Select Page
Poker Forum
Over 1,288,000 Posts!
Poker ForumFTR Community

*** The Official MAGAposting thread ***

Page 58 of 120 FirstFirst ... 848565758596068108 ... LastLast
Results 4,276 to 4,350 of 8926
  1. #4276
  2. #4277
    Quote Originally Posted by Poopadoop View Post
    All I do is point out that he's a criminal retard, using examples. You're the one who wants to make the argument about something else.
    I'm not making the argument about something else. I'm asking why your argument matters.
  3. #4278
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    9,630
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    Fine. Politicians are criminal retards. Why single this one out so often and ignore all the others?

    'Cause it's easy to point your finger at the top of the pile?

    If it wasn't Trump, it'd be Clinton, a person whose presence in the election diverted votes to Trump because she was widely perceived to be a criminal.
    You can find any pattern you want to any level of precision you want, if you're prepared to ignore enough data.
  4. #4279
    Quote Originally Posted by MadMojoMonkey View Post
    Fine. Politicians are criminal retards. Why single this one out so often and ignore all the others?

    'Cause it's easy to point your finger at the top of the pile?

    If it wasn't Trump, it'd be Clinton, a person whose presence in the election diverted votes to Trump because she was widely perceived to be a criminal.
    No, it would be different if Clinton were president. The mainstream media, academia, and the tech oligarchs would cheerlead for her while anyone on the right is cast as a nefarious villain trying to undermine her utopia. Cmon man, do you not remember the Obama administration?? That's exactly what happened for 8 years.

    The reason they're extra mad at Trump is because he ruined their party. They were perfectly happy using identity politics programs to homogenize thinking and disengage the middle class. Democrats liked it because expanding a poor working class translated into reliable votes. Republicans liked it because their donors like low wages.

    And the middle class got fucked over by about 30 years of that, and finally had enough. So we sent the Orange man to piss on their parade. People don't elect populists because they think they're smart rulers. They elect populists when the people in charge *really* fuck up.

    So when Trump was elected, the ruling class should have said "Oh my god, what have we done? Where did we go so wrong that this happened??"

    Instead they said "RUSSIA!!" and "RACIST" and "SEXIST" and blah blah blah

    That's pathetic. And anyone still chanting that shit after the mobilization and subsequent failure of two dozen federal prosecutors, a former FBI chief, 30 million dollars, and about 3,000 subpoenas, is also pathetic.

    Parents wouldn't accept this behavior from their children. People shouldn't accept it from their politicians.
    Last edited by TheSpoonald; 04-22-2019 at 09:25 AM.
  5. #4280
    Yeah electing the Criminal Retard hasn't changed anything, except that you have a Criminal Retard in charge now.

    Maybe try a different means of protesting.
  6. #4281
    Quote Originally Posted by MadMojoMonkey View Post
    Fine. Politicians are criminal retards. Why single this one out so often and ignore all the others?

    'Cause it's easy to point your finger at the top of the pile?

    If it wasn't Trump, it'd be Clinton, a person whose presence in the election diverted votes to Trump because she was widely perceived to be a criminal.
    I think there's a common perception that politicians are criminals by nature. But not all of them are also retards. This one is, and fwiw he's also on another level of criminal than most politicians.
  7. #4282
    Quote Originally Posted by Poopadoop View Post
    Yeah electing the Criminal Retard hasn't changed anything, except that you have a Criminal Retard in charge now.

    Maybe try a different means of protesting.
    Are you for fucking real man?? Get out of your echo chamber.

    First of all, just his presence is a change. Every day he's in office is a day Hillary isn't in office. So just by eating a big mac in the oval office....he's effectively stopped the progressive agenda.

    Second, do you know what the number 1 issue is among voters right now? Immigration. And their opinion is not a positive one. Trump is winning that fight bigtime. He definitely fucked up along the way, the wall should already be built. But I don't see the democrats recovering on this issue.

    Third, the economy. Unemployment, the stock market, property values, interest rates, and the price of gas are all better than fine.

    Fourth, Trump's repulsiveness has caused the left to go completely batshit crazy. Have you listened to any of the 2020 candidates? Eliminate private insurance. Spend 10 billion on health care. Open borders. Green New Deal. ZOMG White supremacy!! Beto thinks his presence in a room = charitable giving. Elizabeth Warren thinks she's a different race. Booker thinks he's spartacus. AOC wants to control how many hamburgers you're allowed to eat. Ilhan Omar was blessed with the good fortune of being allowed to immigrate to the US after fleeing somalia and being raised in a Korean refugee camp. And now she makes a living shitting on this country. 70% tax rates. Swalwell wants to repeal the 2nd amendment. I could go on and on and on and on

    This is completely bizarre, and when it comes voting time, folks are going to be left with a choice between a leftist who wants to take over their lives and a vulgarian who doesn't.

