Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. Joined
    02 Jan '06
    Moves
    10087
    14 Jul '18 19:122 edits
    YouTube

    I grow tired of the extreme right wing taking Peter Strzoke out of context,. Below is an easy to use translator for better understanding and communicating with Peter Strzoke, who was the lead FBI agent on the Trump investigation,.

    Stzroke: "Yes" (understandable translation or UNT: "No"😉

    Strzoke: "No" (UNT: "Yes"😉

    Strzoke: "I would never cheat on my wife" (UNT: "Hell yea! My place or yours?"😉

    Strzoke: "You are a SMELLY ignorant Hillbilly Trump supporter" (UNT: "You are a US voter whom I respect deeply"😉

    Stroke: "F@ck of!" (UNT: "Hi, how are you today?"😉

    Stzroke: "I'm good friends with the FISA judge, he should do what we want" (UNT: "FISA judges are unbiased and trustworthy and in no way part of the deep state"😉
  2. Germany
    Joined
    27 Oct '08
    Moves
    3118
    14 Jul '18 19:23
    Bad batch of moonshine?
  3. Joined
    02 Jan '06
    Moves
    10087
    14 Jul '18 19:281 edit
    Just a show of hands, how many smelly ignorant hillbilly Trump supporters do we have here at RHP, other than KN, of course?
  4. Joined
    02 Jan '06
    Moves
    10087
    14 Jul '18 19:431 edit
    Sedition is overt conduct, such as speech and organization, that tends toward insurrection against the established order. Sedition often includes subversion of a constitution and incitement of discontent towards, or resistance against established authority. Sedition may include any commotion, though not aimed at direct and open violence against the laws. Seditious words in writing are seditious libel. A seditionist is one who engages in or promotes the interest of sedition.

    Typically, sedition is considered a subversive act, and the overt acts that may be prosecutable under sedition laws vary from one legal code to another. Where the history of these legal codes has been traced, there is also a record of the change in the definition of the elements constituting sedition at certain points in history. This overview has served to develop a sociological definition of sedition as well, within the study of state persecution.
  5. Subscriberno1marauder
    Humble and Kind
    In the Gazette
    Joined
    22 Jun '04
    Moves
    39965
    14 Jul '18 20:43
    Could you translate this:

    "I am a dentist. So I read body language very, very well." – Rep. Paul Gosar, Republican of Arizona.
  6. Subscriberno1marauder
    Humble and Kind
    In the Gazette
    Joined
    22 Jun '04
    Moves
    39965
    14 Jul '18 20:47
    There was some pious outrage directed at Strzok for having an extramarital affair.

    One of the Republicans questioning him was Scott DesJarlais of Tennessee. That's this guy: https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/08/scott-desjarlais-reelection-110028
  7. Subscribersonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    slatington, pa, usa
    Joined
    28 Dec '04
    Moves
    52855
    14 Jul '18 21:231 edit
    Originally posted by @no1marauder
    There was some pious outrage directed at Strzok for having an extramarital affair.

    One of the Republicans questioning him was Scott DesJarlais of Tennessee. That's this guy: https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/08/scott-desjarlais-reelection-110028
    You are actually surprised there is hypocrisy in the Republican party?
    What I want to know is why they are continuing to ignore the Russian attack on our democracy? Perhaps if they had been the target instead they may have been a bit more active in our defense. 'It only effected the cursed Democrats, not effecting ME, so fuk off Strzok'.
  8. Joined
    02 Jan '06
    Moves
    10087
    14 Jul '18 22:05
    Originally posted by @sonhouse
    You are actually surprised there is hypocrisy in the Republican party?
    What I want to know is why they are continuing to ignore the Russian attack on our democracy? Perhaps if they had been the target instead they may have been a bit more active in our defense. 'It only effected the cursed Democrats, not effecting ME, so fuk off Strzok'.
    I reckon the same reason Obama ignored the Russian meddling in the elections.

