Finally, a Trump supporter who admits they "fixed" the election.
At least temporarily. I wonder how many more lies he will spew and how long it will be until impeachment proceedings begin ...:cloud9:
The long nightmare has just begun: Inauguration of a fraud.
- Thread starter annabenedetti
- Start date
At least temporarily. I wonder how many more lies he will spew and how long it will be until impeachment proceedings begin ...:cloud9:
So you finally decided to stop talking to yourself...good move.
That's what I said when I lost my job down at the Frosty Treat.
lain: Except it was the FT, not the NSC. And it wasn't General McMaster, it was Bernard, the owner's son.
ClimateSanity
New member
?????? Not following youThat's what I said when I lost my job down at the Frosty Treat.
Except it was the FT, not the NSC. And it wasn't General McMaster, it was Bernard, the owner's son.
Sent from my XT1254 using TheologyOnline mobile app
I get that a lot.
Sometimes even people who do don't. And let me tell you, that can get pretty confusing. :think:
You know the market was priced in for Clinton to win and it would have been more smooth. If this happens, then we might enter a two year recession, or longer. The Trump appeal in this realm was the big corporate tax cuts and what that would mean to investors. There was also the tax roll-back on high incomes, yet the corporate tax would have been the big economic boost. Watch big bank stocks fall if this mess gets deeper.
If it gets that bad you are better off going to cash, then buying CDs, just forget about inflation!!
ClimateSanity
New member
Do you understand bannon was put there temporarily to get a specific job done? Your post didn't address that...only corny sarcasm. Hence the confusion.I get that a lot.
Sometimes even people who do don't. And let me tell you, that can get pretty confusing. :think:
Sent from my XT1254 using TheologyOnline mobile app
Seems like you need to make up your mind. First you say you didn't understand me. Now you're telling me what I did that you didn't understand.
So which time were you being dishonest. :e4e:
ClimateSanity
New member
I was unmasking your post...showing everyone that it was pure BS.
Sent from my XT1254 using TheologyOnline mobile app
ClimateSanity
New member
When you are doing your usual rhetorical dishonest word trickery, it requires a little playing dumb to expose it for what it is.
Sent from my XT1254 using TheologyOnline mobile app
Sent from my XT1254 using TheologyOnline mobile app
You thought that was masked?
lain:How do you imagine you did that?
So dishonest the first time (he says now) but in the service of a sneaky reveal...of a post that, so far, only he appears to find veiled.
Now to go back to a prior confusion on your part:
No, and neither do you. I don't recall ever reading or seeing anywhere that Bannon's position was meant to be temporary going in. Where did you read or hear it?
It did, but you didn't get it. So I suppose you were being honest without realizing it. Which is funnier.
CS finds "corny sarcasm" confusing.
It was neither tricky nor dishonest, which is why you'll declare it, but never illustrate either.
Well, tell me when you stop playing and get to the second bit.
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
Finally, a Trump supporter who admits they "fixed" the election.
wait - weren't all you whiny libs liberally whining about how the election was broken?
you'd think you'd be happy someone with some gumption and know-how (read: conservatives
) had stepped up to the plate and fixed itbut nooooo
just more whining
better get yerself a puppy and some playdough
ClimateSanity
New member
No, and neither do you. I don't recall ever reading or seeing anywhere that Bannon's position was meant to be temporary going in. Where did you read or hear it?....town
It was all over right wing media in print and radio, but since you are a MSM sycophant/ sheep, that info would never make contact with your consciousness.
Sent from my XT1254 using TheologyOnline mobile app
It was all over right wing media in print and radio, but since you are a MSM sycophant/ sheep, that info would never make contact with your consciousness.
Sent from my XT1254 using TheologyOnline mobile app
Meanwhile a lot of people on the right are all excited about the Gorsuch hearings and looking forward to a potential nuclear option (that they'll regret in time if they go to). I don't know why they're happy. Scalia wouldn't be.
Gorsuch is exactly what Trump promised to put before Congress, a strict constructionist. And that way leads to occasional madness, as it did in his dissent in the TransAm truck driver case that Al Franken publicly admonished him over, where Gorsuch's narrow insistence on letter didn't allow him to use his own God given common sense to see a problem in that literal a reading of the law on point.
The result was agreement by Gorsuch that a man should lose his job for doing what any reasonable human being would and should do.
Said Faith & Freedom Coalition leader Ralph Reed, "President Trump won 81 percent of the evangelical vote in no small measure because he made an ironclad pledge that if elected he would fill the vacancy on the US Supreme Court with a strict constructionist who would respect the Constitution and the rule of law, not legislate from the bench. We never doubted then-candidate Trump’s sincerity or commitment, and by nominating Judge Gorsuch, he has now kept that promise."