    You really think the libs are gonna win that contest?
    Last edited by TheSpoonald; 04-22-2019 at 09:57 AM.
  8. #4283
    Quote Originally Posted by TheSpoonald View Post
    Whatever you say man. Four more years of the Criminal Retard!
  9. #4284
    Quote Originally Posted by Poopadoop View Post
    Whatever you say man. Four more years of the Criminal Retard!
    "Shut up" he explained.

    Makes total sense. Very strong and convincing.
  10. #4285
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    9,630
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    Quote Originally Posted by TheSpoonald View Post
    No, it would be different if Clinton were president. The mainstream media, academia, and the tech oligarchs would cheerlead for her while anyone on the right is cast as a nefarious villain trying to undermine her utopia. Cmon man, do you not remember the Obama administration?? That's exactly what happened for 8 years.
    Same story, just changed who's cheering and who's jeering.

    That's what's been happening for at least 20 years, man. Bill Clinton was impeached. His opposition was so into casting him as a nefarious villain because he got a BJ and played fast and loose with the meaning of the word "is."
    Bush had to contend with being accused of war crimes throughout most of his term.
    Obama was accused of not being an American citizen (by Trump, even) for most of the 8 years he served.


    The level of vitriol hasn't really changed in my lifetime.
    You can find any pattern you want to any level of precision you want, if you're prepared to ignore enough data.
  11. #4286
    Quote Originally Posted by TheSpoonald View Post
    "Shut up" he explained.

    Makes total sense. Very strong and convincing.
    You're arguing about things I'm not even talking about. And you're losing your shit over it. Thats why I don't respond.

    My point is simple: Trump is the most criminal, dumbest president there's been in my lifetime at least, if not ever.
  12. #4287
    Quote Originally Posted by Poopadoop View Post
    My point is simple: Trump is the most criminal, dumbest president there's been in my lifetime at least, if not ever.
    Your point is also provably false.

    Bill Clinton raped people ffs!!
  13. #4288
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    9,630
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    Quote Originally Posted by Poopadoop View Post
    I think there's a common perception that politicians are criminals by nature. But not all of them are also retards. This one is, and fwiw he's also on another level of criminal than most politicians.
    No, he's not. Not by any literal interpretation of the word. He just has very different priorities, knowledge, and responsibilities than you do, so he acts differently.

    The assertion that he's lacking in mental function is a cop out. Just gimme a break with that nonsense. If you don't want to see those you disagree with as intelligent humans, then you're being a bigot.
    If you're willing to dehumanize those you oppose in order to buoy your own sense of self-righteousness, then you've coopted the weight of your voice. You will never understand your opposition if you cannot see them as intelligent, caring people. You will never sway those you oppose if you cannot understand them.
    You can find any pattern you want to any level of precision you want, if you're prepared to ignore enough data.
  14. #4289
    Banana you can't even have a normal discussion with someone who disagrees with you about anything without ending up in a temper tantrum. I know two year olds who have a better grip on themselves.
  15. #4290
    Quote Originally Posted by MadMojoMonkey View Post
    No, he's not. Not by any literal interpretation of the word. He just has very different priorities, knowledge, and responsibilities than you do, so he acts differently.

    The assertion that he's lacking in mental function is a cop out. Just gimme a break with that nonsense. If you don't want to see those you disagree with as intelligent humans, then you're being a bigot.
    If you're willing to dehumanize those you oppose in order to buoy your own sense of self-righteousness, then you've coopted the weight of your voice. You will never understand your opposition if you cannot see them as intelligent, caring people. You will never sway those you oppose if you cannot understand them.
    What is all this? lol, so the guy isn't literally mentally retarded is your point?

    Ok, I'll call him another name then, 'clueless'. Is that better? Or are you going to go all dictionary on me on that as well?
  16. #4291
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    9,630
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    Bill Cosby raped people.

    Bill Clinton, though?
    If there's no conviction, then throwing around nonsense like this is exactly the melodramatic BS that you accuse your opposition of using.
    If he hasn't been convicted of a crime, then you're just inflating hearsay into a false sense of fact-hood.
    You can find any pattern you want to any level of precision you want, if you're prepared to ignore enough data.
  17. #4292
    Quote Originally Posted by MadMojoMonkey View Post
    Same story, just changed who's cheering and who's jeering.
    No. Not even close.

    Bill Clinton was impeached. His opposition was so into casting him as a nefarious villain because he got a BJ and played fast and loose with the meaning of the word "is."
    Turns out perjury is something the congress takes seriously. And rightly so. If he had just admitted to getting a bijowski...he probably would have skated. Anyone criticizing Trump for not talking to Mueller should remember that. Perjury traps are a thing.

    But more importantly, New Gingrich decided to NOT be an obstructionist douchebag. He decided to be a reasonable person and actually work for the country, not just his party's ideology. And together, Newt and Bill passed meaningful legislation.

    Democrats were all for a wall until Trump agreed with them. To not have a wall just means that the dems are obstructionist douchebags...which we just established..Clinton did NOT have to deal with.

