Jump to content

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, IcebergSlim said:

Hey, kid...

 

You need a hero?

 

 

Nah, kust laughing at you on here chasing your own tail around and trying to look "smart" abut it.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, IcebergSlim said:

37x,

 

You do know that the other site is up, right?

Yup.been up a couple of days Mr 850 in a week.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, rippy38 said:

Nah, kust laughing at you on here chasing your own tail around and trying to look "smart" abut it.

 

 

 

why me, rippy?

 

Go away....you'll get hurt.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, IcebergSlim said:

why me, rippy?

 

Go away....you'll get hurt.

Ha!

 

I'm shakin' in mah boots...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, IcebergSlim said:

So you might want to quit lying...

Oohhhh, I’m so scared.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, IcebergSlim said:

Then don't quit lying...see what happens..

Whatever.  
 

You have unfinished business on the Flynn thread.  Why you running?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, EltonJohnson said:

 

 

Its been linked her in other threads for days...  my own thread titled. “They Lied”,   Surely you saw it.  

 

 

Farkas expressing confidence is not actually LYING, is it?  

 

If I were to say, "I just KNOW that the Red Sox are going to do well whenever the seasons starts, regardless of trading Mookie Betts, and they will definitely contend in the AL East"

 

And then, it turns out that they actually finish way out of contention and in the cellar of their division, is my earlier statement a LIE?

 

 

  • IDIOT! 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, maineman said:

two year old news.

 

 

anything to divert attention from the fact that more Americans lost their lives to COVID 19 in the month of April than in twenty YEARS of the Vietnam War.

 

It's time there is an accounting for the institutional abuses that tried to bring down a president.

 

 

 

It's now just a matter of who will be held accountable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, maineman said:

two year old news.

 

 

anything to divert attention from the fact that more Americans lost their lives to COVID 19 in the month of April than in twenty YEARS of the Vietnam War.

Worried about what Trump is accused of 30 years ago,Could care less about real crimes Demonrats committed 2 years ago...What a fool!^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, maineman said:

Farkas expressing confidence is not actually LYING, is it

 

There never was any evidence, and she wasn’t the only one doing it, i5 was several.    They made it all up, so yes it was lying.    It wa a conspiracy.

 

44 minutes ago, maineman said:

then, it turns out that they actually finish way out of contention and in the cellar of their division, is my earlier statement a LIE?

 

 

Dummy...  you are making a false comparison between prediction that doesn’t come true (baseball)  to an accusation of an alleged past act (Trump/Russia)that actually never happened.   

 

Doesnt work

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think the Trump Cult should worry about whether "Russians" are indicted or not.   They should worry about Trump.   The Mueller Report shows ten instances of criminal obstruction of justice, and four of them include all that is usually necessary to convict Trump in a court of law.   We won't know if there is more under the redacted portions of the report until Trump leaves the presidency.  But these four cases on their own are enough to lock him up for 80 years (20 each).   Of course, we know this DOJ decided not to indict Trump while he's in office.  But the evidence is clear.

 

I posted the following to a different forum a while back.

 

1- The President's Efforts to Remove the Special Counsel (Page 77)

Mueller says: "Substantial evidence indicates that the President's attempts to remove the Special Counsel were linked to the Special Counsel's oversight of investigations that involved the President's conduct - and, most immediately , to reports that the President was being investigated for potential obstruction of justice [...]There also is evidence that the President knew that he should not have made those calls to McGahn."

2- The President's Efforts to Curtail the Special Counsel Investigation (Page 90)

Mueller says: "Substantial evidence indicates that the President 's effort to have Sessions limit the scope of the Special Counsel's investigation to future election interference was intended to prevent further investigative scrutiny of the President ' s and his campaign's conduct."


3- The President's Further Efforts to Have the Attorney General Take Over the Investigation (Page 107)

Mueller says: "There is evidence that at least one purpose of the President 's conduct toward Sessions was to have Sessions assume control over the Russia investigation and supervise it in a way that would restrict its scope."


