Tanq, your position on Comey is #4, and we're not even 24 hours into counting.

(11-04-2025 10:03 AM)CrimsonPhantom Wrote:  Link

Well I guess he misjudged that one.....

(11-05-2025 08:30 AM)TripleA Wrote:  Tanq, your position on Comey is #4, and we're not even 24 hours into counting.

Wanting to look at facts is a leftist position? Cool cool. Keep swinging that 'anything that disagrees with the residents of 3Aville is by definition left' bat.

(11-05-2025 08:25 AM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  

(11-04-2025 08:43 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(11-04-2025 08:35 PM)TripleA Wrote:  Yes, it is, Tanq. And you slant your comments that way practically all the time.

Maybe the disconnect is you don't think those comments are ones the left would make. Well, most of the rest of us do. You always question the Rs, not the Ds. You always seem to criticize the right, not the left.

I mean, it's so obvious to us, it's laughable. You have always done that as long as I have been on this site.

You're either immensely unaware of how your comments are received here, or you're just being disingenuous. Which is it?

Care to point out where in my comments here I have "criticize[d] the right"?

The comments are actually neutral on their face. But to you they are "ones the left would make."

I think we have the real issue at hand. It appears that in 3Aville, any comment not in line with 3Aville is 'left leaning'. That explains a whole lot, to tell the truth.

Not to mention you being dumber than dirt in not being able to back up your incessant comments with any instances, and you being too fing lazy to actually back up your kneejerk predispostions. But you be you, punkin.

While I agree that many of your comments could be construed as neutral if examined at just the right angle with the light hitting them just right, Andy's comments contained not one word of true disparagement, not one instance of name-calling, yet your reaction is hateful, almost violent, and ridiculous. Far from neutral...

3A (I assume Andy) has a stick up his ass to classify anything and everything I say as 'left leaning'.

Its stupid as ****.

Quote:And you wonder at your reception here. I put you on ignore to avoid being dragged into these ridiculous exchanges, but for some reason I saw this one. It's understandable that you are constantly on the defensive here, but have you ever asked yourself with any honesty why you are received here so poorly? I, for one, couldn't care less whether you identify as left, right, in the middle, or off on another planet somewhere, but you can't expect to come here throwing darts at everyone around you with whom you may disagree and expect a warm welcome. I understand that you have had some serious darts thrown at you also, but reacting in kind isn't productive at all. I've made an effort to be more civil; you should try it. I know I'm not perfect at it; I slip up at times, but no one expects perfection.

Again, it is stupid as **** to label anything and everything said as 'leftie' -- simply because the statement doesnt agree with the mindset of someone.

All I have *literally* said in this thread is 'take a look at the underlying charge, and *actual* underlying facts.' Its idiotic to label that as 'left'. And honestly, when done continuously (literally without regard to what an actual 'leftie' would believe), that engenders the response I gave out that you highlighted.

Quote:While I value your legal expertise and your opinions, right or wrong though they may be, it's not so valuable that I have to eat shite in order to be privy to it without a tongue lashing.

If / when comments are made in neutral tone, I respond in that tone. When approached in the friendly tone, I respond in a freindly tone.

When someone decides to stupidly translate everything I say to 'being a leftie', when the comments dont touch on *any* left leaning issues whatsoever, and when that poster decides to do that on a continual basis -- I will respond as I did above. Bummer.

And to boot, your beloved 3A (I assume Andy) actually does post stuff without *ever* bothering to verify. Bummer, thats lazy as hell. And when your beloved Andy (I assume 3A) decides to not even bother to denote *any* supposed positions I have that are left when callenged -- and when he responds "I am simply going to keep saying this without ever bothering to look" --- that actually is lazy as ****. Borders on being dishonest. So I suggest you use that context when you come to the defense of your beloved Andy. As before, context and facts are imnportant. Maybe not to everyone, but overall they are. Or should be.

(11-05-2025 07:32 AM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(11-05-2025 06:24 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(11-05-2025 04:00 AM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(11-04-2025 08:38 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(11-04-2025 08:34 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

Ill take it you dont know, nor really care what he is charged with. neat stuff.

And Ill take it you really do not care about any of the facts in the issue. Double neat stuff.

obstruction and perjury ... I reckon perjury is different than lying in your twisted sense ... you asked if he was lying ... what next, chico ... muh muh muh russiagate isn't obstruction...

nuts is on muh pins and muh needles...

go for it, mario...