    Bush had to contend with being accused of war crimes throughout most of his term.
    Yeah, by hollywood creampuffs. Who cares? Trump was being framed for treason through a series of illegal leaks from the highest levels of the justice department.

    You really think it's just "same shit, different day"??

    Obama was accused of not being an American citizen (by Trump, even) for most of the 8 years he served.
    I remember that lasting six months tops. Was a special counsel ever appointed to investigate this? Did the government employ two dozen federal prosecutors and at an expense of 30 million dollars? Were lives ruined? Were harmless old men dragged out of their home by a swat team over Obama's citizenship??

    The level of vitriol hasn't really changed in my lifetime.
    Dude.....pay attention
  18. #4293
    Quote Originally Posted by MadMojoMonkey View Post
    If he hasn't been convicted of a crime, then you're just inflating hearsay into a false sense of fact-hood.
    So a woman says "i was raped" and that's "hearsay" to you?

    Ok buddy.
    Last edited by TheSpoonald; 04-22-2019 at 10:36 AM.
  19. #4294
    Quote Originally Posted by MadMojoMonkey View Post
    If there's no conviction, then throwing around nonsense like this is exactly the melodramatic BS that you accuse your opposition of using.
    Is it really melodramatic BS?

    If you weren't so busy hating me, you'd realize that my only point is that Trump isn't any worse than anyone else. I've never defended the guy's character.

    I don't see enough evidence to convict Clinton of rape. Nor do I see enough evidence to conclude that Trump is a criminal, a traitor, or even stupid.

    My goal is to try and understand why Poop is holding Trump to a different standard than he holds literally every other person on earth including presidents.
  20. #4295
    Quote Originally Posted by TheSpoonald View Post
    So a woman says "i was raped" and that's "hearsay" to you?

    Ok buddy.
    Worked for Kavanaugh. And Trump.
  21. #4296
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    9,630
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    Quote Originally Posted by Poopadoop View Post
    What is all this? lol, so the guy isn't literally mentally retarded is your point?

    Ok, I'll call him another name then, 'clueless'. Is that better? Or are you going to go all dictionary on me on that as well?
    No need. Your position is pure ad hominem. There's no substance to it, nor any reason to bring it up if it were substantive.
    Even if we assume your postulate, then what? We have a 'tarded president. OK. How shall we act, with this knowledge.

    ***
    What? Yes, he's 'tarded. You said.
    OK...
    Now calm down...
    Dude. Didn't anyone ever tell you that it's just terribly rude to mock those less fortunate that you? Can you stop pointing at the retarded guy and calling him retarded?
    You're being a dick.
    Don't be a dick.
    ***



    Hey. You do you. I'm not telling you what to think or say. I'm just pointing out that what you choose to say when you express what you think is often not indicative of someone who's interested in an intelligent dialogue.
    You can find any pattern you want to any level of precision you want, if you're prepared to ignore enough data.
  22. #4297
    Quote Originally Posted by TheSpoonald View Post
    My goal is to try and understand why Poop is holding Trump to a different standard than he holds literally every other person on earth including presidents.
    I've given you several examples of ways in which Trump is both more criminal and stupider than literally every other president. I'm sure there's a website somewhere with an exhaustive list if you're really interested.
  23. #4298
    Quote Originally Posted by Poopadoop View Post
    I've given you several examples of ways in which Trump is both more criminal and stupider than literally every other president. I'm sure there's a website somewhere with an exhaustive list if you're really interested.
    No, you've given me examples of your own bias.

    Not the same thing.
  24. #4299
    Quote Originally Posted by TheSpoonald View Post
    No, you've given me examples of your own bias.

    Not the same thing.
    No I've given you examples of the truth. Just because you put the Tucker spin on them or responded with 'what about Hillary's emails?' doesn't make them less fine examples.

    It does reinforce my belief that arguing with you is pointless though. So whatever man. Four more years!
  25. #4300
    Quote Originally Posted by MadMojoMonkey View Post
    No need. Your position is pure ad hominem. There's no substance to it, nor any reason to bring it up if it were substantive.
    I've already given the substance, with several reasons why I think he's criminally 'tarded.


    Quote Originally Posted by MadMojoMonkey View Post
    Even if we assume your postulate, then what? We have a 'tarded president. OK. How shall we act, with this knowledge?
    As I suggested as well, you can vote him out next time.
  26. #4301
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    9,630
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    Quote Originally Posted by TheSpoonald View Post
    If he had just admitted to getting a bijowski...he probably would have skated.
    I think you'll find that it was a bijinski, you tool.


    (FWIW, if you've not seen Lewinski's TED talk or her recent interview on John Oliver, I recommend. The world put her through a decade long shit fest, and she made it out the other side, and damn. That kind of shit builds character, and she took a PhD course in it.)

