. 🤦 If you want to see him try and call me a BOO BOO Head a million times, after reading this, just look below this comment! Cuz, he is gonna freak after the truth of what I have been doing, is going to dawn on him! DANCE PUPPET! DANCE! 🤣
1... No evidence to back up your claims.
2... Bunch of crazy right wing drama queen lies and over exaggerations
3... the inability to form an intelligent argument, or an argument at all without having to call somebody a boo boo head every 2 seconds
4.... the obvious lack of objectivity or ability to see wrong on your own side
5.... random crazy rants about everything and nothing to prove just how unstable you are.
6.... The constant setting up and tearing down of Paper Tigers
7..... And randomly lying about what he actually said because he realized how stupid the argument was 🤣
8... He also doesn't have any ideas of his own. So, he will try and jack yours as often as he can, but he never quite does it right. To find out why he sucks at it see 1,2,3,4,5, 6 and 7! 😜✌
DANCE PUPPET! DANCE! 🤣
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@robinsss Btw, this is all from before he ran. It spans decades... Decades pf racism.
I generally give people these at first. Mostly because they are all before presidency became a factor.
Trump's real estate company tried to avoid renting apartments to African Americans in the 70s and gave preferential treatment to White, according to the federal government.
Trump treated black employees at his casinos differently from whites, according to multiple sources. A former Hotel executive said that Trump criticized a black accountant," black guys counting my money. I hate it. I think that the guy is lazy. And it's possibly not his fault, but laziness is a trait in Blacks."
In 1989, Trump took out ads in the New York newspapers urging the death penalty for 5 black and Latino teenagers accused of raping a white woman in Central Park. He argue that they were guilty as late as October 2016, more than ten years after DNA evidence had exonerated them.
In 1989, on NBC, Trump said, " I think sometimes a black may think they don't have an advantage or this and that. I've said on one occasion, even about myself, if I were starting off today, I would love to be a well-educated black, because I really believe they do have an actual advantage."
He spent years suggesting that the nation's first black president was born not in the United States but in Kenya.
In the 1990s, Trump took out advertisements alleging that the "Mohawk Indian record of criminal activity is well-documented." At the time he was fighting competition for his casino business.
In a 1993 radio interview, he suggested that Native Americans in Connecticut were faking their ancestry. "I think I might have more Indian blood than a lot of the so-called Indians that are trying to open up the reservations."
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Dean4511 Now your lying on me and making excuses. Well, at least the fluctuation between your levels of desperation are ever changing.
I have to ask you guys this way too much, but, you do understand that just saying something doesn't actually make it true, right?
Especially when there are decades worth of history that says different.... But if that really is the case, then why are you so desprate to avoid the question? If its not true and never going to happen, then there is nothing for you to worry about and you can answer the question easily, without having to worry, right?
And I think this tactic is working out Just fine for me actually. It presents a simple working dichotomy, that should get an, of couse, answer structure. The fact that your doing this much dancing, in order to not answer an easy to answer question, speaks volumes, and in many different languages.
I'll put it aside, once you answer the question.
1
-
1
-
@Dean4511 When your NEW EXCUSE involves calling a simple question, that is easy to answer, "offensive" Because you won't even hypothetically suggest that the racist, bigoted, corrupt, ass clown that you support may have done something wrong, you should probably just give up. 🙄😂😁😜✌
Also, ya know what's simple minded? Calling someone else simple minded because you're desperately trying to set up a paper tiger, by saying that I'm demanding that you answer the question. It's either that or, you can't read. Which one of those is it? Stupid ass excuse tactic number 2, in this post alone.
Infact, Feel free to keep not answering it. Keep desperately dancing around it. That's all the answer that is needed.😜✌
And little tip, having an adult converaation, tends to have things like acknowledgement of all relevant material, the ability to go a sentence without calling somebody stupid and not using others actions to excuse your own. This "adult" self-righteous tactic really doesn't go well with your childish behavior, and it doesn't really seem to be working for you. 😜✌
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@toobmaniac So... here's the problem with your theory and veiled excuse. The top of this thread that you chose to write under is about Trump and all his lies. I don't have a problem with evolving the subject. I do have a problem with devolving it. Detraction and using whataboutism in order to deflect from his own actions would qualify as devolving. At the very least you could have done was addressed the main subject and then try to move on. You chose not to do that. Which means you're not interested in discussing the premise. You're interested in pointing nine different other directions in order to not have to.
This is going to sound a bit biased but if nobody is stupid enough to believe something that said repeatedly, Trump wouldn't be president right now. In almost every subject he covers, once you get into the details, and I mean all the details and not just what fits your premise, most of what he has done and promised to do, falls apart. Like... Even the stuff he has a point on. In his first year and a half where he could have gotten like all this stuff done, when he had the house the Senate and the White House.... all he managed to do was tax cuts. Only he made the tax cuts for the wrench permanent and put a clock on the ones for the middle class. He had a more than decent point about China and intellectual property rights and then messed it up by assuming that he could play strongman tactics with a country that is basically the best in the world at playing the long game. The only thing I can really get behind that he has done, is Criminal Justice Reform. Which was also bipartisan. Which meant for One Shining Moment everybody pulled their heads out of their asses for 2 seconds and got something done.
Actually, I just thought of another. Funding the Special Olympics. His education secretary, who had never been in a public school in her entire life, tried to cut funding for Special Olympics. Now I could get on him about hiring her in the first place but in reality there's no way he could have known that she was going to do that and when he saw she did he made her take it back.
In other words... I don't have the blinfing hate... Dem BS... You guys like to put on us. I just like having all relevant information about a subject so I can make an educated opinion on it. When you Institute that train of thought into so much of what he has done, it doesn't look good for him.
And I don't know what the hell kind of straw man you're trying to set up right now with the premise and all of that but... whatever dude. You're trying to act like you have knowledge and that it wasn't just silly juvenile BS you were trying to do with grammar and spelling and then throwing in a couple of lies about the Mueller report. There's a difference between knowledge and fact. Facts come from all the knowledge on one subject. Not just cherry-picked craziness. All that is called is confirmation bias. In other words you think you out and pay attention to only what support what you've already decided to be true. which also has a lot to do with how people can believe something if it's repeated enough.
You know what else doesn't work, shooting the messenger. Occam's razor applies here. The media, the Democratic Party and a whole lot more Independence then y'all like to admit, keep going after Trump. You are correct on that. Occam's razor comes in to play when you guys can understand why that keeps happening. you guys like the gloss over the fact that they're going after him because he did something and because he keeps doing things and because there was plenty of Rock Solid information showing that he did these things. It's just lazy thinking to stop your conclusion before getting to that.
they're going after him for a moment's Clauses because there's documented evidence of him violating the laws of emoluments. Again Occam's razor. they're going after him for paying off pornstars with campaign money because he paid off pornstars with campaign money. Again Occam's razor. they went after him for collusion with Russia because there was evidence of him colluding with Russia. Again Occam's razor. They went after him for obstruction of justice because there's 10 clearly laid out cases for obstruction of justice which he committed during the conclusion portion of the investigation. Again Occam's razor. People call him crazy and unstable because he acts crazy and unstable. One of the most recent examples of this is when he called himself "the chosen one". You can't make that s*** up dude. Again Occam's razor.
Ask for being scratched by anything, why do you think you want so desperately to win in 2020. Because if he doesn't he's going to be going to jail. If he does the clock run out by the time he gets done with the next 4 years on most of the crimes they found. Until then, his office protect him from prosecution. another thing laid out in the Mueller report.
More popular? Show proof. if they're all lies against an honest man than you will have no problem proving they are lies. So unless you're just trying to repeat something enough times to make yourself believe it, you're not saying anything unless you give me proof. His time even before becoming president disproves him being "an honest man".
And this is why you shouldn't make assumptions about people you don't know. not only have I read it, I've read it a multitude of times. If you would like to test that then you can ask me any damn question about it you would like and I will give you the paragraph and page number for the information. Infact... Here is a copy. So you can find something to ask. Like I said... Not everyone is like you. I make sure I can back up what I say before I say it.
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/5955118-The-Mueller-Report.html#text/p9
Mueller did lay it out in no uncertain terms. You laid out 10 counts of obstruction of justice in great detail with documented and witness evidence to back it up. Which you would know if you would read the Mueller report. even back then, they could not have used it to impeach him because of the Senate. The Senate won't vote to impeach.
See, this is a silliness I'm talking about. At the beginning of this paragraph you openly admitted that you would not read the Mueller report" but you still for some reason feel confident enough to say that "absolutely nothing and it has any legal ramifications of any sort to justify an impeachment inquiry." In other words , you made a statement you have willingly admitted that you cannot qualify.
And now it's a big conspiracy with the Democratic party and the whistleblowers. I say again, qualify your statements. Don't throw a bunch of BS conspiracy theories out there with absolutely nothing to back them up. if your reality fit the facts then you would be able to back up what you are saying with actual evidence. You have not and therefore they have not.
In order to dabate something you would first have to come with actual provable facts. You have shown non thus far. Do that and then we will talk. Simply calling things facts does not actually make them facts.
All you have done is prove that you have swallowed a bunch of bias right wing talking points whole, without bothering to do your due diligence.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Chip Diamond Yes... That would be the point. You told me, while acting in a juvenile manner, by silly name calling... And told me to do something. I've stated then and I will state now oh, if you would like to ask me respectfully, and like an adult, I will be more than happy to address your issues. Until then, I have no need. The way you were acting, discredit anything you might say anyways. So at any point, if you would like to call on what I'm sure your mother tried to teach you, in regards to being able to respectfully disagree with somebody oh, I will be more than happy to engage with you. As long as you are acting in a juvenile manner, I don't need to. No It Dont will take anything you say seriously anyways. If you would like me to engage with you further, speak to me in a respectful Manner and ask me for what you want. It's that simple.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Patrick Donald Nope! That's just the right wing media buzz words you have chosen to believe, without actually checking it out. So, oil is a finite resource that is only found in certain parts of the world. America does not have enough oil in order to be energy independent, on its own. It's also massively toxic to the Earth. If you really want America to be energy independent, you'd be supporting green energy. The Sun Shines and the wind blows all over the planet. Given our current technology, there is no way America can be energy independent without green energy.
So, Putin actually incurred on Ukraine's sovereignty for the entirety of Donald Trump's presidency. There has been an ongoing battle and Crimea and Dombas the entire time. Putin also attacked our elections in order to get Donald Trump elected. Putin also put out bounties on American soldiers heads during Trump's presidency, while he sat there and did nothing standing beside him at a worldwide press conference and taking his word over the word of our intelligence agency.
Putin didn't have to do anything when Trump was president. Because Trump was his b****.
And... I see you're one of those kinky people trying to play doctor with President Biden. I mean... Whatever Gets you off. No judgement. 😂
As for the last part... That's just desperate... But... I know.. I look younger then I am. Just 2 years ago I stopped being carded all the time. My mom just turned 60 and she maybe looks 40. I'm 38, Boo Boo Kitty. Not that age has anything to do with this. The only thing that should matter on these subjects are the facts. And a full recitation of it. Not made up statistics like "97% move right" as they get older. That is just, ironically, juvenile.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
👆 Let me tell you a little story about Waterborne Camper / D R.
So I'm am a Lib Dems... But... I also feel like it's important to give equal opportunity critiques. On our side of the isle I do it to be constructive. You know... Give these right wing trolls less to aim at.
Anywho... Exactly what I was trying to do with this one the other day. They had asked this right winger, who said that there were more gang related shootings then there were mass shootings, to give examples. Then, in the very next sentence, of the same comment, he decides to pretend the guy couldn't answer the question, all so he can say, "I told you so!", in the third and final sentence.
Turns out, pretending, for this one, would be a running theme, cuz after I pointed out how that was obv not cool, this one looses his s*** for about a day and a half.
First trying deflection to the other guys comment and how that some how justified his actions. Then, when it was clear I wasn't biting on the deflection, he moved to childish insults and personal attacks. When that didn't have the desired effect he tried to insist that bc no one else in the thread had come to my defense (or his, btw) that this meant that he was clearly right. At which point I simply pointed out that maybe it was bc no-one was listening to the exchange. After that, all the sudden he had a curiously timed like on his comments. Then he finally addressed his actions, but tried to pawn it off as him being "confident". At which time I pointed out why even the request for examples was a bad idea... And gave him 4 better ones.
It's clearly silly, bc gang shootings aren't exactly hard to find in America, unfortunately.
I told him...
"You SOULD HAVE called him out for deflecting to Whataboutism. You should have asked if that makes any of the kids who die in mass shootings any less dead. You should have told him that, on average, there is at least one mass shooting a day in america and has been for over a decade now. You should have told him it's the difference between one or 2 dead at a time and 12."
Then I told him to stop liking his own posts.... Which was a mistake on my part bc it gave him the opportunity to deflect to that, instead of addressing his own flawed argument.
He went on to insist he did not.... And that it was all a big coincidence. In order to prove this, he tried to like all his comments... Hoping that I wouldn't think of ppl having multiple accounts on here.
You can guess how well that went at this point.
So... After that, I was just "crazy". Which is what I thought was going to be the end of it, right.... Because, on this channel, someone randomly trying to imply that you're "crazy" after their argument isn't going so well, usually means they're scraping the bottom of the proverbial Barrel.... But... Not this one. No! This had long sense become about his ego at this point.
So... Next thing I know a "new guy" pops up! One that Sports strikingly similar cadence and spelling and grammar errors as he had, conveniently agreeing with everything he said and claiming to be the one who liked his comments. Mind you, not going any reasoning behind it, even when asked, but, still, nevertheless, completely agreeing with every single thing he had said. It turned out there "was" someone who was hanging on our every word. 😂
... But it doesn't stop there. No! This guy stop talking to me, and then precedes to have a whole conversation with the other guy, about me and how "wrong" and "crazy" I am. Again... No reason why... I'm just "wrong" and I'm just "crazy".
Finally, he uses that as an excuse to save face and run away.
