Politics MEULLER GRILLED

[MarAzul]

I have never called you a lier.

Oh my.
Do you remember when I told everyone that my daughter had receive a rejection letter from Stanford? Some years back now, the discussion I mean?
I also said the reason stated in the letter, was so that they could meet their Diversity goals.
Do you recall your response?
I do.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

Oh my.
Do you remember when I told everyone that my daughter had receive a rejection letter from Stanford? Some years back now, the discussion I mean?
I also said the reason stated in the letter, was so that they could meet their Diversity goals.
Do you recall your response?
I do.

Here is the thread.

http://www.sportstwo.com/threads/th...t-be-allowed-to-speak-to-young-people.300745/

Where did I call you a liar?

 

[MarAzul]

You know what i asked.

Bye bye Cup, you are back on ignore.
Two members of congress were sworn in as new members of congress with their hand on the Quran in this last congress. I never said there were four. You did.

 

[riverman]

No, he hasn't.

yes he has...obstruction which was recorded and documented by people who worked for him. and twitter witness tampering during an on going trial......after he's out of office you'll see. I've heard his obstruction from his own mouth and read his witness tampering on twitter...….dumb moves both by Trump. he just doesn't give a shit

 

[BrianFromWA]

Can I ask a couple of questions? I couldn’t watch much today except on breaks from the tech conference, so maybe I missed something.

It seems Mueller can say “it wasn’t a witch hunt”, but it’s hard for me to believe him when he doesn’t know what FusionGPS is, which is literally the source of said not-witchhunt. How does one reconcile that?
For the last 2+ years I’ve read a lot (including, but not exclusively, here) about Mueller’s “counting stats”...xx many indictments, yy many people in jail, etc. That he was taking down evildoers left and right. And yet the “page 193” testimony that he (allegedly) wrote states that Mifsud lied 3x to the FBI and Mueller won’t/can’t explain how he’s one who got away?

Does anyone not care that he was wrong to Lieu the first time and had to recant, but that the reporting is still from the first time?

I’ll stop there, though I could go on and on...

Frankly, and this is a bit sad to watch, I don’t see how this isn’t an unmitigated disaster for the Ds and the long-term Rs. Mueller looked really sad and doddering. The Ds still can’t do anything close towards impeachment (never could, with the Senate how it is, but whatever) and the old guard Rs keep getting their asses handed to them by lies from guys like Schiff.

Anyway, this is rambling and I’m just on a phone (which I hate typing on) but I have those questions and comments. I know you all too well to hope that you’ll take it seriously and examine your thinking but there’s a silent plurality here that’s not stoked about the Maris wall of text but also not stoked that a bunch of you don’t care to read about the content of what he’s pasting (from wherever you source your news).
Most of you should be Team America. (Bosnian dudes can be Team Bosnia...I’ll stipulate). Today was a loss for America. If Trump is as close to as bad as Lanny and Cup say, I’m disappointed that Mueller, CNN and Congress can’t do anything about it. If he isn’t, I hate that Trump and the rest of government are so ball-less that they can let this go on for 3 years and not make people responsible for the stuff allegedly done by Obama, Clinton and the like who made the so-called witch-hunt happen. I don’t think there’s a neutral ground here. Either satan incarnate is President and you can’t do anything about it or the DNC and it’s allies attempted a coup and we aren’t doing anything about it.
Not a warm and fuzzy day for me. And I’ll go back on a rule of mine and not stick around to answer comments. I’ll read if you choose to respond, but I’m pretty well versed on what the rhetoric will be and where it will come from.

 

[MarAzul]

Here is the thread.

http://www.sportstwo.com/threads/th...t-be-allowed-to-speak-to-young-people.300745/

Where did I call you a liar?

No man, I ain't reading that whole thread again. Perhaps the word was that is a lie.
You can say now just what you believe you said, as what you thing of the information I gave, which was absolutely true. It most likely would not be phrased in that way today, but it was when it happened. Fact, not a lie.

But never the less, I am please you did not go there again.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

No man, I ain't reading that whole thread again. Perhaps the word was that is a lie.
You can say now just what you believe you said, as what you thing of the information I gave, which was absolutely true. It most likely would not be phrased in that way today, but it was when it happened. Fact, not a lie.

