Local broadcast TV channels... I see. Not unlike the local channels from which you purport to get your news. Was Soros' ownership of these local broadcast TV channels a news item on your local news?
However, I can't be wrong that
he colluded with Biden to import latinos
How so? (Also, sounds kinda racist.)
As far as I can tell, a company associated with Soros helped finance a third party's acquisition of these stations. That's hardly a Soros "purchase."
so he could propagate
Joe's border buddies.
That doesn't even make sense. How does one "propagate buddies?"
He contributes to the campaigns of bad prosecutors. It's his way of Defunding the Police.
What sort of prosecutors? Prosecutors aren't in charge of police budgets.
The Joe Biden Crime Crisis is just that; a Joe Biden inspired crime crisis.
And what exactly has Biden done to increase crime?
So Republican propaganda is a thing? And if propaganda appeals to weak-minded voters, as you've said, then people who are already conservatives must be weak-minded voters, no?
Hannity just makes us look stupid anyway.
No argument there. And Tucker Carlson does the same. But they're yours.
How do you know that? The racists who read CNN & MSNBC don't have a comments section.
Because racism is a conservative phenomenon. One of the core tenets of conservatives is preserving the traditional power structure, and the traditional power structure is racist.
Or do they? The conservatives posting racist comments in the comment section sure do seem to appreciate it.
Peter Doocy's questions are idiotic. Also, remember Jim Acosta getting
his press credentials revoked for asking tough questions? Peter Doocy's still there. That says everything about the difference between these two administrations.
That sounds anti-semetic, i.e. that they blame Soros because they are Jewish and believe in scapegoats. Is that how you meant it?There is a lot of smoke from multiple places for there to be no fiDid you know that the idea of a scapegoat originated with the ancient Hebrews?
anywhere.
Nobody "believes" in scapegoats. Scapegoats are what they are: innocent being sacrificed in the place of actual guilty parties.
Mike Powell wrote to Rebecca Marie <=-
"Mr DOJ guy, I handed over five Top-Secret documents! That should make up for the 20 Top Secret documents that I'm trying to either hide or destroy, right?"
If that is what comes out, then he was not cooperating, right?
Mike Powell wrote to REBECCA MARIE <=-
Trump's biggest voting bloc in 2016 were people who did not trust Hillary Clinton. When someone says the same thing over and over for 30 years, it eventually becomes part of the public consciousness. Leaders of the
In my case, it has nothing to do with what others said. It would be
the things that Hillary said, did, and took credit for during those 30 years that let me know she cannot be trusted.
If you paid attention to other Democrats during the 2008 and 2016 primaries, you would know that it is not only Republican party leaders
Using a private email server for government correspondence was only another example, feeding right into the fact that she is not
trustworthy.
Mike Powell wrote to REBECCA MARIE <=-
So are Lee Lofaso and Bjorn Felten. If Aaron and Gregory are the same person, then they are the same person running two different boards, and they have also not made the mistake of accidentally being logged on as "Aaron" but responding as "Gregory," or vise versa. :)
Jeff Thiele wrote to Rebecca Marie <=-
Al and I have been accused of being the same person, but we both can neither confirm nor deny it.
That said, I think Gregory and Aaron are two different people.
Gregory's posts are very wordy and condescending, using stilted English and capitalization rules known only to Gregory himself. My personal
Gregory Deyss wrote to Rebecca Marie <=-
I am like 90% certain that you two are different accounts for the same person.
If you only knew, but I am so much more than "an account".
More like 90% wrong.
. ______ .---------. .--------. .--------------..-----------------.
_[]_||--|| | Fidonet | |FSX Net| | T R U M P | | Another Msg|
{ NET 267 | |1:267/150| |21:1/127| | 2 0 2 4 | | by Gregory|
/00----00'-¨€`-00---00-'¨€`-00--00-'¨€`-00--------00-'¨€`--00--------00--
Aaron Thomas wrote to Rebecca Marie <=-
I'd like to point out that Fox has not changed at all, and they are still one of the most conservative leaning of all "News" outlets this side of
For you to say "Fox has not changed at all," you'd have to have been a loyal Fox viewer for several years. You don't seem like a Fox news type
of person.
I'm going off the subject, but I'd like to point out that this makes 3 of us, at least, conservatives who are aware of Fox News' deceptive
Looking back at what I said, I never said "Fox changed." I'm saying
that they are deceptive, just like the rest. Fox News is a tool for leftists, but disguised as a conservative's BFF.
So are Lee Lofaso and Bjorn Felten. If Aaron and Gregory are the same
person, then they are the same person running two different boards, and
they have also not made the mistake of accidentally being logged on as
"Aaron" but responding as "Gregory," or vise versa. :)
It's possible, for certain, but Lee has such a unique writing style that I think the chances are he's an individual. Perhaps Lee is the primary account and Bjorn is the alt?
Mike Powell wrote to Rebecca Marie <=-
"Mr DOJ guy, I handed over five Top-Secret documents! That should make up for the 20 Top Secret documents that I'm trying to either hide or destroy, right?"
If that is what comes out, then he was not cooperating, right?
It's a classic case of distraction - distract the cops so they won't notice that you're destroying the evidence. If you call that co-operating, I would disagree with your definition.
If you weren't within earshot of what Hillary said, or an eyewitness to
what Hillary "did", then you are definitely listening to what others said.
My guess is that you heard what Hllary "said, did and took credit for" straight from conservative-leaning media. Rush Limbaugh? Fox News?
Using a private email server for government correspondence was only another example, feeding right into the fact that she is not trustworthy.
That is not a fact, that is an opinion. If you can find facts that back up your opinion, then you'd have more credibility.
It still sounds anti-semetic. Aaron doesn't like Soros because of his reputation. Soros happens to be Jewish so, in your mind, Aaron saying he doesn't like Soros is anti-semetic.
Looking back at what I said, I never said "Fox changed." I'm saying that they are deceptive, just like the rest. Fox News is a tool for leftists, but disguised as a conservative's BFF.
I will still disagree with this one. Fox News wouldn't do anything that would help out us liberals, unless they had no other choice. Like if they were reporting on an attempted takeover of our country or something similar.
What's that subtle brainwashing do? It makes conservatives think "It's ok if I
don't vote, the red wave's got me covered."
If you recall, it was also fox news that hoped on and joined the fakenews media bandwagon on election night with questionable analysis and reporting. This whole entire fiasco concerning the raid is designed for
Good luck with that. Trump has essentially admitted that he broke the
law. And then he ran his mouth, egging the DOJ on to do things he didn't think they would do, but they called his bluff.
Good luck with that. Trump has essentially admitted that he broke the law. And then he ran his mouth, egging the DOJ on to do things he did think they would do, but they called his bluff.Who cares if Trump broke the law though? Only leftists! What's a leftist though? A leftist is one of those things that the media creates. Why
would they want to create leftists? The media creates em so that they
can reinforce leftist power and better guard and control all squandered loot.
I still don't have my lead pipes fixed yet, but we can all be happy now that the Democrats have fixed our global warming problem. Never again shall global warming be an issue, because Democrats just fixed it by running off with all the cash.
If you recall, it was also fox news that hoped on and joined the fake media bandwagon on election night with questionable analysis and reporting. This whole entire fiasco concerning the raid is designed fI'm going off the subject, but I'd like to point out that this makes 3
of us, at least, conservatives who are aware of Fox News' deceptive reporting. Shame on them! They're trying to gain our trust so that they manipulate us like the leftists get manipulated by the leftist news.
On 28 Aug 2022, Mike Powell said the following...
If the truth ever comes out, I think we are going to find that there were
many parties who were involved in "Russian dis-information" that were not
Russians.
Are you saying now, in 2022, that there was no Russian interference in the 2016 election?
Are you saying that it was in fact the American government
disseminating obviously pro-Trump disinformation?
Trump demanded that the DOJ release the affidavit justifying the search warrant, because if they refused he could inject doubt into the situation. But they did release the affitavit, at his request. And it was incriminating.
Who cares if Trump broke the law though? Only leftists!
Are you saying that it was in fact the American governmentNot necessarily the government, but certainly members of one of the two major political parties involved in our government.
disseminating obviously pro-Trump disinformation?
I specifically mentioned Hillary Clinton. In the leadup to the 2020 election, Democratic candidate Tulsi Gabbard said some things during a debate that got her a lot of attention but that also made HRC look bad. Soon, there was a rumor that one of the Democratic candidates "with a military background" was involved with Russia. No names, but pretty obviously Gabbard.
Now, an example where it becomes apparent a government entity was
involved in hiding something... "the Biden laptop is Russian misinformation" and does not exist, even though we are already in possession of it.
So, we already know that some of the "Russian disinformation/collussion" came from parties that are not Russian.
How many times are the Democrats/FBI going to cry "Wolf!" (or maybe, "Bear!") with "Russian misinformation/collussion" before people realize
it is not always true? When that happens (as it already has for many of us), when is it going to be true, in a way we really do need to worry about, and the majority of people are going to be desensitized to it?
Trump demanded that the DOJ release the affidavit justifying the search warrant, because if they refused he could inject doubt into the situatio But they did release the affitavit, at his request. And it was incriminaIt was also heavily redacted.
You are not only comparing apples and oranges, you are comparing a
raison to an elephant or a blue whale. Jan 6 invasion was several
orders of magnitude greater severity than the existence of emails on a
private server.
You just stepped in it... (check the bottom of those shoes) a private
server? Was this data ever permitted to be on a private server and was
it additionally her personal property to do as she wished? I think not
in both cases. Apples and Oranges aside, it's time for the harvest.
You completely avoided the comparison. What sort of data did she put on that server? How was it classified? Who had access to the data?
Compare that to the hundreds of classified documents that Trump had in
an insecure locker, with classifications from Confidential to Top Secret SCI. All of what he had there belonged in the National Archives. He
lied about the presence of the material to authorities and told them
that there was no more classified material -- and then the FBI found 15+ boxes with a lot of classified material. Some of the material found
could have comprimized assets and cost them their life.
800
If you recall, it was also fox news that hoped on and joined the fake media bandwagon on election night with questionable analysis and reporting. This whole entire fiasco concerning the raid is designed f
I'm going off the subject, but I'd like to point out that this makes 3
of us, at least, conservatives who are aware of Fox News' deceptive reporting. Shame on them! They're trying to gain our trust so that they manipulate us like the leftists get manipulated by the leftist news.
You're absolutely right and spot on concerning the deceptive
reporting on election night. My thoughts at this moment was, WTF is
this? "This IS the same network as Sean Hannity and Laura Ingraham as
well as |The Great One| Mark Levin?"
Trump demanded that the DOJ release the affidavit justifying the search
warrant, because if they refused he could inject doubt into the situation.
But they did release the affitavit, at his request. And it was
incriminating.
It was also heavily redacted.
Who cares if Trump broke the law though? Only leftists!
I would say more people than that. To win in 2016, Trump needed Independents to vote for him, and for Democrats to also cross parties and vote for him. Not as many did in 2020 so he lost.
I would suspect that many of those Independents include people who are skeptical of our established government and that want people who obey the law.
If I were a betting man, I would bet that they care whether or not
Trump broke the law,
just like I would bet that several want to know if he was really cooperating
or not, and also want to know what the government really has on him.
I believe even more so that any potentially wayward Democrat voters are going to need to know that he was not breaking the law.
Mike Powell wrote to JEFF THIELE <=-
How many times are the Democrats/FBI going to cry "Wolf!" (or maybe, "Bear!") with "Russian misinformation/collussion" before people realize
it is not always true? When that happens (as it already has for many
of us), when is it going to be true, in a way we really do need to
worry about, and the majority of people are going to be desensitized to it?
Ron L. wrote to Gregory Deyss <=-
Trump was very close to implementing something that would effectively eliminate the fireproof-ness of many in the Bureaucracy. The Elitists have been staffing the Burueaucracy with their operatives for a long
time now. Then when they get power, they have been pushing (unconstitutionally) power over to them. If Trump gets a second term, that whole mess will be dismantled.
Gregory Deyss wrote to Mike Powell <=-
However when the layers of lies are peeled back the real truth is
reveled that there was never any Russian dis-information concerning
these particulars as the FBI censored the story about Hunter Biden's Laptop, because they had possession the Hunter Biden laptop since 2019. The FBI lied to the American people to protect this shit-stain of a President Joseph Robinette Biden Jr.
Gregory Deyss wrote to Jeff Thiele <=-
Is that why you two are so concerned about how it makes Trump look,
rather than what Trump actually did?
Not concerned whatsoever, because of my immunity to delusional
liberalism and I guarantee you that this immunity extends to my
Brothers and Sisters.
Only leftists care if Trump broke the law? That's an interesting, and telling, bit of fiction. And what is the Mar-a-Lago scandal about, if not squandered loot? Trump took government property that wasn't his to take, after all. Nice bit of projection, though.
At some point, Fox "News" stopped telling you only what you wanted to
hear and couldn't ignore the truth any longer. They're still deceptive,
incredibly biased, and very conservative -- just not enough for your tastes anymore. Fox News hasn't changed; some of its audience has. Look
at you -- you're perfectly ok with an ex-president breaking the law without consequences, as long as said ex-president is a Republican.
