Politics SPECIAL COUNSEL APPOINTED!

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
Denny Crane said:
I wrote before that Trump has the right/power to implement his ban. Obama did the same under the same right/power.

But I don't agree with the ban.

On the other hand, the talking heads on TV are claiming the ban isn't needed because nobody from those countries have effected an attack in the US (but they do overseas). Well, duh, the Obama bans did their job.
Click to expand...
We agree on this. Please throw your graphs and statistics towards this instead of apologizing for Trump/blaming Obama.
 
Shaboid said:
We agree on this. Please throw your graphs and statistics towards this instead of apologizing for Trump/blaming Obama.
Click to expand...

My "graphs and statistics" are focused on the truth. If that supports Trump, so be it.
 
Denny Crane said:
My "graphs and statistics" are focused on the truth. If that supports Trump, so be it.
Click to expand...

And that is totally fine. I'm just requesting you give us examples of your "truths" when you disagree with him too.
 
Shaboid said:
And that is totally fine. I'm just requesting you give us examples of your "truths" when you disagree with him too.
Click to expand...

When the news is about things I disagree with him, I still post the facts and my opinion about disagreement.

I don't agree with the wall. The wall isn't in the news much. You want me to post "I'm against the wall" daily or something?
 
I've also posted that he should stick to his job and let the special investigator do his job. That Mueller hiring partisans is fine - even ideal. If they can't find anything, there really isn't anything there. Nothing to fear by Trump if he's got nothing to hide.

That bashing the special prosecutor is a democrat ploy (remember how Ken Starr was treated?), and we don't need to do that, no matter who the investigator is.

I've posted that I didn't care if Comey stayed or was fired. It's Trump's right to fire him.

&c
 
Denny Crane said:
When the news is about things I disagree with him, I still post the facts and my opinion about disagreement.
Click to expand...

Fox news or MSM? I've read the OT forum for a while and I haven't seen that as much as you are claiming. Unless you finally are admitting that you are a Trump supporter. I do appreciate your facts and opinions, to be completely honest.

Denny Crane said:
I don't agree with the wall. The wall isn't in the news much. You want me to post "I'm against the wall" daily or something?
Click to expand...

I'm sure you have the ability to create a bot that does that. I suggest you tend to the BGD bot first though.
 
I don't watch Fox News except on rare occasions. MSNBC and CNN and WWW sites like NYTimes and WaPost. HuffPost and some conservative sites for balance.
 
Denny Crane said:
I've also posted that he should stick to his job and let the special investigator do his job. That Mueller hiring partisans is fine - even ideal. If they can't find anything, there really isn't anything there. Nothing to fear by Trump if he's got nothing to hide.

That bashing the special prosecutor is a democrat ploy (remember how Ken Starr was treated?), and we don't need to do that, no matter who the investigator is.

I've posted that I didn't care if Comey stayed or was fired. It's Trump's right to fire him.

&c
Click to expand...
We honestly aren't far apart I suppose. I'm not going to sit here and try to persuade someone whose "never lost a case" that they should see it from my perspective. I'm just elaborating on how you come across sometimes; an opinion.

I don't remember ever bashing (or even bringing up) the special prosecutor. I remember Ken Starr but not how he was treated through the media, as I am a bit younger. If that makes my opinion of recent events invalid, then OK.

No disagreement with the Comey firing here either.
 
Shaboid said:
We honestly aren't far apart I suppose. I'm not going to sit here and try to persuade someone whose "never lost a case" that they should see it from my perspective. I'm just elaborating on how you come across sometimes; an opinion.

I don't remember ever bashing (or even bringing up) the special prosecutor. I remember Ken Starr but not how he was treated through the media, as I am a bit younger. If that makes my opinion of recent events invalid, then OK.

No disagreement with the Comey firing here either.
Click to expand...

Ken Starr was relentlessly ridiculed by the media and the Clinton administration and his apologists.

