Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
The Presidency of Donald J. Trump: No smocking guns. The Presidency of Donald J. Trump: No smocking guns.

02-02-2018 , 06:39 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ut2010
Stock market got tired of winning.
nice
02-02-2018 , 06:42 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
Surprise!

Who's the slappy, again?
I made a guess based on limited information that turned out to be wrong. I have no problem admitting that. As for who's the slappy, probably anyone still in the tank for HRC as a champion of feminism after last week's NYT article. Is that you or can you finally admit maybe she was a bit flawed?
02-02-2018 , 06:42 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirbynator
would trump need to fire sessions before firing rosenstein before firing mueller?
I don't think so (at least I haven't seen anything like that mentioned before).
02-02-2018 , 06:45 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by d10
I made a guess based on limited information that turned out to be wrong. I have no problem admitting that. As for who's the slappy, probably anyone still in the tank for HRC as a champion of feminism after last week's NYT article. Is that you or can you finally admit maybe she was a bit flawed?
Who the hell is "still in the tank for HRC" for literally anything?
02-02-2018 , 06:45 PM
Lol! Did you just non-sequitur what-about Clinton that hard? Dude. My dude.
02-02-2018 , 06:47 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by d10
Does this sound like a rational refutation of my argument or a textbook definition of one of the most common logical fallacies? Do I even need to point out how ironic it is to use a logical fallacy to defend yourself against a charge of being prone to irrational analysis? But please, feel free to continue proving my point.
Yeah, not like d10 would ever...

Quote:
Originally Posted by d10
As for who's the slappy, probably anyone still in the tank for HRC as a champion of feminism after last week's NYT article. Is that you or can you finally admit maybe she was a bit flawed?
oh whoops
02-02-2018 , 06:47 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by d10
Is that you or can you finally admit maybe she was a bit flawed?
There are thousands of posts in this forum about what a flawed candidate she was.
02-02-2018 , 06:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
He'd have to keep firing future Rosensteins until he found some janitor who would fire Mueller
Friday Night Massacre all over again. I could see it happening.
02-02-2018 , 06:48 PM
Chessmate d10!
02-02-2018 , 06:50 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by d10
I made a guess based on limited information that turned out to be wrong. I have no problem admitting that. As for who's the slappy, probably anyone still in the tank for HRC as a champion of feminism after last week's NYT article. Is that you or can you finally admit maybe she was a bit flawed?
Yeah man, it's not like anyone else could have come to a different conclusion and mocked yours based on the same information.
02-02-2018 , 06:53 PM
I admittedly almost never watch any cable news. Tonight I decided to record both Hannity and Maddow and intend to watch them both.

My plan is to watch Hannity first because I do not want that to be the thing that lingers but I am open to suggestions on the appropriate order. Obviously I do not mind those telling me not to watch Hannity, or Maddow for that matter, but as of right now I plan to do it just because....
02-02-2018 , 06:55 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by d10
I made a guess based on limited information that turned out to be wrong. I have no problem admitting that. As for who's the slappy, probably anyone still in the tank for HRC as a champion of feminism after last week's NYT article. Is that you or can you finally admit maybe she was a bit flawed?
I try not to overreact to anonymous posts on an internet forum, but you are certifiably bat**** crazy and now have less than zero credibility.
02-02-2018 , 06:56 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by OneEyedPoker
So looks like Rosenstein is probably getting fired soon



https://twitter.com/ShimonPro/status/959464028711120897
Got to admire the chutzpah of drumming up unfounded controversy and then saying yea it was unfounded but we still might have to fire him because the controversy existed.
02-02-2018 , 06:56 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by eyebooger
Who the hell is "still in the tank for HRC" for literally anything?
I assume the target of letter-numbers unrequited love. So it is creating some confusing feelings.
02-02-2018 , 06:56 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by d10
I made a guess based on limited information that turned out to be wrong. I have no problem admitting that. As for who's the slappy, probably anyone still in the tank for HRC as a champion of feminism after last week's NYT article. Is that you or can you finally admit maybe she was a bit flawed?


In a post admitting he was wrong

Still calling others wrong


You just don’t get it. Literally everyone here knew the memo was a smoke screen that they would use as a reason to fire RR

everyone but you.


