Buckwheat says 9-0.

(03-12-2024 11:30 PM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  Buckwheat says 9-0.

Yep, and Tanq a few months ago on this board said that he had zero idea how the ballot removal case would be decided. No skin off my back, Buckwheat. If you are trying to ascribe that to me -- well, leave it to a moron to try and make something up to attach as some sort of insult in that issue. You be you.

I'd make a comment on the nuance in per curiam decision that is followed by 5 judges, and the concurrence from 3 that says some majorly different things about that unsigned opinion, but I will assume that would be miles above your head, so I wont bother.

Good grief, it seems some of the more terminally stupid around here took a whole host extra helping of stupid pills in the last few months.

(03-10-2024 09:59 AM)shere khan Wrote:  

(03-10-2024 08:20 AM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(03-10-2024 08:07 AM)HCJag Wrote:  I'll go with this one.

thank you for posting this ... he killed it in the first minute ... then he kept on truckin'....

this is how close we are to #roaring'20sPartDeux...





















y'all ain' seen shite, yet!

Wish i had a pencil thin mustache

The Boston Blackie kind.

(03-13-2024 06:13 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(03-12-2024 11:30 PM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  Buckwheat says 9-0.

Yep, and Tanq a few months ago on this board said that he had zero idea how the ballot removal case would be decided. No skin off my back, Buckwheat. If you are trying to ascribe that to me -- well, leave it to a moron to try and make something up to attach as some sort of insult in that issue. You be you.

I'd make a comment on the nuance in per curiam decision that is followed by 5 judges, and the concurrence from 3 that says some majorly different things about that unsigned opinion, but I will assume that would be miles above your head, so I wont bother.

Good grief, it seems some of the more terminally stupid around here took a whole host extra helping of stupid pills in the last few months.

When the Anthony Weiner crotch-photos scandal broke, I recall being surprised most by the comments from Jon Stewart and others on the left chuckling about how large he was. That was a very comforting moment for me. Like most men, I've had my "size matters" moments of self doubt. But if those Anthony Weiner photos qualifies as large, then I've got nothing whatsoever to worry about.

You, tanq., are serving a similar purpose. If your face-saving reservations regarding the ultimate outcome of the Supreme Court's ballot decision count in your mind as smart, then you've elevated most everyone else on this board to genius level. Even the Trumplets outpace you.

What you did on this forum, before running and hiding, was castigate anyone who expressed an opinion on the political weaponization of the FBI, the DoJ and much of the judiciary. How DARE anyone refer to the "Garland Stasi" or the "Wray Gestapo". Procedures govern issuance of search warrants, so the quasi-judge in Florida cannot be questioned about his signing off on the midnight raid of Trump's residence.

Yet now that the Hur testimony is coming to light, there is no other conclusion to be had. Our federal system of justice is corrupt. Those on the right get prosecuted. Those on the left get ignored, or absurd excuses made for them when they no longer can be ignored.

You nevertheless still have the gall to pretend that those of us expressing doubts got it wrong and you were right all along. What a pathetic display. At least RWT gets paid for his intellectual dishonesty.

(03-10-2024 12:26 PM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  

(03-10-2024 12:04 PM)miko33 Wrote:  It’s all political theater. SOTU was a joke. The rebuttal was garbage too. Anyone who gives just a little thought to the speeches can see that neither had any sincerity about them. If I was a member of the Riley family I would be pissed off seeing a deceased family member being thrown around like a political football.

I'm pretty sure I'd be far more mad that she was murdered by an illegal that should never have been allowed in. As are the Riley family.

Pshhhh, you're losing sight of what's important Eric!! You know you can't say illegal! If only everyone would just use their words.

(03-10-2024 12:26 PM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  

(03-10-2024 12:04 PM)miko33 Wrote:  It’s all political theater. SOTU was a joke. The rebuttal was garbage too. Anyone who gives just a little thought to the speeches can see that neither had any sincerity about them. If I was a member of the Riley family I would be pissed off seeing a deceased family member being thrown around like a political football.

I'm pretty sure I'd be far more mad that she was murdered by an illegal that should never have been allowed in. As are the Riley family.

(03-11-2024 02:45 PM)oruvoice Wrote:  

(03-11-2024 02:43 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(03-11-2024 10:44 AM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(03-11-2024 09:47 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Curious how long the right is going to ignore that a key part of her rebuttal was a complete fabrication of events and facts?