    Then when Trump got elected, all of a sudden it was a problem.
  9. Subscriberno1marauder
    Humble and Kind
    In the Gazette
    Joined
    22 Jun '04
    Moves
    39965
    14 Jul '18 22:28
    Originally posted by @whodey
    I reckon the same reason Obama ignored the Russian meddling in the elections.

    Then when Trump got elected, all of a sudden it was a problem.
    The party line from the partisan hack.
  10. Joined
    02 Jan '06
    Moves
    10087
    14 Jul '18 22:30
    Originally posted by @no1marauder
    The party line from the partisan hack.
    Kettle, meet the lying pot.
  11. Subscriberno1marauder
    Humble and Kind
    In the Gazette
    Joined
    22 Jun '04
    Moves
    39965
    14 Jul '18 22:46
    Originally posted by @whodey
    Kettle, meet the lying pot.
    You are lying, as virtually always, in claiming Obama "ignored Russian interference". There is some debate about whether he could have done more (if he had, you would have been screaming it was "FAKE NEWS" to help Hillary) but he issued both private and public warnings to the Russians and did other things to protect electoral integrity. https://www.npr.org/2018/02/21/587614043/fact-check-why-didnt-obama-stop-russia-s-election-interference-in-2016
  12. Joined
    02 Jan '06
    Moves
    10087
    14 Jul '18 22:56
    Originally posted by @no1marauder
    You are lying, as virtually always, in claiming Obama "ignored Russian interference". There is some debate about whether he could have done more (if he had, you would have been screaming it was "FAKE NEWS" to help Hillary) but he issued both private and public warnings to the Russians and did other things to protect electoral integrity. https://www.npr.org/2018/02/21/587614043/fact-check-why-didnt-obama-stop-russia-s-election-interference-in-2016
    You sit there and expect me to believe that warning Putin not to interfere is actually doing something? Additionally, you expect me to believe that warning the press that the Russians were interfering was also doing something?

    LMAO! 😵

    No, what you had here was an insurance policy if Trump won, knowing that they would use it to try and sink his Presidency. Otherwise, it would never have seen the light of day. It would not even surprise me if Obama was behind it. I don't think anyone here believes that it actually influenced the elections.
  13. Subscriberno1marauder
    Humble and Kind
    In the Gazette
    Joined
    22 Jun '04
    Moves
    39965
    14 Jul '18 23:11
    Originally posted by @whodey
    You sit there and expect me to believe that warning Putin not to interfere is actually doing something? Additionally, you expect me to believe that warning the press that the Russians were interfering was also doing something?

    LMAO! 😵

    No, what you had here was an insurance policy if Trump won, knowing that they would use it to try and sink his Presi ...[text shortened]... ma was behind it. I don't think anyone here believes that it actually influenced the elections.
    No, the leaks of the DNC e-mails were completely unimportant and the stuff in them was hardly mentioned by partisan hacks like yourself.

    Is that the new version?
  14. Joined
    02 Jan '06
    Moves
    10087
    14 Jul '18 23:17
    Originally posted by @no1marauder
    No, the leaks of the DNC e-mails were completely unimportant and the stuff in them was hardly mentioned by partisan hacks like yourself.

    Is that the new version?
    So because of their nefarious dealings, millions of potential voters had additional ACCURATE information to guide their votes.

    No lies or deceptions, no tampering with votes, preventing people from voting, no lies about either candidate...and THIS is what Democrats want us to believe led to a stolen election.
  15. Subscriberno1marauder
    Humble and Kind
    In the Gazette
    Joined
    22 Jun '04
    Moves
    39965
    14 Jul '18 23:19
    Originally posted by @whodey
    So because of their nefarious dealings, millions of potential voters had additional ACCURATE information to guide their votes.

    No lies or deceptions, no tampering with votes, preventing people from voting, no lies about either candidate...and THIS is what Democrats want us to believe led to a stolen election.
    Why weren't you demanding the RNC release all their e-mails then? After all, that would have given the voters a lot more ACCURATE information to guide their votes.
Back to Top