So, if you've gotten this far and your one of us... you should know that this guy isn't. He doesn't actually care about any of the issues. He acts like much of the right wing trolls that come here. He doesn't actually care about anything he's saying so much as he just wants to be right, even when he's wrong. He isn't one of us. He is just sad.
1
-
All Donald Trump's public remarks ever amount to are, " You're a Boo Boo Head, because you don't agree with and/or like me. I'm the best at everything, ever! Now here are a bunch of lies, that I will now make up on the spot or that I will recycle from Right wing conspiracy Sites and Channels, that I have decided to believe, irregardless of them being true or not, because they fit the narrative I want to believe." His cult, then, parrots that back, here.
1
-
1
-
👆 Let me tell you a little story about Waterborne Camper / D R.
So I'm am a Lib Dems... But... I also feel like it's important to give equal opportunity critiques. On our side of the isle I do it to be constructive. You know... Give these right wing trolls less to aim at.
Anywho... Exactly what I was trying to do with this one the other day. They had asked this right winger, who said that there were more gang related shootings then there were mass shootings, to give examples. Then, in the very next sentence, of the same comment, he decides to pretend the guy couldn't answer the question, all so he can say, "I told you so!", in the third and final sentence.
Turns out, pretending, for this one, would be a running theme, cuz after I pointed out how that was obv not cool, this one looses his s*** for about a day and a half.
First trying deflection to the other guys comment and how that some how justified his actions. Then, when it was clear I wasn't biting on the deflection, he moved to childish insults and personal attacks. When that didn't have the desired effect he tried to insist that bc no one else in the thread had come to my defense (or his, btw) that this meant that he was clearly right. At which point I simply pointed out that maybe it was bc no-one was listening to the exchange. After that, all the sudden he had a curiously timed like on his comments. Then he finally addressed his actions, but tried to pawn it off as him being "confident". At which time I pointed out why even the request for examples was a bad idea... And gave him 4 better ones.
It's clearly silly, bc gang shootings aren't exactly hard to find in America, unfortunately.
I told him...
"You SOULD HAVE called him out for deflecting to Whataboutism. You should have asked if that makes any of the kids who die in mass shootings any less dead. You should have told him that, on average, there is at least one mass shooting a day in america and has been for over a decade now. You should have told him it's the difference between one or 2 dead at a time and 12."
Then I told him to stop liking his own posts.... Which was a mistake on my part bc it gave him the opportunity to deflect to that, instead of addressing his own flawed argument.
He went on to insist he did not.... And that it was all a big coincidence. In order to prove this, he tried to like all his comments... Hoping that I wouldn't think of ppl having multiple accounts on here.
You can guess how well that went at this point.
So... After that, I was just "crazy". Which is what I thought was going to be the end of it, right.... Because, on this channel, someone randomly trying to imply that you're "crazy" after their argument isn't going so well, usually means they're scraping the bottom of the proverbial Barrel.... But... Not this one. No! This had long sense become about his ego at this point.
So... Next thing I know a "new guy" pops up! One that Sports strikingly similar cadence and spelling and grammar errors as he had, conveniently agreeing with everything he said and claiming to be the one who liked his comments. Mind you, not going any reasoning behind it, even when asked, but, still, nevertheless, completely agreeing with every single thing he had said. It turned out there "was" someone who was hanging on our every word. 😂
... But it doesn't stop there. No! This guy stop talking to me, and then precedes to have a whole conversation with the other guy, about me and how "wrong" and "crazy" I am. Again... No reason why... I'm just "wrong" and I'm just "crazy".
Finally, he uses that as an excuse to save face and run away.
So, if you've gotten this far and your one of us... you should know that this guy isn't. He doesn't actually care about any of the issues. He acts like much of the right wing trolls that come here. He doesn't actually care about anything he's saying so much as he just wants to be right, even when he's wrong. He isn't one of us. He is just sad.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Nicholas Isaza " I said it because you clearly haven't looked at the facts. You provided barely any facts."
1. President Obama had a 33 page pandemic CONTAINMENT PLAN commissioned after H1N1, that was researched and written by infectious disease experts in the field and left for the next Administration.
2. Donald Trump was aware of this even before the first case hit the US, but choose to ignore it because Obama.
3. The CONTAINMENT PLAN, if implemented would have (shocker) CONTAINED THE SPREAD IN THE US.
4. Donald Trump had 3 YEARS to refill the stockpiles of emergency medical equipment before C19 hit and didn't do so.
5. He, instead, chose to blame President Obama.
6. This forced the states into a bidding war with each other, over literal American lives.
7. For the first 6 months of the pandemic OUR PRESIDENT set a bad example by refusing to wear a mask.
8. He also threw massive Trump rallies and 4th of July celebrations where hardly anyone social distanced or wore masks... But also where they where required to sign wavers to get in, for liability purposes.
9. He presented multiple snake oil cures.
10. He came out, multiple times against his experts advice, and in true Trump fashion, name calling and insulting them.
11. We also later found out that he knew how serious it was early on, but still choose to come out and tried to convince his supporters that it was a Dem Hoax.
12. He still barely wears a mask now.
13. He is still holding Trump rallies now with no social distancing.
14. He has discouraged and tried to defund testing throughout the pandemic.
15. He is in court RIGHT N0W trying to take health care away from millions of Americans with no plan to replace it, in the middle of the world world wide pandemic in over 100 years.
16. For 2 and a half months he tried to pretend that C19 was just going to magically go away abd lied about the numbers.
17. He is the president of our country and it is LITERALLY HIS JOB to get us through National crisis scenarios in the fast way available. Which he had all along yet ignored.
Do you need some more or are you done lying and making excuses for an argument you can't sustain any longer.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Nicholas Isaza " That lacks logic, facts and is the definition of misinformation."
There is a difference between lacking facts and logic and you not wanting to acknowledge the facts and logic because you don't want to be wrong.
1. President Obama had a 33 page pandemic CONTAINMENT PLAN commissioned after H1N1, that was researched and written by infectious disease experts in the field and left for the next Administration.
2. Donald Trump was aware of this even before the first case hit the US, but choose to ignore it because Obama.
3. The CONTAINMENT PLAN, if implemented would have (shocker) CONTAINED THE SPREAD IN THE US.
4. Donald Trump had 3 YEARS to refill the stockpiles of emergency medical equipment before C19 hit and didn't do so.
5. He, instead, chose to blame President Obama.
6. This forced the states into a bidding war with each other, over literal American lives.
7. For the first 6 months of the pandemic OUR PRESIDENT set a bad example by refusing to wear a mask.
8. He also threw massive Trump rallies and 4th of July celebrations where hardly anyone social distanced or wore masks... But also where they where required to sign wavers to get in, for liability purposes.
9. He presented multiple snake oil cures.
10. He came out, multiple times against his experts advice, and in true Trump fashion, name calling and insulting them.
11. We also later found out that he knew how serious it was early on, but still choose to come out and tried to convince his supporters that it was a Dem Hoax.
12. He still barely wears a mask now.
13. He is still holding Trump rallies now with no social distancing.
14. He has discouraged and tried to defund testing throughout the pandemic.
15. He is in court RIGHT N0W trying to take health care away from millions of Americans with no plan to replace it, in the middle of the world world wide pandemic in over 100 years.
16. For 2 and a half months he tried to pretend that C19 was just going to magically go away abd lied about the numbers.
17. He is the president of our country and it is LITERALLY HIS JOB to get us through National crisis scenarios in the fast way available. Which he had all along yet ignored.
Do you need some more or are you done lying and making excuses for an argument you can't sustain any longer.
- Quarantine for people coming into the US from known infectious countries.
- Immediate funding and emergency medical supplies instantly being distributed to all major hospitals.
- Emergency funding for developing and distributing testing.
- Immediate and constant release of all known medical testing and findings onset disease shared throughout every hospital and medical lab in the US.
- Immediate lock down of all potential infected areas.
- Immediate social distancing measures being implemented throughout the country.
Just to name a few....
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Nicholas Isaza " My point from the start was that you never had many sacks on the topic that we were talking about."
👇 And all 17 of my FACTS. How many did you have Btw? I forget...
"I said it because you clearly haven't looked at the facts. You provided barely any facts."
1. President Obama had a 33 page pandemic CONTAINMENT PLAN commissioned after H1N1, that was researched and written by infectious disease experts in the field and left for the next Administration.
2. Donald Trump was aware of this even before the first case hit the US, but choose to ignore it because Obama.
3. The CONTAINMENT PLAN, if implemented would have (shocker) CONTAINED THE SPREAD IN THE US.
4. Donald Trump had 3 YEARS to refill the stockpiles of emergency medical equipment before C19 hit and didn't do so.
5. He, instead, chose to blame President Obama.
6. This forced the states into a bidding war with each other, over literal American lives.
7. For the first 6 months of the pandemic OUR PRESIDENT set a bad example by refusing to wear a mask.
8. He also threw massive Trump rallies and 4th of July celebrations where hardly anyone social distanced or wore masks... But also where they where required to sign wavers to get in, for liability purposes.
9. He presented multiple snake oil cures.
10. He came out, multiple times against his experts advice, and in true Trump fashion, name calling and insulting them.
11. We also later found out that he knew how serious it was early on, but still choose to come out and tried to convince his supporters that it was a Dem Hoax.
12. He still barely wears a mask now.
13. He is still holding Trump rallies now with no social distancing.
14. He has discouraged and tried to defund testing throughout the pandemic.
15. He is in court RIGHT N0W trying to take health care away from millions of Americans with no plan to replace it, in the middle of the world world wide pandemic in over 100 years.
16. For 2 and a half months he tried to pretend that C19 was just going to magically go away abd lied about the numbers.
17. He is the president of our country and it is LITERALLY HIS JOB to get us through National crisis scenarios in the fast way available. Which he had all along yet ignored.
Do you need some more or are you done lying and making excuses for an argument you can't sustain any longer."
1
-
1
-
@Nicholas Isaza "provide real facts"👇
How are these not real facts?
1. President Obama had a 33 page pandemic CONTAINMENT PLAN commissioned after H1N1, that was researched and written by infectious disease experts in the field and left for the next Administration.
2. Donald Trump was aware of this even before the first case hit the US, but choose to ignore it because Obama.
3. The CONTAINMENT PLAN, if implemented would have (shocker) CONTAINED THE SPREAD IN THE US.
4. Donald Trump had 3 YEARS to refill the stockpiles of emergency medical equipment before C19 hit and didn't do so.
5. He, instead, chose to blame President Obama.
6. This forced the states into a bidding war with each other, over literal American lives.
7. For the first 6 months of the pandemic OUR PRESIDENT set a bad example by refusing to wear a mask.
8. He also threw massive Trump rallies and 4th of July celebrations where hardly anyone social distanced or wore masks... But also where they where required to sign wavers to get in, for liability purposes.
9. He presented multiple snake oil cures.
10. He came out, multiple times against his experts advice, and in true Trump fashion, name calling and insulting them.
11. We also later found out that he knew how serious it was early on, but still choose to come out and tried to convince his supporters that it was a Dem Hoax.
12. He still barely wears a mask now.
13. He is still holding Trump rallies now with no social distancing.
14. He has discouraged and tried to defund testing throughout the pandemic.
15. He is in court RIGHT N0W trying to take health care away from millions of Americans with no plan to replace it, in the middle of the world world wide pandemic in over 100 years.
16. For 2 and a half months he tried to pretend that C19 was just going to magically go away abd lied about the numbers.
17. He is the president of our country and it is LITERALLY HIS JOB to get us through National crisis scenarios in the fast way available. Which he had all along yet ignored.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Nicholas Isaza 👈 This is what he started saying about these facts. 👇😁😁😁😁😁😁😁😁👇👇👇👇👇👇👇👇👇👇👇👇👇👇👇
" I also agree with your criticism of Trump's pandemic response. He should have acted like a leader and handled the pandemic better."
👆👆👆👆👆👆👆👆👆👆👆👆👆👆
These are the multiple narrative changes he made in between, about said facts.
1. Misinformation
2. Opinions
3. Very little facts
4. Can't read them because they are in multiple short back to back comments, instead of one big comment
5. They where about President Obama and Donald Trump but not covid-19
6. Irrelevant and/or incorrect to what we were speaking about
Which he said was Covid 19 back in # 5. EXCEPT... Back when he said this 👇😁😁😁😁😁😁😁😁👇👇👇👇👇👇👇👇👇👇👇👇👇👇👇
" I also agree with your criticism of Trump's pandemic response. He should have acted like a leader and handled the pandemic better."
👆👆👆👆👆👆👆👆👆👆👆👆👆👆... This is what he was responding to. 👇
👉(FACT 7)👈- He then spent six months not wearing a mask when the experts had been telling them almost that entire time to wear one.
- He spent about two and a half months, starting in the middle of the shutdown, trying to pretend that covid-19 magically Gone Away.
👉(FACT 5)👈 - He then tried to blame Obama for the fact that we didn't have enough stock piles of medical equipment to sustain the emergency supply in America, when he had 3 years to fill that up. forcing the states to literally go into a bidding war with each other over literal American lives.
👉(FACT 9)👈- He's promoted multiple untested, unscientific and ultimately dangerous supposed "cures".
👉(FACT 10)👈- He has come out against the the medical professionals advice on multiple occasions.
👉(FACT 8)👈- He has held giant Trump rallies with little to no social distancing or masks but waivers being signed to protect them from liability.
👉(FACT 11)👈- He is called covid-19 a democratic hoax weeks after (it turns out) he admitted that he knew how bad it was.
👉(FACT 14)👈- He has almost consistently discouraged testing.
- He has insisted that children go back to school even though the medical experts are telling him it is not safe for them. Even going so far as to threaten to defund our already strapped public education system if they don't.
- He has continuously mopped people in public for a hearing to social distancing regulations.
👉(FACT 12)👈 - He still doesn't wear a damn mask on a regular basis and we're 8 months in.
He is supposed to be the leader of this country and he is doing all of that during the worst worldwide pandemic and over a hundred years. I can absolutely blame him for every American covid-19 death."
