Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. SubscriberWOLFE63
    Tra il dire e il far
    C'e di mezzo il mar!
    Joined
    06 Nov '15
    Moves
    22685
    18 Apr '19 11:27
    @averagejoe1 said
    So let us neocons get this straight.... There is an editorial in the Omaha Tribune this morning about expenditure of town funds......., I cannot meet my buddies for coffee and say that the Tribune this morning is suggesting adding another swimming pool at the park? Ha ha ha ha.🤪
    How do you guys get thru a day without wringing your hands into oblivion?
    Some still admit to being a "neocon"? What balls!
    I'd thought their philosophy went out with George Bush Jr.'s "weapons of mass 'humiliation'".
  2. Subscriberno1marauder
    Humble and Kind
    In the Gazette
    Joined
    22 Jun '04
    Moves
    40034
    18 Apr '19 11:36
    @averagejoe1 said
    So let us neocons get this straight.... There is an editorial in the Omaha Tribune this morning about expenditure of town funds......., I cannot meet my buddies for coffee and say that the Tribune this morning is suggesting adding another swimming pool at the park? Ha ha ha ha.🤪
    How do you guys get thru a day without wringing your hands into oblivion?
    Do you know the difference between an opinion piece and an editorial?
  3. Subscriberno1marauder
    Humble and Kind
    In the Gazette
    Joined
    22 Jun '04
    Moves
    40034
    18 Apr '19 11:37
    @mott-the-hoople said
    surely you meant to use the word “alledged”.
    No, I didn't.
  4. Joined
    27 Jul '10
    Moves
    29631
    18 Apr '19 12:38
    @no1marauder said
    Do you know the difference between an opinion piece and an editorial?
    Ahh, lib-speak at its best. So at coffee, I’ll say, hey, guys, I got the morning paper and an opinion piece, Not an editorial for heaven sakes, weighed in on the accuracy of FOX news. Whew.
  5. Joined
    05 Nov '06
    Moves
    81778
    18 Apr '19 13:07
    @no1marauder said
    Do you know the difference between an opinion piece and an editorial?
    please explain it to us deplorables.
  6. Joined
    05 Nov '06
    Moves
    81778
    18 Apr '19 13:08
    @no1marauder said
    No, I didn't.
    so he is guilty without proof? see why we don't like liberals now?
  7. Joined
    05 Nov '06
    Moves
    81778
    18 Apr '19 13:103 edits
    @mott-the-hoople said
    let me ask you a question...can barr legally release the full report?
    so no one can answer this question? No one knows why they are making these claims? @sonhouse...you started this thread, surely you know. @marerider#1...the all knowing, you don't know?
  8. Joined
    05 Nov '06
    Moves
    81778
    18 Apr '19 14:21
    @mott-the-hoople said
    so no one can answer this question? No one knows why they are making these claims? @sonhouse...you started this thread, surely you know. @marerider#1...the all knowing, you don't know?
    still waiting? they cant answer because they are perpetuating a lie.
  9. Joined
    05 Nov '06
    Moves
    81778
    18 Apr '19 14:55
    @mott-the-hoople said
    still waiting? they cant answer because they are perpetuating a lie.
  10. Subscribersonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    slatington, pa, usa
    Joined
    28 Dec '04
    Moves
    52866
    18 Apr '19 15:19
    @mott-the-hoople said
    been researching this...says barr misled congress on a study doj did. Cant find how he (supposedly) misled. Anyone know?
    Your research sucks, since you are not really interested in the answer. The answer is he told congress the opinion was ONLY about domestic law, NO international law implications were sought in the opinion.

    It was shown clearly 2 years later that was ABSOLUTELY false, Barr lying through his teeth because the actual opinion was SCATHING in its view of the situation, citing international law and repercussions about doing what Barr wanted, to be able to kidnap ANY leader in ANY country in the world and bring that person to the US to take to court or whatever. A total reversal of what the actual opinion said. It SAID, DON"T DO IT. Barr did not want anyone to hear that part. He ONLY wanted to get an action started that could clear the present POTUS, Bush Sr, get him off the hook for his failed 'coup' in Panama. Now it is happening all over again, different POTUS, same story by Barr.
  11. Joined
    05 Nov '06
    Moves
    81778
    18 Apr '19 16:151 edit
    @sonhouse said
    Your research sucks, since you are not really interested in the answer. The answer is he told congress the opinion was ONLY about domestic law, NO international law implications were sought in the opinion.