But never the less, I am please you did not go there again.

You have accused me of calling you a liar.

I'm asking you where I said that.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

No man, I ain't reading that whole thread again. Perhaps the word was that is a lie.
You can say now just what you believe you said, as what you thing of the information I gave, which was absolutely true. It most likely would not be phrased in that way today, but it was when it happened. Fact, not a lie.

But never the less, I am please you did not go there again.

I linked the thread for you.

 

[MarAzul]

Can I ask a couple of questions? I couldn’t watch much today except on breaks from the tech conference, so maybe I missed something.

It seems Mueller can say “it wasn’t a witch hunt”, but it’s hard for me to believe him when he doesn’t know what FusionGPS is, which is literally the source of said not-witchhunt. How does one reconcile that?
For the last 2+ years I’ve read a lot (including, but not exclusively, here) about Mueller’s “counting stats”...xx many indictments, yy many people in jail, etc. That he was taking down evildoers left and right. And yet the “page 193” testimony that he (allegedly) wrote states that Mifsud lied 3x to the FBI and Mueller won’t/can’t explain how he’s one who got away?

Does anyone not care that he was wrong to Lieu the first time and had to recant, but that the reporting is still from the first time?

I’ll stop there, though I could go on and on...

Frankly, and this is a bit sad to watch, I don’t see how this isn’t an unmitigated disaster for the Ds and the long-term Rs. Mueller looked really sad and doddering. The Ds still can’t do anything close towards impeachment (never could, with the Senate how it is, but whatever) and the old guard Rs keep getting their asses handed to them by lies from guys like Schiff.

Anyway, this is rambling and I’m just on a phone (which I hate typing on) but I have those questions and comments. I know you all too well to hope that you’ll take it seriously and examine your thinking but there’s a silent plurality here that’s not stoked about the Maris wall of text but also not stoked that a bunch of you don’t care to read about the content of what he’s pasting (from wherever you source your news).
Most of you should be Team America. (Bosnian dudes can be Team Bosnia...I’ll stipulate). Today was a loss for America. If Trump is as close to as bad as Lanny and Cup say, I’m disappointed that Mueller, CNN and Congress can’t do anything about it. If he isn’t, I hate that Trump and the rest of government are so ball-less that they can let this go on for 3 years and not make people responsible for the stuff allegedly done by Obama, Clinton and the like who made the so-called witch-hunt happen. I don’t think there’s a neutral ground here. Either satan incarnate is President and you can’t do anything about it or the DNC and it’s allies attempted a coup and we aren’t doing anything about it.
Not a warm and fuzzy day for me. And I’ll go back on a rule of mine and not stick around to answer comments. I’ll read if you choose to respond, but I’m pretty well versed on what the rhetoric will be and where it will come from.

Frankly, and this is a bit sad to watch

A very important comment!
This is the real point.
"Frankly, and this is a bit sad to watch"

 

[SlyPokerDog]

When my daughter was denied enrollment at Stanford for reasons of diversity goals, I thought that was discrimination.
But many thing that is good.

She could go to a community college and transfer after a couple of years. Or if they raise the minimum wage high enough she might not even have to go to college.

Very clever deflecting from the main issue of discrimination. Geez you do have these Democrat talking point on the mind, like the minimum wage fixes all ills.

Btw, it was a long time ago, but they still do that shit. Discriminate against Caucasian kids that is. I wonder if that was the exception to dviss' judgement of "Bad".

No they don't.

Lets break this down...

Stanford admits 2,100 students a year.

They have 45,000 applicants.

That means they have a 5% acceptance rate.

Of the 2,100 43% are white kids.

And 8% are black kids.

905 white kids were accepted over your daughter.

Only 165 black kids were.

How is that discrimination?

If your daughter didn't make it in the top 905 you're telling me for a fact that she would have made it in the top 1070? Out of 45,000?

Even if Stanford accepted only white kids that still doesn't guarantee your daughter admission. It's still a 5% acceptance rate.

It wasn't the black students she was measured against it was the white students. For whatever reason Stanford choose different white people than your daughter.

That's not discrimination.