Regarding the Mexican woman who was trafficked....

1. It happened in Mexico, not the USA.
2. It happened while George W. Bush was president.
3. She wasn't trafficked by Mexican drug cartels, but rather a pimp.
4. Britt didn't meet 1:1 with the woman.

Even worse, Britt is now doubling down claiming she made all this clear in her speech. Yeah, no, you didn't.

3 of your 4 assertions are wrong or immaterial/misrepresentations.

Let's start with this.

There are youtube videos of her and the woman... so your #4 is just wrong.


Now let's look at what she actually said.

“We know that President Biden didn’t just create this border crisis. He invited it with 94 executive actions in his first 100 days. When I took office, I took a different approach. I traveled to the Del Rio sector of Texas. That’s where I spoke to a woman who shared her story with me. She had been sex trafficked by the cartels starting at the age of 12. She told me not just that she was raped every day, but how many times a day she was raped. The cartels put her on a mattress in a shoe box of a room, and they sent men through that door over and over again for hours and hours on end. We wouldn’t be okay with this happening in a Third World country. This is the United States of America, and it is past time, in my opinion, that we start acting like it. President Biden’s border policies are a disgrace.”

So she spoke to a WOMAN who bad been trafficked starting at age 12.

I don't know about your definition, Tom... but I don't call a girl a 'woman' until at LEAST 18, and even more likely not until at least mid 20's... so anyone that thinks she implied that this 'happened under Biden' is a moron and a liar.... so your number 2 is out as well. She's simply talking about what she really did (went to the border with an expert) , vs what Biden really did (signed a bunch of EOs making things at the border worse).

The woman she met said this about herself...
“I work as a spokesperson for many victims (of human trafficking) who have no voice...."

so she certainly sounds like the sort of person whom wouldn't simply be retelling her own story from years ago, but would be precisely the sort of advocate who could give a new congresswoman an idea of what the CURRENT problems were... and not those from 20 years ago. Congress seems to have agreed, since they also spoke to her.

Point 1...Like Biden you need to understand the problem better... When the woman testified before congress, she reported that she was trafficked to a border town and that it was 'foreign visitors' who raped her.... and given the location, those would most likely be Americans. More on this in a minute.

Like drugs, we create the demand and they create the supply....

In 2004-2008 it was fairly common for US residents to cross the border to go to bars, clubs...and yes... strip joints and brothels... I had a customer in Laredo and we regularly went across the border to the original cadillac bar.... but since then, the border towns have gotten much more dangerous because of the drug smugglers... so NOW they are trafficking those people here. Bringing the supply to the demand like drugs... and that would have been precisely what this woman would have told her. SHE was trafficked in Mexico for the benefit of (mostly) Americans.... and now those people are being brought across the border.

so to point 3, what the hell difference does it make? You realize that they are often the same people, right? They often use drugs to 'hook' the girls.... and certainly now they use the same people to send drugs as people across the border.


Is it a GREAT correlated story? Not at all... I'm actually a bit embarrassed at how poor speech writers are these days.... Kamala literally has only one 'go to' phrase and Biden says the same things he's said for years.... maybe she got nervous and missed a line in her speech or something.... but the ONLY point that you make here that means ANYTHING (and you didn't really make it... I did) was that Biden's policies had nothing to do with that woman Personally being trafficked.... but neither did anyone claim this. They just didn't explain the connection.

Dude, when you have to use that many words, you've lost.

Funny that you never say that in reply to one of Tanq's mindless/rambling novels.

He can't pay attention long enough to read that many words.

(03-11-2024 03:05 PM)b2b Wrote:  Once again Tom drags someone into debating semantics instead of issues. The smarts from Rice keep getting suckered into it.

Sent from my Pixel 7 using Tapatalk

It's why I put his dumb ass on ignore. It's ALL he has, ever.

(03-11-2024 04:47 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(03-11-2024 02:43 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Dude, when you have to use that many words, you've lost.

Well, 'you're a moron' would certainly have been more brief... but I thought you might want to become educated.

Quote:And I heard an interview with the actual woman yesterday. She did NOT have a 1:1 meeting with Britt. Britt was just at an event where the woman shared her story. Britt's story was garbage and had every intention of trying to make it sound like it was something that happened in the US while Biden was president.

We all know it. And so do you.

We all know you lie, yes.
First, nobody said she met 'alone' with this person. She said she spoke to her.