    Quote Originally Posted by TheSpoonald View Post
    Dude.....pay attention
    I try, but this shit is exhausting. You're the smartest person to comment against the echo chamber in here for ages, and for all your intelligence, you also reflect the vitriol.
    At least you don't disregard other people's positions. I mean.. you shred your opposition's points, but at least you address them and don't post a meme of argharghargh and mock them.
    You shred them while mocking them... which is a definitely step up, just a long way still to the apex, IMO. (Though I'm almost certainly setting the bar too high for human political discourse.)


    It really is SSDD. The birther movement was going well into Obama's 2nd term. Maybe I misunderstood and you were only specifically addressing Trump asking for the birth certificate for 6 months.
    This division and passion and vitriol goes back to the Founders. There were duels.. with guns and murder and stuff... back then. There was an American Civil War back then...

    On the whole, we're really not doing that bad for ourselves, historically speaking.
    You can find any pattern you want to any level of precision you want, if you're prepared to ignore enough data.
  27. #4302
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    9,630
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    Quote Originally Posted by TheSpoonald View Post
    So a woman says "i was raped" and that's "hearsay" to you?

    Ok buddy.


    Since when do you ignore a man's right to a fair trial?


    lololol

    Imagine if I had posted that same quote in response to you!
    lolol


    C'mon, man. You can troll better than that.
    You can find any pattern you want to any level of precision you want, if you're prepared to ignore enough data.
  28. #4303
    Quote Originally Posted by MadMojoMonkey View Post
    On the whole, we're really not doing that bad for ourselves, historically speaking.
    Too bad climate change is gonna end it all in less than 12 years now. Fuck.
  29. #4304
    Quote Originally Posted by MadMojoMonkey View Post
    Since when do you ignore a man's right to a fair trial?
    When did I do that? I'm just saying that a credible allegation of rape is not "hearsay"
  30. #4305
    Quote Originally Posted by MadMojoMonkey View Post
    The birther movement was going well into Obama's 2nd term.
    So....by whom? Mainstream voices, or fringe?

    If it was fringe...who cares? Why do those people matter? Their votes are cast long before candidates are even nominated. If a handful of loons harbors a conspiracy theory about the other side and fake birth certificates.....who cares??? Did that really do a damn thing to slow Obama's agenda....really??

    The russia shit was mainstream. And it definitely did undermine Trump's agenda. WAY DIFFERENT

    And now that it's over, my only point is that the fringe still crying "OBSTRUCTION" (present company included) are just as clueless and pathetic as the fringe that carried on the birther movement.
    Last edited by TheSpoonald; 04-22-2019 at 11:16 AM.
  31. #4306
    Quote Originally Posted by MadMojoMonkey View Post
    At least you don't disregard other people's positions. I mean.. you shred your opposition's points, but at least you address them and don't post a meme of argharghargh and mock them.
    Writing a lot of words != addressing people's positions and/or winning the argument. Especially if you just bring things up the original argument had nothing to do with..
  32. #4307
    Quote Originally Posted by MadMojoMonkey View Post
    but at least you address them and don't post a meme of argharghargh and mock them.
    I find this a big time saver for replying to someone who is more interested in losing their shit on anyone who disagrees with them than in trying to have an adult discussion.
  33. #4308
    Quote Originally Posted by MadMojoMonkey View Post
    but at least you address them and don't
    As opposed to just jumping into the middle of someone else's discussion with a non-sequitur?
  34. #4309
    This is what intelligent discourse looks like, btw. No name-calling, changing the topic, or talking garbage out of your ass. If anyone is interested in that here, I'm all for it.

  35. #4310
    Quote Originally Posted by mojo
    Bush had to contend with being accused of war crimes throughout most of his term.
    Contend with? You make it sound like he was picked on. They were entirely justified accusations. The war on Iraq was based on lies, and then we have Extraordinary Rendition and torture. Guantanamo Bay got the headlines but there's Diego Garcia, too.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  36. #4311
    Quote Originally Posted by Poopadoop View Post
    This is what intelligent discourse looks like, btw.
    I'm four minutes in and no it's not intelligent discourse. It's three people getting about 4 minutes a piece to be dumb. they're paid to be there and shut up while the other one is talking. It's not a debate. It's a show.

    And that bearded guy is a retard. He starts off by talking about how Don Jr was welcoming Russian delegates offering dirt on Hillary. Basically the same whine-storm that poop has been making for likely over a year now. It's a completely disingenuous and fraudulent argument

    If it's not a crime for Hillary to hire someone with Russian contacts, and buy dirt on Trump from the Russians....then it's CERTAINLY not a crime for Don Jr to accept similar dirt for free.

    If it's improper or suspicious for Don Jr to even entertain that solicitation, then it is also improper or suspicious to lend any credibility to anything in Steele's dossier.

    So the selective outrage is just grotesque in this case.
  37. #4312
    Dems: We know Trump colluded with the Russians

    Sane people: How do you know?

    Dems: The russians offered opposition research

    Sane people: How do you know?

    Dems: The russians told us in this opposition research we just bought.

    Sane people: [heads explode]
  38. #4313
    Quote Originally Posted by TheSpoonald View Post
    shut up while the other one is talking.
    Lol I know it's outrageous how respectful they are of each other.