The man (Starr) is/was highly qualified: a Supreme Court candidate, was solicitor general who argued cases at the Supreme Court on behalf of the United States (the US is often the defendant in cases), and a judge.
 
Sound familiar?

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=123653000

Starr, Gormley says, "did as good a job as he could do [during Whitewater]. Certainly there were others around him eager to find wrongdoing and came together to produce a witch hunt. But I don't think Ken Starr was out to bring down Clinton."

Clinton, however, saw otherwise. "President Clinton believed from the start that this was nothing but a political witch hunt," Gormley says. "In his mind, they were out to get him because they wanted a regime change and were willing to go for broke."
 
riverman said:
yes....you have no trouble posting hate for the Clintons daily....even going back to Ken Starr and free Willy stories
Click to expand...

And then I posted the PBS article that said I was right about Clinton/Starr.
 
Denny Crane said:
And then I posted the PBS article that said I was right about Clinton/Starr.
Click to expand...
So.......you posted about something that happened roughly 20 years ago. And all these years later the benefit of hindsight proves you right. Congratulations. Ready to move on yet from the Clintons yet......?? You do realize Trump is the guy in the hot seat now, right? And that is all that is relevant at this time. For a guy who chastises the left for not being able to move on, you surely are stuck on the Clintons.......most of us worry about the guy who is dragging us further into the toilet today.......you apparently would rather obsess about yesterday's news......
 
UncleCliffy'sDaddy said:
So.......you posted about something that happened roughly 20 years ago. And all these years later the benefit of hindsight proves you right. Congratulations. Ready to move on yet from the Clintons yet......?? You do realize Trump is the guy in the hot seat now, right? And that is all that is relevant at this time. For a guy who chastises the left for not being able to move on, you surely are stuck on the Clintons.......most of us worry about the guy who is dragging us further into the toilet today.......you apparently would rather obsess about yesterday's news......
Click to expand...

I posted that the precedent set then SHOULD NOT BE FOLLOWED by republicans today. I don't support or like the efforts to discredit Mueller or his associates. Period.
 
riverman said:
we don't need to know what you're having for breakfast but we used to call it shit on a shingle when I was a sailor
Click to expand...
I think they still do. However, that is not what Barf has on his plate.
 
Isn't it cute how the kids are inventing new jargon these days? Like "Deep State". The trouble is they expect Grownups to know what they mean.
 
These pre-date Trump even running for office.

Bill Moyers is one of these kids inventing new jargon?

:lol:



This is 3 years ago.

 
barfo said:
Hard to imagine he's really going to get punished heavily for wearing his wife's campaign t-shirt.

Discrimination, on the other hand, is a serious charge.

barfo
Click to expand...

Was he also wearing his FBI issued shoulder holster and gun over the t-shirt? That's clearly voter intimidation.
 
Rastapopoulos said:
Isn't it cute how the kids are inventing new jargon these days? Like "Deep State". The trouble is they expect Grownups to know what they mean.
Click to expand...

Denny Crane said:
These pre-date Trump even running for office.

Bill Moyers is one of these kids inventing new jargon?

:lol:



This is 3 years ago.

Click to expand...


I don't really agree with this article, but it does show the Deep State is not a new concept.
https://consortiumnews.com/2017/06/23/deep-history-of-americas-deep-state/
 
MarAzul said:
I don't really agree with this article, but it does show the Deep State is not a new concept.
https://consortiumnews.com/2017/06/23/deep-history-of-americas-deep-state/
Click to expand...

Enjoyable link you posted!

The threat seems real enough, but it’s nothing new. Consider these facts: 230 years ago, an unelected group of elite Americans held a secretive meeting with an undisclosed agenda. Their purpose was not merely to manipulate lawful government in their own interests, but to abolish it altogether. In its place, they would install a radically undemocratic government – a “more perfect” government, they said – better suited to their investment portfolios.

History does not identify these conspirators as the Deep State. It calls them the Founders. The Founders did not consider themselves conspirators, but “republicans”.​
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top