These are the things he calls insane now... Because he can no longer realistically argue against his inconsistencies. 👇
1. President Obama had a 33 page pandemic CONTAINMENT PLAN commissioned after H1N1, that was researched and written by infectious disease experts in the field and left for the next Administration.
2. Donald Trump was aware of this even before the first case hit the US, but choose to ignore it because Obama.
3. The CONTAINMENT PLAN, if implemented would have (shocker) CONTAINED THE SPREAD IN THE US.
4. Donald Trump had 3 YEARS to refill the stockpiles of emergency medical equipment before C19 hit and didn't do so.
5. He, instead, chose to blame President Obama.
6. This forced the states into a bidding war with each other, over literal American lives.
7. For the first 6 months of the pandemic OUR PRESIDENT set a bad example by refusing to wear a mask.
8. He also threw massive Trump rallies and 4th of July celebrations where hardly anyone social distanced or wore masks... But also where they where required to sign wavers to get in, for liability purposes.
9. He presented multiple snake oil cures.
10. He came out, multiple times against his experts advice, and in true Trump fashion, name calling and insulting them.
11. We also later found out that he knew how serious it was early on, but still choose to come out and tried to convince his supporters that it was a Dem Hoax.
12. He still barely wears a mask now.
13. He is still holding Trump rallies now with no social distancing.
14. He has discouraged and tried to defund testing throughout the pandemic.
15. He is in court RIGHT N0W trying to take health care away from millions of Americans with no plan to replace it, in the middle of the world world wide pandemic in over 100 years.
16. For 2 and a half months he tried to pretend that C19 was just going to magically go away abd lied about the numbers.
17. He is the president of our country and it is LITERALLY HIS JOB to get us through National crisis scenarios in the fast way available. Which he had all along yet ignored.
Notice any similarities?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@bryguy306 That's easy... I didn't your trying to lie on me so you dont bruise your delicate ego. That sounds like it falls under... Not my problem, to me. .. So I shall press on. 😁
The dossier was a PART of the evidence given to the FIRST judge, the FIRST TIME they applied for the FIRST 90 day FISA warrent, on Carter Page's office. It was 1 small piece of evidence, 1 time, for 1 warrent. Then the FBI caught Steele in some lies, no longer deamed him credible and took it out of the warrent application after that. The warrents, where approved 7 other times after that without the dossier. Its publoc record. Also.. Its in here! 👇In volume 2, under Obstruction. https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/5955118-The-Mueller-Report.html
So... Where did you hear the dossier was how they got the FISA warrent?
It also had nothing to do with a pee tape. Again... I ask... Where are you getting this from?
"Page had already come to the attention of the FBI before he joined the Trump campaign because of his interactions with Russian intelligence officers. In 2015, three of the people whom Page interacted with were charged with conspiracy to act as an unregistered agent of a foreign government, with the interactions with Page forming a key part of the complaint. One of the men pleaded guilty and was sentenced to 30 months in prison; the other two no longer lived in the United States and have not been arrested."
Also, it was a wiretap. One that investigations use all the time to bust American criminals. So, are you implying that all those people sitting in jail right now should be released for all their crimes because the evidence that put them there was a wire tap?
No... I just read and gather information independently instead of just swallowing lies bias people try to tell me. You should try it. 😉✌
1
-
@bryguy306 SoOoOo... The majority of your second comment is posturing and excuses for why you can't prove what your claiming. I'm not shocked.
And then... It is apparently time for the making stuff up about what I said, portion... Where did I call him a buffoon? Where did I call him a manipulated tyrant?
" What, you mean like... Releasing the transcript of the entire phone call?
Why... No... Brain trust... I mean like abusing executive privilage to try and keep it from Congress for a few weeks now, until it hit the press... And only then releasing the transcript after the Congress... Dems and Reps... Had to come out in mass against those 3 doing it... Which forced his hand. Tons of Democrat and Republican Congressman came out against that. And they don't agree on anything.
See... When you don't cherry pick facts and look at the whole board.. It tends to be less embarrassing for you later. 😉✌
And now the WhatAboutIsm... Portion of the rights script. This is all so original.
I will tell you what I tell everybody else. I don't want crooked, self-serving, power-hungry, egomaniacs, on my team. Did I vote for hillary? Only in the end. Only as the lesser of two evils. Did I say anything about all the shady s*** she did, not just the emails but also the DNC... And that's only just in the election season. She did all manner of shady ship before she ran for president. So did I say anything about it? You're damn right I did.
That's called, being objective. That's called having common sense. That's called not throwing your support and weight behind a shady Shady corrupt ass clown because they have the same color I have on. Maybe you should try that sometime.
Again, it's going to be a lot less embarrassing than you asking me questions, assuming the answers and then calling me a hypocrite because of that. If you have to set up that big of a paper tiger, in order to give any validity to your point of view, maybe consider it's not worth doing. Just a thought. 😉✌
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Michael-yl2iq Your talking about personal responsibility, correct?
But now you're acting like the guy I'm talking to, when I'm NOT referring to him as president, is stupid. Do you really think that I have to refer to Donald Trump as president or this person is going to be somehow confused by whether he is president of the most well-known country in the world? I would not be confused by that. Cuz, that's just crazy.
What they could be confused by is me sighting off facts and talking about how childish and ignorant he is, and then at the same time, giving him the respect of a title that he hasn't earned.
Ain't no-one out there, going to be like well, she didn't call him president, so I don't know if he is or not... Or I don't know if she thinks he is or not. Everybody in the past and probably everybody in the future are going to be like, she don't like his ass. Which I'm fine with, because it's true. I talk about politics all the damn time, ain't nobody ever gotten the impression that I didn't recognize that this person was sitting in the Oval Office right now.
As for division, like I've already said, I want that division between me and anyone out there, thinking that I would condone that kind of behavior towards other people. I deplore bullies, and that's all that man is. I don't give a damn Who You Are. Wrong is wrong. Treating people the way that he does, should not be condoned or even made to look that way. That is one very specific way you stand up against people like that. Is it a shame that this person happens to be the president right now, yes. But that don't make it any different. You don't show him respect he hasn't earned, just because he happens to have a powerful title.
As for you explaining to me that my freedom of speech doesn't make facts not facts, I never said it did. That's you yet again putting words into my mouth. Assuming I meant one thing when I said another. I'm not sure where you got the impression that I'm not Direct. Because I sure as s*** have been this whole time with you... but you can't seem to help yourself but to assume I mean something that I haven't said. That's your personal responsibility. Not mine.
I, on the other hand, started bringing up that, I had the first amendment and freedom of speech, because you kept saying things like, people didn't have the right to not call him the president. I have every right NOT to call him that. As a matter of FACT, that was one of the first things you said. Which is also what made me reply to you, BTW. " Even if he behaved terribly does not give you the right to do it as well."
That's the part you are not getting... You think that you are the one that gets to decide what is and is not being a good citizen. In your opinion not referring to Trump, as president Trump, is not being a good citizen. My opinion differs from that. I beleive that showing the dofference between the man who currently resides in the Oval office and the values and morals of the people, he is supposed to represent are infact, different, when they differ that much. At least as far as it goes to me and others who has presented the same opinion as I.
No, you once again, assumed, that's what it meant. Which is again, on you and not me. I said, " I equally have the same right, not to refer to a man, who acts like a child on a daily basis, as my president." I said, "NOT TO REFER".
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Michael-yl2iq Yep... Refer... Definition of refer
transitive verb
1a(1): to think of, regard, or classify within a general category or group
👉(2): to explain in terms of a general cause👈
b: to allot to a particular place, stage, or period
c: to regard as coming from or located in a specific area
2a: to send or direct for treatment, aid, information, or decisionrefer a patient to a specialistrefer a bill back to a committee
👉b: to direct for testimony or guaranty as to character or ability👈
intransitive verb
1a: to have relation or connection : RELATE
👉b: to direct attention usually by clear and specific mentionno one referred to yesterday's quarrel👈
👉2: to have recourse : glance brieflyreferred frequently to his notes while speaking👈
Hey, look at that! Another example of you only looking at the information that parrots back your preconceived notions. Yet, ignoring all other relivant information, that does not. I'm shocked! 🤣
1
-
@Michael-yl2iq I said Refer. Not Reguard. You want it to be reguard, so you don't have to admit that you have been making assumptions and setting up paper tigers, this entire time.
Those are only a few of my words. Cherry picled out of all that I have said. That is you acting quite childish, trying to twist their meaning into something you can argue against, in order to not have to admit that you could have read them wrong or made assptions about me and my meanings that where not true. Ignoring, what doesn't fit and twisting what you think you can, is not an argument.
Just look at all this dancing you have to do... When it all could of been fixed with a "My bad. I read that wrong."
Even when told differently, you think that your assumptions about my use of Southern colloquial speech, is still what you incorrectly assumed it to be, from the jump. Even after having plenty of examples of this. It's a natural speech pattern of my own.... And others down south. BUT NOPE! It has got to have some other kind of meaning, because you said so. That alone, is an example of your need to be right. Even when its clear your not.
1
-
@Michael-yl2iq And I said plenty. You just didn't get the answer that you wanted. So... Now your all butt hurt about it.
"As for your question.... My words are clear enough, as you read them to mean, exactly what they say. Not what you assume them to mean. So, I don't feel the urge to participate in or correct your assumptions. That is also not my responsibility. I have never giving you the impression that I am not direct, despite you trying to read things into almost everything that I have said. I'm not going to refer to him as president, until he earns that respect."
You claim them to be nothing, because they where pointing out what you did not want to acknowledge. Your assumptions about my "meaning" on what I was saying, instead of just taking what I said at face value. I'm not participating in that. You are more than welcome to consider that, whatever you want it to be, sweetheart. At the end of the day, your just guessing, because I am me and you are not.
Your explanation simply denies the recipients personal responsibility and implies ignorance of the world around them. That's what needs to happen, for what you claim, I mean, to be true.
That's why your ignoring the other persons knowledge of the world around them, when I'm not referring to Trump as president. That's why you're ignoring my colloquial terminology as being just that. That's why you're ignoring that you're telling me what I meant. As if you would somehow know better than I.
SoOoOo .. Yeah... I think this conversation is very direct. It directly points out a lot of things that you do not like. Which is why your leaving now. 😁🤘
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@p-squash7341 Oh! And what categories would those be? They have names, I assume?
And don't worry about me being too stupid to understand it. After all, you seem to enjoy trying to humiliate people, and if you took the time to explain to me what the specific pathologies were, then I was, as you say, too stupid to understand it, then you would get that fix that you seem to need, right?
So it's a win win situation for you, right? I mean, as long as you truely do know what your talking about, after all, right?
So, go ahead. Explain to me, the difference between the pathology that you have diagnosed me with, and the one that you seem to hold?
I'll wait. 😏
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Michael-yl2iq YOU ARE LYING! THIS IS WHERE YOU STARTED. 😜🤘
" Every time you don't refer to him as "president" you show disrespect to the office and the country. Even if he behaves terribly does not give you the right to do it as well."
You continuing to repeat things, does not actually make them magically change into the argument you wish you started with. Might as well take the lesson learned, and move on with your life. Cuz Your not lying on me, putting words in my mouth, spinning false narratives on me or using BS tactics on me and trying to talk your way out of it, sugar. You should have played it straight from the jump. I'll be here today, tomorrow, next week, next month and next year. You can play this game as long as you would like.... Or, you can take the lesson, and move on with your life, sweet! 😜🤘
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@p-squash7341 Except... You didn't say aircraft. You said 👉airplane👈.
You didn't say go to the moon. You said invented 👉spaceships👈.
Except you didn't say anything about the light bulb.... Also, Hiram Maximand and Joseph Swan invented the incandescent light bulb, along with Bell.
Except you didn't say anything about Benjamin Franklin or the electric stove. So, not even sure why your bring that up.... ?
"There's a reason we invented the automobile, spaceships, televisions, telephones, the internet, Facebook, YouTube, airplanes, etc"
😁🤘
1
-
1
-
@Michael-yl2iq BACK TO THE FALSE NARRATIVE AGAIN, I SEE! THIS WAS YOUR ORIGINAL ARGUMENT! Which you only tried to change and start putting words into my mouth after you realized that your opinion was not fact. 😜🤘
" Every time you don't refer to him as "president" you show disrespect to the office and the country. Even if he behaves terribly does not give you the right to do it as well."
You continuing to repeat things, does not actually make them magically change into the argument you wish you started with. Might as well take the lesson learned, and move on with your life. Cuz Your not lying on me, putting words in my mouth, spinning false narratives on me or using BS tactics on me and trying to talk your way out of it, sugar. You should have played it straight from the jump. I'll be here today, tomorrow, next week, next month and next year. You can play this game as long as you would like.... Or, you can take the lesson, and move on with your life, sweet! 😜🤘
1
-
@Michael-yl2iq AND WE ARE BACK TO LYING ABOUT WHAT I HAVE SAID. Show me where I said that? I will be waiting.... Forever! 😜🤘
THIS IS YOUR ORIGINAL NARRATIVE! 😁
" Every time you don't refer to him as "president" you show disrespect to the office and the country. Even if he behaves terribly does not give you the right to do it as well."
You continuing to repeat things, does not actually make them magically change into the argument you wish you started with. Might as well take the lesson learned, and move on with your life. Cuz Your not lying on me, putting words in my mouth, spinning false narratives on me or using BS tactics on me and trying to talk your way out of it, sugar. You should have played it straight from the jump. I'll be here today, tomorrow, next week, next month and next year. You can play this game as long as you would like.... Or, you can take the lesson, and move on with your life, sweet! 😜🤘
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Michael-yl2iq Someone who is willfully ignorant of facts, history and narrative, that has continuously also been made aware of such, in order to be able to LIE about another person's intent, is NOT a differance of political views. That is a GENUINE dishonestly of character. Which is why you will only answer 1 of the multiple questions, that I have asked you multiple of times. Its the one, you feel, you can frame to fit another false narrative, you are attempting to construct NOW, on this being about politics. You are not acting in an HONEST or GOOD manner. You have not done so this entire time. You would still like to be perceived as though you have and you are, which is why you are trying to be clever about it. However, I am not inclined to oblige.