"On political corruption, we are going to restore honor to our
government. In my administration, I'm going to enforce all laws
concerning the protection of classified information. No one will be
above the law." -- Donald Trump
Who cares if Trump broke the law though? Only leftists!
I would say more people than that. To win in 2016, Trump needed Independents to vote for him, and for Democrats to also cross parties and vote for him. Not as many did in 2020 so he lost.
I believe even more so that any potentially wayward Democrat voters are going to need to know that he was not breaking the law.
Only leftists care if Trump broke the law? That's an interesting, and telling, bit of fiction. And what is the Mar-a-Lago scandal about, if squandered loot? Trump took government property that wasn't his to ta after all. Nice bit of projection, though.Taxpayers should be concerned about how "Democrats are wasting hundreds
of billions of dollars," but instead, the left is programming them to think about how "Trump took hundreds of billions of documents!"
At some point, Fox "News" stopped telling you only what you wanted to hear and couldn't ignore the truth any longer. They're still deceptivHow do you know this? The same way that you know everything? Nobody
would have ever guessed that you've been studying the evolution of Fox News all this time.
incredibly biased, and very conservative -- just not enough for your tastes anymore. Fox News hasn't changed; some of its audience has. LoThe Fox News audience has changed?? That's news to me. How has it
changed?
at you -- you're perfectly ok with an ex-president breaking the law without consequences, as long as said ex-president is a Republican.I don't care what ex presidents do. This is meant as a distraction from all the terrible stuff that Democrats (who are still in office) are
doing.
"On political corruption, we are going to restore honor to our government. In my administration, I'm going to enforce all laws concerning the protection of classified information. No one will be above the law." -- Donald TrumpAren't you glad that he didn't fulfill that promise? Hillary would be in jail.
But now you think they have buyer's remorse? Why would they care so much that they voted for a document-thief? There's nothing they can do to reverse the damage. Maybe they'll start voting Democrat again? (But then they'll have other stuff turn up missing!)
eye. You're absolutely right and spot on concerning the deceptive reporting on election night. My thoughts at this moment was, WTF is
this? "This IS the same network as Sean Hannity and Laura Ingraham as
well as |The Great One| Mark Levin?"
On 29 Aug 2022, Gregory Deyss said the following...
You're absolutely right and spot on concerning the deceptive reporting on election night. My thoughts at this moment was, WTF is this? "This IS the same network as Sean Hannity and Laura Ingraham as well as |The Great One| Mark Levin?"
Fox News' reporting on election night was not deceptive. They reported that Biden won Arizona, and Biden did in fact win Arizona.
You seem to have a fundamental issue with determining cause and effect. Biden did not win Arizona because Fox News reported that he did; Fox
News reported that he won Arizona because the chances of him not winning it became extremely small, small enough for them to confidently call it. Correctly.
That the reporting did not match your expected outcome in Arizona was not deceptive reporting. It was a result of your expected outcome being
wrong. Reporting that tells you something different from what you want
to hear is not deceptive. It's only deceptive if it's leading you to believe something is true that isn't.
Gregory Deyss wrote to Mike Powell <=-
However when the layers of lies are peeled back the real truth is reveled that there was never any Russian dis-information concerning these particulars as the FBI censored the story about Hunter Biden's Laptop, because they had possession the Hunter Biden laptop since 201 The FBI lied to the American people to protect this shit-stain of a President Joseph Robinette Biden Jr.
How in the world did you not mention President Obama and the Clintons in your conspiracy theorist rant there? And maybe the military releasing UFO information? And the new world order? You missed so many chances there!
at you -- you're perfectly ok with an ex-president breaking the law
without consequences, as long as said ex-president is a Republican.
I don't care what ex presidents do.
This is meant as a distraction from all the terrible stuff that Democrats (who are still in office) are doing.
"On political corruption, we are going to restore honor to our
government. In my administration, I'm going to enforce all laws
concerning the protection of classified information. No one will be
above the law." -- Donald Trump
Aren't you glad that he didn't fulfill that promise? Hillary would be in jail.
There is plenty that can be done to prevent further damage, and many of the
documents have been recovered. Also, Trump needs to serve as an example to future presidents that they are not above the law.
Do you think murderers should go free because "there's nothing they can do to reverse the damage?"
Aaron Thomas wrote to Jeff Thiele <=-
Taxpayers should be concerned about how "Democrats are wasting hundreds
of billions of dollars," but instead, the left is programming them to think about how "Trump took hundreds of billions of documents!"
The real question is are you happy with a Biden Win and are you happyYou're absolutely right and spot on concerning the deceptive reporting on election night. My thoughts at this moment was, WTF this? "This IS the same network as Sean Hannity and Laura Ingrah well as |The Great One| Mark Levin?"Fox News' reporting on election night was not deceptive. They reporte that Biden won Arizona, and Biden did in fact win Arizona.
with the outcome of the Presidential election?
As far as little green men are concerned you would be looking to Men
like me to protect you, because you and your liberal friends don't have any means protect yourselves.
Do you think murderers should go free because "there's nothing they c to reverse the damage?"How is that a reason, or even an excuse, to murdering them in our
name by execution (regardless of means)? Revenge is not justice.
Just an excuse, and a sorry one at that, to see someone dead.
Today we no longer bother with state of federal executions.
Whenever there is a mass shooting, whether at a school or a
shopping mall, the alleged shooter is never taken alive.
All the victims are dead, aside from perhaps a small handful
of survivors who never dispute what happened. And the alleged
shooter being dead as a doornail, either by his/her own hand
or those sent to carry out the execution.
There are some rare exceptions to this. But those folks are always
found to be mental cases and are sent to places where they can be
given the help for their condition they so desperately need.
The real question is are you happy with a Biden Win and are you happy with the outcome of the Presidential election?
That has absolutely nothing to do with whether Fox News' reporting on election night was deceptive or not.What would you know of deceptive actions or tendencies?
On 30 Aug 2022, Gregory Deyss said the following...How typical... more labels applied, all because you can not understand.
As far as little green men are concerned you would be looking to Men like me to protect you, because you and your liberal friends don't ha any means protect yourselves.
And out comes the misogyny.
I specifically mentioned Hillary Clinton. In the leadup to the 2020 election, Democratic candidate Tulsi Gabbard said some things during a debate that got her a lot of attention but that also made HRC look bad. Soon, there was a rumor that one of the Democratic candidates "with a military background" was involved with Russia. No names, but pretty obviously Gabbard.
Clinton said that Russia was "grooming" Gabbard for a third-party run, specifically mentioning not collusion but the same kind of foreign social media support that Trump received in 2016. Gabbard had notably split with her party over policy on Russia, taking several pro-Putin stances.
Now, an example where it becomes apparent a government entity was involved in hiding something... "the Biden laptop is Russian misinformation" and does not exist, even though we are already in possession of it.
The laptop itself is not Russian misinformation; it exists. The rumors of what it contains, though... that is speculation that the Russians tried to exploit.
So, we already know that some of the "Russian disinformation/collussion" came from parties that are not Russian.
The disinformation itself? It sounds more like you're saying that the accusations of disinformation/collusion came from parties that are not Russian, not the disinformation itself.
How many times are the Democrats/FBI going to cry "Wolf!" (or maybe, "Bear!") with "Russian misinformation/collussion" before people realize it is not always true? When that happens (as it already has for many of us), when is it going to be true, in a way we really do need to worry about, and the majority of people are going to be desensitized to it?
The Russians are constantly trying to meddle in our politics, just as we meddle in the politics of other nations. Assuming they aren't is never a good idea.
How many times are the Democrats/FBI going to cry "Wolf!" (or maybe, "Bear!") with "Russian misinformation/collussion" before people realize it is not always true? When that happens (as it already has for many
of us), when is it going to be true, in a way we really do need to
worry about, and the majority of people are going to be desensitized to it?
I think that most people (well, the ones who can think, anyway) have already tuned out the Democrat Russia hoaxes. It's only the "vote blue no matter who"
crowd that still listens to this BS.
I would say more people than that. To win in 2016, Trump needed Independents to vote for him, and for Democrats to also cross parties and
vote for him. Not as many did in 2020 so he lost.
I don't know anyone like that (Independents and/or liberals who voted for Trump) but I understand what you're saying, and surely they exist.
But now you think they have buyer's remorse? Why would they care so much that they voted for a document-thief? There's nothing they can do to reverse the damage. Maybe they'll start voting Democrat again? (But then they'll have othe
stuff turn up missing!)
I believe even more so that any potentially wayward Democrat voters are going to need to know that he was not breaking the law.
But that's only if we want him back again, right?
Gregory Deyss wrote to Jeff Thiele <=-
Not concerned whatsoever, because of my immunity to delusional
liberalism and I guarantee you that this immunity extends to my
Brothers and Sisters.
Hillary was investigated and found not to have done anything prosecutable.
Trump is still being investigated. There are a number of important differences in their situations, chief among them whether they sought to obstruct justice by misleading investigators.
As far as little green men are concerned you would be looking to Men like me to protect you, because you and your liberal friends don't have any means protect yourselves.
And out comes the misogyny.
What would you know of deceptive actions or tendencies?The real question is are you happy with a Biden Win and are you h with the outcome of the Presidential election?That has absolutely nothing to do with whether Fox News' reporting on election night was deceptive or not.
What I have gathered from these past few months is that everything that this administration is doing or will do in the future is totally normal.
How typical... more labels applied, all because you can not understand.As far as little green men are concerned you would be looking to like me to protect you, because you and your liberal friends don any means protect yourselves.And out comes the misogyny.
Clinton said that Russia was "grooming" Gabbard for a third-party run, specifically mentioning not collusion but the same kind of foreign socia media support that Trump received in 2016. Gabbard had notably split wit party over policy on Russia, taking several pro-Putin stances.HRC went farther than that with her second (or more?) go at Gabbard. Gabbard had publicly split from the HRC wing of the party on many things that put her at odds with HRC.
The existence of the laptop itself was passed off as "russian misinformation" by some, and simple "misinformation" by others, in both cases by persons/groups who knew otherwise.Now, an example where it becomes apparent a government entity was involved in hiding something... "the Biden laptop is Russian misinformation" and does not exist, even though we are already in possession of it.The laptop itself is not Russian misinformation; it exists. The rumors o what it contains, though... that is speculation that the Russians tried exploit.
If the accusations are themselves disinformation, and the accusations are of "Russian disinformation," then the "Russian disinformation" came from parties that are not Russian.So, we already know that some of the "Russian disinformation/collus came from parties that are not Russian.The disinformation itself? It sounds more like you're saying that the accusations of disinformation/collusion came from parties that are not Russian, not the disinformation itself.
Maybe I should call it "'Russian disinformation' disinformation," but, either way, it is still disinformation.
I would agree, but assuming that every call if it is true is also horrible.How many times are the Democrats/FBI going to cry "Wolf!" (or maybe "Bear!") with "Russian misinformation/collussion" before people rea it is not always true? When that happens (as it already has for ma us), when is it going to be true, in a way we really do need to wor about, and the majority of people are going to be desensitized to iThe Russians are constantly trying to meddle in our politics, just as we meddle in the politics of other nations. Assuming they aren't is never a idea.
Hillary was investigated and found not to have done anything prosecutablBecause the evidence was destroyed.
Trump is still being investigated. There are a number of important differences in their situations, chief among them whether they sought to obstruct justice by misleading investigators.... and whether or not they destroyed the evidence of their justice obstruction.
HRC 1, Trump 0
you left off the part where he says his brothers *and sisters* will be protecting us.As far as little green men are concerned you would be looking to Me like me to protect you, because you and your liberal friends don't any means protect yourselves.And out comes the misogyny.
you left off the part where he says his brothers *and sisters* will be protecting us.As far as little green men are concerned you would be looking to Me like me to protect you, because you and your liberal friends don't any means protect yourselves.And out comes the misogyny.
cDo you think murderers should go free because "there's nothing they
to reverse the damage?"
How is that a reason, or even an excuse, to murdering them in our
name by execution (regardless of means)? Revenge is not justice.
Just an excuse, and a sorry one at that, to see someone dead.
I did not mention the death penalty, with which I also disagree. Death is not the only possible punishment for murder.
Today we no longer bother with state of federal executions.
Whenever there is a mass shooting, whether at a school or a
shopping mall, the alleged shooter is never taken alive.
All the victims are dead, aside from perhaps a small handful
of survivors who never dispute what happened. And the alleged
shooter being dead as a doornail, either by his/her own hand
or those sent to carry out the execution.
Hmm. Recent events would seem to disprove this.
A number of mass shooters have been taken alive.
There are some rare exceptions to this. But those folks are always
found to be mental cases and are sent to places where they can be
given the help for their condition they so desperately need.
There are quite a few exceptions, with many being sentenced to prison or death.
As far as little green men are concerned you would be looking GD>to Menlike me to protect you, because you and your liberal friends GD>don't have any means protect yourselves.
And out comes the misogyny.