Nope, perjury would be lying under oath. You are correct. Now to the facts -- that is, what was the question asked under oath, and the answer.

lying about leaking ... I know where you're going with the 'he said he said' argument ... however, his participation in muh russiagate is the damning nugget to his credibility...

What was the actual question asked? And what was the actual response?

Its not an argument -- the charges should hinge on what was *actually* asked, and what was *actually* answered.

Not your interpretation, nor mine, nor anyone's.

Quote:like I said, he's going to be acquitted due to a NoVA jury ...

Maybe, maybe not. And he may not even get to trial.

Quote:I ain' doin' this shite with yo' arse...

And stink, I dont (nor does a jury) think squat about *any* third party interpretation (yours, mine, or anyone's) *ideas* on what they *think* he said.

Quote:I want to see him spend all his time and $$$ due to the same bs his corrupt arse tried to do to too many ... yeah, I'm an eye-for-eye guy ... sue me!

So facts be damned -- you dont give a ****. Cool cool. All because in your mind you are slighted.... Aint that special.....

(11-05-2025 10:52 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(11-05-2025 08:25 AM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  

(11-04-2025 08:43 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(11-04-2025 08:35 PM)TripleA Wrote:  Yes, it is, Tanq. And you slant your comments that way practically all the time.

Maybe the disconnect is you don't think those comments are ones the left would make. Well, most of the rest of us do. You always question the Rs, not the Ds. You always seem to criticize the right, not the left.

I mean, it's so obvious to us, it's laughable. You have always done that as long as I have been on this site.

You're either immensely unaware of how your comments are received here, or you're just being disingenuous. Which is it?

Care to point out where in my comments here I have "criticize[d] the right"?

The comments are actually neutral on their face. But to you they are "ones the left would make."

I think we have the real issue at hand. It appears that in 3Aville, any comment not in line with 3Aville is 'left leaning'. That explains a whole lot, to tell the truth.

Not to mention you being dumber than dirt in not being able to back up your incessant comments with any instances, and you being too fing lazy to actually back up your kneejerk predispostions. But you be you, punkin.

While I agree that many of your comments could be construed as neutral if examined at just the right angle with the light hitting them just right, Andy's comments contained not one word of true disparagement, not one instance of name-calling, yet your reaction is hateful, almost violent, and ridiculous. Far from neutral...

3A (I assume Andy) has a stick up his ass to classify anything and everything I say as 'left leaning'.

Its stupid as ****.

Quote:And you wonder at your reception here. I put you on ignore to avoid being dragged into these ridiculous exchanges, but for some reason I saw this one. It's understandable that you are constantly on the defensive here, but have you ever asked yourself with any honesty why you are received here so poorly? I, for one, couldn't care less whether you identify as left, right, in the middle, or off on another planet somewhere, but you can't expect to come here throwing darts at everyone around you with whom you may disagree and expect a warm welcome. I understand that you have had some serious darts thrown at you also, but reacting in kind isn't productive at all. I've made an effort to be more civil; you should try it. I know I'm not perfect at it; I slip up at times, but no one expects perfection.

Again, it is stupid as **** to label anything and everything said as 'leftie' -- simply because the statement doesnt agree with the mindset of someone.

All I have *literally* said in this thread is 'take a look at the underlying charge, and *actual* underlying facts.' Its idiotic to label that as 'left'. And honestly, when done continuously (literally without regard to what an actual 'leftie' would believe), that engenders the response I gave out that you highlighted.

Quote:While I value your legal expertise and your opinions, right or wrong though they may be, it's not so valuable that I have to eat shite in order to be privy to it without a tongue lashing.

If / when comments are made in neutral tone, I respond in that tone. When approached in the friendly tone, I respond in a freindly tone.

When someone decides to stupidly translate everything I say to 'being a leftie', when the comments dont touch on *any* left leaning issues whatsoever, and when that poster decides to do that on a continual basis -- I will respond as I did above. Bummer.

And to boot, your beloved 3A (I assume Andy) actually does post stuff without *ever* bothering to verify. Bummer, thats lazy as hell. And when your beloved Andy (I assume 3A) decides to not even bother to denote *any* supposed positions I have that are left when callenged -- and when he responds "I am simply going to keep saying this without ever bothering to look" --- that actually is lazy as ****. Borders on being dishonest. So I suggest you use that context when you come to the defense of your beloved Andy. As before, context and facts are imnportant. Maybe not to everyone, but overall they are. Or should be.