    Quote Originally Posted by TheSpoonald View Post
    And that bearded guy is a retard. He starts off by talking about how Don Jr was welcoming Russian delegates offering dirt on Hillary.
    The other guy responds that Hillary did the same thing with the Steele dossier. But I guess because he didn't call the other guy a douchebag it's not a fair argument.
  39. #4314
    Quote Originally Posted by Poopadoop View Post
    The other guy responds that Hillary did the same thing with the Steele dossier.
    That should be the end of the show then. Either they are both colluding with Russians, or neither of them are. Make up your mind.

    There's actually no room for honest disagreement on this subject.

    Accepting oppo research from a foreign government is a bad idea because it could be bad information, it could have unintended consequences, and you can't be sure of the foreign government's true motives. Fine. I agree with that.

    Hillary accepted oppo reasearch from a foreign government, and all of the worst fears were realized. The Russians were successful in undermining our government's effectiveness for two years simply by making up stories to give to Steele.

    And Trump is the bad guy here....why?
  40. #4315
    Quote Originally Posted by TheSpoonald View Post
    That should be the end of the show then. Either they are both colluding with Russians, or neither of them are. Make up your mind.

    There's actually no room for honest disagreement on this subject.

    Accepting oppo research from a foreign government is a bad idea because it could be bad information, it could have unintended consequences, and you can't be sure of the foreign government's true motives. Fine. I agree with that.

    Hillary accepted oppo reasearch from a foreign government, and all of the worst fears were realized. The Russians were successful in undermining our government's effectiveness for two years simply by making up stories to give to Steele.

    And Trump is the bad guy here....why?
    Ted Bundy killed a bunch of people. Why is anyone upset that Charles Manson killed people? Why is he a bad guy?
  41. #4316
    Quote Originally Posted by Poopadoop View Post
    Ted Bundy killed a bunch of people. Why is anyone upset that Charles Manson killed people? Why is he a bad guy?
    Was one victimized by an illegal witch hunt that undermined the policy agenda for the entire country while the other was allowed to skate???

    That's a shit analogy.
  42. #4317
    Also there's the question of obstruction of justice. Hillary hasn't been caught trying to fire people to keep them from investigating her wrondoings, Trump has been blatant about it.
  43. #4318
    Quote Originally Posted by Poopadoop View Post
    Also there's the question of obstruction of justice. Hillary hasn't been caught trying to fire people to keep them from investigating her wrondoings, Trump has been blatant about it.
    No, she just threatened rape victims into silence.

    And Trump never fired anybody in order to prevent or encumber any investigation. That's an imagined talking point. We know this because no firing ever resulted in any diminished effectiveness or any investigation. We also know that Trump could have fired people to stop the investigation (namely Mueller), and did not do so.
  44. #4319
    Quote Originally Posted by TheSpoonald View Post
    Was one victimized by an illegal witch hunt that undermined the policy agenda for the entire country while the other was allowed to skate???

    That's a shit analogy.
    You can't have it both ways. Either they're both guilty or they're both not. One doesn't get a 'witch hunt' while the other 'skates'. At most, one gets investigated because he won and is now POTUS and the other doesn't get investigated because she lost and is now living in the woods keeping her mouth shut.
  45. #4320
    Quote Originally Posted by TheSpoonald View Post
    No, she just threatened rape victims into silence.
    Has this been proven? 'Cause it sounds like a crime to me.


    Quote Originally Posted by TheSpoonald View Post
    And Trump never fired anybody in order to prevent or encumber any investigation. That's an imagined talking point.
    He fired Comey, tried to fire Mueller, tried to order Sessions to make a statement and change the nature of the investigation. That's all real.
  46. #4321
    Quote Originally Posted by Poopadoop View Post
    He fired Comey, tried to fire Mueller, tried to order Sessions to make a statement and change the nature of the investigation. That's all real.
    Is any of that illegal?

    PS-I believe I've already explained the fallacy inherent in saying "tried to fire Mueller". He didn't need to "try". He could have, and didn't.
  47. #4322
    yeah, this might be slimy, but it isn't going to stand up in court as a 'threat'.

    Broaddrick first spoke out about Hillary Clinton's attempts to silence her in 1999, when she told the Drudge Report that Hillary Clinton approached her at a political rally to thank her for keeping quiet about the alleged assault.

    "She caught me and took my hand and said, 'I am so happy to meet you. I want you to know that we appreciate everything you do for Bill,'" Broaddrick recalled. "I started to turn away and she held onto my hand and reiterated her phrase—looking less friendly and repeated her statement—'everything you do for Bill.'"

    Broaddrick said Hillary Clinton wouldn't let her "get away until she made her point."

    "She talked low, the smile faded on the second thank you," Broaddrick continued. "I just released her hand from mine and left the gathering."
  48. #4323
    Quote Originally Posted by Poopadoop View Post
    yeah, this might be slimy, but it isn't going to stand up in court as a 'threat'.
    Thank you for making my case that Trump isn't any slimier than anyone else
  49. #4324
    Quote Originally Posted by TheSpoonald View Post
    Is any of that illegal?

