AUFAN78

1 minute ago, homersapien said:

If it's on the screen I read it.  If it's only in your mind, not so much.

 

Well, it's obviously on the thread, so it's a comprehension issue. Hard to argue. 

29 minutes ago, homersapien said:

You should try thinking for a change.

Ha! And you sir should try reading. 

14 minutes ago, homersapien said:

Sounds like a vicious circle.

I've often referred to the "mindless loop of stupidity" related to convos with you homey. 

2 minutes ago, homersapien said:

It's not the poo-flinging remarks that's at issue here, it's the actual poo-flinging.

I'm not worried about that which you find at issue here. I responded in kind to poo-flinging remarks. 

5 minutes ago, homersapien said:

Are you referring to a particular evasion or is all of them?

I'm referring to your intentional failure to read the thread and acknowledge the poo-flinging remarks to which I responded.

2 minutes ago, homersapien said:

There's nothing to read when you refuse to answer the question.

 

That you refuse to read and acknowledge the truth isn't my problem. 

4 minutes ago, homersapien said:

Nice combination of evasion with poo flinging.  You're quite talented.

Thank you, sir. I must admit, your failure to read makes it easy. 

4 minutes ago, aubiefifty said:

did you see the part where he turned to drugs because the church let him down? and agnostic does not believe he does not believe it means he is questioning things.

I'm not particularly interested in his excuses fidy. 

17 minutes ago, homersapien said:

Then, can you please quote the post to which you were "responding"?

It is a two-page thread homey. How hard can this possibly be for you? I'll help you further, eliminate page two as it contains only your drivel.

On 5/6/2024 at 8:16 AM, aubiefifty said:

For the record, McLaughlin was raised in Christianity and served as a missionary in college. He was later introduced to drugs and alcohol and became agnostic. 

2 minutes ago, homersapien said:

Nope.

(I would think a poo flinger would have better recognition of poo when they saw it.)

I responded to poo-flinging in kind. 

5 minutes ago, homersapien said:

Can you be more specific, as in naming them?

That would require a book. I'm not interested in writing a book. The 316 page Durham Report will suffice. I provided quotes for your convenience. Read them.

Just now, homersapien said:

No, actually, poo was flung prior to the charge of "poo flinger".

Go back and check.

I responded to poo. Go back and check.

13 minutes ago, homersapien said:

By whom?

Those who used them for political purposes.

11 minutes ago, homersapien said:

Not in this thread. 

Incorrect

On 5/7/2024 at 1:48 PM, auburnatl1 said:

This is the paradox that hurts my head. Could someone, anyone please explain the rationale for this to be possible.

https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2024/05/07/stormy-daniels-donald-trump-evangelical-appeal-00156488

That was one weird article/interview. I'm not saying this type of stuff isn't happening, but I cannot relate. 

18 minutes ago, homersapien said:

No, those weren't "lies", those were cited as possible evidence/proof  and/or suspicions that sparked the investigation.

Who claimed actual knowledge they were authentic?

You just want to apply the word "lie" to the whole affair as if it were totally bogus.  Never mind what the investigation actually uncovered - Russia did help Trump, they did talk to the Trump campaign, Trump did commit obstruction.  

And I predict we haven't heard the last of the Trump/Russia relationship, which extends beyond the 2016 campaign.

They were deceitful lies. 

7 minutes ago, homersapien said:

Perhaps he understands Trump far better than Ryan does and is making a safer vote for the sake of the country.

Prototypical oxymoron

5 minutes ago, homersapien said:

No, I meant you.  You ultimately resort to insults and name calling. Invariably.

I responded to insults and name-calling in kind.

47 minutes ago, homersapien said:

Paul Ryan said he won't voter for Trump and will write in a Republican candidate.

An example of having a spine, not a brain fart. Duncan should pay attention. 

3 minutes ago, homersapien said:

You and I both know there was no point other than trying to imply Fox is no different than everyone else - regardless of scale and substance - which is patently absurd.

It amazes me how quickly the contents of a single thread escape you. 

6 minutes ago, homersapien said:

For poo-flingers maybe...

Like New Republic and Salon? Yes, on that we agree.

Just now, homersapien said:

Yeah, that's what I figured.  It was a mindless post with no point.

No homey, it is you already forgot the point made. 

8 minutes ago, homersapien said:

I certainly never have, and would not think of, disputing that.

Now, what was your point again?

4:45 cocktails?

17 minutes ago, homersapien said:

Specifically, what were the "lies" of Russia, Russia, Russia?

 

Russian collusion, Crossfire Hurricane, the Steel Dossier. All garbage. 

After four years, we finally have the full 316-page report from Justice Department special counsel John Durham, and it’s a damning indictment of some of our country’s leading institutions. 

Durham said the FBI should have never launched an investigation into alleged Russian collusion with Donald Trump’s 2016 campaign, given the slim evidence. 

urham slammed the FBI’s investigation – dubbed Crossfire Hurricane – into the Trump campaign for its “serious lack of analytic rigor” and a “cavalier attitude” for accuracy. 

“...We conclude that the Department and the FBI failed to uphold their important mission of strict fidelity to the law in connection with certain events and activities described in this report,” Durham wrote.

For its part, the FBI does not dispute the report’s findings, but says it has already taken action and added safeguards in its investigations.

Durham also called out the role of the (now-discredited) Steele dossier, the opposition research gathered for the Hillary Clinton campaign that was in turn given to the FBI. Durham said the dossier was “unvetted and unverified,” yet was used as justification for surveillance. 

“Indeed, based on the evidence gathered in multiple exhaustive and costly federal investigations of these matters, including the instant investigation, neither U.S. law enforcement nor the Intelligence Community appears to have possessed any actual evidence of collusion in their holdings at the commencement of the Crossfire Hurricane investigation," the report stated.

As Durham details, the FBI fumbled the “collusion” investigation. But mainstream media outlets also deserve blame for breathlessly going along with the Trump-Russia allegations.