WSJ: GOP Activist Who Sought Clinton Emails Cited Trump Campaign Officials

[cwolff]

Keep digging.

:devilsmile:

Just please keep in mind that is from Fox News. The tides may be turning here

[time4fun]

Oh shit! She spoke with the office of Russia's top prosecutor?! RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT COLLUSION CONFIRMED!

It is pretty crazy how someone campaigning for an end to a Russian law would be lobbying the Russian government!

God damn you fucking Democrats are so pathetic.

Let me know when you have some actual facts that point to collusion of some sort, time4fun. Until then take all of this bullshit that can be easily explained away and shove them right back up your ass.

You don't understand basic English.

You're not allowed to speak anymore. You should go back to practicing your upper-case letters.

[Tgo01]

You don't understand basic English.

You're not allowed to speak anymore. You should go back to practicing your upper-case letters.

"I am so very very smart! You just don't understand!"

Keep on teaching that logic to your niece, time4fun. Maybe she'll put in a good word with her brother and you can double the amount of students you have!

[Neveragain]

Just please keep in mind that is from Fox News. The tides may be turning here

Democrats are going to do nothing but dig up 33,000 Clinton e-mails.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNA7PTl57Y

[cwolff]

Democrats are going to do nothing but dig up 33,000 Clinton e-mails.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNA7PTl57Y

Holy Shit! That would be something.

[time4fun]

"I am so very very smart! You just don't understand!"

Keep on teaching that logic to your niece, time4fun. Maybe she'll put in a good word with her brother and you can double the amount of students you have!

You actually don't understand.

You didn't understand that she was a Russian government lawyer- as in, you actually didn't understand that "Russian government lawyer" meant she was a lawyer for the Russian government. You didn't understand that she had information from a top Russian government official, and you somehow (and honestly, none of us have actually figured out how) didn't understand that "part of the Russian government" meant "from the Russian government". In fact, you STILL don't actually seem to get it.

You also didn't understand "she was meeting with Russian authorities regularly" meant.

And there's a reason why you're the only person here who's making these arguments. Because literally everyone else actually understands basic English. It may be despicable to argue that the collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russian government is "no big deal", but honestly, that's leaps and bounds ahead of "She wasn't there on behalf of the Russian government!". Better morally bankrupt than just plain stupid.

[RichardCranium]

You actually don't understand.

You didn't understand that she was a Russian government lawyer- as in, you actually didn't understand that "Russian government lawyer" meant she was a lawyer for the Russian government. You didn't understand that she had information from a top Russian government official, and you somehow (and honestly, none of us have actually figured out how) didn't understand that "part of the Russian government" meant "from the Russian government". In fact, you STILL don't actually seem to get it.

You also didn't understand "she was meeting with Russian authorities regularly" meant.

And there's a reason why you're the only person here who's making these arguments. Because literally everyone else actually understands basic English. It may be despicable to argue that the collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russian government is "no big deal", but honestly, that's leaps and bounds ahead of "She wasn't there on behalf of the Russian government!". Better morally bankrupt than just plain stupid.

Do you understand that the lawyer possibly had evidence of illegal activity by an entire American political party?

[Fortybox]

You've spent more time in this thread discussing Obama and Ukraine than the actual Russia collusion issue. You may not be a right winger, but you're adopting a purely conservative set of talking points.

There is no issue. You and the media want to make an issue out of it.

[Tgo01]

And there's a reason why you're the only person here who's making these arguments. Because literally everyone else actually understands basic English. It may be despicable to argue that the collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russian government is "no big deal", but honestly, that's leaps and bounds ahead of "She wasn't there on behalf of the Russian government!". Better morally bankrupt than just plain stupid.

Uh...a lot of people are arguing that she wasn't there on the Russian government's behalf, but rather as a private citizen who is lobbying about this Russian adoption thing. Maybe no one is making that argument on the PC, but there are lots of people making said argument.

Haven't they also said she was at Congress and meeting with other people about this adoption thing? Do we need to also accuse everyone of collusion that she spoke to?

But! Again! Logic! You better hope your niece doesn't ever see your posts on the PC, she'll never put in a good word for you with her brother!

[time4fun]

Do you understand that the lawyer possibly had evidence of illegal activity by an entire American political party?

According to the Russian counterintelligence agent who attended the meeting, you mean? The one who misrepresented his relationship with the Russian government and with the Russian government lawyer in the same interview?

But wait- I thought, according to Trump Junior, that no information was shared?

Odd, because the email sent specifically said the information was about Clinton.

But then, the Russian government lawyer says that no information was offered, and the Trump campaign just heard what they wanted to hear.

Fascinating which story you're choosing to believe.

[Tgo01]

Fascinating which story you're choosing to believe.

The disconnect from reality is strong with this one!

[RichardCranium]

According to the Russian counterintelligence agent who attended the meeting, you mean? The one who misrepresented his relationship with the Russian government and with the Russian government lawyer in the same interview?

But wait- I thought, according to Trump Junior, that no information was shared?

Odd, because the email sent specifically said the information was about Clinton.

But then, the Russian government lawyer says that no information was offered, and the Trump campaign just heard what they wanted to hear.

Fascinating which story you're choosing to believe.

Allegedly.

I don't believe anything without proof. And so far I've seen no proof of collusion, nor proof that there wasn't. You're just willing to believe everything you read, something you so eagerly accuse everyone else of doing.

[Tgo01]

Haven't they also said she was at Congress and meeting with other people about this adoption thing? Do we need to also accuse everyone of collusion that she spoke to?

Let's not forget that the Obama administration allowed a Russian government spy with vast ties to the Kremlin and carrying highly sensitive documents let her into the country.

This collusion not only goes all the way to the top of the current administration, but also the last administration!

RUSSIANS! RUSSIANS! THE RUSSIANS ARE EVERYWHERE!

If only we had the good senses to present them with a giant reset button 8 years ago that could have solved all of this mess!

If only we had a president who promised the Russian president favorable treatment if he just got off his back until after he got reelected!

[time4fun]

Allegedly.

I don't believe anything without proof. And so far I've seen no proof of collusion, nor proof that there wasn't. You're just willing to believe everything you read, something you so eagerly accuse everyone else of doing.

You have an email demonstrating that the Trump family and campaign were 100% comfortable working with the Russian government's program to support their campaign. You know for a fact that EVERY SINGLE member of the campaign who was present in that meeting left the meeting off of their various security forms and out of their answers about their contacts with the Russian government. You know that they repeatedly, intentionally lied through their teeth about the details of the meeting. You know that Trump Jr showed absolutely zero shock at the line about the Russian government working to support their campaign, and you also know that the Trump campaign (including Trump himself) repeatedly deceived the country about the Russian government's desire to get them elected. And you know that the Trump campaign immediately started working on undoing Russian sanctions when they got into the White House until Congress stepped in and made them back off. And you know that Trump- by his own admission- fired the FBI Director overseeing the investigations into his campaign after he refused to bow to repeated pressure to call off the investigation into his former Director of National Security- who is also the first person to have gone on record saying he was willing to flip for immunity to his NUMEROUS crimes.

Do you have another explanation for all of this?

Seriously.

[Tgo01]

You have an email demonstrating that the Trump family

Wait, so now Trump Jr = The entire Trump family?

Yeah. You have officially lost your fucking mind. Take your logic teaching career and shove that right up your ass too. Thanks.

[cwolff]

The deception, Chris, is mind-boggling. And there are still people who are out there who believe we’re making it up. And one day they’re gonna realize we’re not and look around and go, Where are we, and why are we getting told all these lies?

We can all agree that if she's lobbying against the Magnitsky act, shes on government business

[RichardCranium]

You have an email demonstrating that the Trump family and campaign were 100% comfortable working with the Russian government's program to support their campaign. You know for a fact that EVERY SINGLE member of the campaign who was present in that meeting left the meeting off of their various security forms and out of their answers about their contacts with the Russian government. You know that they repeatedly, intentionally lied through their teeth about the details of the meeting. You know that Trump Jr showed absolutely zero shock at the line about the Russian government working to support their campaign, and you also know that the Trump campaign (including Trump himself) repeatedly deceived the country about the Russian government's desire to get them elected. And you know that the Trump campaign immediately started working on undoing Russian sanctions when they got into the White House until Congress stepped in and made them back off. And you know that Trump- by his own admission- fired the FBI Director overseeing the investigations into his campaign after he refused to bow to repeated pressure to call off the investigation into his former Director of National Security- who is also the first person to have gone on record saying he was willing to flip for immunity to his NUMEROUS crimes.

Do you have another explanation for all of this?

Seriously.

No, I have absolutely no idea. What do you believe the end game is?

[Tgo01]

We can all agree that if she's lobbying against the Magnitsky act, shes on government business

How do you figure we all have to agree to that based on that evidence alone?

Russia moved to ban Americans from adopting Russian children in response to the Magnitsky Act. Maybe she really does just give a shit about children and doesn't think orphans should be used as bargaining chips by the Russian government and since the Magnitsky act was a precursor for the said American/Russian children adoption ban she is seeking to have both acts repealed.

Sure, this can all just be a cover for wanting to get rid of the Magnitsky act and she doesn't really give a shit about orphans, but it's absurd to say "Nope! You must agree with me because reasons!"

[cwolff]

That's quite open minded and commendable.

I wasn't here for the election. Was the PC this forgiving of Hillary also?

[Tgo01]

That's quite open minded and commendable.

I wasn't here for the election. Was the PC this forgiving of Hillary also?

Why are you bringing up Hillary?! We're talking about Trump now! Why you are deflecting to Hillary? Is that all you can do?! RRRRREEEEEEEEEE!!!

[cwolff]

Trumps gonna need a new propaganda apparatus.

From Fox News Insider


The Trump team's "no there there" talking point died this week, Chris Stirewalt said this morning on "America's Newsroom."

The Fox News politics editor agreed with Charles Krauthammer's overall assessment of the damage done by the revelation that President Trump's son Donald Jr. met a Russian lawyer last spring in an attempt to obtain dirt on the Clintons.

[Methais]

Oh, you take such umbrage with that? Have you actually deluded yourself into thinking that:

1) the regular heehawing circlejerk of uncritical opinions with absolutely no regard to facts,
2) the dismissal of any news source that doesn't begin with "Breit," "Fox N" or "Drudg"
3) the everchanging goalposts as increasingly egregious developments occur regarding to the Trump sphere

actually constitute reasoned positions or good-faith interest in "discussion"? No.

Look at all the recent threads you and the regulars have posted in. It's almost all "HURRRRRRR, TIME4FUN IS SO RETARDED, HURR, BACK IS SO RETARDED, HURR, CWOLF IS SO RETARDED, HURRRRRR, LOOK HOW MUCH WE ALL AGREE WITH EACH OTHER."

You bask in gleeful ignorance, convinced that you're enlightened. What are you going to say when people start resigning or getting indicted?

The obvious solution would be for you all to stop being retarded. Which isn't actually possible.

[cwolff]

https://scontent.fapa1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/19989807_1960396334230074_2744005976217014186_n.jp g?oh=5bcb9f8e079d24472f8ded522d686323&oe=5A05DDC5

[cwolff]

Putin's getting a good ROI


...the Trump administration is quietly trying to put the kibosh on bipartisan legislation to sanction Russia for election interference.
The bill, co-sponsored by Sens. Ben Cardin (D-MD) and John McCain (R-AZ), would impose new sanctions against Russia and was specifically crafted to make it difficult for President Trump to lift them. It passed in the Senate by a 98-2 margin in June.

But now the bill suddenly looks like it may be in jeopardy. Republicans in the House have been slow to take up a bill that would embarrass the president, and Trump’s team is raising objections to its curtailment of their executive authority to deal with Russia as they see fit.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/7/11/15947970/trump-russia-sanctions-explained

[Methais]

Until Republican voters decide that being lied to repeatedly for a year about the Trump campaign's interactions with Russia is a problem, they'll just keep doing it.

Just when I thought the irony couldn't get anymore delicious.


You don't understand basic English.

You're not allowed to speak anymore. You should go back to practicing your upper-case letters.

You should go wash your smelly cunt.


"I am so very very smart! You just don't understand!"

Keep on teaching that logic to your niece, time4fun. Maybe she'll put in a good word with her brother and you can double the amount of students you have!

Let's be real he probably barely speaks English.


Better morally bankrupt than just plain stupid.

So which one are you?


I wasn't here for the election. Was the PC this forgiving of Hillary also?

Yes, time4fun insists Hillary never did anything wrong and it's all a vast right wing conspiracy + sexism + racism + homophobia + xenophobia, and lack of indictment = proof of innocence despite Comey "If someone else had done this they'd be in huge fucking trouble. HUUUUGE TROUBLE!!!!!1" and then promptly wrapped up on election night with "I've never been so scared in my life!" after Trump tubgirled the fuck out of her pre-emptive "Even Texas is in play!" Hillary victory celebration.

She eventually became so unhinged that now when a democrat loses a special election she considers it a win for democrats anyway and thinks it's a sign that the country is turning left and republicans should be shaking in their boots. Which is something democrats don't do because they only wear sandals with tube socks. Strangely enough, I saw a recent clip from The View where Whoopi was making the exact same argument almost verbatim that time4fish was making about the same (Georgia) special election results.

Also if the topic in/of a thread is anything at all, like literally anything, it's safe to assume that time4fun has at least 1 PhD in it, possibly more, and most likely taught a class in it and has also worked in that field for several years. There's also a high probability that her secretary boyfriend has high level contacts in whatever field the current topic is about.