    PS-I believe I've already explained the fallacy inherent in saying "tried to fire Mueller". He didn't need to "try". He could have, and didn't.
    Obstruction of justice is illegal yes.

    No, actually he couldn't have fired Mueller. He didn't have the authority. At best he could fire people until he found someone who was willing to fire Mueller, ala Saturday Night Massacre. That he didn't shows that he wasn't as desperate as Nixon, not that he didn't try to obstruct justice.
  50. #4325
    Quote Originally Posted by TheSpoonald View Post
    Thank you for making my case that Trump isn't any slimier than anyone else
    I didn't and he is.
  51. #4326
    Quote Originally Posted by Poopadoop View Post
    Obstruction of justice is illegal yes.
    There's no evidence of this. Just suggestion, innuendo, and partisan wishful thinking.

    No, actually he couldn't have fired Mueller.
    Uh, yeah, he could. Remember how you've been yelling for two days about how he told McGahn to do it? That's Trump doing it. McGahn doesn't actually hold any office in the DOJ.
  52. #4327
    Quote Originally Posted by TheSpoonald View Post
    There's no evidence of this. Just suggestion, innuendo, and partisan wishful thinking.
    The Mueller report says otherwise. you should check it out.


    Quote Originally Posted by TheSpoonald View Post
    Uh, yeah, he could. Remember how you've been yelling for two days about how he told McGahn to do it? That's Trump doing it. McGahn doesn't actually hold any office in the DOJ.
    That makes no sense at all.

    McGahn couldn't do it, so Trump telling him to do it is him both being stupid and not knowing who has the authority there, and trying to obstruct justice by trying to fire Mueller.

    What is your argument? Because he ordered the wrong guy to do the firing it wasn't his intent to fire someone? Like by ordering Lewandowski to fire Sessions if he didn't follow his orders, his intent wasn't to fire Sessions?

    you don't get a pass 'cause you're too ignorant to know who to give your illegal orders to.
  53. #4328
    Wait a minute wait a minute wait a minute

    Are you telling me that McGahn was willing to quit his job rather than do something he couldn't do anyway?

    You CNN'd yourself there bud.
  54. #4329
    This is boring now. Let's change the subject.

    Who can beat Trump in 2020? And how?
  55. #4330
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...=.7838fdf34cac

    Professional dumb person Max Boot thinks it's worth impeaching Trump just to leave a stain on his presidency.

    Tell me Professor Boot, how will that help the middle class?
  56. #4331
    oskar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    6,698
    Location
    in ur accounts... confiscating ur funz
    Quote Originally Posted by TheSpoonald View Post
    Explain to me Oskar, why you think it's ok to disregard the constitution, re-arrange the separation of powers, give congress ultimate authority to do everything....all because orange man bad!!!
    I didn't say orange man bad, I said I find it worrying that the presidents personal lawyers can direct the IRS to not comply with congress. Congress has the power to ask the IRS for tax returns, they just never had to ask for a presidents tax returns because every president so far has released their tax returns. So this is an open question that I assume will end up in the supreme court.

    Without any doubt, Trump executed the greatest troll of all time. Epic in scope, brilliantly presented, and so thoroughly effective I can only stand in awe at this truly fantastic work of art.

    This beats "because you'd be in jail" as Trump's greatest smackdown ever.
    I genuinely don't understand what that means. How do you determine what is a "troll" and what isn't? What if they start shipping immigrants straight to sanctuary cities with no hearing? Is that still a troll then? What about saying he'd build a wall? Was that a troll? How do I know what's a troll and what isn't?
    The strengh of a hero is defined by the weakness of his villains.
  57. #4332
    Quote Originally Posted by oskar View Post
    I didn't say orange man bad, I said I find it worrying that the presidents personal lawyers can direct the IRS to not comply with congress
    Why the word salad? This sounds like your beef is with Trump's lawyers. If not, then cut out the extra syllables and just say that Trump is keeping his tax returns private. It is his right to do so. Congress doesn't get to violate due process and the 4th amendment just because orange man bad.

    Congress has the power to ask the IRS for tax returns
    Uhhhhh, nope.

    So this is an open question that I assume will end up in the supreme court
    I'm bored by this typical leftist response. "I don't like the law, so I'm hoping some other government body can get around it"

    I genuinely don't understand what that means. How do you determine what is a "troll" and what isn't?
    If it makes democrats angry, it's a troll. If it makes democrats whine about their moral superiority, it's policy.

    What if they start shipping immigrants straight to sanctuary cities with no hearing?
    Well, first of all, if you want to know the answer to that, just ask the residents of Lewiston Maine. Obama sent them a shitload of Somali refugees without even asking.

    Hint: The somalis fucking love it. Mainers, not so much.