Second, you're just wrong. Britt traveled with two other Republican Senators. There is video and photographic evidence. Pictures of them together. She wasn't merely 'at an event' where this woman shared her story. They shared a stage. They spoke personally.

(03-11-2024 03:05 PM)b2b Wrote:  Once again Tom drags someone into debating semantics instead of issues. The smarts from Rice keep getting suckered into it.

In order to be suckered into a debate, there would have to be two opposing positions. 'Lies/Fallacies' are not an opposing position.... as in there is no debate that water is wet.... other than that, I DO appreciate your concern. I'm trying to be polite.

What has that ever gotten you? Aside from personal pride in being civil it does nothing to advance a cause. The left see's it as weakness, not as a virtue.

(03-11-2024 10:29 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  [quote='Redwingtom' pid='19509932' dateline='1710168423']

(03-13-2024 06:13 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(03-12-2024 11:30 PM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  Buckwheat says 9-0.

Yep, and Tanq a few months ago on this board said that he had zero idea how the ballot removal case would be decided. No skin off my back, Buckwheat. If you are trying to ascribe that to me -- well, leave it to a moron to try and make something up to attach as some sort of insult in that issue. You be you.

I'd make a comment on the nuance in per curiam decision that is followed by 5 judges, and the concurrence from 3 that says some majorly different things about that unsigned opinion, but I will assume that would be miles above your head, so I wont bother.

Good grief, it seems some of the more terminally stupid around here took a whole host extra helping of stupid pills in the last few months.

9-0.

(03-13-2024 06:50 AM)AdoptedMonarch Wrote:  

(03-13-2024 06:13 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(03-12-2024 11:30 PM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  Buckwheat says 9-0.

Yep, and Tanq a few months ago on this board said that he had zero idea how the ballot removal case would be decided. No skin off my back, Buckwheat. If you are trying to ascribe that to me -- well, leave it to a moron to try and make something up to attach as some sort of insult in that issue. You be you.

I'd make a comment on the nuance in per curiam decision that is followed by 5 judges, and the concurrence from 3 that says some majorly different things about that unsigned opinion, but I will assume that would be miles above your head, so I wont bother.

Good grief, it seems some of the more terminally stupid around here took a whole host extra helping of stupid pills in the last few months.

When the Anthony Weiner crotch-photos scandal broke, I recall being surprised most by the comments from Jon Stewart and others on the left chuckling about how large he was. That was a very comforting moment for me. Like most men, I've had my "size matters" moments of self doubt. But if those Anthony Weiner photos qualifies as large, then I've got nothing whatsoever to worry about.

You, tanq., are serving a similar purpose. If your face-saving reservations regarding the ultimate outcome of the Supreme Court's ballot decision count in your mind as smart, then you've elevated most everyone else on this board to genius level. Even the Trumplets outpace you.

What you did on this forum, before running and hiding, was castigate anyone who expressed an opinion on the political weaponization of the FBI, the DoJ and much of the judiciary. How DARE anyone refer to the "Garland Stasi" or the "Wray Gestapo". Procedures govern issuance of search warrants, so the quasi-judge in Florida cannot be questioned about his signing off on the midnight raid of Trump's residence.

Yet now that the Hur testimony is coming to light, there is no other conclusion to be had. Our federal system of justice is corrupt. Those on the right get prosecuted. Those on the left get ignored, or absurd excuses made for them when they no longer can be ignored.

You nevertheless still have the gall to pretend that those of us expressing doubts got it wrong and you were right all along. What a pathetic display. At least RWT gets paid for his intellectual dishonesty.

You're wasting your time. We already knew he was dishonest and it seems pretty clear we can add clueless now as well.

(03-13-2024 06:50 AM)AdoptedMonarch Wrote:  

(03-13-2024 06:13 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(03-12-2024 11:30 PM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  Buckwheat says 9-0.

Yep, and Tanq a few months ago on this board said that he had zero idea how the ballot removal case would be decided. No skin off my back, Buckwheat. If you are trying to ascribe that to me -- well, leave it to a moron to try and make something up to attach as some sort of insult in that issue. You be you.

I'd make a comment on the nuance in per curiam decision that is followed by 5 judges, and the concurrence from 3 that says some majorly different things about that unsigned opinion, but I will assume that would be miles above your head, so I wont bother.

Good grief, it seems some of the more terminally stupid around here took a whole host extra helping of stupid pills in the last few months.