Andy is a grown ass man and he doesn't need me to defend much less venerate him. He isn't my beloved, what's that even about? Weird...

Up until the last paragraph I found nothing abrasive or smug, but then you went off the rails. Ah well, cheers, have a good night.

(11-05-2025 11:31 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(11-05-2025 07:32 AM)stinkfist Wrote:  I want to see him spend all his time and $$$ due to the same bs his corrupt arse tried to do to too many ... yeah, I'm an eye-for-eye guy ... sue me!

So facts be damned -- you dont give a ****. Cool cool. All because in your mind you are slighted.... Aint that special.....

@theSadist

The man who probably did more to help Trump win than anyone not named Trump somehow thought he was helping Killary and would be working for her? Damn he's dumber than I thought he was, and I thought he was very dumb.

(11-05-2025 07:02 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  The man who probably did more to help Trump win than anyone not named Trump somehow thought he was helping Killary and would be working for her? Damn he's dumber than I thought he was, and I thought he was very dumb.

In all honesty, most FBI directors are 'kept on' through a change in administration. That is the reason why they have terms staggered so that Presidents cannot do a 'just get my guy' in the slot.

Trump #2 is literally the first time the incoming President sacked an FBI director at the start of the term.

Only 3 directors have ever been sacked.

Sessions in '93 (for an appearance of an ethical violation by having his family fly with him on a govt plane) (couogh, cough -- Kash Patel's date night **** presently.....)

Comey by Trump in 2018.

It could have been Comey’s ongoing push to get to the bottom of how Russia sought to meddle in the 2016 election and whether any Trump campaign officials colluded with them.

It could have been the reported loyalty pledge Trump sought from Comey in a late January dinner that Comey refused to give.

It could have been Trump’s ongoing frustration with the fact that Comey didn’t bring an indictment against Hillary Clinton despite the fact that many Republicans believed there was ample evidence to do so.

It could have been that Trump didn’t like Comey’s flair for the dramatic. (He referred to the fired FBI director as a “showboat” in the Holt interview.)

It could have been that Comey was an Obama pick, not a Trump one.

And Trump #2 fired Wray, whom Trump had originally picked.

In short, it is very normal for a current FBI director to transition to a new administration. Except under Trump.

So perfectly normal to think he would be working under Hillary. Very normal.

(11-05-2025 06:57 PM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  

(11-05-2025 10:52 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(11-05-2025 08:25 AM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  

(11-04-2025 08:43 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(11-04-2025 08:35 PM)TripleA Wrote:  Yes, it is, Tanq. And you slant your comments that way practically all the time.

Maybe the disconnect is you don't think those comments are ones the left would make. Well, most of the rest of us do. You always question the Rs, not the Ds. You always seem to criticize the right, not the left.

I mean, it's so obvious to us, it's laughable. You have always done that as long as I have been on this site.

You're either immensely unaware of how your comments are received here, or you're just being disingenuous. Which is it?

Care to point out where in my comments here I have "criticize[d] the right"?

The comments are actually neutral on their face. But to you they are "ones the left would make."

I think we have the real issue at hand. It appears that in 3Aville, any comment not in line with 3Aville is 'left leaning'. That explains a whole lot, to tell the truth.

Not to mention you being dumber than dirt in not being able to back up your incessant comments with any instances, and you being too fing lazy to actually back up your kneejerk predispostions. But you be you, punkin.

While I agree that many of your comments could be construed as neutral if examined at just the right angle with the light hitting them just right, Andy's comments contained not one word of true disparagement, not one instance of name-calling, yet your reaction is hateful, almost violent, and ridiculous. Far from neutral...

3A (I assume Andy) has a stick up his ass to classify anything and everything I say as 'left leaning'.

Its stupid as ****.

Quote:And you wonder at your reception here. I put you on ignore to avoid being dragged into these ridiculous exchanges, but for some reason I saw this one. It's understandable that you are constantly on the defensive here, but have you ever asked yourself with any honesty why you are received here so poorly? I, for one, couldn't care less whether you identify as left, right, in the middle, or off on another planet somewhere, but you can't expect to come here throwing darts at everyone around you with whom you may disagree and expect a warm welcome. I understand that you have had some serious darts thrown at you also, but reacting in kind isn't productive at all. I've made an effort to be more civil; you should try it. I know I'm not perfect at it; I slip up at times, but no one expects perfection.