Gregory Deyss wrote to Jeff Thiele <=-
And out comes the misogyny.
How typical... more labels applied, all because you can not understand.
They can vent their emotions, question
other people's motives, make bold assertion, repeat slogans -- anything except reason.
The existence of the laptop itself was passed off as "russian misinformation" by some, and simple "misinformation" by others, in both cases by persons/groups who knew otherwise.
There is a laptop, that is certain. Whether it belonged to Hunter Biden some years ago and contains incriminating information of some vague nature is speculation.
On 31 Aug 2022, Mike Powell said the following...
you left off the part where he says his brothers *and sisters* will be protecting us.As far as little green men are concerned you would be looking to MAnd out comes the misogyny.
like me to protect you, because you and your liberal friends don't
any means protect yourselves.
He also capitalized "Men."
On 31 Aug 2022, Mike Powell said the following...
you left off the part where he says his brothers *and sisters* will be protecting us.As far as little green men are concerned you would be looking to MAnd out comes the misogyny.
like me to protect you, because you and your liberal friends don't
any means protect yourselves.
Also, he seems to assume that liberals are unarmed and helpless in order to make himself feel more Manly-Man. That's not misogynistic, but somewhere between ignorant and stupid.
Its existence, i.e. that there was a laptop, was originally portrayed in the media as "misinformation."The existence of the laptop itself was passed off as "russian misinformation" by some, and simple "misinformation" by others, in cases by persons/groups who knew otherwise.There is a laptop, that is certain. Whether it belonged to Hunter Biden years ago and contains incriminating information of some vague nature is speculation.
He also capitalized "Men."He also capitalized "Sisters." He capitalizes a lot of words where I would not so I don't read much into that.
Also, he seems to assume that liberals are unarmed and helpless in order make himself feel more Manly-Man. That's not misogynistic, but somewhere between ignorant and stupid.I don't know why he assumed it, but it is certainly not a 100% fool-proof assumption.
On 31 Aug 2022, Gregory Deyss said the following...
What would you know of deceptive actions or tendencies?The real question is are you happy with a Biden Win and are with the outcome of the Presidential election?That has absolutely nothing to do with whether Fox News' reporti election night was deceptive or not.
Enough to know that Fox News' reporting on election night 2020 wasn't deceptive, that's for sure.
What I have gathered from these past few months is that everything th this administration is doing or will do in the future is totally norm
Ok, whatever that means. What is "normal?"
On 31 Aug 2022, Gregory Deyss said the following...Liberal labels are just like liberal tears, they dry quickly and are just as irrelevant.
How typical... more labels applied, all because you can not understanAs far as little green men are concerned you would be looki like me to protect you, because you and your liberal friend any means protect yourselves.And out comes the misogyny.
I understand perfectly. And your statement was misogynistic.
Oh c'mon man, even I know you better then that.Enough to know that Fox News' reporting on election night 2020 wasn't deceptive, that's for sure.What would you know of deceptive actions or tendencies?The real question is are you happy with a Biden Win and with the outcome of the Presidential election?That has absolutely nothing to do with whether Fox News' re election night was deceptive or not.
What I have gathered from these past few months is that everythi this administration is doing or will do in the future is totallyOk, whatever that means. What is "normal?"
You bleed freely for everything that this bonehead biden has ever stuttered. Your also in denial, just as much as the Whitehouse or that pathetic Karine Jean-Pierre, who claims that illegals are not walking
into the U.S. when there is video evidence to state otherwise.
It's absurd and completely out
of touch, specially when there is video evidence for foreign nationals walking into the U.S. like they own the place.
I understand perfectly. And your statement was misogynistic.Liberal labels are just like liberal tears, they dry quickly and are
just as irrelevant.
You are and have been of the mindset that you did not appreciate or find any value in America First, Building a Wall along the Southern Border between the U.S. and Mexico or any of many accomplishments of the Trump Administration of which I have posted here previously.
Mike Powell said to Gregory Deyss: <=-
DJT was cooperating with the authorities with these alleged documentsthat he
If he was cooperating and had not broken off talks, like the DoJ claims, then that should come out and would be in his favor.
Aaron Thomas said to Jeff Thiele: <=-
Who cares if Trump broke the law though? Only leftists! What's a leftist though? A leftist is one of those things that the media creates. Why
would they want to create leftists? The media creates em so that they
can reinforce leftist power and better guard and control all squandered loot.
Mike Powell said to Aaron Thomas: <=-
I would say more people than that. To win in 2016, Trump needed Independents to vote for him, and for Democrats to also cross parties
and vote for him. Not as many did in 2020 so he lost.
Ron L. said to Mike Powell: <=-
I think that most people (well, the ones who can think, anyway) have already tuned out the Democrat Russia hoaxes. It's only the "vote blue
no matter who" crowd that still listens to this BS.
Aaron Thomas said to Gregory Deyss: <=-
I'm going off the subject, but I'd like to point out that this makes 3
of us, at least, conservatives who are aware of Fox News' deceptive reporting. Shame on them! They're trying to gain our trust so that they manipulate us like the leftists get manipulated by the leftist news.
Gregory Deyss said to Aaron Thomas: <=-
Oh it is more then just ok my friend, no need to speak to "issues being
off subject." (such a thing is what lefties say) to claim intellectual superiority, but fail to see the insanity and the calamity of who they
say "They are doing an awesome job." It is agreeable that we see eye to
DJT was cooperating with the authorities with these alleged documentsthat he
If he was cooperating and had not broken off talks, like the DoJ claims, then that should come out and would be in his favor.
"Mr DOJ guy, I handed over five Top-Secret documents! That should make up
for the 20 Top Secret documents that I'm trying to either hide or destroy, right?"
I would say more people than that. To win in 2016, Trump needed Independents to vote for him, and for Democrats to also cross parties
and vote for him. Not as many did in 2020 so he lost.
Trump's biggest voting bloc in 2016 were people who did not trust Hillary Clinton. When someone says the same thing over and over for 30 years, it eventually becomes part of the public consciousness. Leaders of the Republican party had been saying for decades that Hillary could not be trusted.
Voters were already biased to see Hillary as untrustworthy. Once her emails came to light, feeding right into the narrative that Hillary was crooked,
the election was basically finished.
On 01 Sep 2022, Mike Powell said the following...
He also capitalized "Men."He also capitalized "Sisters." He capitalizes a lot of words where I would not so I don't read much into that.
I take it as an emphasis. A weird one, but an emphasis.
Gregory Deyss said to Aaron Thomas: <=-
Oh it is more then just ok my friend, no need to speak to "issues being off subject." (such a thing is what lefties say) to claim intellectual superiority, but fail to see the insanity and the calamity of who they say "They are doing an awesome job." It is agreeable that we see eye to
I am like 90% certain that you two are different accounts for the same person.
So you noticed he emphasized "Men" but not "Sisters." Interesting.I take it as an emphasis. A weird one, but an emphasis.He also capitalized "Men."He also capitalized "Sisters." He capitalizes a lot of words where would not so I don't read much into that.
DJT was cooperating with the authorities with these alleged documents
that he
If he was cooperating and had not broken off talks, like the DoJclaims,
then that should come out and would be in his favor.
"Mr DOJ guy, I handed over five Top-Secret documents! That should make up for the 20 Top Secret documents that I'm trying to either hide or destroy, right?"
Who cares if Trump broke the law though? Only leftists! What's aleftist
though? A leftist is one of those things that the media creates. Why
would they want to create leftists? The media creates em so that they
can reinforce leftist power and better guard and control all squandered
loot.
You really should read your posts before sending them, that might help you realize just how non-sensical the things that you write are.
Or wait.... Was your post satire?
Voters were already biased to see Hillary as untrustworthy. Once her emails
came to light, feeding right into the narrative that Hillary was crooked, the election was basically finished.
Oh it is more then just ok my friend, no need to speak to "issues bein off subject." (such a thing is what lefties say) to claim intellectual superiority, but fail to see the insanity and the calamity of who they say "They are doing an awesome job." It is agreeable that we see eye tI am like 90% certain that you two are different accounts for the same person.
Hillary Clinton received 3 million votes more than Donald Trump.
Joe Biden received 7 million votes more than Donald Trump.
Hillary Clinton received 3 million votes more than Donald Trump.
Joe Biden received 7 million votes more than Donald Trump.
Popular vote does not matter, electoral college is the rules of the game. Popular vote may give a mandate to a president, but it does not elect them.
Hillary Clinton received 3 million votes more than Donald Trump.Popular vote does not matter, electoral college is the rules of the game. Popular vote may give a mandate to a president, but it does not elect them.
Joe Biden received 7 million votes more than Donald Trump.
Taxpayers should be concerned about how "Democrats are wasting hundre of billions of dollars," but instead, the left is programming them to think about how "Trump took hundreds of billions of documents!"
The money is not being wasted. Trump broke the law.
Are you certain that you aren't being "programmed" to think about Biden's legislative successes instead of Trump's crimes?
How do you know this? The same way that you know everything? Nobody would have ever guessed that you've been studying the evolution of Fo News all this time.
Because you called them "deceptive" for reporting that Biden won Arizona. Biden did win Arizona, that's obviously not what you wanted to hear, and you decided they must be deceptive. It's not too hard to figure out.
Also, you used to defend Fox News, but don't so much anymore.
The Fox News audience has changed?? That's news to me. How has it changed?
Some of Fox News' audience became more radically right-wing during
Trump's presidency. There were always a far-right, of course, but Trump bringing them into the fold moved the GOP more toward the far-right. Fox News did not make that move.
Those are the 2 most important narratives for the leftists. Nevermind anything else.Taxpayers should be concerned about how "Democrats are wasting h of billions of dollars," but instead, the left is programming th think about how "Trump took hundreds of billions of documents!"The money is not being wasted. Trump broke the law.
Are you certain that you aren't being "programmed" to think about Bid legislative successes instead of Trump's crimes?A president's success would benefit the American people, so Biden don't have any of those yet.
You have too much confidence in yourself. I hardly care what Fox says about the elections, because they've been full of it all along. Their "polls" are fake (or faulty.) They've been trying to controlHow do you know this? The same way that you know everything? Nob would have ever guessed that you've been studying the evolution News all this time.Because you called them "deceptive" for reporting that Biden won Ariz Biden did win Arizona, that's obviously not what you wanted to hear, you decided they must be deceptive. It's not too hard to figure out.
conservatives but they suck at it; it's some kind of lousy Fauci experiment and the conservative viewers are the beagle pups.
Also, you used to defend Fox News, but don't so much anymore.I'll always defend Mark Levin & Dan Bongino but the rest of those people are undercover leftists.
Thanks for the BS explanation! (I knew I was asking for BS.)The Fox News audience has changed?? That's news to me. How has i changed?Some of Fox News' audience became more radically right-wing during Trump's presidency. There were always a far-right, of course, but Tru bringing them into the fold moved the GOP more toward the far-right. News did not make that move.
What have "fox news viewers" done recently that was "so radical?"
Gregory Deyss said to Rebecca Marie: <=-
How in the world did you not mention President Obama and the Clintons in your conspiracy theorist rant there? And maybe the military releasing UFO information? And the new world order? You missed so many chances there!
What I mentioned is not conspiracy theory - at all, it so happens to be
the truth.
As far as little green men are concerned you would be looking to Men
like me to protect you,
Gregory Deyss said to Jeff Thiele: <=-
Liberal labels are just like liberal tears, they dry quickly and are
just as irrelevant.
You are and have been of the mindset that you did not appreciate or
find any value in America First, Building a Wall along the Southern
I am like 90% certain that you two are different accounts for the same
person.
So are Lee Lofaso and Bjorn Felten. If Aaron and Gregory are the same person, then they are the same person running two different boards, and they have also not made the mistake of accidentally being logged on as "Aaron" but responding as "Gregory," or vise versa. :)
You bleed freely for everything that this bonehead biden has ever stuttered. Your also in denial, just as much as the Whitehouse or tha pathetic Karine Jean-Pierre, who claims that illegals are not walking into the U.S. when there is video evidence to state otherwise.
Refugees seeking asylum are walking into the U.S. Refugees seeking
asylum are not "illegals." And this has nothing to do with whether Fox News' reporting on election night were deceptive or not. You are frantically trying to change the subject.
On 01 Sep 2022, Gregory Deyss said the following...America First is not racist, unfair and is not wrong.
I understand perfectly. And your statement was misogynistic.Liberal labels are just like liberal tears, they dry quickly and are just as irrelevant.
Whatever, man. Your statement was misogynistic.
You are and have been of the mindset that you did not appreciate or f any value in America First, Building a Wall along the Southern Border between the U.S. and Mexico or any of many accomplishments of the Tru Administration of which I have posted here previously.
America is a melting pot, open to all who are suffering. "Americe First" is a blasphemy.
If you only knew, but I am so much more than "an account".Gregory Deyss said to Aaron Thomas: <=-
Oh it is more then just ok my friend, no need to speak to "issues bein off subject." (such a thing is what lefties say) to claim intellectual superiority, but fail to see the insanity and the calamity of who they say "They are doing an awesome job." It is agreeable that we see eye t
I am like 90% certain that you two are different accounts for the same person.