When the Anthony Weiner crotch-photos scandal broke, I recall being surprised most by the comments from Jon Stewart and others on the left chuckling about how large he was. That was a very comforting moment for me. Like most men, I've had my "size matters" moments of self doubt. But if those Anthony Weiner photos qualifies as large, then I've got nothing whatsoever to worry about.

You, tanq., are serving a similar purpose. If your face-saving reservations regarding the ultimate outcome of the Supreme Court's ballot decision count in your mind as smart, then you've elevated most everyone else on this board to genius level. Even the Trumplets outpace you.

What you did on this forum, before running and hiding, was castigate anyone who expressed an opinion on the political weaponization of the FBI, the DoJ and much of the judiciary. How DARE anyone refer to the "Garland Stasi" or the "Wray Gestapo". Procedures govern issuance of search warrants, so the quasi-judge in Florida cannot be questioned about his signing off on the midnight raid of Trump's residence.

Yet now that the Hur testimony is coming to light, there is no other conclusion to be had. Our federal system of justice is corrupt. Those on the right get prosecuted. Those on the left get ignored, or absurd excuses made for them when they no longer can be ignored.

You nevertheless still have the gall to pretend that those of us expressing doubts got it wrong and you were right all along. What a pathetic display. At least RWT gets paid for his intellectual dishonesty.

He's a lying dog faced pony soldier who doesn't know when to take the L and move on.

(03-13-2024 07:04 AM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(03-13-2024 06:13 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(03-12-2024 11:30 PM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  Buckwheat says 9-0.

Yep, and Tanq a few months ago on this board said that he had zero idea how the ballot removal case would be decided. No skin off my back, Buckwheat. If you are trying to ascribe that to me -- well, leave it to a moron to try and make something up to attach as some sort of insult in that issue. You be you.

I'd make a comment on the nuance in per curiam decision that is followed by 5 judges, and the concurrence from 3 that says some majorly different things about that unsigned opinion, but I will assume that would be miles above your head, so I wont bother.

Good grief, it seems some of the more terminally stupid around here took a whole host extra helping of stupid pills in the last few months.

9-0.

He likes words, that's NINE to zero...

(03-13-2024 06:50 AM)AdoptedMonarch Wrote:  

(03-13-2024 06:13 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(03-12-2024 11:30 PM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  Buckwheat says 9-0.

Yep, and Tanq a few months ago on this board said that he had zero idea how the ballot removal case would be decided. No skin off my back, Buckwheat. If you are trying to ascribe that to me -- well, leave it to a moron to try and make something up to attach as some sort of insult in that issue. You be you.

I'd make a comment on the nuance in per curiam decision that is followed by 5 judges, and the concurrence from 3 that says some majorly different things about that unsigned opinion, but I will assume that would be miles above your head, so I wont bother.

Good grief, it seems some of the more terminally stupid around here took a whole host extra helping of stupid pills in the last few months.

When the Anthony Weiner crotch-photos scandal broke, I recall being surprised most by the comments from Jon Stewart and others on the left chuckling about how large he was. That was a very comforting moment for me. Like most men, I've had my "size matters" moments of self doubt. But if those Anthony Weiner photos qualifies as large, then I've got nothing whatsoever to worry about.

You, tanq., are serving a similar purpose. If your face-saving reservations regarding the ultimate outcome of the Supreme Court's ballot decision count in your mind as smart, then you've elevated most everyone else on this board to genius level. Even the Trumplets outpace you.

You sure have your panties in a wad this morning. Maybe take them off at night.

How dare I be honest and say 'I don know how this will turn out', when there is zero caselaw on the subject. The horror.

I will say honesty sure takes a backseat to sheer stupidity around here.

Quote:What you did on this forum, before running and hiding,

Yes how dare I actually attend to my job and leave idiots like you in the lurch. The temerity.

Quote:was castigate anyone who expressed an opinion on the political weaponization of the FBI, the DoJ and much of the judiciary.

Opine all you want on the supposed political weaponization, sparkles.

Quote:How DARE anyone refer to the "Garland Stasi" or the "Wray Gestapo".

Hey you are free to say that all day long and then some. No law against stupid ass empty rhetoric. How dare that someone think that that is stupid ass empty rhetoric is your point of view I guess.

Quote: Procedures govern issuance of search warrants, so the quasi-judge in Florida cannot be questioned about his signing off on the midnight raid of Trump's residence.