Oh come on Sly!
I am not speculating here, I am stating what happened. She was very well qualified as the Valedictorian of one of the top High Schools in the State, Monta Vista. She had a 4.0 GPA and top scores on all tests.
I am stating what Stanford University said in the rejection letter. Even though you have outstanding qualifications, we regret ... to meet our diversity goals.

"she would have made it in the top 1070? Out of 45,000? "
Fucking A!

Now please don't tell me it did not happen.

58% of Stanford applicants had a 4.0 GPA.

I don't doubt it. I did recruiting for the company three different years there. I could just about guess that number.

Let us cut the chase here. Are you going to tell me, we (she) did not get this letter from Stanford stating it was to meet diversity goals?

No, I don't have access to your daughter's mail.

Here is a link to some Stanford rejection letters, of the 4 that I've read none say anything about race.

https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&site=imghp&tbm=isch&source=hp&biw=1920&bih=940&q=stanford rejection letter&oq=stanford re&gs_l=img.1.0.0l10.2628.5206.0.7013.11.8.0.3.3.0.140.882.3j5.8.0....0...1ac.1.64.img..0.11.891.DscpSvCT6Vg#imgrc=HuNScCJM1De76M:

I will state my point again, your daughter wasn't denied admission because of 168 black people, she was denied admission because Stanford for whatever reason thought 905 white people were a better fit.

Bull shit Sly, you are being obtuse now and I am quite sure you know it. You do not use the word "diversity" in the reason for rejection when selecting other Caucasians.

Did she ask what kind of diversity they were looking for? Maybe that year they had a flood of applicants from small pacific coastal towns and were looking for more white people from east coast big cities?

The fact is Sly, you are incorrect. She was rejected in 1978 specifically stating the reason why, to meet their diversity goals. Since then due to several discrimination law suites (not all against Stanford) They quit being so explicit even though they continue. They do not see there student enrollment in the same way as state schools. They enroll regional blocks of white kid, more like a bingo draw of qualified applicants.
Then they have ethnic quotas including races, International quotas, each group has it's own qualification parameters.
Stanford can get by with this as can other private schools. They refer to their selection process as, providing a diverse academic environment.

So by the way they do it, Dani did not lose the competition, she just wasn't Lucky in the bingo draw from her regional ethnic bucket. So the system Stanford set up is not fair in the competitive sense, and it is not intended to be. I don't see any reason a private school can not set up their selection process how ever they want to do it. It is fine with me. But they sure as hell said, they rejected her to meet their diversity goals! I don't think they were ever that blunt again after 1978, law suits were filed. However, they still do their selection to meet their diversity goals.

I never said it didn't happen.

I'm sure Stanford would love to hear more about their bingo admissions process.

Lets see if I can make this even more simpler for you, Stanford admited a whole bunch of white kids and a few black kids. You want to blame the few black kids that your daughter wasn't one of the whole bunch of white kids. Not racism.

I am back down the Multnomah Channel now, tied up at a dock on an Island called Coon Island. Curious name? Anyone have any history on how this Island came to be named?

Sly, you don't even seem to read what I write. I never claimed any racism; discrimination I think, but I also think it is their right if that is the way they want to run the place. I don't blame any black kid for anything. But then I think you knew it, You might even be trolling.

PS, I am telling you and everyone else What Stanford said!! I didn't say it, I am passing it along.

And that will close this issue here.

Again, where did I call you a liar or say you lied?

 

[MarAzul]

I linked the thread for you.

I know you did. But I am not about to wade through the thread,
I was amazed that you would post the thought. The memory is there. And I think you were heated in support of screwing people for affirmative, but never the less you surprised me. Dviss also posted the same, not sure which was first.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

I know you did. But I am not about to wade through the thread,
I was amazed that you would post the thought. The memory is there. And I think you were heated in support of screwing people for affirmative, but never the less you surprised me. Dviss also posted the same, not sure which was first.

It's okay, I quoted and posted our entire conversation from that thread.

There was nothing heated in my replies.

 

[MarAzul]

Ah! He used Sly instead of Ly to imply.

 

[MarAzul]

Back the weasle of the day and the lack of democrat ability to support a duly elected President.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

Ah! He used Sly instead of Ly to imply.