On 01 Sep 2022, Rebecca Marie said the following...
Oh it is more then just ok my friend, no need to speak to "issues beiI am like 90% certain that you two are different accounts for the same person.
off subject." (such a thing is what lefties say) to claim intellectua
superiority, but fail to see the insanity and the calamity of who the
say "They are doing an awesome job." It is agreeable that we see eye
Al and I have been accused of being the same person, but we both can neither confirm nor deny it.
Absolutely no value in America First, and we'll be dealing with the
It had to do with pundits - so called experts, that were giving their analysis
on the vote count on election night and some of those, sounded a bit too much supporters of the Democratic party.
A few points to made here.You bleed freely for everything that this bonehead biden has eve stuttered. Your also in denial, just as much as the Whitehouse o pathetic Karine Jean-Pierre, who claims that illegals are not wa into the U.S. when there is video evidence to state otherwise.Refugees seeking asylum are walking into the U.S. Refugees seeking asylum are not "illegals." And this has nothing to do with whether Fo News' reporting on election night were deceptive or not. You are frantically trying to change the subject.
The deceptiveness that "WE" on the Right, are talking about had nothing
to do with the ever growing immigration problem.
It had to do with pundits - so called experts, that were giving their analysis on the vote count on election night and some of those, sounded
a bit too much supporters of the Democratic party.
What is the difference between refugees seeking asylum from corrupt countries with no opportunity for their families - which is why "they"
are coming here to the U.S. but the "Land of the Free" does not mean
that everything is free, but democrats sure do try their best to make
that a reality. Why would that be Jeff?
Are they hoping that these people become new democrats themselves?
No one does nothing for nobody unless there is something in it for them.
beinOh it is more then just ok my friend, no need to speak to "issues
intellectualoff subject." (such a thing is what lefties say) to claim
theysuperiority, but fail to see the insanity and the calamity of who
eye tsay "They are doing an awesome job." It is agreeable that we see
I am like 90% certain that you two are different accounts for thesame
person.
Al and I have been accused of being the same person, but we both can neither
confirm nor deny it.
That said, I think Gregory and Aaron are two different people.
Gregory's posts are very wordy and condescending, using stilted English and
capitalization rules known only to Gregory himself. My personal opinion is that he's trying to imitate the highfalutin' blather of his hero, Rush Limbaugh, but is failing on the finer points.
Aaron's posts are more sane-sounding, but just as delusional. He alternates
between caring for the fate of "his" country and only being concerned about
what he sees in his own neighborhood, depending on how cornered he is. He has
a low grasp of number theory, probability theory, and statistics, which leads
him to inherently distrust anything with a number in it as well as use numbers in ways that are unconventional, to put it mildly. He also has difficulty with set theory.
Hillary Clinton received 3 million votes more than Donald Trump.
Joe Biden received 7 million votes more than Donald Trump.
Popular vote does not matter, electoral college is the rules of the game. Popular vote may give a mandate to a president, but it does not elect them.
America First is not racist, unfair and is not wrong.
here is a bit of corrective education for you and the other libtards. https://tinyurl.com/33pr2tmc
Yup she sure is a Melting Pot, my family way back in late 1880's came to America from Germany. As did many others.
There is a clear distinction to be made.
My family as so many others came here to the U.S. to work hard to support their families and their new communities. They did not come here as freeloaders to get free housing, free health care, free education or a cash handout.
Liberals (Democratic communists) are increasingly in favor of open
borders to anyone who wants to enter the United States and national sovereignty be damned. But not that long ago they all wanted border security.
Schumer 2009: Illegal immigration is wrong, plain and simple. He was all for spending $25 billion to secure the southern border until January of 2018.
Hillary 2015: I voted numerous times when I was a senator to spend money to build a barrier to try to prevent illegal immigrants from coming in.
Obama 2005: We simply cannot allow people to pour into the United States undetected, undocumented, unchecked.
Bill Clinton 1996: His State of the Union address that year showed a striking comparison to what President Trump has said about the subject. We are a nation of laws.
Dianne Feinstein 2006: Democrats are solidly behind controlling the border, and we support the border fence with the Secure Fence Act of
2006.
Nancy Pelosi 2013: House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi referred to border "security as a basic principle" and urged congress to support
legislation that she claimed would secure the U.S. border.
I am like 90% certain that you two are different accounts for the sam person.If you only knew, but I am so much more than "an account".
More like 90% wrong.
Al and I have been accused of being the same person, but we both can nei confirm nor deny it.That was in jest, but I forget you don't understand humor.
It had to do with pundits - so called experts, that were giving their analysisThey soon forget the number of Democrats and others who went to bed on election night 2016 thinking that Hillary had won because the talking heads on TV said she was going to, only to wake up the next morning and find out she had not.
on the vote count on election night and some of those, sounded a bit too supporters of the Democratic party.
We then had four years of "not my President" BS to listen to, and some of the ones I knew honestly thought that Trump didn't win. Others came up with some less far-out, but still far-out, reasons why Hillary didn't
win.
Four years later, folks from the same side as those disillusioned Democrats cannot understand why Gregory claims that Biden is not his President. I am certain that they didn't give their fellow Democrats
the same level of grief.
I'd like to point out that Fox has not changed at all, and they are still one of the most conservative leaning of all "News" outlets this side of OAN. The problem is that there are some lies that even Fox won't get behind, but you've bought into the lies hook, line and sinker. Rather
than accept that the narrative might not be completely true, you'll turn on the people and organizations that challenges those.
I'm going off the subject, but I'd like to point out that this makes 3 of us, at least, conservatives who are aware of Fox News' deceptive reporting. Shame on them! They're trying to gain our trust so that the manipulate us like the leftists get manipulated by the leftist news.
"Undercover leftists" would hardly be the general consensus of Fox News, and particularly of Tucker Carlson. They only appear to be "leftist"
from the point of view of someone even further to the right than they
are.
What have "fox news viewers" done recently that was "so radical?"
Accused Fox News of being "leftist."
"Undercover leftists" would hardly be the general consensus of Fox Ne and particularly of Tucker Carlson. They only appear to be "leftist" from the point of view of someone even further to the right than they are.They're "undercover leftists" because they are manipulating conservatives under the guise of being "the conservative channel."
And who are these "radicalized fox news viewers" that you're talking about? I'm the only person here who's accusing them of being "leftist." You can't go around saying "Fox news viewers are radicalized and theWhat have "fox news viewers" done recently that was "so radical?Accused Fox News of being "leftist."
proof is in a message posted by Aaron on fidonet."
It's not a radical change; I used to watch CNN & MSNBC. They irritated
me with the Trump stuff, so I stopped watching. Now Fox News has
irritated me with all their reverse psychology, so I stopped watching
that too.
I'd like to point out that Fox has not changed at all, and they are s one of the most conservative leaning of all "News" outlets this side OAN. The problem is that there are some lies that even Fox won't get behind, but you've bought into the lies hook, line and sinker. Rather than accept that the narrative might not be completely true, you'll t on the people and organizations that challenges those.For you to say "Fox has not changed at all," you'd have to have been a loyal Fox viewer for several years. You don't seem like a Fox news type
of person.
Looking back at what I said, I never said "Fox changed." I'm saying that they are deceptive, just like the rest. Fox News is a tool for leftists, but disguised as a conservative's BFF.I'm going off the subject, but I'd like to point out that this ma of us, at least, conservatives who are aware of Fox News' decepti reporting. Shame on them! They're trying to gain our trust so tha manipulate us like the leftists get manipulated by the leftist ne
"Undercover leftists" would hardly be the general consensus of FoxNews,
and particularly of Tucker Carlson. They only appear to be "leftist"
from the point of view of someone even further to the right than they
are.
They're "undercover leftists" because they are manipulating conservatives under the guise of being "the conservative channel."
What have "fox news viewers" done recently that was "so radical?"
Accused Fox News of being "leftist."
And who are these "radicalized fox news viewers" that you're talking about?
I'm the only person here who's accusing them of being "leftist." You can't go around saying "Fox news viewers are radicalized and the proof is in a message posted by Aaron on fidonet."
It's not a radical change; I used to watch CNN & MSNBC. They irritated me with the Trump stuff, so I stopped watching. Now Fox News has irritated me with all their reverse psychology, so I stopped watching that too.
theirIt had to do with pundits - so called experts, that were giving
bit tooanalysis
on the vote count on election night and some of those, sounded a
supporters of the Democratic party.
They soon forget the number of Democrats and others who went to bedon
election night 2016 thinking that Hillary had won because the talkingand
heads on TV said she was going to, only to wake up the next morning
find out she had not.
And in the morning they accepted that. The talking heads on TV were just following the numbers in real-time.
We then had four years of "not my President" BS to listen to, andsome of
the ones I knew honestly thought that Trump didn't win. Others cameup
with some less far-out, but still far-out, reasons why Hillary didn't
win.
I don't know anyone who thought that Trump didn't win. Hillary lost, and of
course there are reasons she lost. One of them might even have been the announcement of an FBI investigation right before the election.
Four years later, folks from the same side as those disillusioned
Democrats cannot understand why Gregory claims that Biden is not his
President. I am certain that they didn't give their fellow Democrats
the same level of grief.
It's different because to the Democrats, at least the ones I know, "not my president" means "Yes, he's president, but I didn't vote for him and wash my
hands of anything he does," whereas to people like Gregory, "not my president" means "He was fraudulently elected and is an illegitimate president." The difference is subtle, but see if you can spot it.
According to you yourself, at least two other people in here agree with you. And now you're the only one?
There's no reverse psychology. There's a "news" section that tries to at least maintain an appearance of journalistic integrity, and then there's
least maintain an appearance of journalistic integrity, and then there's
loyal Fox viewer for several years. You don't seem like a Fox news ty of person.
No, one wouldn't. Can you imagine any other way that a person could be exposed to Fox News without being a loyal viewer? Any other way that someone could get the gist of what Fox News is reporting without
actually watching it?
Fox News is owned by Rupert Murdoch. Are you claiming that Rupert
Murdoch is a closet leftist? Or is it possible that you see everything
to your left on the political spectrum, even other conservatives and centrists, as "leftist" because they don't agree with you?
Also above is where you said that there were at least three of you aware of Fox News' "deceptive reporting." And now you're claiming elsewhere
that you're the only one.
According to you yourself, at least two other people in here agree wi you. And now you're the only one?If we were "radicalized," then we'd be supporting Democrats, and we're not.
There's no reverse psychology. There's a "news" section that tries to least maintain an appearance of journalistic integrity, and then therYou are not a person who's been paying close attention to Fox News.
least maintain an appearance of journalistic integrity, and then therThere's no journalistic integrity. Their news stories are cherry-picked, some of them seem fake, and their opinion stories don't match the
opinions of real conservatives. Peter Doocy is the only one acting like
a real conservative.
You can get the gist but you won't see the twist.loyal Fox viewer for several years. You don't seem like a Fox ne of person.No, one wouldn't. Can you imagine any other way that a person could b exposed to Fox News without being a loyal viewer? Any other way that someone could get the gist of what Fox News is reporting without actually watching it?
Fox News is owned by Rupert Murdoch. Are you claiming that Rupert Murdoch is a closet leftist? Or is it possible that you see everythin to your left on the political spectrum, even other conservatives and centrists, as "leftist" because they don't agree with you?I assume that Rupert Murdoch is a leftist. Somebody has got to own the conservatives' attention. His son donates to liberal causes. Murdoch doesn't write the scripts for the puppets.
Also above is where you said that there were at least three of you aw of Fox News' "deceptive reporting." And now you're claiming elsewhere that you're the only one.Three people from Fidonet doesn't equal "fox news viewers are becoming radicalized." (You've got to come out from under the trailer!)
1. Because math.
They're "undercover leftists" because they are manipulating conservat under the guise of being "the conservative channel."
Sean Hannity and James Carville have gone on tour debating before
live audiences. So why not Tucker Carlson doing the same?
And who are these "radicalized fox news viewers" that you're talking about?
Unindicted co-conspirators of the January 6 uprising ...
Even foxnews.com has reported in the past week that various levels classified documents were found. Early on anyway, even Trump was n denying that, claiming that he was working with Archives to get the turned over. That might be the crux of any potential case... wheth not he was cooperating and they raided his home anyway.
If you recall, it was also fox news that hoped on and joined the fakenew media bandwagon on election night with questionable analysis and reporti This whole entire fiasco concerning the raid is designed for one thing aone
thing only, it is to create doubt and speculation, so that the needle oftrust
can be moved in the negative direction against Trump.ar
The Democratic Party and most of the media all share the same bed, but t
not getting much sleep these days. Indeed they are terrified.
Trump will be triumphant and victorious as he will overcome this, just a has done with the previous attempts from the sycophants within the liber trash media. It's time to take out the garbage!
While I have no doubt there has been some "planned timing" of these
recent events, if Trump really has/had possession of classified
documents of a class that he should not have taken home with him, then I put that in the same bucket with Hillary's private email server. It was something I thought should disqualify her as being President, and the timing of these events don't make him any less guilty.