Yep procedures govern the issuance of warrants. And the *judge* in Florida (yes magistrates hold Article 3 powers, I hate to tell your simple mind) should absolutely have the issue scrutinized, as should any decision. The simple fact is that the decision kind of fell in middle of allowable and with the proper procedure. Bummer for you. Notwithstanding of your constant caterwaul of the magical words of 'Stasi' and 'KGB'. Imagine that.

Kind of just like your constant caterwauling about me. Again, imagine that.

Oh, and here is an interesting little factoid about the MAL warrant. For all your animal screeching about it, Trump's team did not make any beef about the insufficiency of the warrant. Considering the deadline for those types of dispositive motions was (I think) two weeks ago, please cry some moar (intentional misspelling to help the mental midgets here) about it. Apparently the Trump legal team thought so much of that issue you whine about that they -- didnt do anything.

Quote:Yet now that the Hur testimony is coming to light, there is no other conclusion to be had. Our federal system of justice is corrupt. Those on the right get prosecuted. Those on the left get ignored, or absurd excuses made for them when they no longer can be ignored.

I guess 'the Hur testimony' is now the battle cry for the empty rhetoric crowd now. Goody.

I guess you didnt catch some of the stuff in the Hur report, and in the testimony recently. That is -- the major difference in the cases was the lack of evidence of intent on one hand, and presence of evidence of intent on the other.

Somehow that seems to be glossed over in you rhetorical diatribe above to the Hur issue.

Second, you may have missed in the Hur report that a warrant wasnt necessary because the target (Biden) cooperated with the investigation. Kind of rolls back directly to your caterwauling above above the Trump warrant. Thank you for bringing the Hur issue up.

Quote:You nevertheless still have the gall to pretend that those of us expressing doubts got it wrong and you were right all along. What a pathetic display. At least RWT gets paid for his intellectual dishonesty.

Huh? Last I saw saying 'I dont know how the case will turn out' is neither right, nor wrong. Oh, I forgot, why let that get in the way of your pathetic rhetorical chorus. Yay.

(03-13-2024 07:16 AM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  

(03-13-2024 07:04 AM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(03-13-2024 06:13 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(03-12-2024 11:30 PM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  Buckwheat says 9-0.

Yep, and Tanq a few months ago on this board said that he had zero idea how the ballot removal case would be decided. No skin off my back, Buckwheat. If you are trying to ascribe that to me -- well, leave it to a moron to try and make something up to attach as some sort of insult in that issue. You be you.

I'd make a comment on the nuance in per curiam decision that is followed by 5 judges, and the concurrence from 3 that says some majorly different things about that unsigned opinion, but I will assume that would be miles above your head, so I wont bother.

Good grief, it seems some of the more terminally stupid around here took a whole host extra helping of stupid pills in the last few months.

9-0.

He likes words, that's NINE to zero...

And as I said before -- no skin off my back. I guess you failed that part of your English curriculum.

(03-13-2024 07:29 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(03-13-2024 07:16 AM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  

(03-13-2024 07:04 AM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(03-13-2024 06:13 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(03-12-2024 11:30 PM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  Buckwheat says 9-0.

Yep, and Tanq a few months ago on this board said that he had zero idea how the ballot removal case would be decided. No skin off my back, Buckwheat. If you are trying to ascribe that to me -- well, leave it to a moron to try and make something up to attach as some sort of insult in that issue. You be you.

I'd make a comment on the nuance in per curiam decision that is followed by 5 judges, and the concurrence from 3 that says some majorly different things about that unsigned opinion, but I will assume that would be miles above your head, so I wont bother.

Good grief, it seems some of the more terminally stupid around here took a whole host extra helping of stupid pills in the last few months.

9-0.

He likes words, that's NINE to zero...

And as I said before -- no skin off my back. I guess you failed that part of your English curriculum.

(03-13-2024 07:24 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(03-13-2024 06:50 AM)AdoptedMonarch Wrote:  

(03-13-2024 06:13 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(03-12-2024 11:30 PM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  Buckwheat says 9-0.

Yep, and Tanq a few months ago on this board said that he had zero idea how the ballot removal case would be decided. No skin off my back, Buckwheat. If you are trying to ascribe that to me -- well, leave it to a moron to try and make something up to attach as some sort of insult in that issue. You be you.

I'd make a comment on the nuance in per curiam decision that is followed by 5 judges, and the concurrence from 3 that says some majorly different things about that unsigned opinion, but I will assume that would be miles above your head, so I wont bother.