4- The President Orders McGahn to Deny that the President Tried to Fire the Special Counsel (Page 113)

Mueller says: "Substantial evidence indicates that in repeatedly urging McGahn to dispute that he was ordered to have the Special Counsel terminated , the President acted for the purpose of influencing McGahn 's account in order to deflect or prevent further scrutiny of the President's conduct towards the investigation."

Mueller cited ten cases of obstruction. But for these four he includes all the elements normally required to convict: act, nexus and intent. The other six still require one of these elements. The report includes instructions to Congress on what is needed. And this is why Trump is stonewalling the investigation.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, EltonJohnson said:

 

There never was any evidence, and she wasn’t the only one doing it, i5 was several.    They made it all up, so yes it was lying.    It wa a conspiracy.

 

 

 

Dummy...  you are making a false comparison between prediction that doesn’t come true (baseball)  to an accusation of an alleged past act (Trump/Russia)that actually never happened.   

 

Doesnt work

Farkas, who previously served as the deputy assistant secretary of Defense for Russia/Ukraine/Eurasia, said on MSNBC in 2017 that she "was urging my former colleagues, and, frankly speaking, the people on the Hill... Get as much information as you can, get as much intelligence as you can, before President Obama leaves the administration, because I had a fear that somehow that information would disappear with the senior people that left. So it would be hidden away in the bureaucracy."

She continued to say she was concerned "the Trump folks, if they found out how we knew what we knew about their, the staff, the Trump staff’s dealing with Russians, that they would try to compromise those sources and methods, meaning we would no longer have access to that intelligence. So I became very worried, because not enough was coming out into the open, and I knew that there was more."

 

Sounds like a confident prediction to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, maineman said:

Sounds like a confident prediction to me.

 

LOL...   it was a  mass conspiracy to  take down Trump and  CYA.    The  unmaksinga, the leaks, the memos saying they  were  going  by the books,  all claiming Trump would destroy  evidence ,   evidence THAT NEVER EXISTED

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rosenstein to Mueller:

 

"By virtue of the authority vested in me as Acting Attorney General, including 28 U.S.C. §§ 509, 510, and 515, in order to discharge my responsibility to provide supervision and management of the Department of Justice, and to ensure a full and thorough investigation of the

Russian government's efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election, I hereby order as follows:

(a) Robert S. Mueller III is appointed to serve as Special Counsel for the United States  Department of Justice."

 

Is anyone really suggesting that Russia did NOT interfere in the 2016 election? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, EltonJohnson said:

 

LOL...   it was a  mass conspiracy to  take down Trump and  CYA.    The  unmaksinga, the leaks, the memos saying they  were  going  by the books,  all claiming Trump would destroy  evidence ,   evidence THAT NEVER EXISTED

 

 

 

 

I can't WAIT for Durham to indict them all!

hahahahahahahahaahahahhahaaha

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, SheikhYerbouti said:

Imgur: The magic of the Internet

Using a fictional character from a movie to make a point. Interesting. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, maineman said:

when you have no intelligent comeback or rejoinder, I can always count on you to bring out your emojis.  Fat dull, pasty, male nurse.

He isn't a nurse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, maineman said:

when you have no intelligent comeback or rejoinder, I can always count on you to bring out your emojis.  Fat dull, pasty, male nurse.

Only a true dbag would consider being a nurse an insult. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


No holds barred chat

  • Hey kfools.. does this help? 


  • By Vegas

    Liberals are going to hell.


  • grgle



  • Where’s at @slideman?


  • Hola


  • I know this one, this new chat thing. I've seen it called the "shoutbox" among other things in my past. Very hard to hide from the chat box. The question is asked, there's no time to go search what other folks think, this is real time. Only seconds should be between chat box replies. This one is made for me. In the chat box one has to be quick on their feet with stuff at the ready. This chat box is the worst nightmare of anyone trying to deal with ol' teach. 