Your original statment was about PERCEPTION. Not FACT.
"Every time you don't 👉refer👈 to him as "president" you show disrespect to the office and the country. Even if he behaves terribly does not give you the right to do it as well."
I responded to you as PERCEPTION, and using the context of " refer". As you even pointed out, at one point.
" We don't give him the respect of 👉calling him👉 president, and therefore referencing the office that you are concerned about protecting, because he has not earned it. I grew up being taught that you earn respect. It's not given to you. I don't know about her place to hold that true than the Oval Office."
Which I kow you read, because later you mentioned me using, the collective "We", in that sentance, in an attempt to paint me as speaking for people I should not have been presuming to speak for. When it was actually, me referring to people who thought as I did.
You just CHOOSE to ignore the other terminology in the very sentence you referred to earlier. You do so by continuously pointing out that I was referring to 👉a state of being👈 and not a sentence, in which I am CHOOSING to reference Trump in a certain way.
" Donald Trump is the president of the US. If you're a citizen, he is your president. As a citizen 👉refusing to accept that he is your president👈 is a divisive act that harms the country. 👉You are intentionally harming the country.👈 Still at the point I started and will remain there."
" Every time you don't refer to him as "president" you show disrespect to the office and the country. 👉Donald Trump is the president.👈 👉You deny this👈 in order to be divisive. Divisive doesn't help the country. Still there, not changing. "
" Donald Trump is your president if you are a US citizen. 👉Your refusal to accept this fact👈 is designed to cause Division. Division in the country is not good. What you were doing is wrong."
And so on and so forth. As you know, there are many more of these examples of you referring to my comments of "referring to his as such" intentionally mistated, by you, as "referring to the state of being". Which was, as I stated above, not your original narrative, upon which I was responding to. You simply continue to try and misstate the narrative, and therefore my reference to it, as this, after I pointed out that...
- your reference on me being "confused" was an assumption on your part about the subject of my confusion
- that your reference on "division" was also not correct on its subject matter, and merely an opinion on your part
Opon which, you began to fluctuate back and forth between, trying to continue to change the narrative to a false one, upon which I keep pointing that out, and lying about what I have said, in order to try and push your false narrative. Also, which I have continued to point out.
Which is also why you refuse to quote me , as I have done to you, and you to me, in regards to other things, when it comes to your persistent claim, that I don't consider him as the office he currently holds. I have never once said this. Which is why you can not. Which is why 👉YOU continue to LIE about me👈.
Which you will more than likely CHOOSE to ignore, once again, because this is not about politics. It stopped being that a while back. It became about you not having to admit that you made assumptions, that turned out to be wrong and you don't want to have to say that. So instead, you continue to LIE about ME and what I have said. Which is a question of character and your clear and unabashed lack of it, that you continue to demonstrate.
Which is why I'm not going to turn this loose. You can reply as many days as you would like. It's not going to matter. You're not going to continue to LIE on ME or try to push this false narrative because you and cannot argue the one that you began on. Which was based on assumption and opinion, on your part. Which I have once again, just laid out, clearly, for you. I bet you ignore it again. I bet you continue to try and paint a false narrative.
1
-
@Michael-yl2iq Except I gave your your original statement.... Word for word. It's also up top for you to go back and read if you would like. At the end of my last one I believe I mentioned you'd go back to trying to push her false narrative. I'm shocked. You've gone back to that because it's all you have. As to where I have the truth. So I will repeat.. from my own and your own words quoted back verbatim...
"Someone who is willfully ignorant of facts, history and narrative, that has continuously also been made aware of such, in order to be able to LIE about another person's intent, is NOT a differance of political views. That is a GENUINE dishonestly of character. Which is why you will only answer 1 of the multiple questions, that I have asked you multiple of times. Its the one, you feel, you can frame to fit another false narrative, you are attempting to construct NOW, on this being about politics. You are not acting in an HONEST or GOOD manner. You have not done so this entire time. You would still like to be perceived as though you have and you are, which is why you are trying to be clever about it. However, I am not inclined to oblige.
Your original statment was about PERCEPTION. Not FACT.
"Every time you don't 👉refer👈 to him as "president" you show disrespect to the office and the country. Even if he behaves terribly does not give you the right to do it as well."
I responded to you as PERCEPTION, and using the context of " refer". As you even pointed out, at one point.
" We don't give him the respect of 👉calling him👉 president, and therefore referencing the office that you are concerned about protecting, because he has not earned it. I grew up being taught that you earn respect. It's not given to you. I don't know about her place to hold that true than the Oval Office."
Which I kow you read, because later you mentioned me using, the collective "We", in that sentance, in an attempt to paint me as speaking for people I should not have been presuming to speak for. When it was actually, me referring to people who thought as I did.
You just CHOOSE to ignore the other terminology in the very sentence you referred to earlier. You do so by continuously pointing out that I was referring to 👉a state of being👈 and not a sentence, in which I am CHOOSING to reference Trump in a certain way.
" Donald Trump is the president of the US. If you're a citizen, he is your president. As a citizen 👉refusing to accept that he is your president👈 is a divisive act that harms the country. 👉You are intentionally harming the country.👈 Still at the point I started and will remain there."
" Every time you don't refer to him as "president" you show disrespect to the office and the country. 👉Donald Trump is the president.👈 👉You deny this👈 in order to be divisive. Divisive doesn't help the country. Still there, not changing. "
" Donald Trump is your president if you are a US citizen. 👉Your refusal to accept this fact👈 is designed to cause Division. Division in the country is not good. What you were doing is wrong."
And so on and so forth. As you know, there are many more of these examples of you referring to my comments of "referring to his as such" intentionally mistated, by you, as "referring to the state of being". Which was, as I stated above, not your original narrative, upon which I was responding to. You simply continue to try and misstate the narrative, and therefore my reference to it, as this, after I pointed out that...
- your reference on me being "confused" was an assumption on your part about the subject of my confusion
- that your reference on "division" was also not correct on its subject matter, and merely an opinion on your part
Opon which, you began to fluctuate back and forth between, trying to continue to change the narrative to a false one, upon which I keep pointing that out, and lying about what I have said, in order to try and push your false narrative. Also, which I have continued to point out.
Which is also why you refuse to quote me , as I have done to you, and you to me, in regards to other things, when it comes to your persistent claim, that I don't consider him as the office he currently holds. I have never once said this. Which is why you can not. Which is why 👉YOU continue to LIE about me👈.
Which you will more than likely CHOOSE to ignore, once again, because this is not about politics. It stopped being that a while back. It became about you not having to admit that you made assumptions, that turned out to be wrong and you don't want to have to say that. So instead, you continue to LIE about ME and what I have said. Which is a question of character and your clear and unabashed lack of it, that you continue to demonstrate.
Which is why I'm not going to turn this loose. You can reply as many days as you would like. It's not going to matter. You're not going to continue to LIE on ME or try to push this false narrative because you and cannot argue the one that you began on. Which was based on assumption and opinion, on your part. Which I have once again, just laid out, clearly, for you. I bet you ignore it again. I bet you continue to try and paint a false narrative."
You keep going back to lying on me because you have no argument. I'll keep proving your wrong and a dishonest man who's letting his ego get in the way because he lacks moral character. See you tomorrow! 😜🤘
1
-
@Michael-yl2iq 😋 Except, the FACT that I have ACTUAL PROOF of the course of events, which I have laid out and can be seen up above. YOU refuse to STOP LYING about the beginning premise and what I HAVE ACTUALLY SAID. Which is why, even though you HAVE BEEN ASKED, several times, you CAN NOT go ☝ and quote ME, where I said, what you KEEP CLAIMING.
WATCH! I'll do it again!
Go up and quote where I said, what you KEEP claiming I did? I'll be waiting!
Bet ya ignore it again! 😁
Your VERY FIRST COMMEMT ALONE, proves your continuous comments on "from the beginning" wrong.
In fact, coming across so many liars, such as yourself, on here, I have began the practice of screenshotting our conversations, just in case people get delete happy/edit happy and then try to lie about what they've said or what I've said. Which I have also done this entire time. Surprise! 😁
SoOoOo... Here is your proof, that, infact, you are the one LYING! With screenshots to back it up, if need be!
"Except I gave your your original statement.... Word for word. It's also up top for you to go back and read if you would like. At the end of my last one I believe I mentioned you'd go back to trying to push her false narrative. I'm shocked. You've gone back to that because it's all you have. As to where I have the truth. So I will repeat.. from my own and your own words quoted back verbatim...
"Someone who is willfully ignorant of facts, history and narrative, that has continuously also been made aware of such, in order to be able to LIE about another person's intent, is NOT a differance of political views. That is a GENUINE dishonestly of character. Which is why you will only answer 1 of the multiple questions, that I have asked you multiple of times. Its the one, you feel, you can frame to fit another false narrative, you are attempting to construct NOW, on this being about politics. You are not acting in an HONEST or GOOD manner. You have not done so this entire time. You would still like to be perceived as though you have and you are, which is why you are trying to be clever about it. However, I am not inclined to oblige.
Your original statment was about PERCEPTION. Not FACT.
"Every time you don't 👉refer👈 to him as "president" you show disrespect to the office and the country. Even if he behaves terribly does not give you the right to do it as well."
I responded to you as PERCEPTION, and using the context of " refer". As you even pointed out, at one point.
" We don't give him the respect of 👉calling him👉 president, and therefore referencing the office that you are concerned about protecting, because he has not earned it. I grew up being taught that you earn respect. It's not given to you. I don't know about her place to hold that true than the Oval Office."
Which I kow you read, because later you mentioned me using, the collective "We", in that sentance, in an attempt to paint me as speaking for people I should not have been presuming to speak for. When it was actually, me referring to people who thought as I did.
You just CHOOSE to ignore the other terminology in the very sentence you referred to earlier. You do so by continuously pointing out that I was referring to 👉a state of being👈 and not a sentence, in which I am CHOOSING to reference Trump in a certain way.
" Donald Trump is the president of the US. If you're a citizen, he is your president. As a citizen 👉refusing to accept that he is your president👈 is a divisive act that harms the country. 👉You are intentionally harming the country.👈 Still at the point I started and will remain there."
" Every time you don't refer to him as "president" you show disrespect to the office and the country. 👉Donald Trump is the president.👈 👉You deny this👈 in order to be divisive. Divisive doesn't help the country. Still there, not changing. "
" Donald Trump is your president if you are a US citizen. 👉Your refusal to accept this fact👈 is designed to cause Division. Division in the country is not good. What you were doing is wrong."
And so on and so forth. As you know, there are many more of these examples of you referring to my comments of "referring to his as such" intentionally mistated, by you, as "referring to the state of being". Which was, as I stated above, not your original narrative, upon which I was responding to. You simply continue to try and misstate the narrative, and therefore my reference to it, as this, after I pointed out that...
- your reference on me being "confused" was an assumption on your part about the subject of my confusion
- that your reference on "division" was also not correct on its subject matter, and merely an opinion on your part
Opon which, you began to fluctuate back and forth between, trying to continue to change the narrative to a false one, upon which I keep pointing that out, and lying about what I have said, in order to try and push your false narrative. Also, which I have continued to point out.
Which is also why you refuse to quote me , as I have done to you, and you to me, in regards to other things, when it comes to your persistent claim, that I don't consider him as the office he currently holds. I have never once said this. Which is why you can not. Which is why 👉YOU continue to LIE about me👈.
Which you will more than likely CHOOSE to ignore, once again, because this is not about politics. It stopped being that a while back. It became about you not having to admit that you made assumptions, that turned out to be wrong and you don't want to have to say that. So instead, you continue to LIE about ME and what I have said. Which is a question of character and your clear and unabashed lack of it, that you continue to demonstrate.
Which is why I'm not going to turn this loose. You can reply as many days as you would like. It's not going to matter. You're not going to continue to LIE on ME or try to push this false narrative because you and cannot argue the one that you began on. Which was based on assumption and opinion, on your part. Which I have once again, just laid out, clearly, for you. I bet you ignore it again. I bet you continue to try and paint a false narrative."
You keep going back to lying on me because you have no argument. I'll keep proving your wrong and a dishonest man who's letting his ego get in the way because he lacks moral character. See you tomorrow! 😜🤘"
Where is yours?!?!? 😁😁😁
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@timothykozlowski2945 If only you where working with actual data and cared about these people who laid down their lives for you, instead of using there deaths, or in this case, disregarding their deaths, so you can can try and attack the other side.
"In 2020, 11 military deaths were recorded as part of Operation Freedom's Sentinel, according to the Defense Department's Defense Casualty Analysis System, which maintains U.S. casualty information for global or regional conflicts.Of those 11 deaths, four were hostile, combat-related deaths in Afghanistan: two in January and two in February."
"Twenty-two American service members were killed in Afghanistan in 2019, the highest number since NATO combat operations in the country ended at the end of 2014."
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Yep... There are Trump trolls....
- Callously and inaccurately quoting death rate numbers. US 3.55%
- They all have "breathing problems", all the sudden... Because... screw all you other people's lives and not having irreparable lung damage because, when I go to the grocery store the mask is itchy.
- People die of other NON-CONTAGIOUS things, so who cares if previous non/wrongly treated pandemics, of this contagion magnitude, have literally whipped out half the worlds population before. Don't they know that me and my husband have drinking at bars to do, and little Johnny simply MUST have his 7th B Day Party at chucky cheese!
- Clearly, if you don't blindly follow Trump in everything you do, you are a Never Trumper. Oh... Wait... I forgot... You actually voted for him last time... Well... Well... Well... I "clearly" wasn't talking about you. Even though I was just responding to what you just said... But now presented with inconvenient facts I have to quickly change my narrative, because this one isn't working for me anymore.
- TRUMP 2020... Despite all logic, fact and reason, that I need to ignore, in order to continue to say that.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Redman Law 99 I'm sure you have... Considering its what happened.... And yrying to cherry pick what I said is just silly.