Good grief, it seems some of the more terminally stupid around here took a whole host extra helping of stupid pills in the last few months.

When the Anthony Weiner crotch-photos scandal broke, I recall being surprised most by the comments from Jon Stewart and others on the left chuckling about how large he was. That was a very comforting moment for me. Like most men, I've had my "size matters" moments of self doubt. But if those Anthony Weiner photos qualifies as large, then I've got nothing whatsoever to worry about.

You, tanq., are serving a similar purpose. If your face-saving reservations regarding the ultimate outcome of the Supreme Court's ballot decision count in your mind as smart, then you've elevated most everyone else on this board to genius level. Even the Trumplets outpace you.

You sure have your panties in a wad this morning. Maybe take them off at night.

How dare I be honest and say 'I don know how this will turn out', when there is zero caselaw on the subject. The horror.

I will say honesty sure takes a backseat to sheer stupidity around here.

Quote:What you did on this forum, before running and hiding,

Yes how dare I actually attend to my job and leave idiots like you in the lurch. The temerity.

Quote:was castigate anyone who expressed an opinion on the political weaponization of the FBI, the DoJ and much of the judiciary.

Opine all you want on the supposed political weaponization, sparkles.

Quote:How DARE anyone refer to the "Garland Stasi" or the "Wray Gestapo".

Hey you are free to say that all day long and then some. No law against stupid ass empty rhetoric. How dare that someone think that that is stupid ass empty rhetoric is your point of view I guess.

Quote: Procedures govern issuance of search warrants, so the quasi-judge in Florida cannot be questioned about his signing off on the midnight raid of Trump's residence.

Yep procedures govern the issuance of warrants. And the *judge* in Florida (yes magistrates hold Article 3 powers, I hate to tell your simple mind) should absolutely have the issue scrutinized, as should any decision. The simple fact is that the decision kind of fell in middle of allowable and with the proper procedure. Bummer for you. Notwithstanding of your constant caterwaul of the magical words of 'Stasi' and 'KGB'. Imagine that.

Kind of just like your constant caterwauling about me. Again, imagine that.

Oh, and here is an interesting little factoid about the MAL warrant. For all your animal screeching about it, Trump's team did not make any beef about the insufficiency of the warrant. Considering the deadline for those types of dispositive motions was (I think) two weeks ago, please cry some moar (intentional misspelling to help the mental midgets here) about it. Apparently the Trump legal team thought so much of that issue you whine about that they -- didnt do anything.

Quote:Yet now that the Hur testimony is coming to light, there is no other conclusion to be had. Our federal system of justice is corrupt. Those on the right get prosecuted. Those on the left get ignored, or absurd excuses made for them when they no longer can be ignored.

I guess 'the Hur testimony' is now the battle cry for the empty rhetoric crowd now. Goody.

Quote:You nevertheless still have the gall to pretend that those of us expressing doubts got it wrong and you were right all along. What a pathetic display. At least RWT gets paid for his intellectual dishonesty.

Huh? Last I saw saying 'I dont know how the case will turn out' is neither right, nor wrong. Oh, I forgot, why let that get in the way of your pathetic rhetorical chorus. Yay.

Buckwheat knew how it would turn out. 9-0.

(03-13-2024 07:24 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  I will say honesty sure takes a backseat to sheer stupidity around here.

Pretty damn funny for you to talk about honesty.

(03-13-2024 07:29 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(03-13-2024 07:16 AM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  

(03-13-2024 07:04 AM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(03-13-2024 06:13 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(03-12-2024 11:30 PM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  Buckwheat says 9-0.

Yep, and Tanq a few months ago on this board said that he had zero idea how the ballot removal case would be decided. No skin off my back, Buckwheat. If you are trying to ascribe that to me -- well, leave it to a moron to try and make something up to attach as some sort of insult in that issue. You be you.

I'd make a comment on the nuance in per curiam decision that is followed by 5 judges, and the concurrence from 3 that says some majorly different things about that unsigned opinion, but I will assume that would be miles above your head, so I wont bother.

Good grief, it seems some of the more terminally stupid around here took a whole host extra helping of stupid pills in the last few months.

9-0.

He likes words, that's NINE to zero...

And as I said before -- no skin off my back. I guess you failed that part of your English curriculum.

No skin off your back except you are still here trying in vain to make it seem like you don't care with 400 word posts. Just take the L dude. We all know what you thought in terms of the state ballot cases. You were wrong. Own it.