You would think, after going off about Hillary and her server, he'd have more sense than to take such documents with him.
On 27 Aug 2022, Ron L. said the following...
This whole entire fiasco concerning the raid is designedYup. It's all about optics. It's one of the way you can spot an Elitist: They are concerned about the optics of something, not the reality.
for one thing and one thing only, it is to create doubt and speculation, so that the needle of trust can be moved in the neg direction against Trump.
Is that why you two are so concerned about how it makes Trump look,
rather than what Trump actually did?
Not concerned whatsoever, because of my immunity to delusionalYup. It's all about optics. It's one of the way you can spot a Elitist: They are concerned about the optics of something, not t reality.Is that why you two are so concerned about how it makes Trump look, rather than what Trump actually did?
liberalism and I guarantee you that this immunity extends to my Brothers and Sisters.
DJT was cooperating with the authorities with these alleged documents that he was alleged to have at Mar-A-Logo. This raid is bigger than these alleged documents. Analysis of the real facts indicates that there are many moving gears and cogs working to drive a false narrative.
This could be about the ego and the revenge of Merrick Garland.
Mainly, I do believe the center focus should be on the FBI who I believe is guilty as sin with interfering with the control of information to social media calling it "Russian dis-information." However when the layers of lies are peeled back the real truth is reveled that there was never any Russian dis-information concerning these particulars as the FBI censored the story about Hunter Biden's Laptop, because they had possession the Hunter Biden laptop since 2019.
If the truth ever comes out, I think we are going to find that there were many parties who were involved in "Russian dis-information" that were not Russians.
On 08-27-22 09:31, Gregory Deyss <=-
spoke to Dale Shipp about Re: fbi <=-
You are not only comparing apples and oranges, you are comparing a
raison to an elephant or a blue whale. Jan 6 invasion was several
orders of magnitude greater severity than the existence of emails on a private server.
You just stepped in it... (check the bottom of those shoes) a private server? Was this data ever permitted to be on a private server and was
it additionally her personal property to do as she wished? I think not
in both cases. Apples and Oranges aside, it's time for the harvest.
On 08-28-22 09:28, Gregory Deyss <=-
spoke to Mike Powell about Re: fbi <=-
DJT was cooperating with the authorities with these alleged documents
that he was alleged to have at Mar-A-Logo. This raid is bigger than
these alleged documents. Analysis of the real facts indicates that
there are many moving gears and cogs working to drive a false
narrative.
This could be about the ego and the revenge of Merrick Garland.
Mainly, I do believe the center focus should be on the FBI who I
believe is guilty as sin with interfering with the control of
information to social media calling it "Russian dis-information."
They soon forget the number of Democrats and others who went to bed on election night 2016 thinking that Hillary had won because the talking heads on TV said she was going to, only to wake up the next morning and find out she had not.
We then had four years of "not my President" BS to listen to, and some of the ones I knew honestly thought that Trump didn't win. Others came up with some less far-out, but still far-out, reasons why Hillary didn't
win.
Four years later, folks from the same side as those disillusioned Democrats cannot understand why Gregory claims that Biden is not his President. I am certain that they didn't give their fellow Democrats
the same level of grief.
Usually when one starts a sentence with "What is the difference
between," two different things follow, usually separated by "and." I cannot figure out what those two things are in this sentence.
Wow, that's quite a statement. There are a lot of examples to counter
it, but I'll go with Jimmy Carter, who donates time and money to Habitat for Humanity and expects nothing in return.
If we were "radicalized," then we'd be supporting Democrats, and we'r not.
Not true. Conservatives can also be radicalized. Hence the events of 1/6/21.
You can get the gist but you won't see the twist.loyal Fox viewer for several years. You don't seem like a F of person.No, one wouldn't. Can you imagine any other way that a person co exposed to Fox News without being a loyal viewer? Any other way someone could get the gist of what Fox News is reporting without actually watching it?
There is no twist. Aaron doesn't agree with Fox News' reporting;
therefore Fox News' reporting must be deceptive is what you're saying.
In what way is Fox News being anti-conservative? Is it that they
abandoned Trump? Is support of Trump necessary to be a "real conservative?"
Aaron Thomas wrote to Rebecca Marie <=-
Looking back at what I said, I never said "Fox changed." I'm saying
that they are deceptive, just like the rest. Fox News is a tool for leftists, but disguised as a conservative's BFF.
Gregory Deyss wrote to Mike Powell <=-
It is alright, these lefties don't know any better.
I know that they consider themselves to be highly educated and of
course that they know better. How irritating it must be to realize all that is a lie.
Usually when one starts a sentence with "What is the difference between," two different things follow, usually separated by "and." I cannot figure out what those two things are in this sentence.You missed the point that the
"Land of the Free" does not mean that everything is free.
Wow, that's quite a statement. There are a lot of examples to counter it, but I'll go with Jimmy Carter, who donates time and money to Habi for Humanity and expects nothing in return.That is way with Philanthropy, there is nothing mysterious about that.
The Democratic Party's interest in these poor and downtrodden hordes of illegals violating U.S. sovereignty has nothing to do with philanthropy.
Indeed, they are nothing more then pawns and are expected to be
tomorrow's Democrats.
I wonder if the Democratic Party will be continuing their supportive nature in the future, now that a large number of Hispanics are turning away from what they see as Democratic lies.
You said we were "radical" because we don't like Fox anymore, but if we were to have a radical response, the radical response would be to begin watching something far different from Fox, something like MSNBC.If we were "radicalized," then we'd be supporting Democrats, and not.Not true. Conservatives can also be radicalized. Hence the events of 1/6/21.
There is no twist. Aaron doesn't agree with Fox News' reporting; therefore Fox News' reporting must be deceptive is what you're sayingI feel like I said this before, but my dissatisfaction with Fox News has little to do with Trump, and it has everything to do with misleading reporting.
In what way is Fox News being anti-conservative? Is it that they abandoned Trump? Is support of Trump necessary to be a "real conservative?"It's the subtle tricks. Helping Biden win an election isn't
conservative. Fox News reported a lot of misleading information around
the week of Election Day. You shouldn't argue that it wasn't misleading, because a couple years back it was you who was telling me that some of that information was misleading or wrong. But now, in your quest to be right about everything, you're acting like those conversations never happened.
It's ok to be wrong once in a while, but it's not ok to double-down after being proven wrong.
Then I heard about grown-ass adults who were within grieving centers or areas known as a "Safe Spaces" with one such activity known as a therapy wall, In addition to this, there were Cry-In's sessions at Cornell and puppies and coloring books at Penn State.
All True by the way.
Looking back at what I said, I never said "Fox changed." I'm saying that they are deceptive, just like the rest. Fox News is a tool for leftists, but disguised as a conservative's BFF.
Hence the Elitist Narrative that Fox is "convervative". Have you ever noticed how hard they push a false Narrative when people start to
discover that the Narrative is false?
You said we were "radical" because we don't like Fox anymore, but if were to have a radical response, the radical response would be to beg watching something far different from Fox, something like MSNBC.
No, I said that many on the right don't like Fox News anymore *because* they've become more radical, not the other way around. You asked what
radical things these ex-viewers had done recently, and I cited your
action of claiming that Fox News was some sort of liberal reverse-psychology operation, which is bizarre and untrue.
If you've given up on Fox News because of their deceptive conservative reporting, I could agree with you. But you're accusing them of deceptive liberal reporting, which isn't true.
Please give an example.
We had 8 years of "Not my president" before that. Accusations that Obama wasn't born in this country, etc. etc.It had to do with pundits - so called experts, that were givingWe then had four years of "not my President" BS to listen to, and
their analysis on the vote count on election night and some of
those, sounded a bit too much supporters of the Democratic party.
some of the ones I knew honestly thought that Trump didn't win.
Others came up with some less far-out, but still far-out, reasons
why Hillary didn't win.
What's that subtle brainwashing do? It makes conservatives think "It's o I
don't vote, the red wave's got me covered."
I would not take their message and assume that.
Nobody "believes" in scapegoats. Scapegoats are what they are: innocentIt still sounds anti-semetic. Aaron doesn't like Soros because of his reputation. Soros happens to be Jewish so, in your mind, Aaron saying he
sacrificed in the place of actual guilty parties.
doesn't like Soros is anti-semetic.
The question is, why does Soros have the reputation that he does? Is he actually guilty of everything he's been accused of, or is he the victim of an anti-semitic smear campaign?
Meanwhile, you used the supposed fact that the idea of scapegoats originated with the Hebrews as a way to cast doubt on the opinion the Israeli government also has of Soros because they are Hebrews.
Perhaps he is their scapegoat.
Apparently he did not destroy the evidence. There are boxes of documents and they still apparently exist. It is not like he was
That is actually much worse. Destroyed documents don't divulge information, documents that are stored in boxes somewhere can be stolen and read by
people that are not cleared to do so.
running a personal server that housed government correspondence that he then destroyed with Bleach Bit.
"Person X might've done this, but Person Y did something worse!" is a
logical fallacy. As I tell my kiddos, "we aren't talking about what your sibling did, we are talking about what you did."
You are trying to answer what I said with something that is completely different. I said that you were listening/reading someone else's account of what happened since you said that you weren't listening to anyone else. You cited a source (Roque Planas), so you are listening to what *he* says is
the most important parts of those pages in Hillary's memoir. But was planas said were most important *actually* the most important? You'd only know by reading the memoir itself.
Perfect, you directly refuted my statement and presented citations that reinforce your rebuttal. That is exactly how logical debates are supposed
to be handled. Good job!
Mike Powell wrote to AARON THOMAS <=-I
What's that subtle brainwashing do? It makes conservatives think "It's ok if
don't vote, the red wave's got me covered."
I would not take their message and assume that.
What's that subtle brainwashing do? It makes conservatives think "It's ok iI
don't vote, the red wave's got me covered."
I would not take their message and assume that.
But there are many who would.
The question is, why does Soros have the reputation that he does? Is he actually guilty of everything he's been accused of, or is he the victim anti-semitic smear campaign?And, again, since the people who believe he is mucking about in Israel
are "semitic," I don't think that could be the case. I didn't even know he was Jewish, and I bet Aaron didn't either, until you told us so. I cannot speak for Aaron, but his religion and ethnicity are not a factor
in any opinion I have of him.
He could be an ultra-conservative Christian from the Southern US, for all I would know or care. I somehow suspect one of us would care, though.
Could be, and could also be that his religion and ethnicity are an easy excuse for those who want to defend him.Meanwhile, you used the supposed fact that the idea of scapegoats originated with the Hebrews as a way to cast doubt on the opinion t Israeli government also has of Soros because they are Hebrews.Perhaps he is their scapegoat.
The question is, why does Soros have the reputation that he does? Is he actually guilty of everything he's been accused of, or is he the victim anti-semitic smear campaign?
And, again, since the people who believe he is mucking about in Israel
are "semitic," I don't think that could be the case. I didn't even know he was Jewish, and I bet Aaron didn't either, until you told us so. I cannot speak for Aaron, but his religion and ethnicity are not a factor
in any opinion I have of him.
The "core tenets of conservatives" is jargon. We don't vote together do racist stuff, and we don't vote together to swindle America out of the largest cash grab in the history of the United States.
What brings you together, then?
Or do they? The conservatives posting racist comments in the com section sure do seem to appreciate it.You can't call them "conservatives." You don't know their political beliefs, because they're just there to say racist stuff.
Who else watches Fox News?
The question is, why does Soros have the reputation that he does? Is he actually guilty of everything he's been accused of, or is he the victim
of an anti-semitic smear campaign?
What's that subtle brainwashing do? It makes conservatives think "It' ok if I don't vote, the red wave's got me covered."
So that leads to an obvious question: during the Blue wave, was that conservative leaders trying to trick progressives to think "It's ok if I don't vote, the blue wave's got me covered?"
For the American people we want peace, safety, equality, andThe "core tenets of conservatives" is jargon. We don't vote toge do racist stuff, and we don't vote together to swindle America o the largest cash grab in the history of the United States.What brings you together, then?
sovereignty. But I can only assume that other conservatives would agree with that statement.
When you say "Preserve the traditional power structure," that sounds
good to me. What is meant by that? Why does it seem racist to you? To me it sounds like "we're gonna remain a Democratic nation with a free market." But to you it means something different. What does it mean to you?
That's racist! You're good at being a leftist because you've masteredWho else watches Fox News?Or do they? The conservatives posting racist comments in th section sure do seem to appreciate it.You can't call them "conservatives." You don't know their politi beliefs, because they're just there to say racist stuff.
that trick where you accuse someone of something while you're the one committing the crime! ;) Good job!
The question is, why does Soros have the reputation that he does? Is actually guilty of everything he's been accused of, or is he the vict of an anti-semitic smear campaign?Some jews are actually guilty of the stuff that nazis accuse them of.
Some black people are guilty of the stuff that white supremacists accuse them of.
Some white people are guilty of the stuff that Mexicansaccuse
them of.