She also claims that she makes more money than all of the rest of the PC combined, so better make sure you never disagree with her because sexism is wrong, and being wrong is for women.

[Ashliana]

The obvious solution would be for you all to stop being retarded. Which isn't actually possible.

The real question is whether or not you deliberately, or just inadvertently demonstrated my claim without a shred of self-awareness. Either way, my thanks.

[Wrathbringer]

The real question is whether or not you deliberately, or just inadvertently demonstrated my claim without a shred of self-awareness. Either way, my thanks.

lol @ your rep

[Androidpk]

I wasn't here for the election. Was the PC this forgiving of Hillary also?

There were a handful of (ignorant) people that defended Hillary and every single one of her fuckups.

[cwolff]

How does this fit the timeline?




The Trump campaign began paying Don Jr's lawyer about two weeks before the email story broke, per new FEC filing https://t.co/F0ifZ3q2Xw

[cwolff]

Things that make you go hmm...

https://scontent.fapa1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/19961337_365678753847159_7756159439335603129_n.jpg ?oh=de540ffc278856e5adc6c1300c89e6fa&oe=5A0FD65D

[Methais]

The real question is whether or not you deliberately, or just inadvertently demonstrated my claim without a shred of self-awareness. Either way, my thanks.

You and the rest of the retard crew are here for my entertainment. Having a serious debate with any of you is a complete waste of time and has no benefit other than watching you become even more retarded, which happens every time you post anyway. Talking about women's shoes with Latrin for 50 pages would be a better use of time.

EDIT: lololol @ your rep


Aww, poor baby with his substantive-free position his ego can't stand having criticized. Perhaps someday you'll be able to muster up an actual response.

I'm sorry that a Girl Scout can beat you in a fist fight.

[Latrinsorm]

Talking about women's shoes with Latrin for 50 pages would be a better use of time.:offtopic: but you KNOW I'm down.

[time4fun]

You and the rest of the retard crew are here for my entertainment. Having a serious debate with any of you is a complete waste of time and has no benefit other than watching you become even more retarded, which happens every time you post anyway. Talking about women's shoes with Latrin for 50 pages would be a better use of time.

EDIT: lololol @ your rep



I'm sorry that a Girl Scout can beat you in a fist fight.

1) You're not capable of a serious debate because you don't actually know much about the topics that are generally discussed

2) "A girl scout can beat you in a fist fight"- congratulations, you may not be smarter than a 5th grader, but you still have a lot in common with them.

[Wrathbringer]

time4dung white knighting for Assliana. That's rich.

[Methais]

1) You're not capable of a serious debate because you don't actually know much about the topics that are generally discussed

You've proven repeatedly that you don't have the first clue what you're talking about in 99% of your posts. You just delude yourself into thinking you were right anyway, i.e. "Georgia special election was really a win for democrats even though the republican won and because of that republicans should be shaking in their boots!" Which hilariously you got that bullshit from The View of all places before you mindlessly regurgitated it here. Which is quite telling, but not at all surprising.

It has nothing to do with what I am or am not capable of either. What it really boils down to is what would honestly be the point of trying to engage in a serious debate with fringe idiots like you that have your own separate reality that is the foundation for your stupidity? Stupidity that's so incredible beyond the realm of normal stupid that the only person here who doesn't think you're a complete retard is Backlash, all while you're talking about how much smarter you are than everyone else in almost every post you make on top of all the other bullshit you come up with that I'm not going to rehash because everyone already knows, all of which almost always consists of you being cunty and incorrect while insisting everyone else is wrong and only you are smart enough to understand these things.

And let's not forget that until you came along and took his title from him, Backlash was by far the undisputed champion of political retardedness on here, with unanimous bipartisan agreement.

And maybe cwolff, at least until he realizes just how severe of a looney toon you are. Giving him the benefit of the doubt since he recently just came back to the PC and you didn't exist here last time he was posting regularly. The good old days. Oh, and Ashliana who's been neck and neck with Back for a long long time.

Great crew you got there. :lol:

Even the other far lefties on here think you're a complete retard. People like you gave us Trump whether you can ever be honest enough with yourself to admit that or not.


2) "A girl scout can beat you in a fist fight"- congratulations, you may not be smarter than a 5th grader, but you still have a lot in common with them.

"Let me remind you again how smart I am!"

A Girl Scout would probably tell you to just take a shit on yourself. A real Girl Scout that was born with a vagina that is, not some mini-Ashliana trying to sell cookies.

time4fun's source of news:

https://youtu.be/9kELG88zGkQ

[cwolff]

You've proven repeatedly that you don't have the first clue what you're talking about in 99% of your posts. You just delude yourself into thinking you were right anyway, i.e. "Georgia special election was really a win for democrats even though the republican won." Which hilariously you got that from The View of all places. Which is quite telling.

It has nothing to do with what I am or am not capable of. What it really boils down to is what would honestly be the point of trying to engage in a serious debate with fringe idiots like you that have your own separate reality that is the foundation for your stupidity? Stupidity that's so incredible beyond the realm of normal stupid that the only person here who doesn't think you're stupid is Backlash, all while talking about how much smarter you are than everyone else in almost every post you make, which is almost always you being cunty and incorrect. And let's not forget that until you came along and took his title from him, Backlash was the undisputed champion of political retardedness on here, with full bipartisan agreement.

And maybe cwolff, at least until he realizes just how severe of a looney toon you are. Giving him the benefit of the doubt since he recently just came back to the PC and you didn't exist here last time he was posting regularly. The good old days. Oh, and Ashliana who's been neck and neck with Back for a long long time.

Great crew you got there. :lol: Even the lefties on here think you're a complete retard. People like you have us Trump whether you can ever be honest enough with yourself to admit that or not.



"Let me remind you again how smart I am!"

A Girl Scout would probably tell you to just take a shit on yourself. A real Girl Scout that was born with a vagina that is, not some mini-Ashliana trying to sell cookies.

Ya baby! I'm loving T4F's posts. I find them thoughtful, well written and she backs up her ideas with references as she can. Can't ask for much more than that on the interwebs.

[Gelston]

Ya baby! I'm loving T4F's posts. I find them thoughtful, well written and she backs up her ideas with references as she can. Can't ask for much more than that on the interwebs.

This coming from the guy that thinks Trump won't give up power without bloodshed. Rich.

[Back]

You've proven repeatedly that you don't have the first clue what you're talking about in 99% of your posts. You just delude yourself into thinking you were right anyway, i.e. "Georgia special election was really a win for democrats even though the republican won and because of that republicans should be shaking in their boots!" Which hilariously you got that bullshit from The View of all places before you mindlessly regurgitated it here. Which is quite telling, but not at all surprising.

It has nothing to do with what I am or am not capable of either. What it really boils down to is what would honestly be the point of trying to engage in a serious debate with fringe idiots like you that have your own separate reality that is the foundation for your stupidity? Stupidity that's so incredible beyond the realm of normal stupid that the only person here who doesn't think you're a complete retard is Backlash, all while you're talking about how much smarter you are than everyone else in almost every post you make on top of all the other bullshit you come up with that I'm not going to rehash because everyone already knows, all of which almost always consists of you being cunty and incorrect while insisting everyone else is wrong and only you are smart enough to understand these things.

And let's not forget that until you came along and took his title from him, Backlash was by far the undisputed champion of political retardedness on here, with unanimous bipartisan agreement.

And maybe cwolff, at least until he realizes just how severe of a looney toon you are. Giving him the benefit of the doubt since he recently just came back to the PC and you didn't exist here last time he was posting regularly. The good old days. Oh, and Ashliana who's been neck and neck with Back for a long long time.

Great crew you got there. :lol:

Even the other far lefties on here think you're a complete retard. People like you gave us Trump whether you can ever be honest enough with yourself to admit that or not.



"Let me remind you again how smart I am!"

A Girl Scout would probably tell you to just take a shit on yourself. A real Girl Scout that was born with a vagina that is, not some mini-Ashliana trying to sell cookies.

time4fun's source of news:

https://youtu.be/9kELG88zGkQ

To me she makes the most legit points of most people in politics. She actually provides links to back up her opinions and observations. I'll take that over all the people who just post stupid pics or insults without anything to back them up with.

[Wrathbringer]

To me she makes the most legit points of most people in politics. She actually provides links to back up her opinions and observations. I'll take that over all the people who just post stupid pics or insults without anything to back them up with.

You're retarded.

[cwolff]

This coming from the guy that thinks Trump won't give up power without bloodshed. Rich.

Oh yes. We are really flirting up to the edge of tyranny with this guy. Of course, he's never hid his authortarian leanings. His followers choose not to see it, or maybe they even embrace it but choose not recognize it out loud.

[Gelston]

Oh yes. We are really flirting up to the edge of tyranny with this guy. Of course, he's never hid his authortarian leanings. His followers choose not to see it, or maybe they even embrace it but choose not recognize it out loud.

It is pretty telling that you think one man is more powerful than the Constitution, the States, the Courts, Congress, and the American people. Trump won't stay in power for 1 day past 8 years.

[time4fun]

Ya baby! I'm loving T4F's posts. I find them thoughtful, well written and she backs up her ideas with references as she can. Can't ask for much more than that on the interwebs.

It's been nice having someone else in the politics folder who actually cites real sources and provides political analysis.

[time4fun]

To me she makes the most legit points of most people in politics. She actually provides links to back up her opinions and observations. I'll take that over all the people who just post stupid pics or insults without anything to back them up with.

Thank you. I appreciate your posts as well.

[Stolis]

It's been nice having someone else in the politics folder who actually cites real sources and provides political analysis.

Shut the fuck up

[cwolff]

It is pretty telling that you think one man is more powerful than the Constitution, the States, the Courts, Congress, and the American people. Trump won't stay in power for 1 day past 8 years.

...past 8 years. I see what you did there!!! :ranting:

Here's something Robert Reich said:


I had breakfast recently with a friend who's a former Republican member of Congress. Here's what he said:
Him: Trump is no Republican. He’s just a big fat ego.
Me: Then why didn’t you speak out against him during the campaign?
Him: You kidding? I was surrounded by Trump voters. I’d have been shot.
Me: So what now? What are your former Republican colleagues going to do?
Him (smirking): They’ll play along for a while.
Me: A while?
Him: They’ll get as much as they want – tax cuts galore, deregulation, military buildup, slash all those poverty programs, and then get to work on Social Security and Medicare – and blame him. And he’s such a fool he’ll want to take credit for everything.
Me: And then what?
Him (laughing): They like Pence.
Me: What do you mean?
Him: Pence is their guy. They all think Trump is out of his mind.
Me: So what?
Him: So the moment Trump does something really dumb – steps over the line – violates the law in a big stupid clumsy way … and you know he will ...
Me: They impeach him?
Him: You bet. They pull the trigger.

Gives me some hope.

[time4fun]

You've proven repeatedly that you don't have the first clue what you're talking about in 99% of your posts. You just delude yourself into thinking you were right anyway, i.e. "Georgia special election was really a win for democrats even though the republican won and because of that republicans should be shaking in their boots!" Which hilariously you got that bullshit from The View of all places before you mindlessly regurgitated it here. Which is quite telling, but not at all surprising.



Your posts never have any political citations or analysis in them- they're just personal attacks against people whose opinions don't fit your own. For you to be talking about how pointless it is to engage with other people is...funny.

More to the point- if you people are so convinced you're right- then it shouldn't be too hard to provide actual citations and analysis to break down the analyses of the people you disagree with. But that's the thing that's so telling about people like you, Wrath, and PB- you're so convinced you're right, but you never have actual evidence to back it up. When you're presented with evidence contrary to your world views- you just fall back on personal harassment because it's all you have. You don't know how to engage with it, so you do your best to make it go away.

There's not a single person here who honestly thinks you people- all of whom post several times a day in the politics folder- don't provide meaningful citations or analysis because it's not worth your time. If that were true- you would just avoid the politics folder. Your posts indicate that you don't really place much value on your time.

Truthfully it's because none of your arguments stand up to real evidence, and your opinions aren't based on actual facts. They're based on your personal comfort. You judge arguments by their conclusions, not based on their evidence and reasoning.

And that tells everyone a lot about how you arrived at your own opinions to begin with.

[Wrathbringer]

Your posts never have any political citations or analysis in them- they're just personal attacks against people whose opinions don't fit your own. For you to be talking about how pointless it is to engage with other people is...funny.

More to the point- if you people are so convinced you're right- then it shouldn't be too hard to provide actual citations and analysis to break down the analyses of the people you disagree with. But that's the thing that's so telling about people like you, Wrath, and PB- you're so convinced you're right, but you never have actual evidence to back it up. When you're presented with evidence contrary to your world views- you just fall back on personal harassment because it's all you have. You don't know how to engage with it, so you do your best to make it go away.

There's not a single person here who honestly thinks you people- all of whom post several times a day in the politics folder- don't provide meaningful citations or analysis because it's not worth your time. If that were true- you would just avoid the politics folder. Your posts indicate that you don't really place much value on your time.

Truthfully it's because none of your arguments stand up to real evidence, and your opinions aren't based on actual facts. They're based on your personal comfort. You judge arguments by their conclusions, not based on their evidence and reasoning.

And that tells everyone a lot about how you arrived at your own opinions to begin with.

You're retarded.

[Back]

For some of our community the politics folder isn't really about politics. It's about insults.

Some people can't deal with their feelings so they rage and resort to insults.

[Androidpk]

Your posts never have any political citations or analysis in them- they're just personal attacks against people whose opinions don't fit your own. For you to be talking about how pointless it is to engage with other people is...funny.