1... The dossier was 1 of several pieces of info in the 1st warrant. You are trying to glaze over the others and pretend that evidence wasn't there because it doesn't fit your point.
2.... The FISA Warrants where valid because every single other warrent was approved by 7 different judges, with the remaining evidence, clearly showing that they would have gotten the first one, irregardless if the dossier was in there or not.
3.... The FISA Warrants where not for Trump. They were for Carter Pages office.
4... the Republicans actually started the Steele dossier. Just when it turned out they didn't have any use for it, that's when Hillary picked it up and finished paying for the rest of it. You guys never quite remember that part. Isn't that funny...
5... You seriously don't even see a little bit of irony when it comes to you trying to paint Trump as the victim of some kind of misinformation campaign? Really?
6.... I know you never mentioned the FBI... That told me a lot. Who do you think ran the investigation?
7... and here we go with the LIE again about the Steele dossier starting the whole thing. If the Steele dossier started the investigation that the FBI ran, how did they not even know that its existence or get a copy of it until 7 weeks after they began the investigation? Also public record.
8 .... to be very clear about Steele dossier, some of it has been discredited. Some of it has not been discredited and some of it has been proven to be true.
9... you painting Trump with some kind of white hat on just shows your bias and your willingness to overlook large hunks of information that does not fit your preconceived notions.... But here's where it's not going to make any sense, because your guy likes to stick his foot in his mouth on a regular basis in public. Which means a great deal of what proves his involvement, much like with Ukraine right now, came directly from him.
10.. these three people who headed the investigation oh, they were all Republicans. So you claiming it some democratic crazy conspiracy, well that just shows you're the one that indulges in conspiracies.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@hanassholesolo5173 Okay... Well... That is a decent point. "Control". Except, it would make the opposite happen. No body of Congress, ever wondering whether they're going to be elected or not again, will vote in a system that deletes the private healthcare From existence in this country. It's just not going to happen. That's just the realest. I wouldn't want it to me either. The whole point in this is us having those options. What it will do however, is forced the private sector to lower their prices to a reasonable amount. The average American makes less than 50,000 a year. They also spend 10000 a year per person on average. Except it gets worse because, most people aren't supporting themselves and only themselves. They're supporting themselves and a family. Which brings up that 10,000 to most of the time between 20000 and 40 thousand a year. And since I don't see them raising the minimum wage to a living wage anytime soon, that means people are having to choose on a regular basis whether they get their child's medicine or they has money to pay their heating bill. They are left in that position because due to a bunch of silly ass laws and regulations, the private sector has the market cornered and can charge whatever the hell they want. Especially with a necessity like healthcare. But watch what happens when they have to compete against the Public Health Care. So I absolutely want to give people a choice between private and public. Just having the public sector there, no matter what someone chooses, it's miles better than it is right now.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@mesolithicman164 Well... First... Don't present false assumptions your not prepared to back up. " probably an underestimation". There's no way you can qualify that. Don't just, on-the-fly, make stuff up to pad your point.
And you really think it's the "policy" they are getting upset with? It's not the policy. It's the Dead family member. You think that these families would be less inclined to threaten to come and kill them if they didn't show them the picture, but, only said they died?
How is informing a family that their child had just died in a war going to be popular, irregardless of how it happens? Come on now... that is not a thing you can measure popularity with. Their family is dead. Literally nobody is going to like that.
Just because you keep trying to frame it as raising the ante, like these families have any control over what's going to happen with chemical weapons, doesn't mean it's actually true. Most of their children that are sent to die in these battles, are conscripted. They didn't even have the choice whether or not they could go. It's not like they're calling up the Kremlin and saying, "bomb those b******". Hell, we can't even do that in America. Like if my brother would have died in Iraq or Afghanistan, I couldn't have just called up the Pentagon and ordered an airstrike. That's not how that works... and we live in a democracy.
This has nothing to do with me being naive or not. It's the fact that you are choosing to only look at part of the picture, and conveniently it's the part that confirms your preconceived notions.
As for what you're putting for it, you are putting the entire onus on the Ukrainian people in government for trying to do the right thing and completely ignoring the Russian side, then trying to claim that your for lowering tensions. Do you maybe think that it would help to lower tensions if the actual Invaders did what they're supposed to do when inform these families in the first place? Or how about they just leave the country they're invading? You were using a completely one-sided point of view and trying to claim you're in the right. It's super easy to get there when you don't pay attention to all sides and all facts.
1
-
1
-
@mesolithicman164 Na! This is just about your ego, at this point.
What you mean is YOU tend to round down. That has nothing to do with being naive. Yet again. That's just personal preference. Though that seems to be the negative connotation you wanted to subscribe to me because you can't prove your point in a mature and fact-based manner, using all relevant material.
You tend to round down. Some round up. Some use basic math rounding, that can be up or down, depending on the remainder. You are attempting to speak for a whole bunch of ppl, bc you can't get out your own bubble.
What's naive, is to think that everything operates all over the world the same way that it operates in America.
And, in fact, I'm not avoiding anything. I'm just not buying into your baseless assumptions as to their reasoning and I'm using the actual quoted words that they used in order to explain the situation.
It's naive to think that the numbers are what you want them to be because they fit the narrative you're trying to spin... actually, that's more arrogance, then naivete. He said it was around 80%. You're making the assumption that it's above with no basis for it other than your personal preference and your inability to see outside of the area you live in. You're doing so because what you're choosing to do is only see what fits your preconceived notions and you need to make assumptions in order to make that work.
So, you can keep calling me naive all day long but I'm the one going by the stated facts and only the stated facts and you're the one making assumptions to fit your narrative.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ynotttt " It's important to realize that America was built on the values, freedoms and work ethic resulting with all we have today." 👈 Actually, it's important to realize that America was built on slave labor, indentured servitude and illegal immigration.
Because the first settlers, that would later become Americans, certainly were not the first people here, and I believe they didn't actually ask permission to come in the country either. In fact, I think I remember there was this whole thing where they slaughtered, enslaved and assaulted the ppl that where there.. then literally wiped out whole scribes and force the rest onto reservations ... And then, after stealing the country and fighting a war to become america, they went over to an entirely different country, got a very specific race of people, brought them over here to do all their work for them. Which they were so committed to doing that they literally went to war with their own country to fight to be able to continue to do. Then after losing the war African Americans who were still considered not a whole person ended up mostly becoming indentured servants for 2 whole more generations.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@JStrong-ps4pu Naa! I'm good! But lets, me and you skip this part, shall we.
Cuz, let me tell you what going to happen....
- Your gonna make some claims of "no collusion" and "no obstruction",
-I'm going to challenge you to show me in the Mueller report where it says that,
- you're going to tell me that either it says it in there or that he said it in his testimony or that Barr said it,
- I'm gonna challange you again and again to show me,
- your not going to be able to do it, so instead you're going to slowly but surely devolve into 3rd grade tactics of calling me a boo-boo head and then probably running away oh,
- I'm going to put the actual quotes up and Link the actual Clips to what he said after
- then if you're feeling extra Plucky you're going to call me a dumbass a bunch of times even though, at that point, it will be very obvious as to who the actual dumbass is
I dont think... You wanna do that... But I'm down if you are! 😜✌
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@truthman9827 The list of the entire week that proves your lack of credibility. And the reason I will insist on 👉1👈 example in the video you have presented, that you claim finally has this proof.
1. Making the initial assumption that I trust CNN. An assumption you will repeat several times, before actually asking.
2. Admitting to be Anon, but claiming to fact-check the media. Yet have spent an entire week not being able to prove one claim.
3. Repeating the cult term "The Great Awakening"
4. Claiming that I'm delusional even though you can't provide any evidence to your claim in over a week.
5. You've actually made several claims repeatedly but I've only ever asked you to provide evidence for one of them and you have not even been able to do that, and again, a week's time.
6. When I first asked you to provide evidence for your claim about the current media, the very first thing you tried to do was get me to prove your claim for you.
7. You claimed it died in 2016 Donald Trump won big time.
I pointed out that in 2020, Joe Biden beat Donald Trump by the exact same margin and then asked you if you would agree that that meant in 2020 that he lost big time. You ignored that question. It wouldn't be the last question you ignore.
8. You would go on to make another baseless assumption about how I hate all Republicans even though I literally am surrounded by Republicans where I live. Which you would have known if you would have asked. You chose not to because it fit your false narrative better. Literally everybody I know voted for Trump in 2016. Friends and family included. You didn't bring that up after that.
9. You then insist that the direction of the world proves your claims the but can provide no solid evidence for that.
10. You're also present a slew of parotid Trump conspiracy theories for which you also prove absolutely none of. Hunter Biden's laptop, Russian collusion hoax, pizzagate... Just to name a few.
11. You then go back to trying to insist that it's my job to prove your claims.
12. After I tell you I won't, you start bringing up a video called out of the shadows and Mark a timestamp for me to watch. I do so on the claim that you said is there is not. The only thing that is there is something over 60 years old that has no direct implication for today's journalism.
13. Then you go on to insist for another day that that is direct evidence for it even though it isn't.
14. Upon which I point out the fact that you've spent almost a week trying to prove something that you can't and that you don't actually believe it because if you did you wouldn't need that kind of validation from a total stranger. At which point you tried to deflect from that and tell me that it's my validation that I need because I keep pointing out the fact that you can't prove your claim.
15. You try several other underhanded and desperate attempts to deflect to me, such as going to my page and giving a false account of what's there, intentionally.
16. At which point your tactic changes a bit when you start to try and insist that it is my belief that I don't believe what you believe. At which point I point out that it's not a belief if it's something you can't prove. It's simply the truth that what you were saying is a work of fiction.
17. During the entire time we are having this exchange I am insisting upon 2 thing. For you to provide evidence for one of your claims and to answer a question, which is, why do you need to believe this very specific form of fiction. A question that you tried to ignore at least a dozen times before finally giving some acknowledgement of it, but not an answer. What you call answering it is simply insisting that the thing that is fiction and that you can't screw is not fiction and is the truth.
18. When I push you to answer the question, you try and deflect to me not answering a question from the start. Which is the false narrative you presented about me believing CNN. Would you drop after I actually answer the question.
19. Instead going back to trying to deflect to me by trying to insist that I'm contradicting myself because I believe you not being able to prove your claim makes it fiction. As to which I point out that that is the literal definition of fiction.
20. Continuing down your road of fiction isn't fiction narrative, you insist that I can keep saying it's fiction but it doesn't make it fiction. As to where I point out yet again that the thing that makes it fiction is the fact that you can't prove it.
21. Which brings us to an entire week later where you present this length of an hour long video claiming that this is some kind of Truth. I insist after all of that happening the week prior is that you give me one example that is in this video that proves your claims about the media and you start insisting that if I don't want to watch it then it's not your problem.
So I will say again, provide one example which is in the video you claim has the proof of your claim after an entire week, and I will spend an hour watching it.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@phollywood9650 Okay... Can't say I didn't warn you. 🤷
How many counts of obstruction of justice did they provide evidence for in the mueller report?
Which section of the report can you find these?
How many times was the famous Steele Dossier cited in the Mueller report, and what was it used for? Why was it ultimately proven useless for both sides?
How many warrants were issued and carried out, in accordance with wire tapping and over what period of time?
Who did Trump call up in the middle of the night, in an attempt to get him to fire Robert Mueller and what did that person ultimately threaten to do, instead?
17 different lead Champaign officials where not either charger, ped or found guilty, in regards to obstruction and conspiracy law, in courts of law?
So, McConnell and the Senate reps didn't completely reverse there position, from back in the Clinton impeachment hearings, when they argued for more investigation, witness testimony and allowed evidence for the trial portion? They didn't block key testament and evidence being revealed as a result? They didn't refuse sending subpoenas to key Witnesses?
Now... I stayed on key elements of the events. Things you should know, if you where paying even half the attention you claim to have done.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@phollywood9650 but while you're at it, are you going to get around to actually answering those questions you told me to ask you and then you ran away from because you couldn't answer them? Let me post them again so you don't forget them.
How many counts of obstruction of justice did they provide evidence for in the mueller report?
Which section of the report can you find these?
How many times was the famous Steele Dossier cited in the Mueller report, and what was it used for? Why was it ultimately proven useless for both sides?
How many warrants were issued and carried out, in accordance with wire tapping and over what period of time?
Who did Trump call up in the middle of the night, in an attempt to get him to fire Robert Mueller and what did that person ultimately threaten to do, instead?
17 different lead Champaign officials where not either charger, ped or found guilty, in regards to obstruction and conspiracy law, in courts of law?
So, McConnell and the Senate reps didn't completely reverse there position, from back in the Clinton impeachment hearings, when they argued for more investigation, witness testimony and allowed evidence for the trial portion? They didn't block key testament and evidence being revealed as a result? They didn't refuse sending subpoenas to key Witnesses?
Now... I stayed on key elements of the events. Things you should know, if you where paying even half the attention you claim to have done.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@phollywood9650 Now back to those question you keep running from... Because you don't want to admit you lied. 😁
How many counts of obstruction of justice did they provide evidence for in the mueller report?
Which section of the report can you find these?
How many times was the famous Steele Dossier cited in the Mueller report, and what was it used for? Why was it ultimately proven useless for both sides?
How many warrants were issued and carried out, in accordance with wire tapping and over what period of time?
Who did Trump call up in the middle of the night, in an attempt to get him to fire Robert Mueller and what did that person ultimately threaten to do, instead?
17 different lead Champaign officials where not either charger, ped or found guilty, in regards to obstruction and conspiracy law, in courts of law?
So, McConnell and the Senate reps didn't completely reverse there position, from back in the Clinton impeachment hearings, when they argued for more investigation, witness testimony and allowed evidence for the trial portion? They didn't block key testament and evidence being revealed as a result? They didn't refuse sending subpoenas to key Witnesses?