  • By pmurT

    hey @teacher that sounds like too much work for me LOL I need that useless thing called *time* in order to authenticate facts and truths which get posted by deceitful Dems


  • What does the red number refer to? currently, on my screen it says 2

     


  • Where does it say 2?


  • So. In the chat....if you tag a member the text afterwards should be a private message. 


  • How do? I'm teacher. If I'm online and the powers that be can figure out how to make it immediately apparent to me that whatever I've said here has been replied to I'm gonna show up right quick and kick some teeth in. It's the chat box, all this is new and scary. I know this gig. This starts now. 



  • Hey kfools, did you lose your securtiy cert? On my browser it is saying your site is not secure?


  • Mine too. I'm looking into it.


  • Mine too. 


  • I thought it was my location.. 


  • Just gave to renew the security cert. No big deal I'll do it tonight


  • OK thanks

     



  • Happy Anniversary, America... on your Civil Union.


  • All lives matter.


  • Double post deleted.


  • By teacher

    Scroll the other way for a while and you'll see me saying that these days the chat box ain't gonna work as one has to be quick on one's feet. The question is posed, there ain't no stinkin time for ya'll to refer to your betters for the answer, ya'll don't understand these things, this political debate, ya'll don't have the answer at hand, ya'll haven't thought this through, ya'll ain't ready for the next question I'll ask,  ya'll can't handle the pace that a bloke such as I can bring it in the chat box, ya'll can't handle this format.

     

    This one is made for me. 


  • By teacher

    Being offended does not make one correct. 


  • By teacher

    Some few days before the next election Mr. Fools is gonna pin my horse thread. it's gonna be horrible, I shall endevour every day to bring some some fresh. 

     

    I still own this cat box.


  • By teacher

    "I'm coming to you for ask a quick favor."


  • By teacher

    "Anyone that places a color in front of their name is racist." That one is not mine, got it from another member. 


  • Where’s all the hot bitches? 


  • By teacher

    Kidding me? 


  • How do I get rid of this chatroom box?


  • How do I get rid of this chatroom box?


  • Get me out of Chatbox!


  • By jefftec

    The chatbox stays expanded and is a nuisance blocking screen images. What setting is there to control/collapse chatbox?


  • By kfools

    Just click the no holds barred to collapse it.


  • diddle dee dee


  • By teacher

    Like Jesse Ventura said to all that would not take a chew in the movie "Predator." LF.org is a political debate forum. This chatbox just ups the opportunity to go at it. Ya'll have your political views, seems to me that ya'll should have thought these things out and be ready to battle. 


  • By teacher

    Is real time political debate a thing ya'll hide from? What do you morons do if you happen to run into some one with opposing political views on the street? 


  • By teacher

    I've never ran into anyone, in real life,  that said Obama lied. I run into folks that tell me Trump lies. I'm at work. I didn't bring it up. I don't reply, I'm representing a company. Not my place. 


  • By teacher

    Lookie there, all I have to do is get out and come back. Why is it that liberals, when they have a company man before them decide they that is the time they go off? Why would ya'll put a company man into that position? 


  • By teacher

    Chatbox is mine. 


  • By teacher

    There is no such thing as "reverse discrimination." There is only discrimination. To imply that black on white discrimination is reverse discrimination sort of lends some justification to the idea of so-called "reverse discrimination." Any discrimination is wrong. Original idea supplied to me by a man called Kyle. Credit where credit is due.


  • By teacher

    How do? I'm teacher. I told you unwashed masses long ago in this, the chat box what the rules were.  Told you all that I would rule the chat box. Go check it out. Scroll some. The chat box is supposed to be a place where debate can happen damn near instantaneously. At the onset I said that the chat box wouldn't fly and that is because the chat box demands that all needs to be ready for real time debate. Everybody but I fails.


You don't have permission to chat in this chatroom
×
×
  • Create New...