US Erection 12 *AND* 16 *AND* 20 *AND* 22 *AND* 24

[rats19]

I honestly see The Donald as committed to cleaning the swamp as best he can.

Per the best or worst part, not sure which one it is, is that he truly believe this.

I’m with doc

[Cornuck]

"Nothing but the best people"

https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/trum ... conflicts/

[5thhorseman]

But you're saying, with no caveats, without any other context, that I don't care whether Biden, the whistleblower, or the Dems in general (not sure where you got the Dems from, actually) are crooked. That's your straw man there, my friend.

Look at your words above, can you see how someone could take them the way I did?

And I didn't call you a Dem, I said you didn't seem to care about the crimes of some Dems involved in this.

What we have here is... failure to communicate.

No strawman here buds...

Sure, I can see how you could interpret my words that way, if you take them out of context. Removing the context is a classic straw man tactic. Let's just revisit my statement for a second:

Even if the whistleblower had ulterior motives, isn't all that matters is whether the activity he brought to light is true and whether it warrants impeachment? The whistleblower could have acted on Biden's direction for all I care; it doesn't affect the truth (or not) of whether Trump committed impeachable acts.

Clearly my opinion of the whistleblower here is only in connection with the report to the ICIG. I wasn't saying that the whistleblower did nothing wrong; only that anything he might have done wrong is irrelevant to the matter at hand (the report to the ICIG).

You just took the bolded part of my statement out of context, and turned it into your bolded statement below ...

Now let me get this straight 5th...

You desperately want Lord Trump investigated because you care about truth, justice, and the American way

... but you don't give a flying fuck how crooked Prez-candidate/ex-VP Joe, the whistleblower, and the Dems may be!

Plus you throw in the Dems, even though I never mentioned "the Dems" at all in my post.

Anyways, enough wrangling over tedious tidbits. I can see how you're often accused of twisting words.

[Per]

Freaky.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canad ... DK5WYwSHh8

[Cousin Strawberry]

Freaky.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canad ... DK5WYwSHh8

They would've had to jump ditches on zero ave to just drive into the US accidentally, there's more to it than what is being said

[Topper]

Freaky.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canad ... DK5WYwSHh8

They would've had to jump ditches on zero ave to just drive into the US accidentally, there's more to it than what is being said

Exactly. In the 1980's my folks lived on 0 Ave, not a large ditch, but one you'd know you hit if you crossed it.

First saying they were separated, then they are a family....something screwy.

[Strangelove]

But you're saying, with no caveats, without any other context, that I don't care whether Biden, the whistleblower, or the Dems in general (not sure where you got the Dems from, actually) are crooked. That's your straw man there, my friend.

Look at your words above, can you see how someone could take them the way I did?

And I didn't call you a Dem, I said you didn't seem to care about the crimes of some Dems involved in this.

What we have here is... failure to communicate.

No strawman here buds...

Sure, I can see how you could interpret my words that way, if you take them out of context. Removing the context is a classic straw man tactic. Let's just revisit my statement for a second:

Bullshit.

What I said was that you didn't seem to give a shit about whether or not the whistleblower was allegedly crooked and spreading vile lies

... and you didn't seem to give a shit about whether the whistleblower was allegedly working with Joe to obstruct an investigation into Joe.

As I said:

...................................................................

What Strawman? 5th has plainly stated a couple of times he doesn't care if Biden and the whistlebower are crooked!

"The concerns with whistleblowers potential motivation is just griping and grasping at straws" - 5th

"Even if the whistleblower had ulterior motives, isn't all that matters is whether the activity he brought to light is true and whether it warrants impeachment? The whistleblower could have acted on Biden's direction for all I care…" - 5th

...................................................................


The "concerns with the whistleblower's potential motivation" were that he was lying through his teeth.

You called those concerns "just griping and grasping at straws".

You then went on to say you "don't care" if the whistleblower was in cahoots with the Bidens.

No Virginia , I did not take anything "out of context", there was no "strawman" created...

You clearly "didn't give a flying fuck how crooked Joe, the whistleblower, and the Dems may be" (as I put it).

Later you returned to "clarify" that you do give a flying fuck about dat dere.

But your previous words... the ones I responded to... clearly indicated you didn't give any kind of a fuck about it.