    Second, who would object to that? The sanctuary cities have been telling us that immigrants are good, immigrants bring economic growth, they're better people than Americans are. Why wouldn't they want more immigrants? And the immigrants themselves should be thrilled to be going to a place where they are so valued and welcomed.

    Explain to me how Trump doing this would be at all bad for anyone. It couldn't possibly be, unless immigrants are undesirable in some way. Are they?
    Last edited by TheSpoonald; 04-22-2019 at 01:16 PM.
  58. #4333
    Quote Originally Posted by TheSpoonald View Post
    Are you telling me that McGahn was willing to quit his job rather than do something he couldn't do anyway?
    Reductio ad bananum. I never said anything like that.

    I said Trump told McGahn to fire Mueller and McGahn said no.

    Doesn't it ever get boring attributing things to people they never said?
  59. #4334
    Quote Originally Posted by oskar View Post
    Congress has the power to ask the IRS for tax returns,
    They can ask, but it's a bit unclear whether or not the IRS has to give them to them.
  60. #4335
    Quote Originally Posted by oskar View Post
    I genuinely don't understand what that means. How do you determine what is a "troll" and what isn't? What if they start shipping immigrants straight to sanctuary cities with no hearing? Is that still a troll then? What about saying he'd build a wall? Was that a troll? How do I know what's a troll and what isn't?
    The job of POTUS in banana's mind is to piss off liberals. So obviously Trump is the GOAT because of all the stupid shit he says and does.
  61. #4336
    Quote Originally Posted by Poopadoop View Post
    Reductio ad bananum. I never said anything like that.

    I said Trump told McGahn to fire Mueller and McGahn said no.

    Doesn't it ever get boring attributing things to people they never said?
    Actually McGahn said "no, and I'm going to quit if you try and make me"

    How exactly that stopped Trump from firing Mueller is what I don't understand. McGahn has no power. He was just trying to keep himself out of the shitstorm that would inevitably follow such a move. That's just him making a smart career move. Let someone else sink in that swamp.

    All Trump had to do was say "ok, then quit, or you're fired, or whatever, just get the fuck out so I can get someone else to do it"

    Where are you getting that McGahn couldn't fire Mueller? More importantly, how does that show that Trump "tried to fire Mueller". That's what I'm not getting....if he tried....why did he fail? What stopped him? What thwarted him?

    What you're really saying is that Trump came close to firing Mueller, and didn't. And I can't figure out why that make Trump a worse retard/criminal than anyone else in politics.
  62. #4337
    Quote Originally Posted by Poopadoop View Post
    The job of POTUS reason trump got elected in banana's Spoonald's mind is to piss off liberals the ruling class. So obviously Trump is the GOAT because of all the stupid shit he says and doeshe is a patriot giving the ruling class the kick in the balls that it deserves.
    You almost get me man.
    Last edited by TheSpoonald; 04-22-2019 at 01:26 PM.
  63. #4338
    oskar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    6,698
    Location
    in ur accounts... confiscating ur funz
    So basically all you want from the president to make democrats angry. You don't care about having open borders as long as it makes democrats angry?
    And why would it make democrats angry? I know few democrats actually advocate for open borders, but I was under the impression that open borders make conservatives more angry than democrats. Do you actually want open borders now because you think that it would make democrats angry? And would it actually make them angry? More angry than conservatives?
    The strengh of a hero is defined by the weakness of his villains.
  64. #4339
    Quote Originally Posted by TheSpoonald View Post
    just ask the residents of Lewiston Maine. Obama sent them a shitload of Somali refugees without even asking.
    Is this something that was actually documented? I can't find it. There's apparently a lot of Somalis in Lewiston, but nothing that says Obama just tossed them in there for whatever reason.
  65. #4340
    oskar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    6,698
    Location
    in ur accounts... confiscating ur funz
    Quote Originally Posted by Poopadoop View Post
    Is this something that was actually documented? I can't find it. There's apparently a lot of Somalis in Lewiston, but nothing that says Obama just tossed them in there for whatever reason.
    Minnesota doesn't seem too unhappy. They put one in congress. BECAUSE THEY FORGOT ABOUT 9/11
    The strengh of a hero is defined by the weakness of his villains.
  66. #4341
    Quote Originally Posted by TheSpoonald View Post
    Actually McGahn said "no, and I'm going to quit if you try and make me".
    So, Trump didn't know McGahn didn't have the power to fire Mueller. So he tried to get Mueller fired, he just didn't insist on it to the point of firing anyone who refused to do it for him. So, his intention was to fire Mueller and he only backed off that intention when he dozily realised it would just make things worse.


    Quote Originally Posted by TheSpoonald View Post
    why that make Trump a worse retard/criminal than anyone else in politics.
    Because even I knew only Rosenstein could fire Mueller. And I'm not POTUS. What isn't retarded about that?
  67. #4342
    Quote Originally Posted by TheSpoonald View Post
    You almost get me man.
    Oh yeah the ruling class is feeling the pain man. Those tax cuts for the rich really hit them where it hurts.
  68. #4343
    Quote Originally Posted by oskar View Post
    So basically all you want from the president to make democrats angry.
    That's a hugely glib interpretation of my position.