More to the point- if you people are so convinced you're right- then it shouldn't be too hard to provide actual citations and analysis to break down the analyses of the people you disagree with. But that's the thing that's so telling about people like you, Wrath, and PB- you're so convinced you're right, but you never have actual evidence to back it up. When you're presented with evidence contrary to your world views- you just fall back on personal harassment because it's all you have. You don't know how to engage with it, so you do your best to make it go away.

There's not a single person here who honestly thinks you people- all of whom post several times a day in the politics folder- don't provide meaningful citations or analysis because it's not worth your time. If that were true- you would just avoid the politics folder. Your posts indicate that you don't really place much value on your time.

Truthfully it's because none of your arguments stand up to real evidence, and your opinions aren't based on actual facts. They're based on your personal comfort. You judge arguments by their conclusions, not based on their evidence and reasoning.

And that tells everyone a lot about how you arrived at your own opinions to begin with.

This coming from the person claiming for months that there was no criminal investigation on Hillary, only a security inquiry.. :lol:

[Androidpk]

For some of our community the politics folder isn't really about politics. It's about insults.

Some people can't deal with their feelings so they rage and resort to insults.

you do realize you just called out your comrade Time4Insults, right?

[Parkbandit]

Ya baby! I'm loving T4F's posts. I find them thoughtful, well written and she backs up her ideas with references as she can. Can't ask for much more than that on the interwebs.

http://www.reactiongifs.com/lol/illK6U.gif

To me she makes the most legit points of most people in politics. She actually provides links to back up her opinions and observations. I'll take that over all the people who just post stupid pics or insults without anything to back them up with.

http://www.reactiongifs.com/lol/illK6U.gif


It's been nice having someone else in the politics folder who actually cites real sources and provides political analysis.

http://www.reactiongifs.com/lol/illK6U.gif


Thank you. I appreciate your posts as well.

http://www.reactiongifs.com/lol/illK6U.gif

[Parkbandit]

For some of our community the politics folder isn't really about politics. It's about insults.

Some people can't deal with their feelings so they rage and resort to insults.

You're a flaming hypocritical little bitch:


I didn't think you cared. So what makes you enjoy being an annoying asshole?


ROFL. You needed to ask? PB has a PHD in bullshit.


It blows my mind that you think anyone takes you seriously.


Wraithbringer is just a troll account. Never mind it. Back him into a corner with a legitimate question and he sharts himself.

In before you call me a mean bully...................

[Parkbandit]

This coming from the person claiming for months that there was no criminal investigation on Hillary, only a security inquiry.. :lol:

Well, that's what the Attorney General said to call it.

[time4fun]

This coming from the person claiming for months that there was no criminal investigation on Hillary, only a security inquiry.. :lol:

This coming from someone who keeps repeating debunked claims about the Clintons after being fact checked endlessly, and someone who was completely wrong about the Clinton email situation.

Having said that- at least you bothered backing up many of your views with citations. Your sources were often cringe-worthy, but they existed.

Even Tgo- bless his borderline illiterate heart- does actually cite sources for at least some of what he says.

And that's why I excluded both of you from my list.

[Androidpk]

This coming from someone who keeps repeating debunked claims about the Clintons after being fact checked endlessly, and someone who was completely wrong about the Clinton email situation.

Having said that- at least you bothered backing up many of your views with citations. Your sources were often cringe-worthy, but they existed.

Even Tgo- bless his borderline illiterate heart- does actually cite sources for at least some of what he says.

And that's why I excluded both of you from my list.


The only thing I was wrong about was thinking Obama and Lynch would be impartial (and not actively try to obstruct justice.) Everything else was spot on.

[Methais]

Your posts never have any political citations or analysis in them- they're just personal attacks against people whose opinions don't fit your own. For you to be talking about how pointless it is to engage with other people is...funny.

Thanks for proving that you have no comprehension skills.


More to the point- if you people are so convinced you're right- then it shouldn't be too hard to provide actual citations and analysis to break down the analyses of the people you disagree with. But that's the thing that's so telling about people like you, Wrath, and PB- you're so convinced you're right, but you never have actual evidence to back it up. When you're presented with evidence contrary to your world views- you just fall back on personal harassment because it's all you have. You don't know how to engage with it, so you do your best to make it go away.

There's not a single person here who honestly thinks you people- all of whom post several times a day in the politics folder- don't provide meaningful citations or analysis because it's not worth your time. If that were true- you would just avoid the politics folder. Your posts indicate that you don't really place much value on your time.

It actually indicates that I place more value on my time. Because no sane person that values their time is going to sink any meaningful amount of time into having a serious debate with you because people like you will argue against the facts all day long all while acting like an arrogant twat despite almost always being wrong, and even after being proven wrong.

If I didn't value my time, I would go dig up links and all that bullshit, only to have you be like "Nuh uh because reasons, and btw I'm much smarter than everyone here!" It's not like I have any expectation of changing your views. I'd assume the same for you too, but honestly you're so arrogant and high on yourself for reasons that don't actually exist that you probably believe you can turn everyone on the PC deep blue "If they'd only just realize how much smarter than them I am!"

And then there's the obvious fact that in the end it's pointless anyway because nobody posting here in the politics folder is ever going to do anything meaningful about it and the chips will still fall where they're going to fall regardless. It's like arguing which sports team is better as if you're going to have some affect on how the season goes when in reality nobody on either team will ever know you even exist. So really it's you who doesn't value your time. You're just stuck so far up your own ass that you'll never be able to admit it to yourself.


Truthfully it's because none of your arguments stand up to real evidence, and your opinions aren't based on actual facts. They're based on your personal comfort. You judge arguments by their conclusions, not based on their evidence and reasoning.

And that tells everyone a lot about how you arrived at your own opinions to begin with.

"Even though the republican won the Georgia special election it's really a victory for democrats and republicans should be very worried!" -You (paraphrased because it's not worth the time to go find the actual post either)

Anyway, feel free to explain why it should be worth anyone's time when dealing with people like you that even other liberals think are unhinged lunatics.

And since you still struggle with processing this...you are entertainment to me and nothing else. And not the laughing with you kind. And nobody noticed you were gone when you went on vacation.

[time4fun]

Exhibit A

Fascinating. Even after being accused of relying purely on personal attacks in lieu of political citations and analysis, your defense was entirely a personal attack with no actual political citations or analysis. It's so knee-jerk that I don't think you actually know how else to respond.


Even more interesting, after being criticized for seeing arguments as nothing but conclusions (and ignoring evidence and reasoning), your attempt to recap my argument was nothing more than a repeat of my conclusion That's not an argument, by the way. An argument is a conclusion AND supporting evidence. My argument was that the results of the special elections were good omens for the Democrats because they averaged a 14 point swing in the direction of Democrats, and that there were 70ish districts where Republicans won by less than that margin.

You had a lot of ways you could have dealt with that, but you did exactly what I accused you of doing as your defense against the accusation.

You say it's not worth your time to engage, but you've got time to write long-winded, concerted personal attacks. You're not entertained- you're offended and threatened. Your personal attacks are your attempt to try to make the conversation about something you feel more comfortable with- something you can wrap your mind around. It makes you look small.

Good luck with that.

[Fortybox]

Fascinating. Even after being accused of relying purely on personal attacks in lieu of political citations and analysis, your defense was entirely a personal attack with no actual political citations or analysis. It's so knee-jerk that I don't think you actually know how else to respond.


Even more interesting, after being criticized for seeing arguments as nothing but conclusions (and ignoring evidence and reasoning), your attempt to recap my argument was nothing more than a repeat of my conclusion That's not an argument, by the way. An argument is a conclusion AND supporting evidence. My argument was that the results of the special elections were good omens for the Democrats because they averaged a 14 point swing in the direction of Democrats, and that there were 70ish districts where Republicans won by less than that margin.

You had a lot of ways you could have dealt with that, but you did exactly what I accused you of doing as your defense against the accusation.

You say it's not worth your time to engage, but you've got time to write long-winded, concerted personal attacks. You're not entertained- you're offended and threatened. Your personal attacks are your attempt to try to make the conversation about something you feel more comfortable with- something you can wrap your mind around. It makes you look small.

Good luck with that.

https://media0.giphy.com/media/aSvmxvARy03ks/giphy.gif

[Methais]

Fascinating. Even after being accused of relying purely on personal attacks in lieu of political citations and analysis, your defense was entirely a personal attack with no actual political citations or analysis. It's so knee-jerk that I don't think you actually know how else to respond.


Even more interesting, after being criticized for seeing arguments as nothing but conclusions (and ignoring evidence and reasoning), your attempt to recap my argument was nothing more than a repeat of my conclusion That's not an argument, by the way. An argument is a conclusion AND supporting evidence. My argument was that the results of the special elections were good omens for the Democrats because they averaged a 14 point swing in the direction of Democrats, and that there were 70ish districts where Republicans won by less than that margin.

You had a lot of ways you could have dealt with that, but you did exactly what I accused you of doing as your defense against the accusation.

You say it's not worth your time to engage, but you've got time to write long-winded, concerted personal attacks. You're not entertained- you're offended and threatened. Your personal attacks are your attempt to try to make the conversation about something you feel more comfortable with- something you can wrap your mind around. It makes you look small.

Good luck with that.

Yes I'm totally threatened by some faceless cunt from an old text game. And I'm sorry if you cap out at 30 wpm, because it really doesn't take long at all to write a "long winded" post. It might for you but you're an all around failure anyway.

Since you still don't get it I'll dumb it down for you some more...political debates with retards like you are a waste of time, but your extreme stupidity and self-righteousness is entertaining as fuck. Nobody is laughing wth you they're laughing at you and you consistently deliver over and over and you still don't get it. And you never will because that's part of being a retard.

What's it like living life stuck that far up your own ass?

[Back]

Someone is cranky this morning.

[time4fun]

Someone is cranky this morning.

No, he's not cranky. He's entertained.

[Wrathbringer]

No, he's not cranky. He's entertained.

He's right.

[hello]

He's right.

No he's not.

time4fun. Clearly, just from the way you write and the way you backup all your points you are far and away more intelligent and educated. I really do believe you when you say you hold several advanced degrees BUT...

The reason why you're failing to make any understanding with people like Methais or PB or Wraithbringer is that you're approaching them as equals. Just look at the way they respond to your comments, not with facts, not with a well thoughtout arguement, but with GIFs and name calling like how a 3rd grader would argue their "point".

People like Methais aren't bad people. They are victims. Please, you must understand that. They are the 21st century version of serfs or peasants getting used, abused, and bamboozled by people who fully utilized their gifts and excelled to a high position in life (like people in DC,Wall Street, Academia).

Presumably, as a male, Methais is feeling intimidated by you time4fun. He understands his own limitations and his personal failings (to his credit) and knows he can't keep up with you, a highly educated strong woman. So he does what a weak under-developed male does, which is to lash out with childish name calling like "cunt" and "stupid." Don't blame him, time4fun. As a person who's worked hard and achieved much it's ,for better or worse, your burden to understand and ultimately help those that achieved far less and made worse choices than you.

As the fountainhead/nobility of this nation it's your duty to drag those of lesser ability into truth and knowledge.
.
https://paulboylan.files.wordpress.com/2016/08/gun-nut.jpg?w=423&h=278
Don't judge him

[Neveragain]

Please don't defile the greatness that is Khaleesi by using her as your avatar.

[Parkbandit]

No he's not.

time4fun. Clearly, just from the way you write and the way you backup all your points you are far and away more intelligent and educated. I really do believe you when you say you hold several advanced degrees BUT...

The reason why you're failing to make any understanding with people like Methais or PB or Wraithbringer is that you're approaching them as equals. Just look at the way they respond to your comments, not with facts, not with a well thoughtout arguement, but with GIFs and name calling like how a 3rd grader would argue their "point".

People like Methais aren't bad people. They are victims. Please, you must understand that. They are the 21st century version of serfs or peasants getting used, abused, and bamboozled by people who fully utilized their gifts and excelled to a high position in life (like people in DC,Wall Street, Academia).

Presumably, as a male, Methais is feeling intimidated by you time4fun. He understands his own limitations and his personal failings (to his credit) and knows he can't keep up with you, a highly educated strong woman. So he does what a weak under-developed male does, which is to lash out with childish name calling like "cunt" and "stupid." Don't blame him, time4fun. As a person who's worked hard and achieved much it's ,for better or worse, your burden to understand and ultimately help those that achieved far less and made worse choices than you.

As the fountainhead/nobility of this nation it's your duty to drag those of lesser ability into truth and knowledge.
.
https://paulboylan.files.wordpress.com/2016/08/gun-nut.jpg?w=423&h=278
Don't judge him

"She's" going to have no idea that you are completely trolling her right now.

Like at all.

[Tisket]

How cute, cwolff and Backlash white knighting for time4fun.

[Gelston]

How cute, cwolff and Backlash white knighting for time4fun.

It is the actual pure, original definition of the term too.

[Androidpk]

How cute, cwolff and Backlash white knighting for time4fun.

What's cute about it?

[Ashliana]

Please don't defile the greatness that is Khaleesi by using her as your avatar.

Number of people who are surprised that you're one of those types too dumb to realize Daenerys' name isn't "Khaleesi": 0

[Tisket]

Number of people who are surprised that you're one of those types too dumb to realize Daenerys' name isn't "Khaleesi": 0

I doubt there is a single person who didn't know who he meant by using one of her character's titles.

[Tisket]

What's cute about it?

It's absolutely adorable. Especially since one of those people loves to accuse others of white knighting.

[Neveragain]

Number of people who are surprised that you're one of those types too dumb to realize Daenerys' name isn't "Khaleesi": 0

That's because a number people are giant cunts and not Dothraki.