I was being gracious about your "clarification" even though it seemed dubious at best, but then you had to push the matter...

Clearly my opinion of the whistleblower here is only in connection with the report to the ICIG. I wasn't saying that the whistleblower did nothing wrong; only that anything he might have done wrong is irrelevant to the matter at hand (the report to the ICIG).

Now who is building a strawman?

I didn't say you said the whistleblower did nothing wrong. (see, two can play this game)

I said you didn't seem to give a flying fuck as to whether or not he did something wrong.

And. You. Didn't. (pre "clarification")

"whistleblowers potential motivation is just griping and grasping at straws" - 5th

"whistleblower could have acted on Biden's direction for all I care" - 5th

Plus you throw in the Dems, even though I never mentioned "the Dems" at all in my post.

Right, I said you didn't seem to give a flying fuck at that point about how crooked the Dems might be in all of this.

And. You. Didn't.

Why pray tell would you have to say "the Dems" before I can say you didn't seem to give a FF about how crooked they are in this matter?

These are "the Dems" we were talking about: Joe, Hunter, the whistleblower, Pelosi, et al.

The crime we were talking about is them inventing a false story so they could play their impeachment games.

(along with obstructing the Biden investigation)

Do you think it good to have every bullshit story some "whistleblower" comes up with spark an impeachment investigation immediately?

Should we expect a parade of phony whistleblowers from this point forward with an "investigation" stemming from each one?

Whatevs dude, this particular "whistleblower" said the transcript would prove Lord Donny behaved improperly.

It didn't, thanks anyway "whistleblower", moving on...

Anyways, enough wrangling over tedious tidbits. I can see how you're often accused of twisting words.

Oh yes, the ole "You twisted my words" argument, the last refuge of slain opponent!

You're much further over that "fence" than you want to admit arentcha big guy...

[Strangelove]

Freaky.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canad ... DK5WYwSHh8

They would've had to jump ditches on zero ave to just drive into the US accidentally, there's more to it than what is being said

Exactly. In the 1980's my folks lived on 0 Ave, not a large ditch, but one you'd know you hit if you crossed it.

In those days and on that road the HAs owned a house with a tunnel.

My brother ended up buying that house from them...

[Topper]

Freaky.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canad ... DK5WYwSHh8

They would've had to jump ditches on zero ave to just drive into the US accidentally, there's more to it than what is being said

Exactly. In the 1980's my folks lived on 0 Ave, not a large ditch, but one you'd know you hit if you crossed it.

In those days and on that road the HAs owned a house with a tunnel.

My brother ended up buying that house from them...

Canadian news story says US officers saw them slowly drive through the ditch...and has a picture of the loverly couple.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british- ... -1.5321656

[Cousin Strawberry]

Freaky.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canad ... DK5WYwSHh8

They would've had to jump ditches on zero ave to just drive into the US accidentally, there's more to it than what is being said

Exactly. In the 1980's my folks lived on 0 Ave, not a large ditch, but one you'd know you hit if you crossed it.

In those days and on that road the HAs owned a house with a tunnel.

My brother ended up buying that house from them...

Canadian news story says US officers saw them slowly drive through the ditch...and has a picture of the loverly couple.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british- ... -1.5321656

The Brown Tranny Family

[Per]

Canadian news story says US officers saw them slowly drive through the ditch...and has a picture of the loverly couple.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british- ... -1.5321656

Have you seen the state of British country roads?

[Topper]

Canadian news story says US officers saw them slowly drive through the ditch...and has a picture of the loverly couple.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british- ... -1.5321656

Have you seen the state of British country roads?

Hedging your bets?

[ukcanuck]

Canadian news story says US officers saw them slowly drive through the ditch...and has a picture of the loverly couple.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british- ... -1.5321656

Have you seen the state of British country roads?

Hedging your bets?

You going to hog all the word play ?

[Per]

Canadian news story says US officers saw them slowly drive through the ditch...and has a picture of the loverly couple.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british- ... -1.5321656

Have you seen the state of British country roads?

Hedging your bets?

You going to hog all the word play ?

We have hedgehogs in our garden.

[Per]

354 - 60!

129 republicans chose to condemn Trump over Syria.