But just because George is "trying to use his wealth to rule the world" doesn't mean that Ben Stein is guilty of it too.
Some people need to
go straight to hell, and it doesn't matter what color or religion they are. Those are just crutches for (insane) people to cry about.
Republicans are not organized enough to pull stunts like that. They know nothing about psychology, or about getting up off their butts.What's that subtle brainwashing do? It makes conservatives think ok if I don't vote, the red wave's got me covered."So that leads to an obvious question: during the Blue wave, was that conservative leaders trying to trick progressives to think "It's ok i don't vote, the blue wave's got me covered?"
That's racist! You're good at being a leftist because you've mastered that trick where you accuse someone of something while you're the one committing the crime! ;) Good job!You can't call them "conservatives." You don't know their p beliefs, because they're just there to say racist stuff.Who else watches Fox News?
Some jews are actually guilty of the stuff that nazis accuse them of.
Is that so? Examples, Nazi?
So... we're down to the "Republicans are stupid" argument?
You want and need white conservatives to be racists, because a narrative like that scares colored people into voting Democrat, but the actionsThat's racist! You're good at being a leftist because you've mas that trick where you accuse someone of something while you're th committing the crime! ;) Good job!You can't call them "conservatives." You don't know th beliefs, because they're just there to say racist stufWho else watches Fox News?
that Democrats take to exploit and manipulate people by color are very obvious to intelligent people. Don't doubt that many colored people are intelligent too and that they're figuring this all out.
I'm glad you ruined the conversation with name calling, because I'm a conservative upstate New Yorker and we don't care for color talk.Some jews are actually guilty of the stuff that nazis accuse theIs that so? Examples, Nazi?
So... we're down to the "Republicans are stupid" argument?The leftists are propagating the notion that the election is in the bag.
Republicans don't have any defense for propaganda; all they do is stand around with their thumbs up their asses. Leftists obviously have some
sort of propaganda processing center; a place where they organize all of their efforts.
Republicans lack that type of organization. They think it's old times, where you can just be an honest person and do an honest job. Democrats know better.
You want and need white conservatives to be racists, because a narrative like that scares colored people into voting Democrat, but the actions that Democrats take to exploit and manipulate people by color are very obvious to intelligent people. Don't doubt that many colored people are intelligent too and that they're figuring this all out.
You yourself said that the comments sections of the Fox News website were filled with racist comments and that, in your opinion, the ability to comment should be removed.
On 18 Sep 2022, Aaron Thomas said the following...
I'm glad you ruined the conversation with name calling, because I'm a conservative upstate New Yorker and we don't care for color talk.Some jews are actually guilty of the stuff that nazis accuse thIs that so? Examples, Nazi?
Do you not have any examples?
What are some jews actually guilty of, as accused by Nazis?
Republicans lack that type of organization. They think it's old times, where you can just be an honest person and do an honest job. Democrats know better.
Republican politicians, and especially Trump, are not honest people. They're desperately trying to find a way to unify the Trumper MAGA base with the traditional non-MAGA base, and are having difficulty doing so.
radical things these ex-viewers had done recently, and I cited your action of claiming that Fox News was some sort of liberal reverse-psychology operation, which is bizarre and untrue.They've been talking about the "Red Wave," but there's not gonna be one. It's a distraction. Leftists aren't ditching their party. Fox's angle is for us to hear that and then let our guard down. "A Fox News poll indictates Biden's approval rating to be lower than any other president
in the history of approval ratings." <- Sure thing. He'll be re-elected
in a landslide victory.
If you've given up on Fox News because of their deceptive conservativ reporting, I could agree with you. But you're accusing them of decept liberal reporting, which isn't true.On an almost daily basis, they're posting articles about black-on-white homicides on their website. That's cherry-picking police reports.
Please give an example.
They tease us with stuff like "Hunter's laptop," but then nothing
becomes of it. You don't see that as "leftist propaganda," but it is, because they're tricking conservatives into parroting BS, which will
come back to haunt them.
The owner is a billionaire; billionaires aren't conservatives, and
they're not to be trusted. Conservatives make up a significant portion
of the USA, but leftists don't want anyone acknowleging that. They would rather cut their losses by investing in a smidge of power over the conservative population, and use it carefully and wisely for strategic success. Maybe for an election, for example, try to make conservatives think that they've got nothing to lose.
They don't cover the most pressing issues for GOP supporters, which are: We need our party to be fine tuned, we need media infrastructure, we
need way more money, and we need labor unions to ditch the DNC in favor
of us. If Rupert cared so much about conservatives, he'd get right on
that stuff. He's not looking for political change though, he's just running a business covering a niche market.
Aaron Thomas wrote to Dr. What <=-
Legislation of the latest money-grab comes to mind. When Joe Manchin questioned the urgency for all this money, other confederates threw him under the bus. That's pushing the narrative hard. "Joe Manchin wants to defund FEMA."
Legislation of the latest money-grab comes to mind. When Joe Manchin questioned the urgency for all this money, other confederates threw h under the bus. That's pushing the narrative hard. "Joe Manchin wants defund FEMA."I've learned that when a salesman pushes harder, it's because he wants
the sale - not because it's best for you.
There's a great deal of similiarity between a Democrat and a sleezy used car salesman.
I've learned that when a salesman pushes harder, it's because he wants the sal
- not because it's best for you.
in the history of approval ratings." <- Sure thing. He'll be re-elect in a landslide victory.
They're reporting what they think conservatives want to hear.
Please give an example.On an almost daily basis, they're posting articles about black-on-whi homicides on their website. That's cherry-picking police reports.
True, but how is that pro-Biden/anti-Trump?
Now you're catching on! They want to control conservatives, similar toin the history of approval ratings." <- Sure thing. He'll be re- in a landslide victory.They're reporting what they think conservatives want to hear.
the way that George Soros controls you.
Exhibit A:True, but how is that pro-Biden/anti-Trump?Please give an example.On an almost daily basis, they're posting articles about black-o homicides on their website. That's cherry-picking police reports
Fox News' target audience is whites. By cherry-picking these articles, they're fomenting resentment of blacks and non-whites.
Exhibit B:
foxnews.com, unlike 99% of other news websites, continues to allow comments on their site, and people post very racist stuff every time.
The openly-leftist media controls liberals, and the shadow-leftist Fox News controls conservatives. Not only controls them, but also creates
the perfect place (comments section on their website) to create a
"whites are racist" narrative.
Question: What's at the end of this rainbow? Answer: More desperate situations for the American people that predatory politicians can tantilize them with later. "Re-elect me and your crime problems will be solved."
Now you're catching on! They want to control conservatives, similar to the way that George Soros controls you.
Soros doesn't control liberals; that's an anti-semitic conspiracy theory and, while you may not consider yourself anti-semitic, espousal of said conspiracy theory would suggest otherwise.
You implied that Fox News has changed in some way prior to the last election, but Fox News has always been about telling conservatives what they want to hear.
So when the Israeli government, or Israeli citizens, claim that Soros is also attempting to influence their citizens and interfere with their government, is that considered anti-themselves?Now you're catching on! They want to control conservatives, similar the way that George Soros controls you.Soros doesn't control liberals; that's an anti-semitic conspiracy theory while you may not consider yourself anti-semitic, espousal of said consp theory would suggest otherwise.
If it was only a bunch of American right-wing radicals questioning his influence, I could see the anti-semitic argument having merit. Since other countries make similar claims, I question it.
There is a lot of smoke from multiple places for there to be no fire anywhere.
You implied that Fox News has changed in some way prior to the last elec but Fox News has always been about telling conservatives what they want hear.They were also, at times before the 2016 election was over, anti-Trump. Maybe FOX never fully got over that, either.
Soros doesn't control liberals; that's an anti-semitic conspiracy theory and, while you may not consider yourself anti-semitic, espousal of said conspiracy theory would suggest otherwise.
And, just for logic's sake, if Fox News is secretly liberal, then are you saying that George Soros is secretly conservative?
comments on their site, and people post very racist stuff every time.
I can see how that could be a problem. Perhaps conservatives need to disavow themselves of their racist comrades, although they will risk losing their votes as well, which I suspect is why they have not done so.
Perhaps Fox News is inadvertently opening your eyes to something you'd really rather not have to acknowledge.
Not all whites are racist, but racists tend to be white in this country.
Not all media is leftist, either, unless Fox News is considered centrist (which it isn't).
Where are you getting your news now that you've abandoned Fox News?
Soros doesn't control liberals; that's an anti-semitic conspiracy the and, while you may not consider yourself anti-semitic, espousal of sa conspiracy theory would suggest otherwise.George pushes propanganda on his news channels,
and funds non-prosecuting
prosecutor campaigns.
He also funds Democrats, who will later campaign on
"re-elect us to solve the crime problem."
And, just for logic's sake, if Fox News is secretly liberal, then are saying that George Soros is secretly conservative?It doesn't matter what George's political beliefs are, but what matters
is that he's colluding with Democrats to wreck our country, so that they can pander to idiots later on.
There's no "racist comrades." foxnews.com just needs to remove the comments section like every other news site has already done.comments on their site, and people post very racist stuff everyI can see how that could be a problem. Perhaps conservatives need to disavow themselves of their racist comrades, although they will risk losing their votes as well, which I suspect is why they have not done
Perhaps Fox News is inadvertently opening your eyes to something you' really rather not have to acknowledge.They're not opening my eyes to anything. They're leftist propagandists.
Not all whites are racist, but racists tend to be white in this countRacists don't "tend" to be white. It's racist to say that.
Not all media is leftist, either, unless Fox News is considered centr (which it isn't).It's all leftist. If the leftists had a problem with stuff that Fox News is doing, then all it would take is a phonecall to solve it.
Leftists are fine with Fox News. They love the Hunter's Laptop story, because it's a dead-end. They also love all the "election was stolen" stuff, because that helps them look good too.
Where are you getting your news now that you've abandoned Fox News?I still browse foxnews.com but I don't take them seriously. Local news
at 12 and 6 are good enough.
The "core tenets of conservatives" is jargon. We don't vote together toHow do you know that? The racists who read CNN & MSNBC don't hav comments section.Because racism is a conservative phenomenon. One of the core tenets o conservatives is preserving the traditional power structure, and the traditional power structure is racist.
do racist stuff, and we don't vote together to swindle America out of
the largest cash grab in the history of the United States.
The leftists are the ones who are constantly talking about skin color. Nobody brought it up besides you.
Or do they? The conservatives posting racist comments in the comment section sure do seem to appreciate it.You can't call them "conservatives." You don't know their political beliefs, because they're just there to say racist stuff.
Peter Doocy's questions are idiotic. Also, remember Jim Acosta gettin his press credentials revoked for asking tough questions? Peter Doocy still there. That says everything about the difference between these administrations.Jim Acosta wasn't "asking tough questions." Jim Acosta was harrassing the president. Peter Doocy's questions don't seem idiotic to me. He's
helping us log white house inconsistencies so that later we can reflect
on all the dishonesty. That's gonna be a fun day.
Nobody "believes" in scapegoats. Scapegoats are what they are: innocent sacrificed in the place of actual guilty parties.It still sounds anti-semetic. Aaron doesn't like Soros because of his reputation. Soros happens to be Jewish so, in your mind, Aaron saying he doesn't like Soros is anti-semetic.
Meanwhile, you used the supposed fact that the idea of scapegoats originated with the Hebrews as a way to cast doubt on the opinion the Israeli government also has of Soros because they are Hebrews.
That sounds more anti-semetic to me.
Al and I have been accused of being the same person, but we both can neither confirm nor deny it.Wow! I think it's pretty amazing that you turned my short post into an opportunity to slag others. Bravo!
That said, I think Gregory and Aaron are two different people.
Gregory's posts are very wordy and condescending, using stilted Engli and capitalization rules known only to Gregory himself. My personalI don't know why, but that made me giggle!
Mike Powell wrote to REBECCA MARIE <=-
Apparently he did not destroy the evidence. There are boxes of
documents and they still apparently exist. It is not like he was
running a personal server that housed government correspondence that he then destroyed with Bleach Bit.
Mike Powell wrote to REBECCA MARIE <=-
If you weren't within earshot of what Hillary said, or an eyewitness to
what Hillary "did", then you are definitely listening to what others said.
My guess is that you heard what Hllary "said, did and took credit for" straight from conservative-leaning media. Rush Limbaugh? Fox News?
The Huffington Post is a good example that I have cited here multiple times. They cite her own memoirs which, as a autobiographical book, was
Using a private email server for government correspondence was only another example, feeding right into the fact that she is not trustworthy.
That is not a fact, that is an opinion. If you can find facts that back up your opinion, then you'd have more credibility.
"feeding right into the *fact* that she is not trustworthy."
I am certain that breaching trust is, by definition, untrustworthy.
The documents I sign are pretty black and white. The definition of untrustworthy is readily available in any dictionary. I don't see an opinion there.
So now I will wait for your message telling me that, as a former First Lady and SoS, she should be held to a lesser standard than Jeff or I
when it comes to mishandling government information.