Again, it is stupid as **** to label anything and everything said as 'leftie' -- simply because the statement doesnt agree with the mindset of someone.

All I have *literally* said in this thread is 'take a look at the underlying charge, and *actual* underlying facts.' Its idiotic to label that as 'left'. And honestly, when done continuously (literally without regard to what an actual 'leftie' would believe), that engenders the response I gave out that you highlighted.

Quote:While I value your legal expertise and your opinions, right or wrong though they may be, it's not so valuable that I have to eat shite in order to be privy to it without a tongue lashing.

If / when comments are made in neutral tone, I respond in that tone. When approached in the friendly tone, I respond in a freindly tone.

When someone decides to stupidly translate everything I say to 'being a leftie', when the comments dont touch on *any* left leaning issues whatsoever, and when that poster decides to do that on a continual basis -- I will respond as I did above. Bummer.

And to boot, your beloved 3A (I assume Andy) actually does post stuff without *ever* bothering to verify. Bummer, thats lazy as hell. And when your beloved Andy (I assume 3A) decides to not even bother to denote *any* supposed positions I have that are left when callenged -- and when he responds "I am simply going to keep saying this without ever bothering to look" --- that actually is lazy as ****. Borders on being dishonest. So I suggest you use that context when you come to the defense of your beloved Andy. As before, context and facts are imnportant. Maybe not to everyone, but overall they are. Or should be.

Andy is a grown ass man and he doesn't need me to defend much less venerate him. He isn't my beloved, what's that even about? Weird...

Up until the last paragraph I found nothing abrasive or smug, but then you went off the rails. Ah well, cheers, have a good night.

Tanq has TADS. Triple A Derangement Syndrome.

(11-05-2025 07:00 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(11-05-2025 11:31 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(11-05-2025 07:32 AM)stinkfist Wrote:  I want to see him spend all his time and $$$ due to the same bs his corrupt arse tried to do to too many ... yeah, I'm an eye-for-eye guy ... sue me!

So facts be damned -- you dont give a ****. Cool cool. All because in your mind you are slighted.... Aint that special.....

@theSadist

That is the major difference between you and I, stink. I dont automatically hit the 'corrupt arse' simply because someone else told me to do that, and prefer facts.

Much like I prefer facts in moving forward with Comey. While it is readily apparent that you literally do not give a **** about those underlying facts. Explicitly.

Cool cool.

(11-05-2025 07:27 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(11-05-2025 06:57 PM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  

(11-05-2025 10:52 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(11-05-2025 08:25 AM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  

(11-04-2025 08:43 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  Care to point out where in my comments here I have "criticize[d] the right"?

The comments are actually neutral on their face. But to you they are "ones the left would make."

I think we have the real issue at hand. It appears that in 3Aville, any comment not in line with 3Aville is 'left leaning'. That explains a whole lot, to tell the truth.

Not to mention you being dumber than dirt in not being able to back up your incessant comments with any instances, and you being too fing lazy to actually back up your kneejerk predispostions. But you be you, punkin.

While I agree that many of your comments could be construed as neutral if examined at just the right angle with the light hitting them just right, Andy's comments contained not one word of true disparagement, not one instance of name-calling, yet your reaction is hateful, almost violent, and ridiculous. Far from neutral...

3A (I assume Andy) has a stick up his ass to classify anything and everything I say as 'left leaning'.

Its stupid as ****.

Quote:And you wonder at your reception here. I put you on ignore to avoid being dragged into these ridiculous exchanges, but for some reason I saw this one. It's understandable that you are constantly on the defensive here, but have you ever asked yourself with any honesty why you are received here so poorly? I, for one, couldn't care less whether you identify as left, right, in the middle, or off on another planet somewhere, but you can't expect to come here throwing darts at everyone around you with whom you may disagree and expect a warm welcome. I understand that you have had some serious darts thrown at you also, but reacting in kind isn't productive at all. I've made an effort to be more civil; you should try it. I know I'm not perfect at it; I slip up at times, but no one expects perfection.

Again, it is stupid as **** to label anything and everything said as 'leftie' -- simply because the statement doesnt agree with the mindset of someone.

All I have *literally* said in this thread is 'take a look at the underlying charge, and *actual* underlying facts.' Its idiotic to label that as 'left'. And honestly, when done continuously (literally without regard to what an actual 'leftie' would believe), that engenders the response I gave out that you highlighted.