[Ashliana]

I doubt there is a single person who didn't know who he meant by using one of her character's titles.

That's not the point. Many people (most of them monumentally stupid, like Neveragain) seriously think that's her given name.

They're like the people who think this is "Zelda":

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/20/4f/60/204f60cfd2ffe18855ff855c062d289e.png

[Tisket]

Yes, but Khaleesi just rolls off the tongue and, it has the added appeal of having an exclamatory feel to it.

[Tisket]

That's not the point.

I didn't miss your point. Your point was taking a stab at Neveragain.

[Tisket]

I've got to white knight for Neveragain for at least one day since he posted the best video of all time on my visitor's page.

:(

[Back]

No he's not.

time4fun. Clearly, just from the way you write and the way you backup all your points you are far and away more intelligent and educated. I really do believe you when you say you hold several advanced degrees BUT...

The reason why you're failing to make any understanding with people like Methais or PB or Wraithbringer is that you're approaching them as equals. Just look at the way they respond to your comments, not with facts, not with a well thoughtout arguement, but with GIFs and name calling like how a 3rd grader would argue their "point".

People like Methais aren't bad people. They are victims. Please, you must understand that. They are the 21st century version of serfs or peasants getting used, abused, and bamboozled by people who fully utilized their gifts and excelled to a high position in life (like people in DC,Wall Street, Academia).

Presumably, as a male, Methais is feeling intimidated by you time4fun. He understands his own limitations and his personal failings (to his credit) and knows he can't keep up with you, a highly educated strong woman. So he does what a weak under-developed male does, which is to lash out with childish name calling like "cunt" and "stupid." Don't blame him, time4fun. As a person who's worked hard and achieved much it's ,for better or worse, your burden to understand and ultimately help those that achieved far less and made worse choices than you.

As the fountainhead/nobility of this nation it's your duty to drag those of lesser ability into truth and knowledge.
.
https://paulboylan.files.wordpress.com/2016/08/gun-nut.jpg?w=423&h=278
Don't judge him

Damn. Well said.

[Neveragain]

I've got to white knight for Neveragain for at least one day since he posted the best video of all time on my visitor's page.

:(

No, please don't.

At least give me a chance to find the wound here.

[Neveragain]

That's not the point. Many people (most of them monumentally stupid, like Neveragain) seriously think that's her given name.

They're like the people who think this is "Zelda":

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/20/4f/60/204f60cfd2ffe18855ff855c062d289e.png

Can you provide me a Link?

[Tisket]

Damn. Well said.

You do realize hello is trolling her, right?

Of course you don't. Silly question.

[Tisket]

No, please don't.


I don't make the rules, buddy.

[Neveragain]

Anywho, now that Hillary is president..........

[Parkbandit]

Damn. Well said.

http://anasattic.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/tumblr_inline_mx9fa2XTli1qce30r.gif

[Parkbandit]

You do realize hello is trolling her, right?

https://i.giphy.com/media/G1Zu26ae7mZr2/giphy.webp


Of course you don't. Silly question.

http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/scale_super/11111/111119260/4241033-3886633-2559988948-37837.gif

[Androidpk]

Damn. Well said.

Is this real life? Is today Tuesday?

[Ashliana]

Spoiler Alert: Couching apt criticisms about the board conservatives' inability to respond substantively with sarcasm and satire doesn't actually render those criticisms irrelevant.

You all heehawing that you somehow "tricked" Back implicitly ignores that, and that's what's actually funny.

[Wrathbringer]

Spoiler Alert: Couching apt criticisms about the board conservatives' inability to respond substantively with sarcasm and satire doesn't actually render those criticisms irrelevant.

You all heehawing that you somehow "tricked" Back implicitly ignores that, and that's what's actually funny.

lol@ your rep

[Neveragain]

Spoiler Alert: Couching apt criticisms about the board conservatives' inability to respond substantively with sarcasm and satire doesn't actually render those criticisms irrelevant.

You all heehawing that you somehow "tricked" Back implicitly ignores that, and that's what's actually funny.

When you're using fictional characters to make some point, there's nothing left for us but to call you retards.

I literally hear your mouth breathing every time you make a response.

[Ashliana]

lol@ your rep

Look at your post history: http://forum.gsplayers.com/search.php?searchid=4517396

Probably the cringiest the board's ever seen. You desperately need some new material.


When you're using fictional characters to make some point, there's nothing left for us but to call you retards.

I literally hear your mouth breathing every time you make a response.

I love how hurt you are that you got called out for being batshit-levels stupid. You are a hilarious self-parody of a Trump voter.

[Wrathbringer]

Look at your post history: http://forum.gsplayers.com/search.php?searchid=4517396

Probably the cringiest the board's ever seen. You desperately need some new material.



I love how hurt you are that you got called out for being batshit-levels stupid. You are a hilarious self-parody of a Trump voter.

lol @ your rep

[Ashliana]

lol @ your rep

lol @ your inability to construct reasoned positions

[Neveragain]

Look at your post history: http://forum.gsplayers.com/search.php?searchid=4517396

Probably the cringiest the board's ever seen. You desperately need some new material.



I love how hurt you are that you got called out for being batshit-levels stupid. You are a hilarious self-parody of a Trump voter.

batshit-levels of

you're welcome

[Neveragain]

But anywho....now that Clinton is president.

[time4fun]

You do realize hello is trolling her, right?

Of course you don't. Silly question.

You're right Tisket. When he says that people like Wrath, you, Methais, and PB respond like 3rd Graders do- he clearly means the opposite.

You just sound so darn sophisticated!

Point of clarification though- I only have one advanced degree. The "multiple advanced degrees" line is just the angry conservative posse "exaggerate to invalidate" strategy. Because...third grade.

[Androidpk]

But anywho....now that Clinton is president.

http://www.informationliberation.com/files/UDg2lGe22.jpg

[cwolff]

http://www.informationliberation.com/files/UDg2lGe22.jpg

awwww....it's getting me in the feels.

BTW: do you think there are thousands of kids in Africa reading this while wearing Cleveland Cavaliers 2017 NBA champs t-shirts?

[Tgo01]

Point of clarification though- I only have one advanced degree. The "multiple advanced degrees" line is just the angry conservative posse "exaggerate to invalidate" strategy. Because...third grade.

Yeah! She only has ONE degree in gender studies!

But you do make more than any 10 members of the PC combined, right?

[Neveragain]

A sure sign of liberals making grounds with future voters.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k0kp6eqjBv4

Even the indoctrination is no longer working.

[Parkbandit]

You're right Tisket. When he says that people like Wrath, you, Methais, and PB respond like 3rd Graders do- he clearly means the opposite.

You just sound so darn sophisticated!

Point of clarification though- I only have one advanced degree. The "multiple advanced degrees" line is just the angry conservative posse "exaggerate to invalidate" strategy. Because...third grade.

Tell us again how intelligent McGuyver is.. and how enlightened he is...

You're hilarious.

[Tisket]

You're right Tisket. When he says that people like Wrath, you, Methais, and PB respond like 3rd Graders do- he clearly means the opposite.

You just sound so darn sophisticated!

Point of clarification though- I only have one advanced degree. The "multiple advanced degrees" line is just the angry conservative posse "exaggerate to invalidate" strategy. Because...third grade.

Ahh, there it is. A typical gaslighter response. Textbook.

[Tisket]

I've noticed she uses gaslighter debate technique quite frequently. She's probably never encountered the term even though she is quite accomplished in it's use.

[Tgo01]

She's probably never encountered the term even though she is quite accomplished in it's use.

You dare to presume more than someone who has 20 degrees in gender studies, who makes more than any 10 people on the PC combined, who rescued a building filled with people on 9/11, and spent a summer giving lectures at the UN?

[Neveragain]

I've noticed she uses gaslighter debate technique quite frequently. She's probably never encountered the term even though she is quite accomplished in it's use.

According to time4fun I made an army of F2P characters I didn't know about and spent weeks spamming lnet with racist and anti-Semitic shit.

Oh yea, she's a gaslighter.

Normally it takes a lot for me to really dislike a person but...if I had a a gun with two bullets and I was locked in a room with my x-wife, hitler and time4fun, I would shoot time4fun twice.

[Wrathbringer]

You dare to presume more than someone who has 20 degrees in gender studies, who makes more than any 10 people on the PC combined, who rescued a building filled with people on 9/11, and spent a summer giving lectures at the UN?

You forgot that she also got in a car on 9/11.

[Parkbandit]

Normally it takes a lot for me to really dislike a person but...if I had a a gun with two bullets and I was locked in a room with my x-wife, hitler and time4fun, I would shoot time4fun twice.

So.. you're a Nazi sympathizer.........

[tyrant-201]

So.. you're a Nazi sympathizer.........

Don't tell me you're surprised?

[Gelston]

Nothing some rando said on an internet forum would push me towards shooting them, even if it is just a fake scenario. I'd shoot Hitler in both his kneecaps then probably beat him to death with the gun.

[drauz]

According to time4fun I made an army of F2P characters I didn't know about and spent weeks spamming lnet with racist and anti-Semitic shit.

That was BigWorm or something like that. Or Tyrant.

[Tisket]

So.. you're a Nazi sympathizer.........

Do you ever watch Wrecked? There is an episode where one of the castaways panics and shoots a fellow castaway. Everyone thinks he's a murderer until they find Nazi symbols tattooed on the dead guys body. Then the killer starts strutting around because he's now a Nazi killer. That show is so funny.

[tyrant-201]

That was BigWorm or something like that. Or Tyrant.

I don't recall ever saying something like that, but judging by NeverAgain's character and unpredictability - I'd say that situation is highly possible.

[Neveragain]

Don't tell me you're surprised?

So easily triggered.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-HFHsF-zJy4

Now the office is a Nazi propaganda show.

[Neveragain]

That was BigWorm or something like that. Or Tyrant.

99.999% sure it was time4fun that started that line.

[tyrant-201]

So easily triggered.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-HFHsF-zJy4

Now the office is a Nazi propaganda show.

You're gonna have to step up your game if you think you're gonna trigger me, son.

[~Rocktar~]

Please don't defile the greatness that is Khaleesi by using her as your avatar.

^^ This!

[Neveragain]

You're gonna have to step up your game if you think you're gonna trigger me, son.

Honestly the only reason I switched Bin Laden out for my x-wife is that I didn't want to come off as being Islamophobic.

It's good to see you have gotten over your recent tantrum though.

[time4fun]

I've noticed she uses gaslighter debate technique quite frequently. She's probably never encountered the term even though she is quite accomplished in it's use.

So, granted I'm not a huge fan of British plays, but I'm familiar with this incredibly esoteric concept. (dry sarcasm) Having said that, I don't think you know what gaslighting is. Gaslighting in a political/debate scenario generally refers to drawing conclusions based on contradictory evidence with the intent to deceive. Here are some examples of gas lighting:

1) Telling the American people that your Health Care Bill will increase the number of people with insurance and lower premiums after a CBO Report that clearly states that most people will see an immediate- and often significant- increase in premiums and over 20 million fewer people will be insured after it passes.

2) Maintaining that you fired the FBI Director for the same behavior that you spent months praising.

3) Getting up in front of the American people and denying that Russia interfered with our elections after your son, son-in-law, and campaign manager received an email from a Russian Oligarch's representative offering information on your opponent as part of an official Russian government program supporting your campaign, brought to you by Russian government lawyer representing a top Russian official. Also while your own administration has given sworn testimony that the interference both occurred in the last election and is ongoing.

4) Swearing that your inauguration crowd sizes were larger than your predecessor's even after pictures were posted clearly demonstrating a crowd the fraction of that size.

5) Tweeting that you believe the former US President personally ordered a wiretap on you despite that being illegal, having no evidence to back it up, and sworn testimony from your own administration saying that it never occurred. Also despite having full personal access to any warrants for wiretapping and being able to prove or disprove the claim on your own.

THOSE are examples of gas lighting.

Do you have examples of me doing that?

[Neveragain]

Goes on to prove Tisket right. So sad.

[Tgo01]

Gaslighting in a political/debate scenario generally refers to drawing conclusions based on contradictory evidence with the intent to deceive.

God damn you're stupid.

Gaslighting is manipulating someone into questioning their own sanity.

[Tgo01]

Goes on to prove Tisket right. So sad.

Oh shit, you're right! Her entire post was gaslighting :O

RUSSIA!

[Stolis]

Do you ever watch Wrecked? There is an episode where one of the castaways panics and shoots a fellow castaway. Everyone thinks he's a murderer until they find Nazi symbols tattooed on the dead guys body. Then the killer starts strutting around because he's now a Nazi killer. That show is so funny.

"Wow, how did we miss he was a Nazi?!"

That show is amusing.

[Tisket]

So, granted I'm not a huge fan of British plays, but I'm familiar with this incredibly esoteric concept. (dry sarcasm) Having said that, I don't think you know what gaslighting is. Gaslighting in a political/debate scenario generally refers to drawing conclusions based on contradictory evidence with the intent to deceive. Here are some examples of gas lighting:

1) Telling the American people that your Health Care Bill will increase the number of people with insurance and lower premiums after a CBO Report that clearly states that most people will see an immediate- and often significant- increase in premiums and over 20 million fewer people will be insured after it passes.

2) Maintaining that you fired the FBI Director for the same behavior that you spent months praising.

3) Getting up in front of the American people and denying that Russia interfered with our elections after your son, son-in-law, and campaign manager received an email from a Russian Oligarch's representative offering information on your opponent as part of an official Russian government program supporting your campaign, brought to you by Russian government lawyer representing a top Russian official. Also while your own administration has given sworn testimony that the interference both occurred in the last election and is ongoing.

