Lol

https://twitter.com/RepLeeZeldin/sta...461060096?s=09

Whoops.

i dont think you can draw a negative inference from all the secrecy. i dont think you can draw a negative inference from rudy being in ukraine pushing for dirt. or that z was going to do the TV thing, got aid (2 days after story broke. with no change in corruption policy or more money from europe) and then didnt do it. or that sondland says he presumed trump wanted dirt when he told ukrainians if they want aid, trump needs dirt.

or from mulvaney's admission three times, its aid for dirt, get over it. or the call where it goes "we do for u, u need to do more...weapons please? do me a favor though. dirt and dirt"

or from firing the lady fighting corruption for no reason and having rudy take over, who wanted the double dirt. or from bill taylor saying everybody is telling me its aid for dirt. or from sondland lunch call with trump the next day and only thing he asks about is dirt. or from the fact that we know trump by now and his character suggest what sondland said is true. he wants dirt, doesnt care about ukraine...so why else hold back aid and hide that fact from everybody? right, corruption and europe pays more. or that trump was told to speak of corruption in first call, they said he did, and turns out he didnt. told to speak on corruption to Z, didnt, just withheld aid. secretly.

or from the fact that they refuse to let anyone testify or release any documents, clear obstruction of a constitutionally valid impeachment.

nah...no negative inferences.

Good for you. Don't you let anyone take away your hope!

Prime example of why you don't want the dumbest members of society to consider certain hearsay evidence. Thanks joe!

No linkage.

If "linkage" as you deem it came out, how would you adjust your take on things at that time? Always fun to see how the goalposts would shift, but I totally understand if you choose to evade this direct question, as you would prefer no linkage.

All the best.

its hard to decipher if they are true believers or if they are just spewing misinformation to muddy the waters and convince others. I mean, I guess either way they are true believers. its just that its pretty hard to imagine that someone who is paying attention would actually believe such blatant and proven lies.

NYPOST: Pence aide calls Trump’s call with Ukraine ‘unusual and inappropriate’

there arent any undecideds lurking here though to convince. its a declining poker forum. it's gross when ted cruz lies and you know he is lying and he knows you know and etc etc, but he does it because he isn't talking to us, he talking to his idiot base. but there isn't an idiot base here.

if one wants to say: ldo he did it, but the GOP is doing a good job muddying the waters, without direct proof, the pubic wont buy it, this is going nowhere imo, etc etc. that's cool. but to be well informed and into it and have the intelligence to spin and troll decently, everybody here knows whats up, and there is no reason for it other than to troll.

That would depend on the specific context and so on. I prefer to stick to known facts, and not comment on hypothetical situations.

Maybe you should pay attention.

Oh so I guess no quid pro quo

Good boy, you're learning. See what happens when you pay attention.

Seems there is no cure for this, except the ignore button. He's the only one anyways. And he seems to be either trolling or he got brainwashed too much.

Joe, I would recommend to read this other thread in the meantime, maybe it will help you to start thinking about what happened to you:
Facebook/Twitter/Youtube Threat to Society

And when you are done with it, read those two articles for example, from WikiPedia or any other reputable source:
Wikipedia: Mueller Report
Wikipedia: Special Counsel investigation (2017–2019)

It's a lot to read, but you seem to have a lot of time available.

Interesting is the role Barr played in this.

So you evaded the question with the "go with the flow" bit, and no doubt you would come up with a belief structure that justified as well as rationalized away that reality. That's fine, and is of course what I expected though I wish you had more courage to take pride in that defence mechanism approach of yours. Hopefully you do not stare into middle distance space like a scientologist when you use it. I always found that a bit creepy. Try to not be creepy when doing your bit in the future.

All the best.

What people think is irrelevant as nobody is psychic. Doesn't matter if they are honest, trolling, on a power trip or just trying to feel smart by making conversation dumb.

It's what they write and argue that matters. If they write and argue something, it is their opinion to own.

They don't get to hide behind satire either. Satire is at its heart constructive, not random lies meant to frustrate others so you can feel good about yourself.

Like I said your critical thinking skills are garbage so I have to explain it to you in an extremely dumbed down way. If your critical thinking skills were not garbage, you would not need it explained to you.

Which hearsay? Hearsay3 or hearsay4?

The hearsay Fox News marching orders on hearsay are one of my favorites as it is devoid of understanding what is hearsay and how hearsay is or is not evidence.

Big you guys follow your orders and scream “hearsay hearsay!”

He already said it wouldn’t change his made. He is playing stupid right wing trolling games because he has nothing to stand on.

The linkage is obviously there, joe is simply too dumb to see it. But even dumb people can see it so joe is extraordinarily dumb, wholly lacking in perception. His inability to see linkage is entirely a joe problem.

I never asked with the assumption that he would answer in a direct manner, but his side does not own that approach. When I asked how people would react if the Mueller thing did not go down as they hoped (shortly after he was appointed when most here were believing he was the saviour) a couple actually answered honestly (saying they would respect his findings - though who knows if that held), but most deflected and did their joint personal attacks, which I think earned me a temp ban from the Cookie when I replied in my normal manner. Kind of miss those days, as those guys were nice and angry all the time, which made for a more entertaining read for those of us not living this 24/7.

Anyway, at least this guy works alone, so I will give him credit for that, even though I cannot take his thinking or "logic" seriously in the slightest. More like a religious belief, though again hopefully he does not stare off in the distance when he talks - that is always creepy.

Look you are clearly not getting it. TRUMP wanted to do a quid pro quo then TRUMP changed his mind and decided it wasn’t a good idea so then he didn’t do a quid pro quo. So for this he should be removed from office. Get it now?

Obviously I'm a slow learner. It must be the big words.

Wow, I truly feel sorry for you

Edit: and every other 1 of you liberals, sad

I was talking to Joe in my last posting, or are you one and the same person? Either way, I would recommend you to read the stuff I had linked to and then please bring forward some real discussion points beyond getting emotional.

Both of you remind me of a guy, whose girl friend is cheating and he is unwilling to accept that reality. You know what I mean?

Another article that may help you: Wikipedia: Dunning–Kruger effect