Again, you have made two serious accusations against me. Show me where I called you a liar and where I was heated in my replies to you.

 

[TorturedBlazerFan]

 

[MarAzul]

Again, you have made two serious accusations against me. Show me where I called you a liar and where I was heated in my replies to you.

Well Sly like I began with, I am pleased you did not call me a liar again. That is a fact.
Now what went down before, I sure as hell do not now know if you deleted it or I inferred it from the stuff you posted that seemed to me to imply I lied.
I can tell you, that I sure as hell thought you did implicitly by your post. and I sure as hell think you intended to do so. At that time I thought of you as a friend, the surprise was real.
Carry on.

Oh! btw, where did I insult you about Sly and Schiff? Actually the thread is about Schiff and the his disaster of the day.

 

[Hoopguru]

Just another day in dysfunctional and partisan Washington D.C. Did anyone on this board really expect anything differently than exactly what we are seeing?? Is anyone that delusional (or truly stupid) enough to think that this “hearing” would produce anything new or earth shaking???? No wonder nothing of value ever gets done by our government. What a bunch of morons. And that goes for anyone who thinks ANY of these people have any real value to our country, regardless of their political affiliation.

amen

 

[Hoopguru]

So many realize that politics is just a short window to take as much wealth and you can and run.....money is the big political affiliation for most of these guys...for the higher ups who already have it, it's all about power and insuring they keep their wealth. Interesting to me that they all use banks in Cypress or Germany....I'd think they'd give American banks their business

I remember years back congressman & gals were bouncing checks all over the place.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

Well Sly like I began with, I am pleased you did not call me a liar again. That is a fact.
Now what went down before, I sure as hell do not now know if you deleted it or I inferred it from the stuff you posted that seemed to me to imply I lied.
I can tell you, that I sure as hell thought you did implicitly by your post. and I sure as hell think you intended to do so. At that time I thought of you as a friend, the surprise was real.
Carry on.

1. I didn't call you a liar.

2. Here are the moderator logs from that thread. All deletions or edits by staff are logged.

3. You inferring that I called you a liar is not the same thing as me actually calling you one.

4. Yes, I thought we were/are friends. I didn't know that friendship ended on that day.

5. I'm actually very insulted that you have made false accusations against me and when I politely and accurately proved them those accusations wrong you are now accusing me of being a liar.

6. Again, I did not call you a liar. I did not edit or delete anything in that thread. I have posted our conversation in that thread for all to see and everything I am saying now is backed up by facts.

 

[MarAzul]

1. I didn't call you a liar.

2. Here are the moderator logs from that thread. All deletions or edits by staff are logged.

3. You inferring that I called you a liar is not the same thing as me actually calling you one.

4. Yes, I thought we were/are friends. I didn't know that friendship ended on that day.

5. I'm actually very insulted that you have made false accusations against me and when I politely and accurately proved them those accusations wrong you are now accusing me of being a liar.

6. Again, I did not call you a liar. I did not edit or delete anything in that thread. I have posted our conversation in that thread for all to see and everything I am saying now is backed up by facts.

Ok Sly. I will take you word for it. If you can read your post, today and say you did not call me a liar. You are Sly, and I am not. Implying it and saying it are the same.

I suppose the results would be the same about the time you said, I Threatened to burn someones house down!
I said where did you get that shit.! I never did any such thing!!! Then you went on with the Sly thing. Are you just playing victim? .....

Enough!
Carry on

 

[SlyPokerDog]

Implying it and saying it are the same.

I didn't imply that you were a liar, I didn't say you were a liar. If you reread our conversation in that thread you will see that.

I Threatened to burn someones house down!
I said where did you get that shit.! I never did any such thing!!! Then you went on with the Sly thing. Are you just playing victim? .....

Two dudes arguing on Oregonlive, what, 8, 9 years ago? One said rape a wife, the other said burn a house down. Do I know or care who said what? Nope, sure don't. I actually assumed it was you who said burn a house down because I didn't think you were the raping kind. Lanny remembers that argument differently.

