Flynn in major trouble for speaking to Russia about sanctions

[Spurs Homer]

Stone: "My hero Assange will educate the American Public"






https://investigaterussia.org/media/...-14/tale-texts

[Reck]

Flake stepping up to the plate again. Saying if McConnell won't protect Mueller -

no more judges get approved!

https://investigaterussia.org/media/...ller-bill-vote

This guy.

Flake is such a confused individual. Whatever he says hold little to no water. Even less now.

Auditioning for a CNN gig.

[Spurs Homer]

This guy.

Flake is such a confused individual. Whatever he says hold little to no water. Even less now.

Auditioning for a CNN gig.

if flake doesnt flake - mcconnell has to either put muellers bill on the floor
or
tell trump

no more judges
lol

[Reck]

if flake doesnt flake - mcconnell has to either put muellers bill on the floor
or
tell trump

no more judges
lol

Or he could just wait out the lame duck session to end which is like a month and some days long. The turtle waited almost a year to get a supreme court judge that he likes. What do you think he'll do this time? Panic?

[TSA]

Or he could just wait out the lame duck session to end which is like a month and some days long. The turtle waited almost a year to get a supreme court judge that he likes. What do you think he'll do this time? Panic?

[DMC]

inb4 "bribed" is not the same as "bribery"

More out of context retorts from the forum sniper. The article states "there's no proof that the donation influenced the decision". I was responding to that with an analogy. There no way to proof any bribery influences a decision. There's no way to prove Russians influencing the election affected the outcome. That's never the goal, to prove the effect, only to show it happened and common sense then dictates people don't give money like that away for no return.

But keep looking for token points Philo while being dishonest in the process. You're a lawyer after all.

[Spurs Homer]

Or he could just wait out the lame duck session to end which is like a month and some days long. The turtle waited almost a year to get a supreme court judge that he likes. What do you think he'll do this time? Panic?

no

but

these weeks before the dems get power is the gop’s chance at all kinds of ery and jamming a bunch of corrupt judges
before anyone can stop them is exactly mcconnells modus operandi

the fact that another gop guy is strongarming mcconnell will really get his panties in a twist

[DMC]

My point was not about whether or not anybody passed it but that they didn't mind doing business with Russia then. That's why I posted all of the images of different leaders with Putin. So you're just semen shielding as always for the forum mosquito. Maybe stay in your lane which is usually the median between the lines.

are you saying i misinterpreted your post and the post you were replying to? or are you just taking a shot from a distance aka sniping

Seem pretty cut and dry to me. You engaged me, how could I be sniping at you?

But you never follow up. You typically just regress back into the forage of the forum until you see an opening. I don't expect much from you other than scoreboard posting.

[DMC]

Nervous laughter. 4 emojis. s is shook.

[spurraider21]

Seem pretty cut and dry to me. You engaged me, how could I be sniping at you?

you were dishonest AF in post #38911 and you got called out for it. you then spun it into "but philo isn't objective!" just taking shots with no substance. trying to snipe.

But you never follow up. You typically just regress back into the forage of the forum until you see an opening. I don't expect much from you other than scoreboard posting.

this is your narrative

[spurraider21]

gotem

[spurraider21]

More out of context retorts from the forum sniper. The article states "there's no proof that the donation influenced the decision". I was responding to that with an analogy. There no way to proof any bribery influences a decision. There's no way to prove Russians influencing the election affected the outcome. That's never the goal, to prove the effect, only to show it happened and common sense then dictates people don't give money like that away for no return.

But keep looking for token points Philo while being dishonest in the process. You're a lawyer after all.

lol moving goalposts.

your claim: i never used the word bribed
truth: you did

that's all that post was about. now you're deflecting and changing the topic, something you've complained about quite a bit recently

[DMC]

you were dishonest AF in post #38911 and you got called out for it. you then spun it into "but philo isn't objective!" just taking shots with no substance. trying to snipe.


this is your narrative

You're one of the worst paraphrasing gots here. You prefer to put words in people's mouths instead of responding to what they actually said. See example in your post above. This seems to be a common tactic with the left. What's wrong, is the quote function just too hard to use?

[DMC]

lol moving goalposts.

your claim: i never used the word bribed
truth: you did

that's all that post was about. now you're deflecting and changing the topic, something you've complained about quite a bit recently

No I didn't. You know that already which is why you tried to head it off with "ib4.."

[spurraider21]

You're one of the worst paraphrasing gots here. You prefer to put words in people's mouths instead of responding to what they actually said. See example in your post above. This seems to be a common tactic with the left. What's wrong, is the quote function just too hard to use?

oh no, i said objective instead of "fair and balanced"

totally misrepresented you

[DMC]

oh no, i said objective instead of "fair and balanced"

totally misrepresented you

Quoting is so hard

[spurraider21]

No I didn't. You know that already which is why you tried to head it off with "ib4.."

no you didn't what? be specific. you didnt use the word bribed? or you didn't claim to not have used the word bribed

it sounds silly to ask but you've been consistently dishonest and just want to pin down what you claim to be claiming

[spurraider21]

Quoting is so hard

panic edits

please explain how i misrepresented you there.

how is "philo isn't objective" misrepresenting your post where you said "yes he has a history of being fair and balanced"

lay it out for me

[spurraider21]

DMC keeps changing topics per par... anything to avoid his "clinton sold uranium to putin" narrative

[DMC]

no you didn't what? be specific. you didnt use the word bribed? or you didn't claim to not have used the word bribed

it sounds silly to ask but you've been consistently dishonest and just want to pin down what you claim to be claiming

You using "Ib4..." then trying to create a conversation to bring your take to fruition =

You know damn well I never said "bribed". Otherwise you would never have posted "inb4 "bribed" is not the same as "bribery"'.

Now you want me to use that exact same statement so you can

Trying to set a trap for me. so dishonest

[Pavlov]

No I didn't. You know that already which is why you tried to head it off with "ib4.."

Typical liberal wordplay.

DerpMC

[DMC]

DMC keeps changing topics per par... anything to avoid his "clinton sold uranium to putin" narrative

3rd person narrating to imaginary audience.

Today's Philo

You must address one thing at a time. You want to stop at that, but the root topic is doing business with Putin and Russia.

I won't let you squirm out of that, none of you.

[djohn2oo8]

Hmmm now he doesn’t want to discuss it

[Pavlov]

3rd person narrating to imaginary audience.

Today's Philo

You must address one thing at a time. You want to stop at that, but the root topic is doing business with Putin and Russia.

I won't let you squirm out of that, none of you.

Your claim was and still is that Clinton sold uranium to Putin.

I won't let you squirm out of that.

Prove it.

[boutons_deux]

McC just signalled to Trash that Mueller is not protected, so fire away.