October of 1962 was an amazing month...
James Bond movies debuted
Johnny Carson started on the Tonight Show.
We discover Russian missiles in Cuba.
And I was born...
Racmanaz wrote:
Lol olol yeah if the Democrats lose it's always voter suppression or illegal gerrymanding. But when the Republicans lose it was all fair and square nothing illegal no suppression. LOL you Democrats are real loonies.
Well, the Democrats have a very long history of winning lawsuits about gerrymandering and vote suppression, while the GOP has a long history of LOSING lawsuits about alleged voter fraud.
Racmanaz wrote:
Nope Many would be right about you guys on the left. You on the left always think you're right about everything and this election will prove that you're wrong when you guys get slaughtered at the polls.
The election will say nothing about who is "correct" --- If the GOP wins big, it'll just be the effects of their (illegal) gerrymandering, and voter suppression.
Racmanaz wrote:
That's funny, many can say the same thing about you and other lefties.
Also, it's "That's Funny. Many can say..."
And I have no idea what you're trying to say here: "You left these always think you're right"
For a person calling everyone else "illiterate", you really should check your own writing.
Racmanaz wrote:
That's funny, many can say the same thing about you and other lefties.
Well, many COULD say it, but they would be wrong. Lefties prefer to look over the entire landscape of the situation, rather than fixating on one picayune detail. But, since that's all you've got, you have to.
Racmanaz wrote:
See there you so deflecting. You left these always think you're right when you're mostly wrong. You're wrong on this issue.
No. He was pointing out that YOU were deflecting.
Racmanaz wrote:
Nope, you are wrong as you usually are. The intent was to find the origin of the Russia probe. The intent was not to convict anybody and DIDN'T start-up as a criminal investigation.
(sigh)... And we were getting so close. I repeat.... "We -->AGREED<-- that the Durham investigation's intent was to find impropriety in the origin of the Trump-Russia investigation." (Do you recall writing "That's what I just said minus the word "impropriety" which was basically implied anyways" ?)
As a matter of record, Durham was charged with helping to evaluate “whether the government’s intelligence-gathering efforts in the early stages of the probe were legal and appropriate.”
A QR Code holds a block of text. The most common format can hold about 50 characters, but a more dense layout can hold up to 4K. Usually, this is used for a web URL, with your phone's camera recognizing it, and offering a "Click here" to go there button.
However, it can hold other things. Formats are defined contacts and calendar events among other things.
Racmanaz wrote:
Are you that illiterate?? I really don't care about the convictions I care about the intent of Durham's investigation and what it found out and it was successful in what it found.
No. We agreed that the Durham investigation's intent was to find impropriety in the origin of the Trump-Russia investigation. It found none. It failed.
Racmanaz wrote:
Have you ever noticed that those on the right that have lied to Congress or FBI are indicted and convicted but the ones on the left that have lied to the FBI or congress get away with it.
That's because the ones on the right ACTUALLY lied to Congress/FBI, while those on the left didn't, despite wild (and slanderous) accusations by those on the right.
Racmanaz wrote:
If someone is found not guilty then they're not guilty.
True enough, but Trump was never FOUND "Not Guilt".
And again, there's a rather hefty book of "evidence". Bob Barr claimed it wasn't enough to indict his boss, so he refused to, so we'll never know if it really was or not.
Racmanaz wrote:
In fact the molar investigation proved that Trump did not collude with Russia as a matter of fact Mueller said not one American was found to collude with Russia. So if not one American that includes Trump.
Mueller never said that. He, in fact, said, "while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him."
In other words, there is a massive amount of evidence that he did and nothing to prove he didn't. There was just insufficient evidence to prove it conclusively (due to the illegal stonewalling by Trump & Co).
There is a very significant difference between "insufficient evidence to prove it conclusively" and "proved that someone did not do it". (Ask OJ Simpson)
Racmanaz wrote:
Looks like you're intellectually challenged and disingenuous and a liar. You're claiming that Trump hired an attorney general that kisses his butt?
Absolutely. Barr wrote an article about the absolute power of the presidency. Many consider it an audition to be Attorney General. Two weeks later, Trump appointed him. Up until the point when Trump lost the election, Barr did everything Trump wanted. (After Trump lost, Barr realized that Trump was of no value anymore, and actually started to tell the truth).
Racmanaz wrote:
Lol That's what I just said minus the word "impropriety" which was basically implied anyways. And no you're wrong as usual it did not fail it actually succeeded the liar. You know what really failed?? Here is one headline..."Mueller finds no collusion with Russia.."
Obviously, it was not "implied" (I wanted to write "IMPROPRIETY" in all caps, but I was on my phone), because that word makes all the difference. And it's why Durham failed miserably. He claimed three minor offenses from three bit players -- and TWO of them were found innocent! In the end, he found the Mueller Investigation was completely properly handled.
And Mueller never said he found no collusion with Russia. He said that, due to so many people in Trump's Administration who lied or obstructed Justice (several of whom went to prison for it), it was impossible to know exactly what happened.
davidrb wrote:
Biden wants to go the other way and eliminate weekends! His empty-headed thoughts are since nobody works on weekends we need to eliminate the debts we accrue then! Eliminate the days-we-pay and the debts disappear! Brilliant Jo will now demand the Nobel Prize for Economics and declare himself Emperor-Pro-Quid of the Universe! And the world thought Hilary was a ball-buster???
I would say Conservatives aren't very good at humor, but I already did that once in this thread. (still true)