Quote:While I value your legal expertise and your opinions, right or wrong though they may be, it's not so valuable that I have to eat shite in order to be privy to it without a tongue lashing.

If / when comments are made in neutral tone, I respond in that tone. When approached in the friendly tone, I respond in a freindly tone.

When someone decides to stupidly translate everything I say to 'being a leftie', when the comments dont touch on *any* left leaning issues whatsoever, and when that poster decides to do that on a continual basis -- I will respond as I did above. Bummer.

And to boot, your beloved 3A (I assume Andy) actually does post stuff without *ever* bothering to verify. Bummer, thats lazy as hell. And when your beloved Andy (I assume 3A) decides to not even bother to denote *any* supposed positions I have that are left when callenged -- and when he responds "I am simply going to keep saying this without ever bothering to look" --- that actually is lazy as ****. Borders on being dishonest. So I suggest you use that context when you come to the defense of your beloved Andy. As before, context and facts are imnportant. Maybe not to everyone, but overall they are. Or should be.

Andy is a grown ass man and he doesn't need me to defend much less venerate him. He isn't my beloved, what's that even about? Weird...

Up until the last paragraph I found nothing abrasive or smug, but then you went off the rails. Ah well, cheers, have a good night.

Tanq has TADS. Triple A Derangement Syndrome.

... literally lol...

#PotD

(11-05-2025 07:27 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(11-05-2025 06:57 PM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  

(11-05-2025 10:52 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(11-05-2025 08:25 AM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  

(11-04-2025 08:43 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  Care to point out where in my comments here I have "criticize[d] the right"?

The comments are actually neutral on their face. But to you they are "ones the left would make."

I think we have the real issue at hand. It appears that in 3Aville, any comment not in line with 3Aville is 'left leaning'. That explains a whole lot, to tell the truth.

Not to mention you being dumber than dirt in not being able to back up your incessant comments with any instances, and you being too fing lazy to actually back up your kneejerk predispostions. But you be you, punkin.

While I agree that many of your comments could be construed as neutral if examined at just the right angle with the light hitting them just right, Andy's comments contained not one word of true disparagement, not one instance of name-calling, yet your reaction is hateful, almost violent, and ridiculous. Far from neutral...

3A (I assume Andy) has a stick up his ass to classify anything and everything I say as 'left leaning'.

Its stupid as ****.

Quote:And you wonder at your reception here. I put you on ignore to avoid being dragged into these ridiculous exchanges, but for some reason I saw this one. It's understandable that you are constantly on the defensive here, but have you ever asked yourself with any honesty why you are received here so poorly? I, for one, couldn't care less whether you identify as left, right, in the middle, or off on another planet somewhere, but you can't expect to come here throwing darts at everyone around you with whom you may disagree and expect a warm welcome. I understand that you have had some serious darts thrown at you also, but reacting in kind isn't productive at all. I've made an effort to be more civil; you should try it. I know I'm not perfect at it; I slip up at times, but no one expects perfection.

Again, it is stupid as **** to label anything and everything said as 'leftie' -- simply because the statement doesnt agree with the mindset of someone.

All I have *literally* said in this thread is 'take a look at the underlying charge, and *actual* underlying facts.' Its idiotic to label that as 'left'. And honestly, when done continuously (literally without regard to what an actual 'leftie' would believe), that engenders the response I gave out that you highlighted.

Quote:While I value your legal expertise and your opinions, right or wrong though they may be, it's not so valuable that I have to eat shite in order to be privy to it without a tongue lashing.

If / when comments are made in neutral tone, I respond in that tone. When approached in the friendly tone, I respond in a freindly tone.

When someone decides to stupidly translate everything I say to 'being a leftie', when the comments dont touch on *any* left leaning issues whatsoever, and when that poster decides to do that on a continual basis -- I will respond as I did above. Bummer.

And to boot, your beloved 3A (I assume Andy) actually does post stuff without *ever* bothering to verify. Bummer, thats lazy as hell. And when your beloved Andy (I assume 3A) decides to not even bother to denote *any* supposed positions I have that are left when callenged -- and when he responds "I am simply going to keep saying this without ever bothering to look" --- that actually is lazy as ****. Borders on being dishonest. So I suggest you use that context when you come to the defense of your beloved Andy. As before, context and facts are imnportant. Maybe not to everyone, but overall they are. Or should be.

Andy is a grown ass man and he doesn't need me to defend much less venerate him. He isn't my beloved, what's that even about? Weird...