Now... I stayed on key elements of the events. Things you should know, if you where paying even half the attention you claim to have done.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@phollywood9650 Okay... Okay... For real... Dead serious question/sentiment... That if you answer HONESTLY, I will stop all the magic play! I give you my word! Fare warning, its gonna require an admission of sorts, on your part, but, HOPEFULLY, for the betterment of a genuine convo. Let's see how this goes. 🤞
Don't you want to support and believe in someone, you don't have to surrender your reason, logic and moral values to defend? Don't you want that for yourself?
I know that NO political figure isn't perfect. Biden certainly is not... And I would not have picked him, personally. Does he lie? Of course! Does he have shady areas? Of course! But despite all that, he is still... With in a country mile... More honest then Trump! Damn the CNN argument, like tons of other stations don't report that stuff to. You guy have to KNOW he LIES ALL THE TIME! I can't count the amount of times he has said one thing one day, ON CAMERA... And then tried to lie about it the next, also ON CAMERA! I don't want that in my party. That is why I don't have a problem admitting the fault on my side. Which you would have found out, if you had been honest. I prefer to call that stiff out. I EXPECT BETTER from my side... Hell! I fervently talked against Hilary Clinton's Shady ass, back in 2015 and 2016! On multiple different things. I preferred Bernie both with Biden and Clinton. Is he perfect? No! But that dude! He has spent his WHOLE LIFE fighting for us! Serving us! He marched with King and got beat up doing so. He has consistently pushed for the lower and middle classes. The disenfranchised. Insisting that everyone deserves a voice. He is someone you can tell is just trying to do what's right. That is who I want. Hell... That is why I always liked Ron Paul! Rand Paul's Daddy! Don't know what the hell happened with the son.... But I always liked Ron... And McCain. May not have agreed with them all the time... But I ALWAYS RESPECTED THEM and NEVER had to Doubt their intent! That is one of the biggest problems in America today! To many are lowering their standards to support their side. Surrendering their morals and values to be able to defend them. Things will only get worse that way. So just be honest about the faults of your side! When were you can dance that you had to find a way to defend every single thing that your people did, to defend your side? Don't lower your expectations for them! EXPECT THEM TO MEET YOURS! Make your people, people you can defend Honestly! Its human nature to get away with what you can. Show them what they can't! Make them meet you where you are. That's their job. Don't go to them. Make them come to you! That is their job! They are our representatives! Not the other way around!
So this went on longer then expected.... But you get why I asked that by now... For sure! Hillary, Joe, Trump, McConnell and others are not that now! But we can either make them that, or put someone there that is, if we make them meet our expectations! So don't you want someone you can honestly defend?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@cuddliies80223 And you can try and minimize Trump's actions but it doesn't make the laws, constitution abuse of power and your blatant lack of desire to consider all relevant info, go away.
It is not legal for a politician of any kind to seek out a foreign government to help them investigate their current political opponent. That is not only a campaign-finance violation, it's also when abuse of power. Once more, he knew it.
If not, why lie to reporters when asked if he had even mentioned Joe Biden in in the July 25th phone call?
Why has he not had the Justice Department ( for which he is the head ) open an independent investigation into the bidens, with coordination from Ukraine, sense the July 25th phone call?
Why go so far as to commit obstruction of justice a multitude of times, in order to impede the impeachment investigation?
If he did nothing wrong, wouldn't the smarter move be to above and beyond to cooperate with the investigation, in order to discredit the Dems, when they find nothing?
Why make attempts to hide the phone call in a top secret storage, for which it did not qualify for and would not go without specific orders?
Why are the House Reps pretending they don't know article 2 section 4, or the house rules, which the Reps literally wrote?
Why would the Reps pretend the closed to the public original meetings where some kind of secret, for which they could not know, when half of the Reps who pulled that idiotic, storm the castle move, where actually on the committee and could have not only gone in, but also be given equal time to ask questions?
Why would Trump and the Reps try to play like the house investigation was some kind of sham because they weren't allowed in, they weren't allowed to ask questions, they weren't allowed to have their lawyers in the room, Trump wasn't allowed to testify... Etc... When they where invited to do all of those things, but declined?
I could go on....
1
-
1
-
1
-
@cuddliies80223 and... Big surprise. ... More cherry picking. Yes, sometimes collusion is used a descriptor. It, however, is not a crime. Which was the implication all along, from the right.
"The term “collusion” is defined as “concerted activity toward a common purpose.”[2] The colloquial connotation of the word indicates that people who “collude” have worked together, usually in secret, to do something illegal. Still, other than in an antitrust context, “collusion” is not the name of a crime. (In antitrust law, two product sellers who conspire to set the price for goods may be guilty of “collusion,” but that is obviously not relevant here.) Former federal prosecutor Andrew McCarthy recently wrote that “collusion is a hopelessly vague term.”[3] There is no federal law that criminalizes collusion between a political campaign and foreign government. Even though “colluding” with a foreign government, especially one as hostile as the Russian government may be inappropriate or politically damaging, it’s not illegal. In this sense, collusion is viewed as a political term and not a legal term. As a result, Trump Jr, Manafort, and Kushner could not be prosecuted under a charge called “collusion.”"
https://nationalparalegal.edu/ViewNews.aspx?intTakeOnNewsID=129
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@darrellmadden6874 Damn right I protect my son, from every small minded ass clown who claims he isn't black because he is not pure enough for them. He is raised by a hard working African American father, beside his african American little brother and sister, they're mom and extended family, as well as (me) his mother and our family. Everytime he enters a new school year and his dad comes to his school, everyone starts looking at him differently on both sides. All the sudden he isn't black or white enough for anyones liking. All the sudden those beautiful curls on his head that everybody has been gushing about, don't get mentioned anymore. All the sudden he comes home asking me questions about why he doesn't even have the same eyes as me or his daddy. Mine are blue and his daddies are brown. His are green (I'm half Irish). He tells me because his friends where asking him about them because his daddy was black and asking if that was his real daddy. Then the next week coming home asking why he isn't darker like daddy.. Because his (African American ) teacher asked him about it. All because they found out his daddy was African-American and therefore so was he. This summer, he asked if mommy could do all the school stuff for third grade.
It will only get harder for him as he gets older and he is not very big or athletic. He is kind, gental, smart and funny but small. He shouldn't have to worry about being enough of one thing or another because he is just a little boy.
So when people say that people like Kamala Harris are not black enough for their liking, I think about my little boy. How they say the same about him.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@danestivers2943 🙄 I'm sure.... Ya know what I've noticed...
-Every time Trump tries to down play the virus severity and death toll, all the sudden, all of (AND ONLY YOU) guys on the right have some, anecdotal story about your brothers, uncles, cousins, sisters, gardner, having their loved ones death certificate mislabeled Covid 19.
-I've noticed you all make the same mistake, as to how they file death certificates. The multitude of causes of death and, especially, how they label the cause. Literally NO-ONE dies from covid 19. They die from the damage it does to their body, organs and immune system. It is always labeled under,
"Contributing factor - Corona Virus 19 Related Death".
-I've also noticed that none of you are willing to use the death of your own relatives for that purpose.
More then likely, this means, you are either being lied to, or you are doing the lying.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
T Tullock or how about when his mouthpiece, Rudy Giuliani said it...
"Jeanine Pirro: I want to ask you about this ban [the territory ban Executive Order] and the protests. Does the ban [the territory ban] have anything to do with religion? How did the president decide the seven countries? I understand the permanent ban on the refugees. Talk to me.
Rudy Giuliani: I will tell you the whole history of it [the Executive Order]. When he first announced it [the Executive Order], he said, ‘Muslim ban.’ He called me up. He said, ‘Put a commission together. Show me the right way to do it [the Muslim ban] legally.’ I put a commission together with Judge Mukasey, with Congressman McCaul, [Congressman] Pete King, whole group of other very expert lawyers on this. And what we did was, we focused on, instead of religion, danger—the areas of the world that create danger for us, which is factual basis, not a religious basis. Perfectly legal."
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@alexanderthegreat8064 Harth filed a lawsuit in 1997 in which she accused Trump of non-consensual groping of her body, among them her "intimate private parts",[27][28] and "relentless" sexual harassment.[29] The suit was withdrawn after Houraney settled with Trump for an undisclosed amount in a lawsuit that claimed that Trump backed out of a business deal.[1][30] She still claims to have been sexually assaulted[1] and although he was never violent with her, she says his actions were "unwanted and aggressive, very sexually aggressive".
He settled
On January 17, 2017, Zervos filed a defamation lawsuit against Trump, arising from his statement that she had lied about the allegations.[40][41] Marc Kasowitz is defending Trump in the case.[42] Zervos has filed a subpoena for "all documents concerning any woman who asserted that Donald J. Trump touched her inappropriately".[43] On 21 March 2018, a New York Supreme Court judge decided to allow a defamation lawsuit against the President to go forward.[44][45][46] On June 4, 2018, Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Jennifer Schecter ruled that Trump must be deposed by January 31, 2019.[47]
Judge ruled that he's going to court for this one
On February 25, 2019, Alva Johnson filed a lawsuit against Trump, alleging he had forcibly kissed her at a rally in Florida in August 2016 while she was working on his 2016 presidential campaign.[51] Johnson said that two people—including Pam Bondi, then the attorney general of Florida—saw the kiss, but both denied it.[52] According to an interview with Teen Vogue, Johnson decided to stop working for the Trump campaign after the media started covering the Access Hollywood tape. She declared sick days until she could speak to a lawyer.[53]
In addition to the "unwanted sexual attention", the lawsuit also alleges that Johnson was "a victim of race and gender discrimination through unequal pay."[53][54] In response, White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders called the lawsuit "absurd on its face."[52]On February 25, 2019, Alva Johnson filed a lawsuit against Trump, alleging he had forcibly kissed her at a rally in Florida in August 2016 while she was working on his 2016 presidential campaign.[51] Johnson said that two people—including Pam Bondi, then the attorney general of Florida—saw the kiss, but both denied it.[52] According to an interview with Teen Vogue, Johnson decided to stop working for the Trump campaign after the media started covering the Access Hollywood tape. She declared sick days until she could speak to a lawyer.[53]
In addition to the "unwanted sexual attention", the lawsuit also alleges that Johnson was "a victim of race and gender discrimination through unequal pay."[53][54] In response, White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders called the lawsuit "absurd on its face."[52]
This one happened during the campaign when she was working for him and he's going to court for that too.
That's just 3 out of the 20+
You wanna tell some more lies about what is or isn't on the link I sent you? Or you done making an ass out of yourself?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@A_name_is_a_name dude, I just read your first comment. It was a whole lot of s*** talking and not a lot of doing so.... I'm really not worried. mostly because I use facts. I don't claim things that I can't verify... And if you want to try and play silly games to avoid using them yourself... Feel free... But fair warning, they tend not to work on me. Mostly because I called them out and then go directly back to the facts... While insisting you do the same... if you choose not to, then I just Crush you under the weight of your own ridiculous argument. Here's the thing, I'm not some genius debater. My big secret is, I just use the facts, that I can back up to make my argument. Then I watch people like you try to dance around, s*** talk, cherry-pick, outright lie, Jack techniques, misquote and childishly name call people... All in an attempt to distract from the fact that you can't make your argument based on fact. If you have a solve for that, I welcome you to try.... Oh... and I wouldn't suggest not admitting to any mistake that you make or that your side makes, because then all the sudden the only thing the arguments going to be about is why you're lying.... and why you're making yourself look so ridiculous instead of admitting that you or your side is not a perfect creature.
Oh... and I'm not very helpful with your last paragraph of your first comment. Though it is making me think that I really don't have anything to worry about. You know who usees grammar Nazi BS? People who can't argue the substance. I, myself, have a life. There are about a million things on my priority list before the YouTube comment section, so when I respond, I use talk text a lot and sometimes I don't have time to speed read the grammar checks. If I can read it and understand it, then so can you. If you can't deal with that, then you can dip out at any point but, you're just not that important to me. Sorry.... So.... Suck it up, Butter Cup! Or run along.... Your choice. Be back for your second one later! 😉✌
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
👆 Let me tell you a little story about Waterborne Camper / D R.
So I'm am a Lib Dems... But... I also feel like it's important to give equal opportunity critiques. On our side of the isle I do it to be constructive. You know... Give these right wing trolls less to aim at.
Anywho... Exactly what I was trying to do with this one the other day. They had asked this right winger, who said that there were more gang related shootings then there were mass shootings, to give examples. Then, in the very next sentence, of the same comment, he decides to pretend the guy couldn't answer the question, all so he can say, "I told you so!", in the third and final sentence.
Turns out, pretending, for this one, would be a running theme, cuz after I pointed out how that was obv not cool, this one looses his s*** for about a day and a half.
First trying deflection to the other guys comment and how that some how justified his actions. Then, when it was clear I wasn't biting on the deflection, he moved to childish insults and personal attacks. When that didn't have the desired effect he tried to insist that bc no one else in the thread had come to my defense (or his, btw) that this meant that he was clearly right. At which point I simply pointed out that maybe it was bc no-one was listening to the exchange. After that, all the sudden he had a curiously timed like on his comments. Then he finally addressed his actions, but tried to pawn it off as him being "confident". At which time I pointed out why even the request for examples was a bad idea... And gave him 4 better ones.
It's clearly silly, bc gang shootings aren't exactly hard to find in America, unfortunately.
I told him...
"You SOULD HAVE called him out for deflecting to Whataboutism. You should have asked if that makes any of the kids who die in mass shootings any less dead. You should have told him that, on average, there is at least one mass shooting a day in america and has been for over a decade now. You should have told him it's the difference between one or 2 dead at a time and 12."
Then I told him to stop liking his own posts.... Which was a mistake on my part bc it gave him the opportunity to deflect to that, instead of addressing his own flawed argument.
He went on to insist he did not.... And that it was all a big coincidence. In order to prove this, he tried to like all his comments... Hoping that I wouldn't think of ppl having multiple accounts on here.
You can guess how well that went at this point.