4) Swearing that your inauguration crowd sizes were larger than your predecessor's even after pictures were posted clearly demonstrating a crowd the fraction of that size.

5) Tweeting that you believe the former US President personally ordered a wiretap on you despite that being illegal, having no evidence to back it up, and sworn testimony from your own administration saying that it never occurred. Also despite having full personal access to any warrants for wiretapping and being able to prove or disprove the claim on your own.

THOSE are examples of gas lighting.

Do you have examples of me doing that?

You epitomize a gaslighter. In almost every post you make. You're manipulative and deceptive and what irritates you most is that most of us understand this about you. You are like the wizard of Oz shouting, "Don't look behind the curtain!" Too late.

[time4fun]

You epitomize a gaslighter. In almost every post you make. Your manipulative and deceptive and what irritates you most is that most of us understand this about you. You are like the wizard of Oz shouting, "Don't look behind the curtain!" Too late.

Ahhh yes, I do it so often that you can't come up with a single concrete example.

[Tisket]

Ahhh yes, I do it so often that you can't come up with a single concrete example.

I don't care enough to spend time searching. No, that does not prove anything beyond my basic laziness, sorry.

[Neveragain]

Ahhh yes, I do it so often that you can't come up with a single concrete example.

You're doing it again. Man do I feel sorry for your boyfriend.

[time4fun]

I don't care enough to spend time searching. No, that does not prove anything beyond my basic laziness, sorry.

Gas Lighting-

Making extreme claims like "You always do X" and being unable and "unwilling" to provide any evidence.

[Tisket]

Gas Lighting-

Making extreme claims like "You always do X" and being unable and "unwilling" to provide any evidence.

You're doing it again.

[Neveragain]

Yes, everyone's crazy but time4fun. You will continue to be crazy until Time4fun gets her way.

[cwolff]

Ahhh yes, I do it so often that you can't come up with a single concrete example.

The right has mastered the technique of taking criticism, changing the word and throwing it back. As evidenced most succinctly by trump's, "no puppet, no puppet, you're a puppet"

[Tgo01]

Ahhh yes, I do it so often that you can't come up with a single concrete example.

Just off the top of my head; your insistence that people on "the right" on the PC always engage in some behavior whenever anyone points out one example of it.

Parkbandit calls Back a dipshit, cwolff comes along and says "Why you gotta call him a dipshit?" time4fun comes along "The conservatives on these boards always call everyone a dipshit when they don't agree with them. They can never come up with any evidence to backup their claims because they are all racist, sexist, bigoted assholes."

And I only had to slightly exaggerate the above example.

[Tisket]

Just off the top of my head; your insistence that people on "the right" on the PC always engage in some behavior whenever anyone points out one example of it.

Parkbandit calls Back a dipshit, cwolff comes along and says "Why you gotta call him a dipshit?" time4fun comes along "The conservatives on these boards always call everyone a dipshit when they don't agree with them. They can never come up with any evidence to backup their claims because they are all racist, sexist, bigoted assholes."

And I only had to slightly exaggerate the above example.

This.

[Tgo01]

The right has mastered the technique of taking criticism, changing the word and throwing it back.

Gaslighting. Now we just need time4fun to quote this and add her own spin; "They've been doing it for decades! Republicans have been unhappy ever since women earned the right to vote. They've always voted against women and they always vote against their own best interests."

Oh, that reminds me of another one; whenever you insist people "vote against their own best interests."

I mean talk about gaslighting!

"Hey Mr. Person I don't know but know enough about you that you're voting against your best interests! Stop voting against your best interests! Cause NO Republican cares about your best interests! VOTE DEMOCRAT!"

[Gelston]

Gaslighting. Now we just need time4fun to quote this and add her own spin; "They've been doing it for decades! Republicans have been unhappy ever since women earned the right to vote. They've always voted against women and they always vote against their own best interests."

Which would be hilarious since it was a Republican that proposed the 19th Amendment.

[cwolff]

Which would be hilarious since it was a Republican that proposed the 19th Amendment.

It highlights how far the GOP has fallen. Being republican uses to be something to be proud of. They had ideas, ideals and moral integrity.

[Tgo01]

Which would be hilarious since it was a Republican that proposed the 19th Amendment.

No. Remember anytime a Republican has supported anything to do with civil rights in this country means they were really a Democrat, and when Democrats were against civil rights it means they were really a Republican.

Again, gaslighting.

Democrats have mastered this shit so well that most people don't even question this shit anymore, they just accept it as fact that the parties "switched" over civil rights and if you ask someone to prove it they'll just laugh at you for being dumb.

All we need now is Latrin and WB to come along and insist the parties really did switch and post some maps or something "proving" it.

[Tgo01]

It highlights how far the GOP has fallen. Being republican uses to be something to be proud of. They had ideas, ideals and moral integrity.

You forgot; they became the party of racists after they support the civil rights act.

[time4fun]

Just off the top of my head; your insistence that people on "the right" on the PC always engage in some behavior whenever anyone points out one example of it.

Parkbandit calls Back a dipshit, cwolff comes along and says "Why you gotta call him a dipshit?" time4fun comes along "The conservatives on these boards always call everyone a dipshit when they don't agree with them. They can never come up with any evidence to backup their claims because they are all racist, sexist, bigoted assholes."

And I only had to slightly exaggerate the above example.

It helps when you use things people have actually said.

Also, how is that gas lighting? Even if you were accurately representing my statements (you're not), that would be an example of over-generalization, not gas lighting.

You misrepresenting someone's statements and then drawing a conclusion unsupported by the reality (or the misrepresentation) might quality, however.

[time4fun]

It highlights how far the GOP has fallen. Being republican uses to be something to be proud of. They had ideas, ideals and moral integrity.

Been a while since Eisenhower was in Office, however.

[Tgo01]

It helps when you use things people have actually said.

Also, how is that gas lighting? Even if you were accurately representing my statements (you're not), that would be an example of over-generalization, not gas lighting.

You're constantly telling people they never cite any sources, even people who have provided a lot of sources.

It's a common tactic of someone engaging in gaslighting; make someone question their own reality.

"Wait, do I really never provide sources? I could have sworn I do. Do I not provide them enough?"

Also your tactic of latching on to someone's post when they agree with you or when they disagree with someone you don't like, you'll quote them and like I said say something like "Oh all these conservatives on these boards do shit like this. They are just angry old white men who can't get laid!"

It's a tactic of gaslighters to try and turn other people against the person/people you are gaslighting.

Just because you're not very successful in your gaslighting bullshit does not mean you don't engage in it.

[Tgo01]

Here's a classic example of gaslighting, projecting!


When you can't dispute the facts- you attack the messenger.

There's a desperate need on the right to attack the journalists who are uncovering incriminating information about the administration and the campaign so they can avoid having to actually talk about what's been uncovered.

Start dealing with the actual facts of the situation. Stop ignoring it. If you can't dispute those facts- then you need to own up to that fact.

time4fun mocking someone for "attacking the messenger." TIME4FUN! The queen of "Oh you take <insert any source she doesn't like here> seriously?"

[Tgo01]

I didn't even have to go back very far to find an example of time4fun doing exactly what I described a few posts back:


I've never understood why these people keep using that ridiculous argument. They know full well that those old Dems became Republicans, they know full well that WE know that, and they're well aware that today is not 100 years ago.

What is the point of using an argument that you know EVERYONE in the room recognizes as BS?

See? People JUST KNOW that Democrats became Republicans. Why even argue with anyone who doesn't agree with this "known fact"? GASLIGHTING!

[Tisket]

I didn't even have to go back very far to find an example of time4fun doing exactly what I described a few posts back:



See? People JUST KNOW that Democrats became Republicans. Why even argue with anyone who doesn't agree with this "known fact"? GASLIGHTING!

I'm pretty sure that "gaslighter" just became a trigger word for time4fun. Lolol

[hello]

I'm pretty sure that "gaslighter" just became a trigger word for time4fun. Lolol

Dumb cunt.

[drauz]

Dumb cunt.

http://i.imgur.com/hcEAyNZ.gif

[Tisket]

Dumb cunt.

Honey, that word ceased triggering me about a decade ago. Unless you meant time4fun? In which case, yes, she is.

[Gelston]

Honey, that word ceased triggering me about a decade ago. Unless you meant time4fun? In which case, yes, she is.

aids

[Tisket]

aids

Use your words!

[tyrant-201]

Honey, that word ceased triggering me about a decade ago. Unless you meant time4fun? In which case, yes, she is.

liberal

[Tisket]

liberal

Oh you are cruel!

[time4fun]

Here's a classic example of gaslighting, projecting!



time4fun mocking someone for "attacking the messenger." TIME4FUN! The queen of "Oh you take <insert any source she doesn't like here> seriously?"

It's fun to watch you try so hard.

[Tisket]

It's fun to watch you try so hard.

You beg people to give you examples of your gaslighter behavior but, when someone actually does, you dismissively accuse them of trying too hard.

Classic gaslighter behavior.

[cwolff]

Another RINO! Fox libtards with their fake news.


Fox Legal Analyst: Russia Meeting 'Would've Been A Felony' If They Got Clinton Info
...
Andrew Napolitano says there's "enough to commence a criminal investigation."

[Tgo01]

Another RINO! Fox libtards with their fake news.

Someone ask him to name the crime.

[cwolff]

Someone ask him to name the crime.

Haha Haha, call him out. Get his ass on Twitter

[time4fun]

You beg people to give you examples of your gaslighter behavior but, when someone actually does, you dismissively accuse them of trying too hard.

Classic gaslighter behavior.

It helps if the example fits the definition.

It's cute though- you two HAVE been providing apt examples. Just not the way you think you have.

[Wrathbringer]

dur hur hur.

mmhm. yes. Interesting. please, go on.

[Ashliana]

Which would be hilarious since it was a Republican that proposed the 19th Amendment.

Ooh! What a shocker -- Gelston, yet again proudly asserting that "Republicans" proposed the 19th Amendment (FYI, it was a Californian), and those "Republicans" were the party that just defeated the Confederacy.

And tell me, Gelston, when it was ratified four decades later, which states lacked women's suffrage?

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f6/Map_of_US_Suffrage%2C_1920.svg/959px-Map_of_US_Suffrage%2C_1920.svg.png

What's that?? The conservative, rural, white south? NO! B-b-b-b-b-but "REPUBLICANS" are responsible for women's suffrage!

But by all means, continue touting the accomplishments of liberals in the past, as if the modern-day Republicans aren't the descendants of those who fought tooth and nail against everything those liberals fought for.

Are you going to cry "context" again?

[Neveragain]

Ooh! What a shocker -- Gelston, yet again proudly asserting that "Republicans" proposed the 19th Amendment (FYI, it was a Californian), and those "Republicans" were the party that just defeated the Confederacy.

And tell me, Gelston, when it was ratified four decades later, which states lacked women's suffrage?

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f6/Map_of_US_Suffrage%2C_1920.svg/959px-Map_of_US_Suffrage%2C_1920.svg.png

What's that?? The conservative, rural, white south? NO! B-b-b-b-b-but "REPUBLICANS" are responsible for women's suffrage!

But by all means, continue touting the accomplishments of liberals in the past, as if the modern-day Republicans aren't the descendants of those who fought tooth and nail against everything those liberals fought for.

Are you going to cry "context" again?

You do understand that California was a Republican stronghold in 1919?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9CS7j5I6aOc

[Ashliana]

You do understand that California was a Republican stronghold in 1919?


You keep using the word "Republican." And Gelston keeps using the word "Republican," especially in contexts to efforts that liberals, not conservatives, fought for -- i.e., against the Confederacy, for women's rights, etc.

"Abraham Lincoln was a Republican!"

The point, which apparently went sailing clear over your head, is that "Republican" didn't equal "reactionary conservative" the way it does in 2017, and modern-day conservatives are the grandchildren, great grandchildren/etc, who fought against the accomplishments that Gelston keeps touting.

Learn to read.

[Neveragain]

You keep using the word "Republican." And Gelston keeps using the word "Republican," especially in contexts to efforts that liberals, not conservatives, fought for -- i.e., against the Confederacy, for women's rights, etc.

"Abraham Lincoln was a Republican!"

The point, which apparently went sailing clear over your head, is that "Republican" didn't equal "reactionary conservative" the way it does in 2017, and modern-day conservatives are the grandchildren, great grandchildren/etc, who fought against the accomplishments that Gelston keeps touting.

Learn to read.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7kID3n3_CJ0

Your revisionist history is just that, revised.

[Gelston]

Ooh! What a shocker -- Gelston, yet again proudly asserting that "Republicans" proposed the 19th Amendment (FYI, it was a Californian), and those "Republicans" were the party that just defeated the Confederacy.

And tell me, Gelston, when it was ratified four decades later, which states lacked women's suffrage?

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f6/Map_of_US_Suffrage%2C_1920.svg/959px-Map_of_US_Suffrage%2C_1920.svg.png

What's that?? The conservative, rural, white south? NO! B-b-b-b-b-but "REPUBLICANS" are responsible for women's suffrage!

But by all means, continue touting the accomplishments of liberals in the past, as if the modern-day Republicans aren't the descendants of those who fought tooth and nail against everything those liberals fought for.

Are you going to cry "context" again?

The man who proposed the amendment was a Republican. That is historical fact. You wanting to be a tard and say otherwise doesn't change that fact.

[Neveragain]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2RBFOTdY1yY

[hello]

The man who proposed the amendment was a Republican. That is historical fact. You wanting to be a tard and say otherwise doesn't change that fact.