    It was shown clearly 2 years later that was ABSOLUTELY false, Barr lying through his teeth because the actual opinion was SCATHING in its view of the situation, citing ...[text shortened]... is failed 'coup' in Panama. Now it is happening all over again, different POTUS, same story by Barr.
    A lot to research but I am trying. I would really like to see an article posted on this prior to 2019...no of any?

    And just a quick thought...since we didnt have pakistans permission...did the US violate law when the shot osama bin laden in pakistan? are all these drone strikes illegal?
  12. Joined
    27 Jul '10
    Moves
    29631
    19 Apr '19 01:08
    @mott-the-hoople said
    so he is guilty without proof? see why we don't like liberals now?
    The thing is, they decided on day 1 that 'he must go', he has to b guilty of something, lets find it and ruin him. What if it were reversed, and it was Hillary!! We would say, we just dont like her pants suit and orange hair, she has to be guilty of something, lets find it and ruin her. It would take an hour or so, and no need to spend $35M to do it!
  13. Subscribersonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    slatington, pa, usa
    Joined
    28 Dec '04
    Moves
    52866
    19 Apr '19 01:37
    @mott-the-hoople said
    A lot to research but I am trying. I would really like to see an article posted on this prior to 2019...no of any?

    And just a quick thought...since we didnt have pakistans permission...did the US violate law when the shot osama bin laden in pakistan? are all these drone strikes illegal?
    You want to do 'what about himism'? Why don't you stick with the subject, Barr doing his thing TWICE:

    https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2019/04/william-barr-mueller-report-summary
  14. Joined
    05 Nov '06
    Moves
    81778
    19 Apr '19 04:382 edits
    @sonhouse said
    You want to do 'what about himism'? Why don't you stick with the subject, Barr doing his thing TWICE:

    https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2019/04/william-barr-mueller-report-summary
    just caught your friend in a lie, thats all. I see you want to continue on the lie about barr...can you post any articles prior to 2019?
  15. Subscribersonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    slatington, pa, usa
    Joined
    28 Dec '04
    Moves
    52866
    19 Apr '19 07:03
    @mott-the-hoople said
    just caught your friend in a lie, thats all. I see you want to continue on the lie about barr...can you post any articles prior to 2019?
    Did you actually READ that article? It clearly talks about 1989, not 2019. Are you that stupid you can't see the difference? It is a FACT jack. He (Barr) lied to congress in 89 and he lied again in 2019, in fact even on the morning of the release of the Mueller report he said again and again, TRUMP'S words, NO COLLUSION and in fact the Mueller report says that word has no legal standing so OF COURSE there was no ''collusion'. There was CONSPIRACY and in fact it does not have to be the actual commission of a crime, it was enough to fire Comey to show conspiracy. He conspired to stop the Mueller report and in fact his own white house lawyer was asked by Trump a number of times to fire that asssswipe Mueller but McGann was an actual human being interested in protecting the US and refused and in fact resigned, FIND SOMEONE ELSE TO DO YOUR DIRTY WORK.
    You need to wake up and smell the coffee, you buddy Trump is a sociopath and narcissist who never reads and has such a poor memory that in the written questions in answer to Muellers probe, couldn't remember 31 times. Yet he himself pronounced himself the man with the best memory in DC. AND called himself a 'Stable genius'. You seriously think he didn't know the answers to the written questions Mueller asked of him? OF COURSE he knew the answers and also BTW, said to his aides, I am FUKKED. I have lost the presidency. THAT is in the record.
    Barr and the Repubs are white washing all this. Barr has ZERO credibility now with his despicable display this morning in his 'No collusion' statements, when he knows full well that is not a legal term. He was talking to an audience of ONE. Trump.
    And in the Q&A after his so-called statement, when asked by a journalist it sounded like he was being Trump's personal lawyer and not the top law enforcement officer of the country, he turned around and left, not saying another word. Did you see that TOADY performance?
    You seriously think just because he said NO COLLUSION there was none?
    Come on, THINK about it.
Back to Top