So... After that, I was just "crazy". Which is what I thought was going to be the end of it, right.... Because, on this channel, someone randomly trying to imply that you're "crazy" after their argument isn't going so well, usually means they're scraping the bottom of the proverbial Barrel.... But... Not this one. No! This had long sense become about his ego at this point.
So... Next thing I know a "new guy" pops up! One that Sports strikingly similar cadence and spelling and grammar errors as he had, conveniently agreeing with everything he said and claiming to be the one who liked his comments. Mind you, not going any reasoning behind it, even when asked, but, still, nevertheless, completely agreeing with every single thing he had said. It turned out there "was" someone who was hanging on our every word. 😂
... But it doesn't stop there. No! This guy stop talking to me, and then precedes to have a whole conversation with the other guy, about me and how "wrong" and "crazy" I am. Again... No reason why... I'm just "wrong" and I'm just "crazy".
Finally, he uses that as an excuse to save face and run away.
So, if you've gotten this far and your one of us... you should know that this guy isn't. He doesn't actually care about any of the issues. He acts like much of the right wing trolls that come here. He doesn't actually care about anything he's saying so much as he just wants to be right, even when he's wrong. He isn't one of us. He is just sad.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@dustincaso6781 " By your own argument, abortion should be banned once the unborn baby has its own brain function, circulatory system, its own unique genetic code and DNA, and producing the hormones necessary for personhood which it's typically at 5 weeks."
Most of that is a Nope, because you seam to be mistaking what I said, with what you said. These where your words, not mine. 👉 "circulatory system, its own unique genetic code and DNA, and producing the hormones necessary for personhood"
The scientific consensus is considered to be when the basic cognitive thought process can be formed and they have the ability perceive feelings. Which begins near the end of the second trimester.
These are not my definitions, btw. Its science.
However, if it where my call, which it, should not be, because its not my body, I would air on the side of caution and call it the beginning of the second trimester where the brain structure splits into its 3 lobes. That is when the brain structure begins to form in a way that prepares for very basic brain function and consciousness. It is also when you start to feel things.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@davidmurphy4672 Oh goodness.... I know that, you can't practice law in any other state without prassing the bar in that state.. My mom's a Tax Attorney. What you are claiming... Is not that. You are essentially claiming that if you don't pass the bar in a state, you don't know that States laws. I can name about a houndred thousand law students, studing for their bars right now... That would argue against that.... not passing a particular states Bar means you can't practice in that state. It doesn't mean you don't know the laws in that state.
See... You dont even know how to have an adult debate... You have given me nothing to "fact check". You said, " Mueller didn't write the Mueller report. It is garbage lol." Then you asked me to prove your statment wrong. Except you gave nothing to prove it to be true. So, essentially you were asking me to prove something wrong that you have yet to prove is true... And that doesn't make any sense.
Not to mention the faulty logic of "The only thing that matters is what I decide matters and I have decided a 448 page report on multiple subject matters, witness statments, document Trails, plain text reading of laws, detailed examples of breaking those laws, 9 different lead campaign officials either pleading guilty and taking deals or getting found guilty and going to jail, all coming from a 2 year investigation with over a hundred investigators and lawyers working on it... Doesn't matter because I said so... Oh and because somewhere in the 3hr video, I refuse to time stamp... Mueller might have mentioned something about not remembering something about Fusion GPS.... After a 3 hour none stop deposition asking about a 2 year investigation." That is your argument... Yeah... I think I'm good! 😉✌
Not even close to the possible SC involvment yet... So not sure why you are even bringing that one up... Other then you trying to strike out as a fortune teller...
1
-
@davidmurphy4672 okay... I tried to give you the chance to fix it... But sure, we can do it this way....
" different laws in different states lawyers 👉👉👉only know laws👈👈👈 in their own state that they passed the bar in."
You didn't say they couldn't practice law. You said they didn't know less: in other states. Like there is no way a lawyer can know estate law that isn't from the state that they passed the bar in. . That was your claim. Which was nonsensical. Cuz what do you think they're doing? They just have each state law locked away keeping them from the eyes and hands of lawyers that don't practice in their state... that is the silliness you were suggesting... 🤣
And, sure. You don't have to prove anything. You can continue to bob weave and look silly all damn day, if you want. So, you do you and I will keep pointing out the fact that you can't back up what you say... And keep trying to excuse it. Works for me.😊👍
You said that Mueller didn't write the Mueller report and that the Mueller report was garbage. You have given no proof of that whatsoever and the part that you think is proof can only be described as you having crazy lazy logic.
What you did give was a 3-hour long Mueller deposition, we refuse to time-stamp what you were speaking about, and therefore can only be taken as not worth entertaining... I know you're trying to connect one small part of the Mueller investigation and Mueller report into throwing out the whole damn thing for no discernible reason. I want to do this for a second, let's entertainment idea that Mueller didn't know anything about Fusion GPS. Why does that thing mean that the entirety of the Mueller report and all the evidence which encompasses it, is garbage?
And where exactly is your proof that Mueller didn't write the report? Or is that the FBI and all them did?
No vote in the House for impeachment? That's because it's still in impeachment inquiry. If you knew anything about what you were talking about, you would know that.
And what exactly am I supposed to prove you wrong about? You would literally yet to prove anything you said true. We've been through this. It doesn't make any damn sense for me to try and prove you wrong about something you said was true but have yet to prove that it was.
Better explanation... This is the logic you are using. Santa Claus is real simply because I say he is. Prove me wrong. You can't prove me wrong. Santa is real dammit!
I could claim any number of things and just be like prove me wrong. That's your logic. That's what you're using right now.
And maybe if your ego could handle having your ideas challenged, you would know what was going on during the Mueller investigation. Maybe if you read the mother report you would know what's going on during the investigation and you wouldn't have to ask other people these questions. You would just know. Lol
You have a rough idea as to what reliable sources are, yet you can't come up with any for your claims. That's speaks volumes...
And the last bit of your comment was just crazy. You were trying to set up a poorly constructed paper tiger. So you would have something to argue against. Except I didn't say a damn thing about being arrested or laws or anything like that. You're just so desperate to not be wrong but now you need to make s*** up. We just fine for me. You're going to do nothing but discredit yourself. So it's whatever! 😉✌
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@devious1 Children being intentionally killed is, emphatically, NOT A SPIN on ANYTHING. Honestly... Act like your mother raised you right. No one is messing with Russia borders. Russia is the aggressor. Russia in the invader.
Way back in the day that 1 of the reasons NATO was formed was to defend against Russian aggression. It is very easy to find out that their preview has changed sense then.
Not only has NATO offered membership to Russia 3 different times in the last the decades, backed by the US support, there are several different American satellite installations in Russia, america buys 9% of our gas and oil from Russia (when we really don't need to), and the US backed the deal that convinced Ukraine to literally surrender all it's nukes TO RUSSIA, for a promise that ( ironically ) the US and RUSSIA would have its back, if attacked. Ukraine was NOT willing to do so with just Russia making that promise. "For some reason" they didn't trust Russia to keep their word by themselves. Gee! I wonder why.
If your going to give historical context, you can't cherry pick your historical context. RUSSIA is the aggressor and bad faith actor. Putin is the aggressor and bad faith actor.... And not for the first time.
Over the past several years, Putin has been becoming more and more aggressive and shady.
-The annexation of Crimea
-The Proven tampering into US elections
-The bounty's put on US and Canadian soldiers heads in Afghanistan
-The tendency for Putin's opposition to meet with very shady ends, at very convenient times.
Just to name a few.... That is why literally NO OTHER country in the world has Russia's back on this. That's why Putin is throwing spaghetti at the wall trying to come up with a viable excuse for invasion.
We've gone from "NATO"
To "Dombas"
Hunting for nonexistence "weapons"
To trying to accuse a country that almost overwhelmingly voted in a Jewish comedian as their president, of being a Nazi state.
Not to mention... Ukraine is a sovereign country all of its own. Russia does not control it anymore. It does not get to decide what Ukraine does or does not do to better their country and their people's future. The Iron Curtain dropped a long time ago and Ukraine damn near unanimously voted to leave. They broke up with you. Get over it.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@tbronk7996 A violent mob of hundreds stormed our nation's capital, with the intent to subvert our democracy. The woman who died was one of them. She got herself killed. All signs point to it being planned ahead of time.
Police where beaten, sprayed with chemicals, threatened, spit on, hella injured, chased, crushed between doors and forced to beg for their lives. The same police you chaim, we don't care about. It's funny how you guys only care about police when it's convenient for your narrative.
These same ppl planted pipe bombs the night before, used blue lives matter flag poles to beat police. As well as other things. They broke into the capital. They brought material and tools in order to construct a working gallows. They had tac gear and zip ties. They had ppl on bull horns actively directing ppl in the building. They brought guns and had small Arsenal's stashed in nearby hotel rooms. The FBI's found message boards where they had pre-planned this.
In the meantime, all you can do is focus on the news reporting something that turned out to be not true about one out of millions of aspects of that day.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@tbronk7996 1. Its not some kind of sick tragedy contest. What the hell is wrong with you?
2. The people who were referring to it and using 911 to do so, they were doing so in a way that referenced the Insurrection being this generation's 9/11. They were referring to the collective trauma. How you can try and demonize them for trying to bring us together with the tragedy, by pointing put the trauma of it, that we all feel, as something bad... Is beyond me.
3. How your trying to blame the left for telling their ppl to go to the streets and fight for things like stopping police brutality and the open slaughter of black ppl with, Donald Trump trying to lie about losing the election and then sending a mob of people to attack the capital and claiming he will go with him, is beyond me. How are these left political figures even responsible for the actions of that day? Most of them were the ones running from the violent mob. They weren't responsible for that, and why do you have to use whataboutism instead of just having them take responsibility for their actions? "Yes... But" that's all that is.
4. Literally no one believes you guys when you try and claim you "used to be dems". You know why? Because you all use the same current right-wing talking points as you're trying to convince us how left you used to be so you can have more credibility. So just stop.
5. Literally no one has advocated open borders. That is more right wing spin. No policy or person from the left has ever done that. We've advocated for treating human beings humanely. We've fought for the dreamers not to have to pay the price for their parents choices. We pointed out that when the right is screaming about illegal immigrants being loud in the country with covid, that our covid rates were much higher than theirs were and our country was doing much worse than theirs was, while they were screaming about it.
6. If the front line workers you were referring to were the ones that were using brutality as a practice instead of an extreme situation, like they should have been, absolutely. Just because you have a badge it doesn't mean you get to beat up whoever you want whenever you want. Either we are all accountable by the law or none of us are.
7. They were mostly peaceful protest, absolutely no city was burned down, the left came out and called for peace when there were riots and looting, and I can support these people because I don't have a far-right wing closed off point of view of what they are actually doing and what is actually going on. I choose to look at all relevant facts and material before coming to my opinion. Maybe you should try to do the same.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@RyanESmith-wf4cu Yeah... That has nothing to do with anything. I come from a military family, boo boo. I know tons of people who have fought in real wars. Not sporting contests.
Both my grandfathers fought in World War II. I have Army National Guard (Big Brother, 2 tours, Green Beret (Cousin, Still Active), Air Force (Mom, Dad, 2 Aunts, 1 cousin) and even a coast guard in there. Most of which have traveled overseas and fought for our country. All of which will tell you that pretending You're Not Afraid is BS. Mostly because not being afraid of some things is just stupid. On a real Battlefield, fear is instinct. Listening to your instincts while remaining calm and rationally analyzing situations, is how you stay alive.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The interview was a little over 16 min long.
- 30 sec of Intro/Trip and queen🇬🇧
- 50 sec on the whether that day🌈
- 3 sec shy of a full minute (57 seconds) on the Vets and WW2🇺🇸
- 2 min and 25 sec Lying about NATO falling apart, on Theresa May and how he saved NATO and made everyone pay.🤥
- 2 min and 45 sec on how the tariffs that he put dow are everyone else's fault but his, lying about Border Patrol numbers, invasion and general fear mongering about brown people🤥
- 2 min 5 secs of him childishly trashing Nancy Pelosi, Robert Mueller and the justifiably respected Democrat prosecutors on his team. Also, lying again about the findings of the Muller Report.🤥
- 1 min 30 sec Lying about Joe Biden, the reason for his GDP and putting words in the mouth of all American farmers.🤥
- 20 sec bragging about how he is holding everyone up so he can do an interview with Fox News. Then another 5 sec on Laura ingraham's ratings 🙄
- 1 min 20 sec about Russia, China and a trade deal. Also, "Witch Hunt", lying about numbers again (Stock Market) and talking shit about Hillary Clinton because he still can't get over the fact that he lost the popular vote 🙄🤥
- 1 min 25 sec being asked about what he can do to unite the country and deciding the best way to do that is to talk more shit about people. At some point deciding to become a $5 a pop mall fortune teller about Mexico and using the usual hypocrisy on deals when talking about China 🙄💩🙄
- 35 sec on✌, military building, 💰, brag, brag, brag, Iran, brag, brag, brag, China again, brag, brag and brag.🙄
- Just over 1 min about fist bumping with the Queen of England, brag, talking with her, complementing her and thankfully the end!🙄💩🙄💩🙄💩🙄💩
Sorry about the sassy pants in the middle and twards the end. It was starting to be like audio water torture up in here. 😢
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Hingle McCringleberry As far Helping their cause... oh, it's worse than that, sweetheart. Couple years ago we did that ancestry thing and one of the funniest things that came out of it was it turned out that I was more white than most KKK members wish they were. MY WHOLE FAM on BOTH SIDES. Strictly Caucasian. Until now. Until me. Until my son came along. 😁 My beautiful, fair skinned, curly hair, green eyed, testing off the charts in school and already skipping a grade, athletic, kind, funny and artistic son, came into this world and this family. None of us would have it any other way!!!
Though none of us are quite so obsessed with ignorant racist thoughts, like you seem to be.😉✌
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@barryfohn4385 And then you say stuff like... Obama had nothing to do with recovery from the recession. Which is perfect. Cuz not I can show you what I am talking about when I say, make a claim and back it up.