What was odd about the entire thing is that I got called from someone claiming to be the police from a blocked number. I said to him what I have said to you, I thought one person said rape a wife and the other said burn a house down but the mod in New Jersey deleted it, I also said I would not give out that person's name or phone number unless I had a court order or order from the DA. I never heard from anyone again.

What came about from that ugly incident is when I became staff here we would not have interactions like that in this forum.

I have nothing to be a victim about. If we're picking a winner or loser in this conversation I have clearly won. I didn't call you a liar and I have proven that.

This is fun!

 

[Chris Craig]

I didn't imply that you were a liar, I didn't say you were a liar. If you reread our conversation in that thread you will see that.



Two dudes arguing on Oregonlive, what, 15, 16 years ago? One said rape a wife, the other said burn a house down. Do I know or care who said what? Nope, sure don't. I actually assumed it was you who said burn a house down because I didn't think you were the raping kind. Lanny remembers that argument differently.

What was odd about the entire thing is that I got called from someone claiming to be the police from a blocked number. I said to him what I have said to you, I thought one person said rape a wife and the other said burn a house down but the mod in New Jersey deleted it, I also said I would not give out that person's name or phone number unless I had a court order or order from the DA. I never heard from anyone again.

What came about from that ugly incident is when I became staff here we would not have interactions like that in this forum.

I have nothing to be a victim about. If we're picking a winner or loser in this conversation I have clearly won. I didn't call you a liar and I have proven that.

This is fun!

 

[MarAzul]

This is fun!

Really! How nice for you.

Well! I am pleased you didn't call me a lier again. Did I remember it incorrectly? I inferred the Sly was preferred.

This is how we got here. Glad you had fun. You did take the time to post once in S2 telling everyone that threatened to burn a house down. Now my friend, that was a lie and not so Sly.
Sort of show why Schiff and Sly kind a come together in my mind.
But I grow weary of this shit.
Good night.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

Really! How nice for you.


This is how we got here. Glad you had fun. You did take the time to post once in S2 telling everyone that threatened to burn a house down. Now my friend, that was a lie and not so Sly.
Sort of show why Schiff and Sly kind a come together in my mind.
But I grow weary of this shit.
Good night.

Misremembering an argument isn't the same as lying. It had nothing to do with me. You're the one who gave my name and number to "the police" and drug me into it.

BTW, if you weren't the one who said burn the house down I guess you were the one who said...

 

[riverman]

But I grow weary of this shit.

So take a laxative and flush the bowl!

 

[MarAzul]

You're the one who gave my name and number to "the police" and drug me into it.

Nope, I declined to give them Lanny's name I did not want to cause him any more stress. I did not know you knew the name until much later when you admitted it.
But since and Oregon State Police detective read the thread as well as the DA. I suspect you might have been contacted. If I had known you knew who the dude was, that threaten to kill my wife, I sure as hell would have given your ass up in a heart beat.
I have no friends that would protect a person that threatened to kill anyone's wife. Friends have no place in protecting assholes of that ilk.

BTW, if you weren't the one who said burn the house down I guess you were the one who said...

Well that about cover the issue! You really are the ass you seemed when you stated to the S2 gang that, I threaten to burn a house down. Damn! I had no idea where you got that notion!
The Oregon State Police sure did not, they placed the load right on your buddy. I knew he was Lanny's buddy. And he protected him directly when asked for his name. Shit, they want to bust him then.
I persuaded them that he might not deserve the hassle, I figured I could get the name from another of you guys. Nope! Not a man among you! You lied to me directly when I asked you for the his name. I did not find that out until much later. If I had it to do over, Lanny would have been answering to the OSP.

Btw, @dviss1 also called me a liar in the same thread you did. You did not delete it or edit it, with the cut him slack policy. So why isn't it in there? You guy both did it with in one page and it may well be that you did it implicitly and I inferred the same.
I think we did cover this more than once.

 

[BlazerWookee]

We still need to drain the swamp. TERM LIMITS FTW!

 

[MarAzul]

So take a laxative and flush the bowl!

Just did.

 

[MarAzul]

Btw @SlyPokerDog, none of this deflection will save Schiffy Sly and his band of not so Sly.
They will likely be relegated observers when the hammer falls. then beggars for votes.