Republican and Democrat meant vastly different things a hundred years ago much like a whole lot of things if you dial it back 100 years. The more proper term would be liberal or socialist leaning or conservative or fascist leaning which applied back then.

[Ashliana]

Your revisionist history is just that, revised.

Spoiler Alert: Ben Shapiro, your favorite imbecile from Breitbart, hasn't singlehandedly or magically changed American history. Edit: Nope, Mark Levin. Even more deranged, and just like Breitbart, willfully distorting the historical record.


The man who proposed the amendment was a Republican. That is historical fact. You wanting to be a tard and say otherwise doesn't change that fact.

You not understanding what "Republican" meant in 1880 is your ignorance. No one else's. By all means, deludedly take pride in your willful ignorance and cherish the fact that the word "Republican" was used when those "Republicans" just smashed the Confederacy, the seceding states of which are the root of the modern-day Republican party, and fought tooth and nail against the 19th Amendment.

[Gelston]

Spoiler Alert: Ben Shapiro, your favorite imbecile from Breitbart, hasn't singlehandedly or magically changed American history.



You not understanding what "Republican" meant in 1880 is your ignorance. No one else's. By all means, deludedly take pride in your willful ignorance and cherish the fact that the word "Republican" was used when those "Republicans" just smashed the Confederacy, which is the root of the modern-day Republican party, and fought tooth and nail against the 19th Amendment.

When I made my post, I was replying to a quote. What was that quote? Go ahead. I'll wait.

[Ashliana]

When I made my post, I was replying to a quote. What was that quote? Go ahead. I'll wait.

Ooh! You're crying "context" again exactly as I predicted. I repeat: You not understanding what "Republican" meant in 1880 is your ignorance. No one else's.

This is a consistent theme with you, where you enjoy accomplishments by "Republicans" of 70-100+ years ago, as if modern-day Republicans are the same group of people in any way -- ideologically, geographically, ancestrally. They aren't, and in fact, the ancestors of modern-day Republicans fought against those accomplishments, which you're unironically, with a mindlessly ignorant, shit-eating grin, taking pride in.

[Gelston]

Ooh! You're crying "context" again exactly as I predicted. I repeat: You not understanding what "Republican" meant in 1880 is your ignorance. No one else's.

This is a consistent theme with you, where you enjoy accomplishments by "Republicans" of 70-100+ years ago, as if modern-day Republicans are the same group of people in any way -- ideologically, geographically, ancestrally. They aren't, and in fact, the ancestors of modern-day Republicans fought against those accomplishments, which you're unironically, with a mindlessly ignorant, shit-eating grin, taking pride in.

Context is pretty important. The person who put forward the amendment was a Republican. End of story.

[Ashliana]

Context is pretty important. The person who put forward the amendment was a Republican. End of story.

Yes, and as I mentioned, a "Republican" in 1880 has absolutely no bearing in any way, shape or form to modern-day Republicans, and fits into your established, years-long pattern of implying modern-day Republicans deserve credit for the accomplishments of people who their predecessors fought tooth and nail against. Context.

[Gelston]

Yes, and as I mentioned, a "Republican" in 1880 has absolutely no bearing in any way, shape or form to modern-day Republicans, and fits into your established, years-long pattern of implying modern-day Republicans deserve credit for the accomplishments of people who their predecessors fought tooth and nail against. Context.

What was the quote I was responding to when I first mentioned this? What did it say?

[Ashliana]

What was the quote I was responding to when I first mentioned this? What did it say?

Spoiler Alert: What you were responding to doesn't magically explain the stupidity or intentional misrepresentation of your statement away.

Try again.

[Gelston]

Spoiler Alert: What you were responding to doesn't magically explain the stupidity or intentional misrepresentation of your statement away.

Try again.

There was no stupidity or misrepresentation. It was a Republican that proposed the amendment. I didn't say anything about liberalism or conservatism. I stated what party he belong to in response-

"They've been doing it for decades! Republicans have been unhappy ever since women earned the right to vote. They've always voted against women and they always vote against their own best interests."

Obviously not, since, whether the party has changed in views or not, THOSE Republicans obviously weren't unhappy.

Either way, if was a joke, not a dick, stop taking it so hard.

[Ashliana]

There was no stupidity or misrepresentation. It was a Republican that proposed the amendment. I didn't say anything about liberalism or conservatism. I stated what party he belong to in response-

"They've been doing it for decades! Republicans have been unhappy ever since women earned the right to vote. They've always voted against women and they always vote against their own best interests."

Obviously not, since, whether the party has changed in views or not, THOSE Republicans obviously weren't unhappy.

Either way, if was a joke, not a dick, stop taking it so hard.

Yeah, none of that magically erases the validity of my response to you, especially with your established pattern of asserting or implying modern-day Republicans are the same group as they were decades/centuries ago.

[Gelston]

Yeah, none of that magically erases the validity of my response to you, especially with your established pattern of asserting or implying modern-day Republicans are the same group as they were decades/centuries ago.

It completely does. Actually, all of your responses come across as a whiny child flailing his arms around yelling "Look at me! Look at me!" Your responses had nothing to do with my comment. It is as if I was talking about pizza and you start yelling about Fords or something.

[Ashliana]

It completely does. Actually, all of your responses come across as a whiny child flailing his arms around yelling "Look at me! Look at me!" Your responses had nothing to do with my comment. It is as if I was talking about pizza and you start yelling about Fords or something.

"What I post exists in a magical vacuum that shields me from criticism!"
-unironically asserted by Gelston

[Gelston]

"What I post exists in a magical vacuum that shields me from criticism!"
-unironically asserted by Gelston

I didn't say that. I said your criticism had absolutely nothing to do with my comment. You were criticizing something that was never said. Any implication you think I made you created in your own head.

[Ashliana]

I didn't say that. I said your criticism had absolutely nothing to do with my comment. You were criticizing something that was never said. Any implication you think I made you created in your own head.

It had a lot to do with your comment. Spoiler Alert: If it didn't, you wouldn't have subsequently repeated "BUT HE WAS A REPUBLICAN!"

You can sit here insisting "up is down, 4 is purple" until the cows come home, and now you're doing mental gymnastics as if you don't have a years-long, established history of doing exactly what I said.

[Gelston]

It had a lot to do with your comment. You can sit here insisting "up is down, 4 is purple" until the cows come home, and now you're doing mental gymnastics as if you don't have a years-long, established history of doing exactly what I said.

Post every instance.

[Ashliana]

Post every instance.

Ooh! Pretend memory loss! Super convincing.

"Document every instance in which I've done what you've told me."
unironically asserted by Gelston

Well, there's that instance (http://forum.gsplayers.com/showthread.php?110072-Sorry-But-It%92s-Entirely-the-Right%92s-Fault&p=1961020#post1961020) just over a week ago, that instance in May 2015 (http://forum.gsplayers.com/showthread.php?90261-Thread-for-Things-That-Made-You-Laugh-Today&p=1779822#post1779822), participated in another exact discussion (http://forum.gsplayers.com/showthread.php?100916-Pick-SC-Dem-primary-winner-(2-27)/page12&highlight=slaves) of the same topic in March of 2016, etc. That enough? I'm not going to spend an afternoon going through your shit-show of a posting history where you ramble on about being interested in Civil War reenactments.

So, yeah, exactly like I said -- a years-long, established history of doing exactly what I claimed.

[Gelston]

Ooh! Pretend memory loss! Super convincing.

"Document every instance in which I've done what you've told me."
unironically asserted by Gelston

Well, there's that instance (http://forum.gsplayers.com/showthread.php?110072-Sorry-But-It%92s-Entirely-the-Right%92s-Fault&p=1961020#post1961020) just over a week ago, that instance in May 2015 (http://forum.gsplayers.com/showthread.php?90261-Thread-for-Things-That-Made-You-Laugh-Today&p=1779822#post1779822), participated in another exact discussion (http://forum.gsplayers.com/showthread.php?100916-Pick-SC-Dem-primary-winner-(2-27)/page12&highlight=slaves) of the same topic in March of 2016, etc. That enough? I'm not going to spend an afternoon going through your shit-show of a posting history where you ramble on about being interested in Civil War reenactments.

So, yeah, exactly like I said -- a years-long, established history of doing exactly what I claimed.

And you fail to see the context. Back said the Democrat party has never changed. If true, my statement was completed correct. Hell, READ the statement itself... "If he wants to say that the Democrats are the party of slavery, secession, and Jim Crowe, that is fine with me."

The other was a joking exchange with Back. It started when I said Libertarians don't exist. Hey, I won't say that doesn't look like what you were saying, so ok. I'll accept it.

Great though, you found 3 entire examples in the 10 years I've posted, two of which you taken completely out of the context in which they were presented. Yeah, such an "established" history.

[Neveragain]

It had a lot to do with your comment. Spoiler Alert: If it didn't, you wouldn't have subsequently repeated "BUT HE WAS A REPUBLICAN!"

You can sit here insisting "up is down, 4 is purple" until the cows come home, and now you're doing mental gymnastics as if you don't have a years-long, established history of doing exactly what I said.

You guys are the worst, post two videos that explain in full detail the whole situation and it's dismissed because you don't like the messenger. Do I get to call you anti-Semitic now that you called Ben Shapiro an imbecile? That's how this works, right?

Of course I'm more than happy to watch your ilk continue with the 'ist whistle blowing as your faces get pummeled in the ballot box.

Whites vote for Obama = progressives / same whites vote for Trump = racists

It's the same logic as 1 racist switches parties and suddenly that party is the party of racists.

I'll take "How to lose elections for 1000" Alex.

[Ashliana]

You guys are the worst, post two videos that explain in full detail the whole situation and it's dismissed because you don't like the messenger. Do I get to call you anti-Semitic now that you called Ben Shapiro an imbecile? That's how this works, right?

Of course I'm more than happy to watch your ilk continue with the 'ist whistle blowing as your faces get pummeled in the ballot box.

Whites vote for Obama = progressives / same whites vote for Trump = racists

It's the same logic as 1 racist switches parties and suddenly that party is the party of racists.

I'll take "How to lose elections for 1000" Alex.

You're posting videos by people who serve up shitty conservative apologetics that fall apart the second they're analyzed -- for a living. Not historians, not academics. I get that you're frustrated that reactionary propaganda doesn't constitute academic scholarship. That's your problem, though.

[Ashliana]

And you fail to see the context. Back said the Democrat party has never changed. If true, my statement was completed correct. Hell, READ the statement itself... "If he wants to say that the Democrats are the party of slavery, secession, and Jim Crowe, that is fine with me."

The other was a joking exchange with Back. It started when I said Libertarians don't exist. Hey, I won't say that doesn't look like what you were saying, so ok. I'll accept it.

Great though, you found 3 entire examples in the 10 years I've posted, two of which you taken completely out of the context in which they were presented. Yeah, such an "established" history.

I did a two second search and found multiple examples, even accepting your explanation here at face value -- what, pray tell, is your excuse for the other day? It was "context," then, too -- except the "context," just like this thread, didn't magically erase the validity of the criticisms.

[Gelston]

I did a two second search and found multiple examples, even accepting your explanation here at face value -- what, pray tell, is your excuse for the other day? It was "context," then, too -- except the "context," just like this thread, didn't magically erase the validity of the criticisms.

What other day? The one in this thread? Where I already explained it out to you?

[Neveragain]

You're posting videos by people who serve up shitty conservative apologetics that fall apart the second they're analyzed -- for a living. Not historians, not academics. I get that you're frustrated that reactionary propaganda doesn't constitute academic scholarship. That's your problem, though.

LOL, OK Ash.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0U3lsgp4v9s

[Ashliana]

What other day? The one in this thread? Where I already explained it out to you?

You know what? You're absolutely right. I didn't give you enough credit the other day. Total mea culpa there. I still don't find your explanation of the 19th Amendment reference above convincing.

[time4fun]

And you fail to see the context. Back said the Democrat party has never changed. If true, my statement was completed correct. Hell, READ the statement itself... "If he wants to say that the Democrats are the party of slavery, secession, and Jim Crowe, that is fine with me."

The other was a joking exchange with Back. It started when I said Libertarians don't exist. Hey, I won't say that doesn't look like what you were saying, so ok. I'll accept it.

Great though, you found 3 entire examples in the 10 years I've posted, two of which you taken completely out of the context in which they were presented. Yeah, such an "established" history.

Back didn't say it had never changed. He was clearly talking about recent politics (~10 years or so). This has been pointed out to you previously.

Your entire diatribe was based on a gross exaggeration of a point Back made.

[cwolff]

Back didn't say it had never changed. He was clearly talking about recent politics (~10 years or so). This has been pointed out to you previously.

Your entire diatribe was based on a gross exaggeration of a point Back made.

Maybe he's talking about me writing that the GOP's completely changed while the Democrats haven't in the thread "Sorry, it's all the right's fault"

[Gelston]

Back didn't say it had never changed. He was clearly talking about recent politics (~10 years or so). This has been pointed out to you previously.

Your entire diatribe was based on a gross exaggeration of a point Back made.

Yeah well, you're a vegan.

[Tisket]

Yeah well, you're a vegan.

That would explain so much.

Vegans are batshit insane.

[Tisket]

It helps if the example fits the definition.

It's cute though- you two HAVE been providing apt examples. Just not the way you think you have.

You're doing it AGAIN. I guess it's so normal to you that you can't even see it.

[hello]

Republican and Democrat meant vastly different things a hundred years ago much like a whole lot of things if you dial it back 100 years. The more proper term would be liberal or socialist leaning or conservative or fascist leaning which applied back then.