Aaron Thomas wrote to Rebecca Marie <=-
conservative sheep in a subtle way. They aren't telling us "Vote
against all Democrats because they're all monsters!" but they're
telling us stuff like "There's gonna be a red wave. Democrats are
expected to lose really bad."
What's that subtle brainwashing do? It makes conservatives think "It's
ok if I don't vote, the red wave's got me covered."
Considering that it is a comment section, and those are often filled with at least a few trolls, it is not a safe assumption that they are white or conservative or anything else.You want and need white conservatives to be racists, because a narr like that scares colored people into voting Democrat, but the actio that Democrats take to exploit and manipulate people by color are v obvious to intelligent people. Don't doubt that many colored people intelligent too and that they're figuring this all out.You yourself said that the comments sections of the Fox News website wer filled with racist comments and that, in your opinion, the ability to co should be removed.
On 18 Sep 2022, Aaron Thomas said the following...One of the things that Hitler claimed they were involved with is Communism. That is a very general belief to have about all members of
Do you not have any examples?I'm glad you ruined the conversation with name calling, because I'm conservative upstate New Yorker and we don't care for color talk.Some jews are actually guilty of the stuff that nazis acc thIs that so? Examples, Nazi?
What are some jews actually guilty of, as accused by Nazis?
the Jewish community. That said, back before WWI, there was indeed involvement by Jewish Germans in Communist activities. Some of them
were also Zionists, who moved to Israel and settled there, setting up their communes in places which, in their mind, were "unclaimed lands."
So, some German Jews did indeed have Communist beliefs, which the Nazis incorrectly accused them all of having. So, the Nazis took a small truth and made a large falsehood out of it.
Back to the Zionists who left for Israel before WWI...
These settlements caused a lot of friction with the native Jews, Muslims, and Christians. Back several years ago, there was a show on PBS about this period in history. The German (and other European) Jews took over lands that those natives had been using as their nomadic hearding lands and, of course, the Zionists also wanted the most fertile lands for themselves, leaving less desirable land for the natives. The Zionists
also brought in muscle, sometimes in the form of Russian criminals, to keep the natives off of "their" land. This lead to some violent
incidents between said muscle and the natives.
At the time, that area was a part of the Ottoman Empire. As their power was waning, they had some difficulty keeping law and order in that area. There was eventually a movement to come to some peaceful resolution between the Zionists, the natives, and the government. WWI broke out
and, with the Ottomans losing control of that area, this never happened.
One things I took away from that special was that, despite being of different religions, the natives apparently got along pretty well up
until the Zionist Europeans starting showing up in numbers.
And I called it...Republicans lack that type of organization. They think it's old tim where you can just be an honest person and do an honest job. Democr know better.Republican politicians, and especially Trump, are not honest people. The desperately trying to find a way to unify the Trumper MAGA base with the traditional non-MAGA base, and are having difficulty doing so.
The other day, you were claiming that politicians on the whole were
honest people who were not in it for the power, the money, or
themselves. I pointed out that your views were naive and also would be different if we were qualifying "politician" with "Republican."
So here we are.
I'm glad you ruined the conversation with name calling, because I'm a conservative upstate New Yorker and we don't care for color talk.Some jews are actually guilty of the stuff that nazis accusIs that so? Examples, Nazi?
Do you not have any examples?
What are some jews actually guilty of, as accused by Nazis?
Hahaha, no. Rightists have propaganda, too; it's just that you buy into
it hook, line, and sinker. To you, it's not propaganda. However, you are correct in that it is not working very well right now. Post 2015, it has been increasingly aimed at Trump's far-right MAGA base and any conservatives caught between that and the center are not buying it. Hahaha, no. Rightists have propaganda, too; it's just that you buy into
it hook, line, and sinker. To you, it's not propaganda. However, you are correct in that it is not working very well right now. Post 2015, it has been increasingly aimed at Trump's far-right MAGA base and any conservatives caught between that and the center are not buying it.
I don't know of any leftist propaganda clearing centers; as far as I can tell that's your paranoia speaking. There is reality, though, which you may have confused for a leftist propaganda machine.
Republican politicians, and especially Trump, are not honest people. They're desperately trying to find a way to unify the Trumper MAGA base with the traditional non-MAGA base, and are having difficulty doing so.
Are the statistics about all of Trump's successes just a pile of propaganda?
I feel like conservatives are unified. Nobody cares if it's Trump or Romney; Joe's got to go. That's all.
George pushes propanganda on his news channels,
Soros has news channels?
I take it this means he contributes to the campaings of prosecutors who don't prosecute things that you think should be prosecuted, rather than
to the campaigns of prosecutors who don't prosecute at all.
He also funds Democrats, who will later campaign on
"re-elect us to solve the crime problem."
Didn't Trump campaign on "law & order," tough-on-crime promises?
It doesn't matter what George's political beliefs are, but what matte is that he's colluding with Democrats to wreck our country, so that t can pander to idiots later on.
Sure it matters. If Rupert Murdoch has Fox News being 'deceptive' in
order to control conservatives because he's a secret leftist, and Soros has "his" news channels publishing "propaganda" in order to control the left, isn't there at least a possibility that he's a secret conservative who is colluding with Republicans?
There's no "racist comrades." foxnews.com just needs to remove the comments section like every other news site has already done.
To hide the racism of the racist comrades who don't exist. Have you thought that through? Racists share the same preference in news sites
that you do.
They are definitely not leftist propagandists. They approach just about everything with a conservative bent. But now that that's becoming inconvenient and/or embarassing to you, suddenly they're "leftists."
Not all whites are racist, but racists tend to be white in thisRacists don't "tend" to be white. It's racist to say that.
It's not racist to point out actual demographics, and most of the
racists in the US are white. It's interesting that you would take exception to that fact.
"Leftists" have had a problem with what Fox News is doing for decades. Just check out all of the "leftist" fact-checks calling out Fox News for their lies.
The Hunter Biden laptop story is a dead end? Are you sure it's not being covered up by the FBI? Trump is generating most of the "election was stolen" stuff; does that make him a secret "leftist," too?
You do know that the natural progression of this delusional thinking will result in you believing that everyone except you is a "leftist," right? All it takes is for someone to say something you disagree with or shine
a bad light on your beliefs, and suddenly they're playing for the other team. Eventually there will be no one left but you.
That's not an accurate perception of reality; that's paranoia. You might want to seek help.
So when the Israeli government, or Israeli citizens, claim that Soros is also attempting to influence their citizens and interfere with their government, is that considered anti-themselves?Now you're catching on! They want to control conservatives, similaSoros doesn't control liberals; that's an anti-semitic conspiracy theor
the way that George Soros controls you.
while you may not consider yourself anti-semitic, espousal of said cons
theory would suggest otherwise.
Do they complain that George Soros "controls" them?
It's a claim that's been around for a long, long time. For what it's worth, Soros also donates to conservative causes.
There is a lot of smoke from multiple places for there to be no fire anywhere.
Did you know that the idea of a scapegoat originated with the ancient Hebrews?
They were also, at times before the 2016 election was over, anti-Trump. Maybe FOX never fully got over that, either.
I think that would depend on whether the reporters in question were in the news department or the entertainment department.
I believe that Soros, or one of his companies, owns some local broadcast tv channels.
However, I can't be wrong that
he colluded with Biden to import latinos
and now he's purchased 18
(formerly) conservative latino radio stations
so he could propagate
Joe's border buddies.
I take it this means he contributes to the campaings of prosecutors don't prosecute things that you think should be prosecuted, rather th to the campaigns of prosecutors who don't prosecute at all.He contributes to the campaigns of bad prosecutors. It's his way of Defunding the Police.
The Joe Biden Crime Crisis is just that; a Joe Biden inspired crime crisis.He also funds Democrats, who will later campaign onDidn't Trump campaign on "law & order," tough-on-crime promises?
"re-elect us to solve the crime problem."
Propaganda appeals to weak minded voters. Republicans can't afford propaganda anyway. They are broke. Propaganda costs a ton.It doesn't matter what George's political beliefs are, but what is that he's colluding with Democrats to wreck our country, so t can pander to idiots later on.Sure it matters. If Rupert Murdoch has Fox News being 'deceptive' in order to control conservatives because he's a secret leftist, and Sor has "his" news channels publishing "propaganda" in order to control t left, isn't there at least a possibility that he's a secret conservat who is colluding with Republicans?
They have no
TV outlets, especially not broadcast TV outlets.
All Republicans have
for propaganda is AM radio, and that's pathetic, because nobody listens
to that except for people who are already conservatives,
and Sean
Hannity just makes us look stupid anyway.
How do you know that? The racists who read CNN & MSNBC don't have a comments section.There's no "racist comrades." foxnews.com just needs to remove t comments section like every other news site has already done.To hide the racism of the racist comrades who don't exist. Have you thought that through? Racists share the same preference in news sites that you do.
They are definitely not leftist propagandists. They approach just abo everything with a conservative bent. But now that that's becoming inconvenient and/or embarassing to you, suddenly they're "leftists."Racism isn't conservative. Conservatives don't ask for cherry-picked police reports or for a racist comment section.
You're full of it. You're the one who's racist. "Most of the racists.."It's not racist to point out actual demographics, and most of the racists in the US are white. It's interesting that you would take exception to that fact.Not all whites are racist, but racists tend to be white inRacists don't "tend" to be white. It's racist to say that.
Do you realize how full of it you are? You have no proof; using a big
word like "demographics" doesn't vindicate you. There's no study,
survey, statistic, or fact to prove you right.
"Most white people enjoyed the George Floyd video."
"Most conservatives were at the January 6 riot."
Phrases with the word "most" hold no water in 9 out of 10 of your leftist sentences.
"Leftists" have had a problem with what Fox News is doing for decades Just check out all of the "leftist" fact-checks calling out Fox News their lies.But at least they have people like Peter Doocy asking questions at the White House. That's all they're good for.
The Hunter Biden laptop story is a dead end? Are you sure it's not be covered up by the FBI? Trump is generating most of the "election was stolen" stuff; does that make him a secret "leftist," too?The laptop isn't Hunter's. Republicans have had long enough to do something about it if it was real, and they haven't. It doesn't mean
that I trust Joe or anything, but I trust that the laptop story was Democrat disinformation. (Make it look like idiot conservatives tried to frame Hunter when really they did it themselves to make conservatives
look bad in the long run.)
Democrats are super organized. They know what they're doing, unlike Republicans.
You do know that the natural progression of this delusional thinking result in you believing that everyone except you is a "leftist," righ All it takes is for someone to say something you disagree with or shi a bad light on your beliefs, and suddenly they're playing for the oth team. Eventually there will be no one left but you.I know that it's fun to diagnose each other's mental issues, but no, that's not a true diagnosis of me. Outside the BBS world, I don't care about anyone's political beliefs. I only come here for that.
That's not an accurate perception of reality; that's paranoia. You mi want to seek help.Nope, it's just Fox News that I think is the leftists. Dan Bongino seems like he wants to talk about elephants in the room, but he barely
scratches the surface. I don't think it's his choice though, he's got to do what King Soros desires if he likes having a job.
Do they complain that George Soros "controls" them?I take complaints of "interference" to mean that the Israeli government believes he is controlling something.
That sounds anti-semetic, i.e. that they blame Soros because they are Jewish and believe in scapegoats. Is that how you meant it?There is a lot of smoke from multiple places for there to be no fir anywhere.Did you know that the idea of a scapegoat originated with the ancient Hebrews?
I don't know which department they were in, but FOX did not seem to warm to him until sometime after he became the nominee.They were also, at times before the 2016 election was over, anti-Tr Maybe FOX never fully got over that, either.I think that would depend on whether the reporters in question were in t news department or the entertainment department.
And, again, since the people who believe he is mucking about in IsraelThe question is, why does Soros have the reputation that he does? Is he actually guilty of everything he's been accused of, or is he the victim anti-semitic smear campaign?Nobody "believes" in scapegoats. Scapegoats are what they are: innocentIt still sounds anti-semetic. Aaron doesn't like Soros because of reputation. Soros happens to be Jewish so, in your mind, Aaron say he
sacrificed in the place of actual guilty parties.
doesn't like Soros is anti-semetic.
are "semitic," I don't think that could be the case. I didn't even know he was Jewish, and I bet Aaron didn't either, until you told us so. I cannot speak for Aaron, but his religion and ethnicity are not a factor
in any opinion I have of him.
He could be an ultra-conservative Christian from the Southern US, for all I would know or care. I somehow suspect one of us would care, though.
Could be, and could also be that his religion and ethnicity are an easy excuse for those who want to defend him.Meanwhile, you used the supposed fact that the idea of scapegoats originated with the Hebrews as a way to cast doubt on the opinion t Israeli government also has of Soros because they are Hebrews.Perhaps he is their scapegoat.
Exactly. I have mentioned that as a reason that the government should have been moving much faster to get them back but, for some reason, did not. If he is as irresponsible as is claimed, he certainly cannot be trusted to not show those documents to others during the several monthsApparently he did not destroy the evidence. There are boxes of documents and they still apparently exist. It is not like he wasThat is actually much worse. Destroyed documents don't divulge informati documents that are stored in boxes somewhere can be stolen and read by people that are not cleared to do so.
he has had them. Especially Russian someones.