Up until the last paragraph I found nothing abrasive or smug, but then you went off the rails. Ah well, cheers, have a good night.

Tanq has TADS. Triple A Derangement Syndrome.

Nah, I just find you exceptionally pathetic in your ever growing and ever expanding quest to tag me with something.

(11-05-2025 07:29 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(11-05-2025 07:00 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(11-05-2025 11:31 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(11-05-2025 07:32 AM)stinkfist Wrote:  I want to see him spend all his time and $$$ due to the same bs his corrupt arse tried to do to too many ... yeah, I'm an eye-for-eye guy ... sue me!

So facts be damned -- you dont give a ****. Cool cool. All because in your mind you are slighted.... Aint that special.....

@theSadist

That is the major difference between you and I, stink. I dont automatically hit the 'corrupt arse' simply because someone else told me to do that, and prefer facts.

Much like I prefer facts in moving forward with Comey. While it is readily apparent that you literally do not give a **** about those underlying facts. Explicitly.

Cool cool.

you're right ... however, I've filtered thru enough bs to know bs as you ignore my rebuttal in fact ... I'm also old enough to call that spade a spade .... you have to remember this about me ... I despise politics ... even more so, those entrusted to carry out duty that is supposedly w/o poli-bias...

if there's one thingy stink knows, it's stink ... the fact you're unable to reconcile what happened since DJT rode the escalator to the center and how he's been persecuted speaks volumes in your version of 'rhetorical fact'...

enjoy your evening, chico...

(11-05-2025 07:31 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(11-05-2025 07:27 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(11-05-2025 06:57 PM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  

(11-05-2025 10:52 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(11-05-2025 08:25 AM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  While I agree that many of your comments could be construed as neutral if examined at just the right angle with the light hitting them just right, Andy's comments contained not one word of true disparagement, not one instance of name-calling, yet your reaction is hateful, almost violent, and ridiculous. Far from neutral...

3A (I assume Andy) has a stick up his ass to classify anything and everything I say as 'left leaning'.

Its stupid as ****.

Quote:And you wonder at your reception here. I put you on ignore to avoid being dragged into these ridiculous exchanges, but for some reason I saw this one. It's understandable that you are constantly on the defensive here, but have you ever asked yourself with any honesty why you are received here so poorly? I, for one, couldn't care less whether you identify as left, right, in the middle, or off on another planet somewhere, but you can't expect to come here throwing darts at everyone around you with whom you may disagree and expect a warm welcome. I understand that you have had some serious darts thrown at you also, but reacting in kind isn't productive at all. I've made an effort to be more civil; you should try it. I know I'm not perfect at it; I slip up at times, but no one expects perfection.

Again, it is stupid as **** to label anything and everything said as 'leftie' -- simply because the statement doesnt agree with the mindset of someone.

All I have *literally* said in this thread is 'take a look at the underlying charge, and *actual* underlying facts.' Its idiotic to label that as 'left'. And honestly, when done continuously (literally without regard to what an actual 'leftie' would believe), that engenders the response I gave out that you highlighted.

Quote:While I value your legal expertise and your opinions, right or wrong though they may be, it's not so valuable that I have to eat shite in order to be privy to it without a tongue lashing.

If / when comments are made in neutral tone, I respond in that tone. When approached in the friendly tone, I respond in a freindly tone.

When someone decides to stupidly translate everything I say to 'being a leftie', when the comments dont touch on *any* left leaning issues whatsoever, and when that poster decides to do that on a continual basis -- I will respond as I did above. Bummer.

And to boot, your beloved 3A (I assume Andy) actually does post stuff without *ever* bothering to verify. Bummer, thats lazy as hell. And when your beloved Andy (I assume 3A) decides to not even bother to denote *any* supposed positions I have that are left when callenged -- and when he responds "I am simply going to keep saying this without ever bothering to look" --- that actually is lazy as ****. Borders on being dishonest. So I suggest you use that context when you come to the defense of your beloved Andy. As before, context and facts are imnportant. Maybe not to everyone, but overall they are. Or should be.

Andy is a grown ass man and he doesn't need me to defend much less venerate him. He isn't my beloved, what's that even about? Weird...

Up until the last paragraph I found nothing abrasive or smug, but then you went off the rails. Ah well, cheers, have a good night.

Tanq has TADS. Triple A Derangement Syndrome.

Nah, I just find you exceptionally pathetic in your ever growing and ever expanding quest to tag me with something.