Thanks for the Red Rep Tisket I know I'm far more prettier then you and younger too. Why don't you take a look at that sagging butt in the mirror cunt. Don't cry now!

[Fortybox]

Thanks for the Red Rep Tisket I know I'm far more prettier then you and younger too. Why don't you take a look at that sagging butt in the mirror cunt. Don't cry now!

Didn't you say you'd go away? Nobody wants you here.

[Tisket]

Thanks for the Red Rep Tisket I know I'm far more prettier then you and younger too. Why don't you take a look at that sagging butt in the mirror cunt. Don't cry now!

See, that is how I know you are not a female. While there are a few that will go straight to attacking another woman's appearance, that is not the case for most. Besides, it's so much more satisfying to attack someone's intelligence. But you're too stupid to realize that.

[Gelston]

See, that is how I know you are not a female. While there are a few that will go straight to attacking another woman's appearance, that is not the case for most. Besides, it's so much more satisfying to attack someone's intelligence. But you're too stupid to realize that.

He has already said he was a guy before.

[Tisket]

He has already said he was a guy before.

Apparently, now "he" is not. I think it's safest to just use quotes when referring to "him."

[Fortybox]

Apparently, now "he" is not. I think it's safest to just use quotes when referring to "him."

Maybe "she" is transitioning like Time4fun.

Going vegan and chopping off the hotdog is srs biz.

[cwolff]

Wonder if he'll plead the fifth.


Just in: @SenFeinstein says #SpecialCounsel Mueller gave Senate Judiciary all-clear to interview Don Jr and Manafort in public session

Jim Sciuto on Twitter

[RichardCranium]

So hello is Inspire?

[Gelston]

So hello is Inspire?

Yes.

[Savageheart]

Wonder if he'll plead the fifth.

Jim Sciuto on Twitter

Might tune in for that one, but I don't think half scoop will be doing his own talking.

[time4fun]

PPP released a poll (http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2017/PPP_Release_National_71817.pdf)today that really hits the heart of how concerted misinformation campaigns on the part of Trump and the Trump-supportive media have managed to build an alternative narrative on the Trump/Russia situation:


Only 26% of Trump voters believe that Russia wanted Trump to win- despite the fact that Russia's involvement and goals have been well-established. 44% think Russia wanted CLINTON to win- despite there being zero evidence for that assertion. 31% just aren't sure one way or the other.

Only 45% of Trump voters believe that Donald Trump Jr had a meeting with the Russians about information harmful to Clinton- despite the fact that DTJ himself released the actual e-mail chain explicitly stating as much.

32% of Trump voters believe the aforementioned meeting never happened- despite people who were at the meeting expressly stating it occurred.

24% of Trump voters just aren't sure if the meeting happened or not


24% of Trump voters support an investigation into the collusion allegations; 64% are opposed to even trying to uncover the truth (whatever it may be)

77% of Trump voters don't think Trump should leave office if collusion is uncovered


It's hard to avoid a comparison with anti-vaccers. They did a study last year (I believe) that demonstrated that the more evidence you presented them with that contradicted their belief that vaccines were dangerous, the more it made them dig in on their own beliefs. A big part of that is because anti-vaccine beliefs also include an intense amount of skepticism towards medical professionals- who are exactly the ones in a position to present the evidence that proves vaccines are generally safe.

You look at this group of people who have been taught to despise impartial media outlets that can present evidence that contradicts the Administration's narrative, and then you realize they don't even want to know the truth. No amount of reality will change their minds- they've got their narrative, and they're going to stick to it no matter how inaccurate it is.

And this is why Trump and associates spend so much time attacking the media. They need to make sure that they have a sizable chunk of the country who won't believe the institution most likely to reveal the truth behind the administration's deception.

[Androidpk]

New poll says Americans think the Democratic party only stands to attack Trump.

http://dailycaller.com/2017/07/17/poll-52-percent-of-americans-think-democratic-party-just-stands-against-trump/?utm_campaign=thedcmainpage&utm_source=Facebook&utm_medium=Social

[Androidpk]

New poll says that despite all the shit Trump has done he's still more popular than Hillary Clinton.

http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/342462-poll-clinton-more-unpopular-than-trump

[Stolis]

Where's the poll that asks if Americans are tired of all this bullshit and just want Congress to do their job and quit wasting everyone's time?

[Fortybox]

A poll from the TrannyTimes says 97.5784% of the PC wants Time4Fun to leave.

[Fortybox]

Oh, and polls and predictive models said Hillary would win.

[Wrathbringer]

PPP released a poll (http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2017/PPP_Release_National_71817.pdf)today that really hits the heart of how concerted misinformation campaigns on the part of Trump and the Trump-supportive media have managed to build an alternative narrative on the Trump/Russia situation:


Only 26% of Trump voters believe that Russia wanted Trump to win- despite the fact that Russia's involvement and goals have been well-established. 44% think Russia wanted CLINTON to win- despite there being zero evidence for that assertion. 31% just aren't sure one way or the other.

Only 45% of Trump voters believe that Donald Trump Jr had a meeting with the Russians about information harmful to Clinton- despite the fact that DTJ himself released the actual e-mail chain explicitly stating as much.

32% of Trump voters believe the aforementioned meeting never happened- despite people who were at the meeting expressly stating it occurred.

24% of Trump voters just aren't sure if the meeting happened or not


24% of Trump voters support an investigation into the collusion allegations; 64% are opposed to even trying to uncover the truth (whatever it may be)

77% of Trump voters don't think Trump should leave office if collusion is uncovered


It's hard to avoid a comparison with anti-vaccers. They did a study last year (I believe) that demonstrated that the more evidence you presented them with that contradicted their belief that vaccines were dangerous, the more it made them dig in on their own beliefs. A big part of that is because anti-vaccine beliefs also include an intense amount of skepticism towards medical professionals- who are exactly the ones in a position to present the evidence that proves vaccines are generally safe.

You look at this group of people who have been taught to despise impartial media outlets that can present evidence that contradicts the Administration's narrative, and then you realize they don't even want to know the truth. No amount of reality will change their minds- they've got their narrative, and they're going to stick to it no matter how inaccurate it is.

And this is why Trump and associates spend so much time attacking the media. They need to make sure that they have a sizable chunk of the country who won't believe the institution most likely to reveal the truth behind the administration's deception.

You're retarded.

[Savageheart]

Two cents PK...

Democrats are more likely to self identify as democrat than Republicans are (and this is important) in recent years - The first pole was 35% Independent Identification - It's perfectly valid pole however one could make the case that it was more heavily balanced with likely conservatives.

The second pole - no fucking doubt, at this point quite a few democrats, and even further left folks blame Hilldog for making Trump a legitimate choice.

Forgetting the fact that Republicans are excellent at the long game and have been running against Hillary for over a decade.

[time4fun]

Where's the poll that asks if Americans are tired of all this bullshit and just want Congress to do their job and quit wasting everyone's time?

That would be a minority opinion according to the polls.

Most Americans tend to see an enemy meddling in our elections as a security threat and are concerned that our President trying to convince the country it never happened makes us even more vulnerable next time. And most Americans tend to frown upon the idea of a sitting US President colluding with that foreign power to get elected.

Crazy, I know.

[Tisket]

Two cents PK...

Democrats are more likely to self identify as democrat than Republicans are (and this is important) in recent years - The first pole was 35% Independent Identification - It's perfectly valid pole however one could make the case that it was more heavily balanced with likely conservatives.

The second pole - no fucking doubt, at this point quite a few democrats, and even further left folks blame Hilldog for making Trump a legitimate choice.

Forgetting the fact that Republicans are excellent at the long game and have been running against Hillary for over a decade.

Poland and strippers object to your post.

[time4fun]

New poll says that despite all the shit Trump has done he's still more popular than Hillary Clinton.

http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/342462-poll-clinton-more-unpopular-than-trump

Oh look- once again you bring up Clinton! It's almost like you're a one trick pony.

The PPP poll (http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2017/PPP_Release_National_71817.pdf)today actually has her losing to Trump by 7 points.

You know what's interesting about both your stat and mine?

Literally nothing. They're irrelevant.

[Savageheart]

Poland and strippers object to your post.

https://ih0.redbubble.net/image.29572277.6433/poster,220x200,ffffff-pad,220x200,ffffff.u1.jpg

[Savageheart]

Oh look- once again you bring up Clinton! It's almost like you're a one trick pony.

The PPP poll (http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2017/PPP_Release_National_71817.pdf)today actually has her losing to Trump by 7 points.

You know what's interesting about both your stat and mine?

Literally nothing. They're irrelevant.

It seems to be a common refrain to look at the past to somehow mollify the present.

The also ran has no impact on legislation today and moving forward, indeed on any branch of the government.

For folks who seem to celebrate her loss so much, you do seem to be having trouble moving past the 'victory' and assessing the present.

[Wrathbringer]

That would be a minority opinion according to the polls.

Most Americans tend to see an enemy meddling in our elections as a security threat and are concerned that our President trying to convince the country it never happened makes us even more vulnerable next time. And most Americans tend to frown upon the idea of a sitting US President colluding with that foreign power to get elected.

Crazy, I know.

Soooooo profoundly retarded.

[time4fun]

It seems to be a common refrain to look at the past to somehow mollify the present.

The also ran has no impact on legislation today and moving forward, indeed on any branch of the government.

For folks who seem to celebrate her loss so much, you do seem to be having trouble moving past the 'victory' and assessing the present.

What's really interesting is that if you watch right wing media outlets (Fox, Briebart, Daily Caller, etc), they're running constant stories about Clinton right now. It's all distraction material of course. If they don't invent some Clinton stories, then they have only Trump stories- which are always defensive and rarely favorable. Seems like a concerted effort to try to make Trump look better to his base. There's no greater boogeyman than Clinton for their readers, and if they can continually talk about how "corrupt" she is- then it makes him appearing increasingly corrupt feel more mundane.

[Fortybox]

What's really interesting is that if you watch right wing media outlets (Fox, Briebart, Daily Caller, etc), they're running constant stories about Clinton right now. It's all distraction material of course. If they don't invent some Clinton stories, then they have only Trump stories- which are always defensive and rarely favorable. Seems like a concerted effort to try to make Trump look better to his base. There's no greater boogeyman than Clinton for their readers, and if they can continually talk about how "corrupt" she is- then it makes him appearing increasingly corrupt feel more mundane.

Let us know when the left wing media finally gets its Russian collusion.

[time4fun]

Politico is reporting (http://www.politico.com/story/2017/07/18/irakly-kaveladze-trump-tower-russia-eighth-man-240679) today that the now-identified 8th person in the recently uncovered meeting between Russian associates and Trump campaign officials (and family) was connected to Russian money laundering:


The eighth named attendee at a June 2016 Trump Tower meeting between top Trump associates and a politically-connected Russian lawyer is a business associate of a top Moscow oligarch and was once identified as a key figure in a Congressional money laundering probe.

Irakly Kaveladze, until now the mysterious “eighth man” in the room, attended the meeting on behalf of Aras Agalarov, a billionaire real estate magnate with ties to Russian President Vladimir Putin and a Trump family friend. A lawyer for Agalarov has confirmed Kaveladze’s attendance to other news outlets, though he did not respond to requests for comment from POLITICO.


Business filings list Kaveladze as the founder of a company called IBC Group, which shares a New Jersey address — 333 Sylvan Avenue in Englewood Cliffs — with several shell companies connected to Aras Agalarov.

One of those firms is Saffron Property Management, which Agalarov reportedly used to purchase an $11 million condo in Florida last year.

The others include CI Publishing, PB Consulting, Russian Art Mall and a company called RJI Properties, which is run by two childhood friends of Agalarov's son, Emin, a well-known Russian pop-singer. RJI's Instagram account links to the real estate profile of Emin Agalarov’s sister.

A POLITICO reporter visiting the nondescript office building where all of these companies are headquartered found that the suite linked to Agalarov and Kaveladze was empty, with unopened mail sitting by the door. A sign in the lobby indicated that the suite belonged to IBC and Russian Art Mall, which was founded in 2000 and registered to Emin Agalarov, who is a partner in his father's business.


Soooo, the Trump campaign sits in a meeting with a Russian government lawyer who lobbies on Russian sanctions and who appears to represent a top Russian official (who specializes in procuring compromising material about people), a representative of a Russian oligarch who has close ties to Trump, and a central figure in a Russian money laundering scheme from the 90s. Thereafter, the Trump campaign repeatedly lies to the American people about having absolutely no contact with the Russian government, and also about the Russian state-sponsored work to support Trump at the expensive of Clinton, and also suddenly starts claiming they have incriminating information about Clinton and asking the Russian government to hack into her email server on national TV.

Nope, nothing suspicious going on here at all.

[Androidpk]

Oh look- once again you bring up Clinton! It's almost like you're a one trick pony.

The PPP poll (http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2017/PPP_Release_National_71817.pdf)today actually has her losing to Trump by 7 points.

You know what's interesting about both your stat and mine?

Literally nothing. They're irrelevant.


time4fun has a degree in one trick ponies

[Androidpk]

Politico is reporting (http://www.politico.com/story/2017/07/18/irakly-kaveladze-trump-tower-russia-eighth-man-240679) today that the now-identified 8th person in the recently uncovered meeting between Russian associates and Trump campaign officials (and family) was connected to Russian money laundering:






Soooo, the Trump campaign sits in a meeting with a Russian government lawyer who lobbies on Russian sanctions and who appears to represent a top Russian official (who specializes in procuring compromising material about people), a representative of a Russian oligarch who has close ties to Trump, and a central figure in a Russian money laundering scheme from the 90s. Thereafter, the Trump campaign repeatedly lies to the American people about having absolutely no contact with the Russian government, and also about the Russian state-sponsored work to support Trump at the expensive of Clinton, and also suddenly starts claiming they have incriminating information about Clinton and asking the Russian government to hack into her email server on national TV.