Also. Why in the **** are you talking about Clinton. She has 0 relevance to this story.
02-02-2018 , 06:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by markksman
I admittedly almost never watch any cable news. Tonight I decided to record both Hannity and Maddow and intend to watch them both.

My plan is to watch Hannity first because I do not want that to be the thing that lingers but I am open to suggestions on the appropriate order. Obviously I do not mind those telling me not to watch Hannity, or Maddow for that matter, but as of right now I plan to do it just because....
I watched some cable news on a flight last month. I switched between fox and MSN and CNN. It was right when the ****hole thing popped. I would not wish it on anyone. I recommend you do not.
02-02-2018 , 06:57 PM
Given that the memo seems to be regarded as a dud, are people (that's non-Trumpkin people) glad that it was released rather than be withheld after the speculation that suggested something way more substantial? Or is this just part of normalising the obscene / distorting reality /confusing the masses etc that has a wider goal?

Seems like a bad day for Trump on the face of it.
02-02-2018 , 06:58 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Truant
I watched some cable news on a flight last month. I switched between fox and MSN and CNN. It was right when the ****hole thing popped. I would not wish it on anyone. I recommend you do not.
Yeah, I always regret it if I catch some of it. It is seriously depressing.
02-02-2018 , 07:01 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by d10
I made a guess based on limited information that turned out to be wrong. I have no problem admitting that. As for who's the slappy, probably anyone still in the tank for HRC as a champion of feminism after last week's NYT article. Is that you or can you finally admit maybe she was a bit flawed?
literally everyone knew the memo would be a huge joke
02-02-2018 , 07:04 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DTD
Given that the memo seems to be regarded as a dud, are people (that's non-Trumpkin people) glad that it was released rather than be withheld after the speculation that suggested something way more substantial? Or is this just part of normalising the obscene / distorting reality /confusing the masses etc that has a wider goal?

Seems like a bad day for Trump on the face of it.
Naw, it'll convince the base and they'll stay convinced.

The division was already bad in your country, but by this move your congress officially sanctioned that facts no longer apply to even the most important of politics and that it is not congress' responsibility to hold a president accountable.

The partisan aspect is bad, but it's when you ignore it the true horror of this situation becomes clear. It's basically congress giving the executive office free reigns.

They took a huge dump on your founding fathers idea of people making the system self-governing and officially went for self-serving instead.
02-02-2018 , 07:05 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by d10
I made a guess based on limited information that turned out to be wrong. I have no problem admitting that. As for who's the slappy, probably anyone still in the tank for HRC as a champion of feminism after last week's NYT article. Is that you or can you finally admit maybe she was a bit flawed?
I’ll give you 24 hours to prove I’ve claimed she's a champion of feminism, or else it’s time for a ban. Unsupported claims of hypocrisy not being allowed and all.

Last edited by Loki; 02-02-2018 at 07:06 PM. Reason: Or whatever the hell this is supposed to be.
02-02-2018 , 07:09 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by eyebooger
Who the hell is "still in the tank for HRC" for literally anything?
Loki obv

Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Truant
Lol! Did you just non-sequitur what-about Clinton that hard? Dude. My dude.
The question was "who's the slappy?" Loki is well known for his HRC hero worship. If you don't understand the context of the conversation feel free to stay out of it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by goofyballer
Yeah, not like d10 would ever...

oh whoops
If a mod of this forum wants to engage in a discussion about who's the slappy, figuring out who's the slappy isn't an ad hominem attack is it? See above.

Quote:
Originally Posted by otatop
There are thousands of posts in this forum about what a flawed candidate she was.
And yet I doubt you could find even one from Loki
02-02-2018 , 07:12 PM
Remember, it never ends for the right wing outrage machine:



Just two weeks ago, Donnie jr was endlessly retweeting #ReleaseTheMemo, lest we forget.

Wasn't it the DOJ IG report that was the catalyst for McCabe to go on leave/exit? I don't remember for sure, but whatever it is will no doubt be part of the next round of right wing hackery
02-02-2018 , 07:14 PM
Anyone tracking the Dow at all or equating it with the market in general would be well advised to put all thier money under thier mattress. You simply don't know enough to invest.
02-02-2018 , 07:20 PM
remember when don jr and eric took control of the blind trust that operates the trump corporation? that was a thing that happened.

      
m