Thanks to you, we were discussing the destruction of evidence in therunning a personal server that housed government correspondence tha then destroyed with Bleach Bit."Person X might've done this, but Person Y did something worse!" is a logical fallacy. As I tell my kiddos, "we aren't talking about what your sibling did, we are talking about what you did."
form of government documents and information, which makes it on topic.
Do you not also tell your kiddos, "If you don't want to talk about it don't bring it up?" Pretty sure my parents did.
I have not noticed you presenting many citations. Like Jeff and others, we are expected to take your word for it.
Perfect, you directly refuted my statement and presented citations that
reinforce your rebuttal. That is exactly how logical debates are supposed
to be handled. Good job!
I have not noticed you presenting many citations. Like Jeff and others, we
are expected to take your word for it.
The government was moving to get them back, but they were dealing with an ex-President. Politics required them to do so with kid gloves. Look what happened when they *did* move to take back the documents without Trump's consent.
Where I work, government records have retention poilicies, based on the type of record that it is. My understanding is that the deleted documents should have been deleted the previous year but weren't, and then were deleted independent of the subpoena.
Hillary was investigated and found to have been irresponsible, but other than that to have done nothing wrong.
I have not noticed you presenting many citations. Like Jeff and others, we are expected to take your word for it.
I present citations when necessary. When I don't, the issue in question is either common knowledge or a matter of the public record.
The government was moving to get them back, but they were dealing with a ex-President. Politics required them to do so with kid gloves. Look what happened when they *did* move to take back the documents without Trump's consent.Some people complained but nothing major has happened.
Where I work, government records have retention poilicies, based on the of record that it is. My understanding is that the deleted documents sho have been deleted the previous year but weren't, and then were deleted independent of the subpoena.Are you allowed to keep them on a private server, where there is no "retention period" because they should not be there to begin with?
Hillary was investigated and found to have been irresponsible, but other that to have done nothing wrong.That there was any evidence remaining of.
In past, you have told us that there is no such thing as "common sense," because of the "common" part of the phrase. If that is the case, I would argue that "common knowledge" is also non-existent.I have not noticed you presenting many citations. Like Jeff and ot we are expected to take your word for it.I present citations when necessary. When I don't, the issue in question either common knowledge or a matter of the public record.
No more rights for women to make their own choice.
No more democracy.
The list goes on.
No more rights for women to make their own choice.
Al, that's ridiculous.
We don't have that issue here. We have a federal gov and a state gov (don't you have a national gov plus a provincial gov?) Our national (federal we
call it) gov has decided to back off the issue of abortion and let the
states handle it as they please.
No more democracy.
It's much more democratic this way. Americans are diverse.
People from California & Virginia are extreme *leftists* so they prefer to presereve a woman's right to murder her baby up until the day of birth.
However, we've got our *rightest* (love that word) Americans in other areas who (democratically so) wish to restrict abortions. If you don't like it, then move to Virginia, and they'll let you murder it even after it's been born for a day.
The propagation continues.
Aaron Thomas wrote to Jeff Thiele <=-
Are the statistics about all of Trump's successes just a pile of propaganda?
How do you know that? I feel like conservatives are unified. Nobody
cares if it's Trump or Romney; Joe's got to go. That's all.
Trying to rule the world. George Soros is trying it, and he's jewish.Do you not have any examples?I'm glad you ruined the conversation with name calling, because conservative upstate New Yorker and we don't care for color talkSome jews are actually guilty of the stuff that nazisIs that so? Examples, Nazi?
What are some jews actually guilty of, as accused by Nazis?
Hahaha, no. Rightists have propaganda, too; it's just that you buy in it hook, line, and sinker. To you, it's not propaganda. However, you correct in that it is not working very well right now. Post 2015, it been increasingly aimed at Trump's far-right MAGA base and any conservatives caught between that and the center are not buying it. Hahaha, no. Rightists have propaganda, too; it's just that you buy in it hook, line, and sinker. To you, it's not propaganda. However, you correct in that it is not working very well right now. Post 2015, it been increasingly aimed at Trump's far-right MAGA base and any conservatives caught between that and the center are not buying it.
Are the statistics about all of Trump's successes just a pile of propaganda?
I don't know of any leftist propaganda clearing centers; as far as I tell that's your paranoia speaking. There is reality, though, which y may have confused for a leftist propaganda machine.They left you out in the cold, but surely the top dawgs like George and Oprah have clearance to enter the facility.
Republican politicians, and especially Trump, are not honest people. They're desperately trying to find a way to unify the Trumper MAGA ba with the traditional non-MAGA base, and are having difficulty doing sHow do you know that?
I feel like conservatives are unified.
Nobody
cares if it's Trump or Romney; Joe's got to go. That's all.
We don't have that issue here. We have a federal gov and a state gov (don't you have a national gov plus a provincial gov?) Our national (federal we call it) gov has decided to back off the issue of abortion and let the states handle it as they please.
Sure, it's much the same here but we haven't tried to push the views of a mino
ty on the majority. Such a thing is doomed to failure.
It's much more democratic what way? But yes, Americans and Canadians and peoplNo more democracy.It's much more democratic this way. Americans are diverse.
of the world are very diverse.
However, we've got our *rightest* (love that word) Americans in other areas who (democratically so) wish to restrict abortions. If you don't like it, then move to Virginia, and they'll let you murder it even after it's been born for a day.
It's not about murder, it never was. It's about a woman's right to choose for rself what to do in such a situation.
The propagation continues.
A woman in the US had this right up until an extremist SCOTUS over turned Roe Wade a few short months ago. Today they do not (many of them). That's not prop
anda. That is a fact.
Roe V Wade was spoken of as settled law, a precedent. This issue alone could s
k any party since it is wanted by a majority of the people.
and otI have not noticed you presenting many citations. Like Jeff
we are expected to take your word for it.
questionI present citations when necessary. When I don't, the issue in
either common knowledge or a matter of the public record.
In past, you have told us that there is no such thing as "commonsense,"
because of the "common" part of the phrase. If that is the case, Iwould
argue that "common knowledge" is also non-existent.
Common knowledge would encompass things like "Trump was the 45th President of
the United States," etc. Things that no sane person would dispute.
Some people complained but nothing major has happened.
People, yourself included, have intimated that the search was politically motivated. However, they gave Trump multiple chances to come clean before they resorted to that. Had they gone straight to the search & seizure, I believe that the outcry would have been much greater and something major may very well have happened.
Trump is right now threatening that very bad things will happen if he is indicted.
No. But with the post-COVID work from home policies, some lines have become a bit more blurred. Am I allowed to keep such records on my work-issued laptop in my home? Yes. Are people who deal with paper-based records and work from home allowed to keep those records in their home? Yes, under lock and key. Are these records in our homes subject to records retention rules? Absolutely.
Hillary was investigated and found to have been irresponsible, but otheThat there was any evidence remaining of.
that to have done nothing wrong.
Correct. And there is no evidence that the "missing" evidence to which you're alluding ever existed.
Yes, "some people (including me) complained."Some people complained but nothing major has happened.People, yourself included, have intimated that the search was politicall motivated. However, they gave Trump multiple chances to come clean befor they resorted to that. Had they gone straight to the search & seizure, I believe that the outcry would have been much greater and something major very well have happened.
Trump is right now threatening that very bad things will happen if he is indicted.You said that things had already happened.
No. But with the post-COVID work from home policies, some lines have bec bit more blurred. Am I allowed to keep such records on my work-issued la in my home? Yes. Are people who deal with paper-based records and work f home allowed to keep those records in their home? Yes, under lock and ke Are these records in our homes subject to records retention rules? Absolutely.We are not allowed to keep Federal records in places such as work-issued laptops or in our homes. They have to stay on government owned servers and in goverment-owned (and marked!) file cabinets, and only certain servers and certain file cabinets. There have to be X number of levels
of security one must pass through in order to physically access these servers and file-cabinets. Even when everyone was work-from-home full time, that was still the case.
As the office of the SoS is a Federal office, I doubt the security on those articles was as loose as it apparently is in Texas with state data.
Secure deleting things from a server, using a product such as Bleach Bit, will not leave any such evidence.Correct. And there is no evidence that the "missing" evidence to which y alluding ever existed.Hillary was investigated and found to have been irresponsible, bu otheThat there was any evidence remaining of.
that to have done nothing wrong.
I see. And what evidence do you have that Soros is "trying to rule the world?" Plenty of wealthy people make both political donations and business acquisitions. iHeartMedia (formerly Clear Channel Media) owns over 850 radio stations and was the primary carrier for the shows of
Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity.
They left you out in the cold, but surely the top dawgs like George a Oprah have clearance to enter the facility.
I see. And what evidence do you have that such a facility exists? There
is none.
They're desperately trying to find a way to unify the Trumper MA with the traditional non-MAGA base, and are having difficulty doHow do you know that?
It's playing out right in front of you. MTG is actively encouraging the ouster of McConnell, for one thing.
I feel like conservatives are unified.
That's not an opinion supported by the facts at hand.
Just wait until it comes down to Trump or Romney (if that happens, which
I doubt).
I see. And what evidence do you have that Soros is "trying to rule th world?" Plenty of wealthy people make both political donations and business acquisitions. iHeartMedia (formerly Clear Channel Media) own over 850 radio stations and was the primary carrier for the shows of Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity.I agree that "Plenty of wealthy people make both political donations and business acquisitions,"
but George played a huge role in Joe's campaign,
joe began the importation service for 2 million hispanic illegals, millions more hispanic refugees from vacation countries, an entire prisonload of hispanic Honduran releasees.
Ruling the free world, is what George is doing.
The facility doesn't have to exist, there are other ways to communicate besides in-person meetings.They left you out in the cold, but surely the top dawgs like Geo Oprah have clearance to enter the facility.I see. And what evidence do you have that such a facility exists? The is none.
Real conservatives know that MTG is a real problemIt's playing out right in front of you. MTG is actively encouraging t ouster of McConnell, for one thing.They're desperately trying to find a way to unify the Trump with the traditional non-MAGA base, and are having difficulHow do you know that?
Mitch
Mcconnell being a problem is a leftist narrative.
But that doesn't mean
that we're not unified. Why is it important to leftists for
conservatives to be divided?
So that Fox News can brainwash us into
voting against Trump in the primary?
What facts? You don't have "facts" about "division of conservatives."I feel like conservatives are unified.That's not an opinion supported by the facts at hand.
Just wait until it comes down to Trump or Romney (if that happens, wh I doubt).That's all that matters to the leftists; "anything but Trump."
Although
I can ask any leftist "Why anybody but Trump?" and the best answer they can give is "because he was impeached!" or "because he said dead
soldiers are losers!" or "because he beats his wife!"
There were several years between Roe v Wade and now where the Democrats had both a President and majority in congress yet chose not to codify it into national law. That would have been a much better solution, if they wanted one, vs. a "spoken of" SCOTUS ruling.
Mike Powell wrote to REBECCA MARIE <=-
That is actually much worse. Destroyed documents don't divulge information, documents that are stored in boxes somewhere can be stolen and read by people that are not cleared to do so.
Exactly. I have mentioned that as a reason that the government should have been moving much faster to get them back but, for some reason, did
not. If he is as irresponsible as is claimed, he certainly cannot be trusted to not show those documents to others during the several months
he has had them. Especially Russian someones.
Thanks to you, we were discussing the destruction of evidence in the
form of government documents and information, which makes it on topic.
Aaron Thomas wrote to Rebecca Marie <=-
So that leads to an obvious question: during the Blue wave, was that conservative leaders trying to trick progressives to think "It's ok if I don't vote, the blue wave's got me covered?"
Republicans are not organized enough to pull stunts like that. They
know nothing about psychology, or about getting up off their butts.
As Aaron pointed out, it is still readily available in places where the majority wants it to be so, and not in places where the majority does not.
There were several years between the Roe v Wade decision and now where the Democrats had both a President and majority in congress yet chose not to codify it into national law.
Last I checked, we still have a greater freedom of speech, expression, and especially to assemble than you do in Canada. When we assemble, our Prime Minister does not freeze our assets, for example.
It is murder if they can do it after birth. I have not confirmed Aaron's suggestion that they can in Virginia, but California was considering
allowing babies carried to term to be terminiated after birth. I did not keep track of how far that got.
Being spoken of something does not make it so.
Aaron speaks of Trump being good, but that does not make it so.
You speak of all sorts of things that are not so, and sometimes you laterclaim > not to have spoken them when you realize as much.
There were several years between Roe v Wade and now where the Democrats had both a President and majority in congress yet chose not to codify it into national law. That would have been a much better solution, if they wanted one, vs. a "spoken of" SCOTUS ruling.
| Sysop: | Zazz |
|---|---|
| Location: | Mesquite, Tx |
| Users: | 7 |
| Nodes: | 4 (0 / 4) |
| Uptime: | 09:57:26 |
| Calls: | 157 |
| Files: | 2,095 |
| Messages: | 145,077 |