Nope, nothing suspicious going on here at all.


How many fucks did you give when people from Hillary's campaign were secretly meeting with people from the Chinese government?

[Neveragain]

Politico is reporting (http://www.politico.com/story/2017/07/18/irakly-kaveladze-trump-tower-russia-eighth-man-240679) today that the now-identified 8th person in the recently uncovered meeting between Russian associates and Trump campaign officials (and family) was connected to Russian money laundering:






Soooo, the Trump campaign sits in a meeting with a Russian government lawyer who lobbies on Russian sanctions and who appears to represent a top Russian official (who specializes in procuring compromising material about people), a representative of a Russian oligarch who has close ties to Trump, and a central figure in a Russian money laundering scheme from the 90s. Thereafter, the Trump campaign repeatedly lies to the American people about having absolutely no contact with the Russian government, and also about the Russian state-sponsored work to support Trump at the expensive of Clinton, and also suddenly starts claiming they have incriminating information about Clinton and asking the Russian government to hack into her email server on national TV.

Nope, nothing suspicious going on here at all.

And this will change nothing, it's like you're completely oblivious to why people voted for Trump. There's a reason why people keep replying with "and the Clintons did this", your trying to vilify a "hit man" hired by the American voter to take out the corrupt Washington machine. They don't care, they just want to bring it down without having to do it the old fashioned way.

Get that through your thick skull and everything becomes crystal clear.

Your alt-left ideas have been rejected, go home, it's over, your side overstepped their bounds. Nobody wants to listen to your sides fruit loop bullshit anymore. It's really this simple.

[Wrathbringer]

Politico is reporting (http://www.politico.com/story/2017/07/18/irakly-kaveladze-trump-tower-russia-eighth-man-240679) today that the now-identified 8th person in the recently uncovered meeting between Russian associates and Trump campaign officials (and family) was connected to Russian money laundering:






Soooo, the Trump campaign sits in a meeting with a Russian government lawyer who lobbies on Russian sanctions and who appears to represent a top Russian official (who specializes in procuring compromising material about people), a representative of a Russian oligarch who has close ties to Trump, and a central figure in a Russian money laundering scheme from the 90s. Thereafter, the Trump campaign repeatedly lies to the American people about having absolutely no contact with the Russian government, and also about the Russian state-sponsored work to support Trump at the expensive of Clinton, and also suddenly starts claiming they have incriminating information about Clinton and asking the Russian government to hack into her email server on national TV.

Nope, nothing suspicious going on here at all.

No one cares fake news you lost get over it

[Tenlaar]

Yes, yes...they want corruption out of Washington, so they sent in...Donald Trump...

http://cdn.smosh.com/sites/default/files/ftpuploads/bloguploads/laughing-gifs-foolish-human.gif

[Back]

Yes, yes...they want corruption out of Washington, so they sent in...Donald Trump...

http://cdn.smosh.com/sites/default/files/ftpuploads/bloguploads/laughing-gifs-foolish-human.gif

Statement on point.

[Tgo01]

It helps if the example fits the definition.

It's cute though- you two HAVE been providing apt examples. Just not the way you think you have.

More projecting.

[Neveragain]

Yes, yes...they want corruption out of Washington, so they sent in...Donald Trump...

http://cdn.smosh.com/sites/default/files/ftpuploads/bloguploads/laughing-gifs-foolish-human.gif

Clintons spent over a billion dollars on this venture, had the media in their pocket, mainstream republicans went after him and he still won. Yes, they sent Trump in to do it and he continues to expose the corruption. He beat overwhelming odds.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x4hdcrS3k24

[Tenlaar]

Clintons spent over a billion dollars on this venture, had the media in their pocket, mainstream republicans went after him and he still won. Yes, they sent Trump in to do it and he continues to expose the corruption. He beat overwhelming odds.

That's cool. I don't think the Clintons should be in charge either. That doesn't change who Donald Trump is, or his actions.

[Tgo01]

Only 26% of Trump voters believe that Russia wanted Trump to win- despite the fact that Russia's involvement and goals have been well-established. 44% think Russia wanted CLINTON to win- despite there being zero evidence for that assertion. 31% just aren't sure one way or the other.

Only 45% of Trump voters believe that Donald Trump Jr had a meeting with the Russians about information harmful to Clinton- despite the fact that DTJ himself released the actual e-mail chain explicitly stating as much.

32% of Trump voters believe the aforementioned meeting never happened- despite people who were at the meeting expressly stating it occurred.

24% of Trump voters just aren't sure if the meeting happened or not


24% of Trump voters support an investigation into the collusion allegations; 64% are opposed to even trying to uncover the truth (whatever it may be)

77% of Trump voters don't think Trump should leave office if collusion is uncovered

You are such a fucking joke. Remember when 100% of Democrats, including those in Congress, thought Russia had literally hacked our elections and changed votes to make sure Trump won? Even though it turned out that was all bullshit based on nothing?

Remember how even a few days ago you (and 100% of Democrats) were still spouting the bullshit that 14 agencies thought Russia tried to interfere with our elections, even though the director said it was only 3?

You're projecting AGAIN.

[time4fun]

And this will change nothing, it's like you're completely oblivious to why people voted for Trump. There's a reason why people keep replying with "and the Clintons did this", your trying to vilify a "hit man" hired by the American voter to take out the corrupt Washington machine. They don't care, they just want to bring it down without having to do it the old fashioned way.

Get that through your thick skull and everything becomes crystal clear.

Your alt-left ideas have been rejected, go home, it's over, your side overstepped their bounds. Nobody wants to listen to your sides fruit loop bullshit anymore. It's really this simple.

Trump isn't in office because "the people" voted for him. He's here because of the electoral college system.

And Trump is running at high 30s/low 40s approval ratings right now- so stop pretending like we're magically back in November. We're not, and he's lost quite a bit of support.

Also, honestly, no one really cares with the local card-carrying white supremacist thinks about politics =/

[Neveragain]

That's cool. I don't think the Clintons should be in charge either. That doesn't change who Donald Trump is, or his actions.

The voters gave 0 fucks about his actions, I think that's pretty obvious. A billion dollars on a campaign dude and they still lost.

The whole Russia narrative is only hurting the Democrat party, that should speak volumes to you about the mindset of the voters.

[Tgo01]

What's really interesting is that if you watch right wing media outlets (Fox, Briebart, Daily Caller, etc), they're running constant stories about Clinton right now. It's all distraction material of course. If they don't invent some Clinton stories, then they have only Trump stories- which are always defensive and rarely favorable. Seems like a concerted effort to try to make Trump look better to his base. There's no greater boogeyman than Clinton for their readers, and if they can continually talk about how "corrupt" she is- then it makes him appearing increasingly corrupt feel more mundane.

There you go again. Quoting someone you agree with who was just talking about one person and conflating it to "Trump's base."

Because, yeah, I'm sure pk is part of "Trump's base" and watches Fox News. Shit, I don't even watch Fox News.

[Neveragain]

Trump isn't in office because "the people" voted for him. He's here because of the electoral college system.

And Trump is running at high 30s/low 40s approval ratings right now- so stop pretending like we're magically back in November. We're not, and he's lost quite a bit of support.

Also, honestly, no one really cares with the local card-carrying white supremacist thinks about politics =/

Gaslighting.

[Savageheart]

Congratulations you got another zinger on T4F with zero substance otherwise.

Lets address the 17 agencies thing, lets get granular.

It was only the FBI, CIA and NSA... Published by the ODNI.

It was the three agencies with the largest budgets, and most concern with the subject matter at hand.

Had the Treasury Office's Intel Analytics department come up with something that might have had more to do with his Tax Returns.

For those of you who want to take the last line literally it was entirely made up I have no idea what that agency does

[Tgo01]

Congratulations you got another zinger on T4F with zero substance otherwise.

Lets address the 17 agencies thing, lets get granular.

It was only the FBI, CIA and NSA... Published by the ODNI.

It was the three agencies with the largest budgets, and most concern with the subject matter at hand.

Had the Treasury Office's Intel Analytics department come up with something that might have had more to do with his Tax Returns.

For those of you who want to take the last line literally it was entirely made up I have no idea what that agency does

That sure is a strange way to disagree with me all the while agreeing with me.

[Savageheart]

I bite my thumb at you sir.

[Tgo01]

Oh look- once again you bring up Clinton! It's almost like you're a one trick pony.

The PPP poll (http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2017/PPP_Release_National_71817.pdf)today actually has her losing to Trump by 7 points.

You know what's interesting about both your stat and mine?

Literally nothing. They're irrelevant.

"Let's stop talking about the corrupt piece of shit bitch I voted for, supported, and defended tooth and nail for everything wrong that she did! WAHH! It's not fair! WAHH! Leave Hillary alone! WAHH!"

If she would have slunk back into the depths of obscurity maybe your pathetic rantings would actually make sense. But since she's still out there, even today, peddling her bullshit and insisting it's the fault of everyone else (even yourself!) for why she lost then I think she's fair game to bash.

[Wrathbringer]

"Let's stop talking about the corrupt piece of shit bitch I voted for, supported, and defended tooth and nail for everything wrong that she did! WAHH! It's not fair! WAHH! Leave Hillary alone! WAHH!"

If she would have slunk back into the depths of obscurity maybe your pathetic rantings would actually make sense. But since she's still out there, even today, peddling her bullshit and insisting it's the fault of everyone else (even yourself!) for why she lost then I think she's fair game to bash.

I've noticed that those who get on your bad side are frequently labeled "a piece of shit".

[Tgo01]

I've noticed that those who get on your bad side are frequently labeled "a piece of shit".

Yes.

[Tisket]

I've noticed that those who get on your bad side are accurately labeled "a piece of shit".

Fixed.

[Tgo01]

Fixed.

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Tisket again.

Speaking of which, did you all know I have 6,022,805 karma?

Everyone must accept me as their one true god.

[Neveragain]

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Tisket again.

Speaking of which, did you all know I have 6,022,805 karma?

Everyone must accept me as their one true god.

Well..dog is God spelled backwards.

[Parkbandit]

That's cool. I don't think the Clintons should be in charge either. That doesn't change who Donald Trump is, or his actions.

They were both terrible choices... but they were the only 2 choices that we had.

Trump > Clinton.. if only for the SCOTUS appointments.

[Gelston]

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Tisket again.

Speaking of which, did you all know I have 6,022,805 karma?

Everyone must accept me as their one true god.

I have 4.9m Also, it isn't called karma. Stop being a piece of shit.

[Tgo01]

I have 4.9m Also, it isn't called karma. Stop being a piece of shit.

When 6.02m talks, 4.9m listens.

[Gelston]

When 6.02m talks, 4.9m listens.

No it doesn't.

[drauz]

Where do you get the number?

[Tgo01]

Where do you get the number?

Click settings, towards the top it will say something like: Latest Reputation Received (6022805 point(s) total)

Towards the bottom you can see your rep power, which is just 1% of your total rep/karma.

[Androidpk]

When 6.02m talks, 4.9m listens.

Does Trump listen to Hillary?

[Tisket]

TG finally overtook me. Such a relief to have the burden of leadership removed from my shoulders.

[time4fun]

For the love of-

CNN Reporting (http://www.cnn.com/2017/07/18/politics/trump-putin-g20/index.html) tonight that apparently Trump and Putin had an hour or so long, undisclosed, meeting during the G20 Summit


The White House, in a statement acknowledging the meeting, contended it was "brief" and said Trump spoke with Putin through Russia's translator. The US translator at the dinner -- each country was only allowed only one -- spoke Japanese, the White House said.

National Security Council spokesman Michael Anton said no other staff were present for the discussion.
The White House statement said the conversation took place in full view of other world leaders and their spouses at a dinner hosted by German Chancellor Angela Merkel during the G20 summit. Trump was seated near Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe and Abe's wife, while first lady Melania Trump was seated next to Putin.

Not a single American was there for the meeting- just Putin, his translator, and Trump. Apparently the conversation was very friendly and animated, and for some reason it was never thought to mention it.

It raised quite a few eyebrows during the event, according to the person who broke the story (he was on Maddow this evening), and it greatly unnerved US allies that they seemed to be getting along so well, off the record. Interestingly enough, Maddow asked the guy who broke the story how common it was for US Presidents to hold these kinds of off-the-record meetings with Heads of State, and the last time this was a common occurrence was...Nixon- because he didn't trust the State Department (who provides staff for these events) and wanted to keep things secret.

[time4fun]

"Let's stop talking about the corrupt piece of shit bitch I voted for, supported, and defended tooth and nail for everything wrong that she did! WAHH! It's not fair! WAHH! Leave Hillary alone! WAHH!"

If she would have slunk back into the depths of obscurity maybe your pathetic rantings would actually make sense. But since she's still out there, even today, peddling her bullshit and insisting it's the fault of everyone else (even yourself!) for why she lost then I think she's fair game to bash.

Or, you know, let's talk about the US President and his intimate relationship with Russia, as well as the constant lies and deception he and his campaign have been spewing about said relationship.

Because, you know, he's the current US President.

[Tgo01]

Does Trump listen to Hillary?

OH SNAP!


TG finally overtook me. Such a relief to have the burden of leadership removed from my shoulders.

I shall only abuse this duty slightly.