    As for the rest of your post, I'm not sure what you're talking about. I never once advocated for open borders, and it's certainly not something I support.
  69. #4344
    I think he's saying Trump said, in effect, 'ok you libruls, you all wanted to ruin the country with open borders so I'm going to threaten to open them now like I reductio ad bananummed you saying, and when you protest the obviously stupid idea, you're going to look like hypocrites'.

    Is that about it?
  70. #4345
    oskar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    6,698
    Location
    in ur accounts... confiscating ur funz
    Quote Originally Posted by MadMojoMonkey View Post
    No, he's not. Not by any literal interpretation of the word. He just has very different priorities, knowledge, and responsibilities than you do, so he acts differently.
    retarded (/rɪˈtɑːdɪd)
    less advanced in mental, physical, or social development than is usual for one's age.
    "the child is badly retarded"
    literally retarded by the literal definition of the word. You just got used to it. If you heard Trump speak for the first time today, you'd think: My god! This child is badly retarded.
    The strengh of a hero is defined by the weakness of his villains.
  71. #4346
    Quote Originally Posted by Poopadoop View Post
    So, Trump didn't know McGahn didn't have the power to fire Mueller.
    McGahn did. either directly, or indirectly through rosenstein. Have fun splitting that hair. If McGahn didn't have the power to do that....then he wouldn't threaten to resign rather than get involved. He could have just said "hey not my bag man, try someone else".

    So he tried to get Mueller fired, he just didn't insist on it to the point of firing anyone who refused to do it for him.
    So what you're saying is that he *could have* fired Mueller and didn't. Do you see how that's different than trying and failing?

    So, his intention was to fire Mueller and he only backed off that intention when he dozily realised it would just make things worse.
    So a President, under unfair attack, while sitting in the most stressful job in the universe decided had an unwise impulse but deferred to his counsel. And that's it. How many times did you have to put that through the spin cycle for it to sound like ORANGE MAN BAD
    Last edited by TheSpoonald; 04-22-2019 at 01:37 PM.
  72. #4347
    oskar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    6,698
    Location
    in ur accounts... confiscating ur funz
    Quote Originally Posted by TheSpoonald View Post
    That's a hugely glib interpretation of my position.

    As for the rest of your post, I'm not sure what you're talking about. I never once advocated for open borders, and it's certainly not something I support.
    What is taking immigrants into the country with no legal process to you? How is it different from open borders?
    Last edited by oskar; 04-22-2019 at 01:39 PM.
    The strengh of a hero is defined by the weakness of his villains.
  73. #4348
    Quote Originally Posted by Poopadoop View Post
    I think he's saying Trump said, in effect, 'ok you libruls, you all wanted to ruin the country with open borders so I'm going to threaten to open them now like I reductio ad bananummed you saying, and when you protest the obviously stupid idea, you're going to look like hypocrites'.

    Is that about it?
    No. I'm not sure where this "threatening to open the border" idea came from. As far as I know Trumps policy consideration relates to immigrants currently being held in over-burdened border detention facilities, and any other immigrants that might be detained between now and whenever the wall gets built.

    I don't think he's talking about opening up the floodgates and just directing traffic towards San Francisco.
  74. #4349
    Quote Originally Posted by TheSpoonald View Post
    McGahn did. either directly, or indirectly through rosenstein. Have fun splitting that hair. If McGahn had not power to do that....then he wouldn't resign rather than get involved. He could have just said "hey not my bag man, try someone else".
    But he did resign. So ya, basically Trump tried to use McGahn to fire Mueller and instead he resigned.

    Quote Originally Posted by TheSpoonald View Post
    So what you're saying is that he *could have* fired Mueller and didn't. Do you see how that's different than trying and failing?
    You're defense is that he didn't try as hard as he could?

    I'd love to see you as a defense attorney - "Sure your honor, my client shot at the victim in an attempted murder. But when he ran out of bullets, at least he didn't go out and buy some more."


    Quote Originally Posted by TheSpoonald View Post
    So a President, under unfair attack, while sitting in the most stressful job in the universe decided to listen to his counsel. And that's it. How many times did you have to put that through the spin cycle for it to sound like ORANGE MAN BAD
    That poor man, so pure and innocent and people keep finding things he did wrong.
  75. #4350
    Quote Originally Posted by oskar View Post
    What is taking immigrants into the country with no legal process to you? How is it different from open borders?
    I'm honestly not sure where the bolded part is coming from

    An immigrant detained at teh border has to be held somewhere. We are currently running out of space. Current immigration policy has them identified, given a hearing date (that they skip), and allowed to roam free in America until they are apprehended again. That's the current legal process.

    Instead of letting them go, or keeping them in a detention facility, Trump is proposing to offer them a bus ride to Oakland. What's your beef with that?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •