Become a part of one of the fastest growing adult communities online. We have something for you, whether you’re a male member seeking out new friends or a new lady on the scene looking to take advantage of our many opportunities to network, make new friends, or connect with people. Join today & take part in lively discussions, take advantage of all the great features that attract hundreds of new daily members!
Exactly what the fuck I thought. All bark no bite, typical conservative.
If Asshole gets reelected I will leave the forum for good. If he loses (which he will) you must do the same. How bout it??
Why would I trust a libtard like you Lil Twerp? I won the bet last time with Asswipe and Iva Biggen. They both came back with other handles. Here’s the bet, if I lose I’ll leave for three months. If you lose you stay and continue to make an ass out of yourself.
Ben Rhodes wrote the Benghazi talking points memo that Susan Rice used to lie to the American people on the Sunday morning talk-show circuit on every channel of the lame-stream media.
Ben Rhodes bragged about how easy it was to create an "echo chamber" and lead lib-retards in the direction he wanted them to go. Gruber bragged about that too, as he called lib-retard voters stupid and gullible.
Ben Rhodes now works for NBC and MSNBC where he's still feeding dim-retards misinformation and leading these dim-retard minions by the rings in their noses.
I rarely agree with you, but you gave a coherent answer here, to a question directed at Waco, who flips off anything that is remotely challenging. at least you are passionate about your positions, and can expound on occasion.
I will say, though, the Republicans have out talking-pointed the Democrats today. I have never seen a group of people so in line with the same rhetoric.
I rarely agree with you, but you gave a coherent answer here, to a question directed at Waco, who flips off anything that is remotely challenging. at least you are passionate about your positions, and can expound on occasion.
I will say, though, the Republicans have out talking-pointed the Democrats today. I have never seen a group of people so in line with the same rhetoric.
you mean this hot mess of a convoluted question? why bother? you'd claim the answer is "factually incorrect" or not reply at all.
you are King Chung the non-answering poster. why don't you at least explain your ridiculous claim of 100 million people ganging up on Trumpy? that should be interesting, yeah?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chung Tran
you are most welcome, Wakko Kid!
I want a yes or no answer to this question.. nothing more or less.
do you think there is a mass conspiracy orchestration, consisting of media, Democrats, and other "haters", to completely bring down the Trump Presidency, punctuated by refusal to acknowledge truths (such as the Steele Dossier account), and a continuous attack on anything Trump?
if you answer "yes", follow it up with a coherent response to this question.. how did 100 million people (or more) decide all at once, to gang up on Trump, systematically ignoring certain facts, while all climb aboard to foment attacks, ranging from the Kavanaugh Hearings, to a Russian conspiracy, to a phony quid pro quo Ukrainian impeachment move. if the scope of such a conspiracy is real, it is unprecedented in the history of Man. really, how are so many "Trump haters" so aligned with one another? how could it happen so organically? or did it?
you mean this hot mess of a convoluted question? why bother? you'd claim the answer is "factually incorrect" or not reply at all.
you are King Chung the non-answering poster. why don't you at least explain your ridiculous claim of 100 million people ganging up on Trumpy? that should be interesting, yeah?
do you think it is fewer? I threw out 100 million as a guess. you guys seem to think ALL the media, all the "lefties", etc., have conspired to destroy Trump, since the day he was sworn in.
I'll go along with much fewer if you like.. say, 25? my point is you are nuts over-thinking the gravity of a anti-Trump conspiracy.
do you think it is fewer? I threw out 100 million as a guess. you guys seem to think ALL the media, all the "lefties", etc., have conspired to destroy Trump, since the day he was sworn in.
I'll go along with much fewer if you like.. say, 25? my point is you are nuts over-thinking the gravity of a anti-Trump conspiracy.
you wouldn't make much of a spy. the less in on it the better. 25 million is still a beyond ridiculous number. it only take a few in the media to push an agenda. do you think the media in general is not biased against Trump?
perhaps you aren't interested in videos about media bias .. doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
just watch a few minutes .. your attention span can handle that yeah?
of course it exists, and has for many years. on the right, too.
but just because a lot of people want to destroy Trump, doesn't mean he hasn't given them plenty of fuel to do so. like "the Whistleblower".. who cares if he's a never-Trumper, or whatever? many people have given accounts that offer credulity to his.
of course it exists, and has for many years. on the right, too.
but just because a lot of people want to destroy Trump, doesn't mean he hasn't given them plenty of fuel to do so. like "the Whistleblower".. who cares if he's a never-Trumper, or whatever? many people have given accounts that offer credulity to his.
have they? we don't know yet because the Democrats have controlled the narrative so far. why do you think all the leaks from the closed door sessions have tended to be negative? certainly even you don't think the Republicans are leaking this crap do ya? the Democrats are. this is nothing more than a publicity stunt. why Nancy Pants might not even call for a vote at all.
and then there is the Senate that Nancy Pants and Schitthead Schiff can't control. that will be interesting do ya think?
have they? we don't know yet because the Democrats have controlled the narrative so far. why do you think all the leaks from the closed door sessions have tended to be negative? certainly even you don't think the Republicans are leaking this crap do ya? the Democrats are. this is nothing more than a publicity stunt. why Nancy Pants might not even call for a vote at all.
and then there is the Senate that Nancy Pants and Schitthead Schiff can't control. that will be interesting do ya think?
I already have posted that Nancy might not call for a vote.. and maybe it's a good idea if she doesn't. because it will NOT be interesting in the Senate.. if won't be anything. therefore why bother impeaching? Nancy is better off with slow, continuous leaks. that only works for another week or so. the public hearings and full transcripts (coming soon, to a theater near you!) will be better ammunition.
I already have posted that Nancy might not call for a vote.. and maybe it's a good idea if she doesn't. because it will NOT be interesting in the Senate.. if won't be anything. therefore why bother impeaching? Nancy is better off with slow, continuous leaks. that only works for another week or so. the public hearings and full transcripts (coming soon, to a theater near you!) will be better ammunition.
so you agree this is nothing more than a democratic political stunt designed to influence the 2020 election. Got it!
so you agree this is nothing more than a democratic political stunt designed to influence the 2020 election. Got it!
thank you valued poster!
of course it is. but that doesn't make it false. the Democrats have wanted Trump out from day one, duh? your team thinks that disqualifies the Impeachment process. it does not. Trump's action was designed to influence the 2020 election, too. Duh? both parties try to influence the next election constantly, always have.. duh?
your "thank you valued poster" schtick is past its humor stage, you need better Writers.
of course it is. but that doesn't make it false. the Democrats have wanted Trump out from day one, duh? your team thinks that disqualifies the Impeachment process. it does not. Trump's action was designed to influence the 2020 election, too. Duh? both parties try to influence the next election constantly, always have.. duh?
your "thank you valued poster" schtick is past its humor stage, you need better Writers.
so Democrats who who use their office to enrich themselves and their children in violation of law get a free pass, according to Chung Tran, eccie law professor. ok, got it!
so Democrats who who use their office to enrich themselves and their children in violation of law get a free pass, according to Chung Tran, eccie law professor. ok, got it!
as long as their children get the money, not the politicians... It look bad, and its legal. that should be changed.