Oh yeah, you never say anything that would lead anybody to criticize you. It's a conspiracy! People just make up crap to criticize Tanq!

I'm simply using your own words, dude.

(11-05-2025 07:38 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(11-05-2025 07:29 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(11-05-2025 07:00 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(11-05-2025 11:31 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(11-05-2025 07:32 AM)stinkfist Wrote:  I want to see him spend all his time and $$$ due to the same bs his corrupt arse tried to do to too many ... yeah, I'm an eye-for-eye guy ... sue me!

So facts be damned -- you dont give a ****. Cool cool. All because in your mind you are slighted.... Aint that special.....

@theSadist

That is the major difference between you and I, stink. I dont automatically hit the 'corrupt arse' simply because someone else told me to do that, and prefer facts.

Much like I prefer facts in moving forward with Comey. While it is readily apparent that you literally do not give a **** about those underlying facts. Explicitly.

Cool cool.

you're right ... however, I've filtered thru enough bs to know bs as you ignore my rebuttal in fact ... I'm also old enough to call that spade a spade .... you have to remember this about me ... I despise politics ... even more so, those entrusted to carry out duty that is supposedly w/o poli-bias...

if there's one thingy stink knows, it's stink ... the fact you're unable to reconcile what happened since DJT rode the escalator to the center and how he's been persecuted speaks volumes in your version of 'rhetorical fact'...

enjoy your evening, chico...

Stink, as I said above -- the facts drive the buggy in my line.

For you, it appears your goal determines the best outcome, regardless of the facts.

Notwithstanding your near constant retreat to 'TDS' as the well worn and well squawked rebuttal.

Somebody needs to take their meds.

(11-05-2025 07:40 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(11-05-2025 07:31 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  Nah, I just find you exceptionally pathetic in your ever growing and ever expanding quest to tag me with something.

Oh yeah, you never say anything that would lead anybody to criticize you. It's a conspiracy! People just make up crap to criticize Tanq!

I'm simply using your own words, dude.

Im sure that I have used that language. The vast majority in response to that same aimed my way. A time or two I have done them w/o provocation.

And to your current autistic like goal -- "3A (I assume Andy) has a stick up his ass to classify anything and everything I say as 'left leaning'. Its stupid as ****."

Bummer for you. Too bad you seemingly dont have a clue as to what a 'leftist' idea or stance is -- that is beyond your seeming current idea that anything critical of Trump, or repubs is by default 'leftist'. If you are too dense to understand what you are saying when you kneejerk the comments, not my place to fill that big void in that brain of yours on that, my friend.

You keep saying I have a stick up my butt, like you bother me. Dude, you suck at psychology, which should be odd for an attorney.

You don't bother me one bit. You make me laugh. If you ever left, I would miss you. It is funny to poke you, b/c you have such an over-the-top reaction to everything.

It's like somebody walks up and gently jabs you from behind, and you fall down, start screaming, and call for an ambulance.

(11-05-2025 07:38 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(11-05-2025 07:29 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(11-05-2025 07:00 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(11-05-2025 11:31 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(11-05-2025 07:32 AM)stinkfist Wrote:  I want to see him spend all his time and $$$ due to the same bs his corrupt arse tried to do to too many ... yeah, I'm an eye-for-eye guy ... sue me!

So facts be damned -- you dont give a ****. Cool cool. All because in your mind you are slighted.... Aint that special.....

@theSadist

That is the major difference between you and I, stink. I dont automatically hit the 'corrupt arse' simply because someone else told me to do that, and prefer facts.

Much like I prefer facts in moving forward with Comey. While it is readily apparent that you literally do not give a **** about those underlying facts. Explicitly.

Cool cool.

you're right ... however, I've filtered thru enough bs to know bs as you ignore my rebuttal in fact ... I'm also old enough to call that spade a spade .... you have to remember this about me ... I despise politics ... even more so, those entrusted to carry out duty that is supposedly w/o poli-bias...

if there's one thingy stink knows, it's stink ... the fact you're unable to reconcile what happened since DJT rode the escalator to the center and how he's been persecuted speaks volumes in your version of 'rhetorical fact'...

enjoy your evening, chico...

"the fact you're unable to reconcile what happened since DJT rode the escalator to the center and how he's been persecuted speaks volumes in your version of 'rhetorical fact'"

Someone's Hate for someone will do that. It's almost sad that someone has that much Hate someone bottled up inside.