So... "In February 2009, Congress approved Obama's $787 billion economic stimulus package. It cut taxes, extended unemployment benefits, and funded public works projects. The recession ended in July 2009 when GDP growth turned positive.
In just seven months, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act pumped $241.9 billion into the economy. That increased growth to a robust rate of 3.9% by early 2010. By March 30, 2011, almost all ($633.5 billion) of the funds were spent. "
https://www.thebalance.com/what-has-obama-done-11-major-accomplishments-3306158
"On February 17, 2009, Obama signed into law the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, a $831 billion economic stimulus package aimed at helping the economy recover from the deepening worldwide recession.[26] The act increased federal spending by $573 billion[27] for health care, infrastructure, education and social benefits, with the remainder used for tax relief[28] — including a $116 billion income tax cut that benefited 95% of working families.[29] Democrats overwhelmingly supported this measure, while only a few Senate Republicans supported the law.
The CBO estimated ARRA would positively impact GDP and employment, with primary impact between 2009 and 2011. It projected an increase in the GDP of between 1.4 and 3.8% by late 2009, 1.1 and 3.3% by late 2010, and 0.4 and 1.3% by late 2011, as well as a decrease of between zero and 0.2% beyond 2014.[30] The impact to employment would be an increase of 0.8 million to 2.3 million by last-2009, an increase of 1.2 million to 3.6 million by late 2010, an increase of 0.6 million to 1.9 million by late 2011, and declining increases in subsequent years as the U.S. labor market reaches nearly full employment, but never negative.[30] The CBO estimated that enacting the bill would increase federal budget deficits by $185 billion over the remaining months of fiscal year 2009, $399 billion in 2010, and $134 billion in 2011, or $787 billion over the 2009–2019 period.[31]
The Congressional Budget Office and a broad range of economists credit Obama's stimulus plan for economic growth.[32][33] The CBO's final analysis in February 2015 found that ARRA provided substantial improvement to GDP growth and employment.[34]
CBO final estimate of impact of Obama stimulus. Although an April 2010 survey of members of the National Association for Business Economics (NABE) showed an increase in job creation (over a similar January survey) for the first time in two years, 73% of the 68 respondents believed that the stimulus bill had no impact on employment at their company after one year of ARRA's enactment.[35] The economy of the United States has grown faster than the other original NATO members by a wider margin under President Obama than it has anytime since the end of World War II.[36] The OECD credits the much faster growth in the United States to the stimulus in the United States, in contrast to the austerity measures taken in the European Union.[37]
The Council of Economic Advisers produced a comprehensive report on the ARRA in 2014, which includes a variety of graphics illustrating the positive effect on both GDP and jobs. It also covers the allocation of spending and tax cuts contained in the legislation.[38]"
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Recession
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@AkonFenty1992 "an unarmed white woman executed by a black officer who didn't give them any warning." 👈 SoOoOo... Is this what you actually saw, or is that actually what you saw? Cuz, I'm trying to determine whether or not you have had some kind of psychotic break or not... Cuz, what happened was a bunch of people cussing and screaming, was rushing the barricades and busting out the windows, as the officer screams to back up several times, WHILE POINTING A GUN AT THEM, before firing.... So... I guess... My real question would be... How much more warning would you like her to of had? Should he have ran to Kinko's and made a quick billboard that read, "Violent, irrational and angry mob, if you continue to attempt to break windows and push past the barrier, I will be forced to shot this gun, I'm pointing at you, right now."? That woman died of her own criminal behavior and stupidity.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@sionel2604 well... Someone who is trying to mock someones education probably shouldn't begin to argue that with a baseless assumption like "leftist feminist". They probably also should not base their entire argument on a straw man they set up from the beginning buy bastardizing what I said. Unless you can quote me where I said "There is no difference with the brain of a man and woman."
Transgender makeup specifically .6% of the US population. That is according to the Williams Institute study and people who report themselves as transgender.
Okay "educator" let's discuss your phrasing on your argument of my belief about transgender.
" there is no research that everyone agrees upon that supports your narrative"
There is no research that everyone agrees upon that supports anyone's narrative.... on anything... At any point in time... Ever. So what's your f**** point?
One one recent study oh, but by no means the only one, summarizes as this... from the European Society of endocrinology... brain activity and structure in transgender adolescents more closely resembles the typical activation patterns of their desired gender, according to new research. The findings suggest that differences in brain function may occur early in development and that brain Imaging may be a useful tool for earlier identification of transgenderism in young people.
Periods and the ability to give birth are not the only factors in gender assignment. You say that biology does not back up my believe but in doing so you were denying all factors in biology and focusing only on the ones that fit you're already decided conclusion. Unless you would like to explain why you were completely disregarding the biology of the human brain?
" suicide rates are huge and transgender world. Do you know their suicide rate, before and after transition, is about 40%. Do you know the only group to have the same level of suicide rates were Jews living during the genocides? Do you mean to tell me that in today's world, Jews who lived during the genocides and trans have the same obstacles and Hate? No, they do not.
THAT is the the definition of a STRAWMAN ARGUMENT. You asked a bunch of questions, connected them with two very different subjects from a similar stat and then presumed I answered all these questions in a particular way (instead of... Ya know... Not at all) , then proceeded to argue against those made-up answers. Then in that argument made a presumption that you could not possibly know. So again I ask, what's your f**** point?
There are sites claiming that the spork is the most Innovative invention to ever hit Humanity. Again, what's your f**** point?
You mean to say that there are teachers who are treating children with the respect of honoring their belief in who they are as a person, irregardless of their own beliefs, while at the same time teaching and educating them? Well we must put a stop to that at once.
Well... Lets put it this way.... if I believe that there is an entire civilization of tiny people living in my eyebrow who all call themselves Harry and that there is mass confusion because of that, how does that hurt or in any way negatively affect anyone else and therefore must be put a stop to? If you want to talk about being well-rounded then how about you be well-rounded in respecting other people for their beliefs well you ask them to respect you for yours.
So you're explaining to me that there was a guy who transitioned back and forth 30 years ago? I know it's going to be a broken record at this point but I must ask, what's your f**** point?
that is one person out of how many? It is at best anecdotal. For someone who started out your comment with mocking evidence, maybe you should have brought some of your own.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Lord_Poyo Well, I gave you a list, right off the bat. All of which except 2 that you ignored... I'm sure so you could still have a point.... But, sense you are trying to desperately seem so unbothered... I'm more than happy to give them to you again.
- body cam footage
- unnamed Witnesses
- the police officers track record
- police officer training expert
Etc...
Also, it is completely common for the police not to release all the evidence in a case, to the media.
As for issue.... The only issue there is, is yours, by continuing to insist there isn't any other evidence, even though we both know there is no possible way for you to know that. The only reason you continue to make this baseless assumption is because your point falls apart if you don't.
Not one time did I claim "all cases" had additional evidence held back by the prosecution. Now you are just making things up about my meaning.... But... Please feel free to quote me where I said that?
I completely understand what you're telling me. You just don't understand that there's no way for you to quantify that into reality. No matter how many times you insist you know this, it doesn't stop the fact that you cannot prove that. It doesn't make your claim any less of a baseless assumption.
That is not the only evidence that can show up. It's just the only thing you say could show up. Except... you saying things doesn't actually make them true. She wouldn't even have to have a direct confrontation with that specific person for it to apply. She could simply have a track record of similar encounters or even audio and/or video of her expressing opinions about similar situations, or the same situation. Even a history of online postings which paint a picture of clear bias.
I'm simply just not willing to form an opinion without all the facts, unlike you. I'm also not willing to assume I have all the facts when I couldn't possibly know that, unlike you. As I have stated, you have no clue whether you have all the information you need to form an opinion, yet you've already decided what it was. Meaning the only one here who doesn't understand logic comes from a full and accurate reading of facts.. Would be you.
I don't have to prove you wrong. You have yet to prove that it was true. Your claim, your burden of proof. The only thing you've presented as evidence to your claim that there's absolutely no more evidence in this case is, because you said so. Except you ignoring facts don't actually make them go away.
So.. Let's end this with some questions, I'm sure you will try to ignore... Because you don't have good answers for them.
If, in her history as a police officer,it turned out that in other (similar) situations, she had announced the taser procedure and pulled her gun instead, would that not establish a pattern of for thought and/or mindset?
Could there not be body cam footage from the other officers?
Given that this didn't happen in the middle of nowhere and everyone has phones, could there not possibly be other video of the encounter and/or other witnesses?
If the prosecution has not announced The video is the only evidence and you have no way of knowing whether or not there is other evidence or not, how can you be so sure there isn't any???
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
cj p This is what you will see, everytime you see me, from now on. Have fun with that.
If ppl show you who they are, believe them. This is who this person is. ( I abbreviated some but do have the screenshots if you want the whole thing.)
Threat beginner comment - Basically Trump can shoot everyone on 5th Avenue and get away with it.
cj p - if they were antifa or in a pussy hat... Then yes it would be epic and I would want to see him shoot more.
Me - So you're basically saying you want to see the president of the United States commit murder and then you want him to get away with it... All we need to know about you, to figure out how jacked up in the head you are.
(This part is a lil long and crazy ranty, so highlights)👇
cj p - if he shot you, I would throw a black party.
(Some comment section thing about people cheering for a red state woman dying in a hurricane and CNN YouTube commenters cheering. Basically a justification for his actions. Which tells us, he does feel the need to justify it or aka he knows he is wrong.) (Then assumptions about what I would do, just encase that justification didn't work.)(Libs are evil then...) I don't need to fake it. When I watch the skinny effeminate antifa kid get mowed down by a red pickup... I laughed and watched it again. He didn't even break a bone. When I saw it another video of a motorist get out of his white suburban and beat the crap out of an antifa weirdo standing in front of his car... I laughed again and make jokes in the comments like every other person did. You want links to those videos they are pretty good?
Me - 👈👈👈ANNNNNDDD... A perfect example of what I was talking about, everyone. This is all you need to know about him, to know nothing that comes out of his mouth is important, in any way. He is always so eager to help me prove that point and I really do appreciate it! 😉✌
Me - BTW, you are talking about taking a little boys mother away from him. That is what you are celebrating. That is who you are right now... I'm sure yours would be super proud that just came out of her little boys mouth. You are such a sad person.
cj p - you were going to raise a little nut job. He might be better off adopted. And there you go again with the virtue signaling. I don't use my kid as a shield. Pathetic how you're trying to squeeze guilt from me when I'm using satire. No wonder you don't get Trump jokes. I bet memes fly past you too. Fifty bucks says your son's girlfriend's will never get along with his overbearing controlling mother with no humor.
(👆You will notice, throughout this portion, you see them justifying, excusing and trying to flip what he has said onto me. All signs he knows what he has said, was wrong.)
Me - 👈👈👈 Yep... This is who this person is. 👆👆👆This is why anything they say, does not matter. They aren't a good person. They aren't even mostly human. When people show you who they are, believe them.
I'm going to screenshot this, copy and paste it everywhere I see this "person" from now on.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
👆 Let me tell you a little story about this guy.
So I'm am a Lib Dems... But... I also feel like it's important to give equal opportunity critiques. On our side of the isle I do it to be constructive. You know... Give these right wing trolls less to aim at.
Anywho... Exactly what I was trying to do with this one the other day. They had asked this right winger, who said that there were more gang related shootings then there were mass shootings, to give examples. Then, in the very next sentence, of the same comment, he decides to pretend the guy couldn't answer the question, all so he can say, "I told you so!", in the third and final sentence.
Turns out, pretending, for this one, would be a running theme, cuz after I pointed out how that was obv not cool, this one looses his s*** for about a day and a half.
First trying deflection to the other guys comment and how that some how justified his actions. Then, when it was clear I wasn't biting on the deflection, he moved to childish insults and personal attacks. When that didn't have the desired effect he tried to insist that bc no one else in the thread had come to my defense (or his, btw) that this meant that he was clearly right. At which point I simply pointed out that maybe it was bc no-one was listening to the exchange. After that, all the sudden he had a curiously timed like on his comments. Then he finally addressed his actions, but tried to pawn it off as him being "confident". At which time I pointed out why even the request for examples was a bad idea... And gave him 4 better ones.
It's clearly silly, bc gang shootings aren't exactly hard to find in America, unfortunately.
I told him...
"You SOULD HAVE called him out for deflecting to Whataboutism. You should have asked if that makes any of the kids who die in mass shootings any less dead. You should have told him that, on average, there is at least one mass shooting a day in america and has been for over a decade now. You should have told him it's the difference between one or 2 dead at a time and 12."
Then I told him to stop liking his own posts.... Which was a mistake on my part bc it gave him the opportunity to deflect to that, instead of addressing his own flawed argument.
He went on to insist he did not.... And that it was all a big coincidence. In order to prove this, he tried to like all his comments... Hoping that I wouldn't think of ppl having multiple accounts on here.
You can guess how well that went at this point.
So... After that, I was just "crazy". Which is what I thought was going to be the end of it, right.... Because, on this channel, someone randomly trying to imply that you're "crazy" after their argument isn't going so well, usually means they're scraping the bottom of the proverbial Barrel.... But... Not this one. No! This had long sense become about his ego at this point.
So... Next thing I know a "new guy" pops up! One that Sports strikingly similar cadence and spelling and grammar errors as he had, conveniently agreeing with everything he said and claiming to be the one who liked his comments. Mind you, not going any reasoning behind it, even when asked, but, still, nevertheless, completely agreeing with every single thing he had said. It turned out there "was" someone who was hanging on our every word. 😂
... But it doesn't stop there. No! This guy stop talking to me, and then precedes to have a whole conversation with the other guy, about me and how "wrong" and "crazy" I am. Again... No reason why... I'm just "wrong" and I'm just "crazy".
Finally, he uses that as an excuse to save face and run away.
So, if you've gotten this far and your one of us... you should know that this guy isn't. He doesn't actually care about any of the issues. He acts like much of the right wing trolls that come here. He doesn't actually care about anything he's saying so much as he just wants to be right, even when he's wrong. He isn't one of us. He is just sad.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1