Gorsuch will likely fill Scalia's seat. And that's too bad, because the right can do better. It proved that with Scalia.
“No one should be a strict constructionist. That is stupid. Texts should not be interpreted strictly, they should be interpreted reasonably.” Antonin Scalia
Gorsuch is exactly what Trump promised to put before Congress, a strict constructionist. And that way leads to occasional madness, as it did in his dissent in the TransAm truck driver case that Al Franken publicly admonished him over, where Gorsuch's narrow insistence on letter didn't allow him to use his own God given common sense to see a problem in that literal a reading of the law on point.
The result was agreement by Gorsuch that a man should lose his job for doing what any reasonable human being would and should do.
Said Faith & Freedom Coalition leader Ralph Reed, "President Trump won 81 percent of the evangelical vote in no small measure because he made an ironclad pledge that if elected he would fill the vacancy on the US Supreme Court with a strict constructionist who would respect the Constitution and the rule of law, not legislate from the bench. We never doubted then-candidate Trump’s sincerity or commitment, and by nominating Judge Gorsuch, he has now kept that promise."
Gorsuch will likely fill Scalia's seat. And that's too bad, because the right can do better. It proved that with Scalia.
“No one should be a strict constructionist. That is stupid. Texts should not be interpreted strictly, they should be interpreted reasonably.” Antonin Scalia
ClimateSanity
New member
They should be interpreted with original intent and context. No decision should refer to a part of the Constitution without first fully understanding the portion of the Federalist papers that are applicable.
Sent from my XT1254 using TheologyOnline mobile app
Sent from my XT1254 using TheologyOnline mobile app
I don't recall ever reading or seeing anywhere that Bannon's position was meant to be temporary going in. Where did you read or hear it?....town
Quote and link to it being said by the administration at any time prior to Bannon assuming the seat. Should be easy for you and it would be edifying for those of us who don't recall seeing anything of the sort.
Well, no. I don't watch MSN. I think the last time I saw anything on that network was when Keith still had his show and I still had satellite. I look at a lot of different outlets for news, from the NY Times to the BBC and points in between.
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
:freak:
I guess the most frustrating thing about being a hard right winger must be how liberal most of the country has to look, given how broadly applied the term is by you guys, even covering anyone who isn't in lock step with everything else in your monochrome approach to ideological definition.
It does explain the victim/fear motivation and rhetoric that is otherwise inexplicable given the election cycle. It also explains RINOs and the ever present hard right paranoia in relation to the Republican party.
Anyway, what I said about the last election was that the EC having twice overturned the popular vote in fairly recent years, it might be time to take a look at doing away with it. I wasn't sure then (or now) that it wouldn't be more trouble than it's worth to attempt it and I doubt the rare and troubling exceptions will ever resemble the rule...and unlike some I never suggested the most recent election should be revisited for that or any other reason absent clear indication of large scale fraud, which only the current office holder believes was a real possibility.
I keep forgetting how you struggle with inference...and the literal. So I guess I mostly keep forgetting how you struggle. And by keep forgetting I mostly mean not caring about.you'd think you'd be happy someone with some gumption and know-how (read: conservatives
Thanks for the MSM correction of CS. I used it following the point and being so far removed from watching MSN. I know you just pounced on the wrong side of that with a smiley, but it was helpful anyway. And that's rare enough to warrant a nod.
So, to sum up the latest:
Bannon is out at the NSC and the spin is that he was always meant as a temporary appointment to help fix what had been operationalized.
CS said that the temporary nature of the appointment was common knowledge and not a face saving attempt and he should be providing links soon to those of us who, not getting news from right wing blogs and the like, missed Trump setting that out prior to Bannon taking the post.
Should be illuminating.
Meanwhile, Gorsuch is in route to an appointment, satisfying Trump's promise to put a strict constructionist in the spot once held by Antonin Scalia, who said of that legal philosophy:
“No one should be a strict constructionist. That is stupid. Texts should not be interpreted strictly, they should be interpreted reasonably.”
And so it goes.
Bannon is out at the NSC and the spin is that he was always meant as a temporary appointment to help fix what had been operationalized.
CS said that the temporary nature of the appointment was common knowledge and not a face saving attempt and he should be providing links soon to those of us who, not getting news from right wing blogs and the like, missed Trump setting that out prior to Bannon taking the post.
Should be illuminating.
Meanwhile, Gorsuch is in route to an appointment, satisfying Trump's promise to put a strict constructionist in the spot once held by Antonin Scalia, who said of that legal philosophy:
“No one should be a strict constructionist. That is stupid. Texts should not be interpreted strictly, they should be interpreted reasonably.”
And so it goes.