|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
United States42744 Posts
Buck: "it never happened"
Washington Post: "we have a recording of it, would you like to revise that statement?"
Buck: "I misspoke, what I was trying to say is that it did happen but it's fine"
Do you think there's a certain point where they realize that they're just not very good at lying and stop?
|
Fuck, Evan McMullin was in the room when that discussion took place. And he went on the record? Are you kidding me? There is a recording? They are so fucked. Ryan is so fucked.
|
So that earlier statement I made about how Ryan is probably not complicit? yeah...
|
I won't belive that there's a recording until there is one but I'd say that this might be manufactured a while ago to give the establishment cover to dump trump. Wouldn't be surprised to see people have an ace up their ass for when it's time to just jump.
|
On May 18 2017 08:46 Gorsameth wrote: So that earlier statement I made about how Ryan is probably not complicit? yeah...
I don't see it as them being complicit. It's hearsay in the record given but at the most it's an admission of what they think is true that they didn't reveal either to not be sued for libel or to not influence the election that it was too late to line up someone else to win the presidency.
|
On May 18 2017 08:44 KwarK wrote: Buck: "it never happened"
Washington Post: "we have a recording of it, would you like to revise that statement?"
Buck: "I misspoke, what I was trying to say is that it did happen but it's fine"
Do you think there's a certain point where they realize that they're just not very good at lying and stop?
A: are you seeing another girl? B: uh no you're the only one A: are you sure because C told me that ya'll met on a dating app B: oh yeah we talked a bit A: she said ya'll went on a date B: just friends, promise A: oh but then she told me you took her home B: it was just to hang out A: but she said ya'll hooked up B: it was only once A: she said it was 5 times B: uh
|
On May 18 2017 08:53 ticklishmusic wrote:Show nested quote +On May 18 2017 08:44 KwarK wrote: Buck: "it never happened"
Washington Post: "we have a recording of it, would you like to revise that statement?"
Buck: "I misspoke, what I was trying to say is that it did happen but it's fine"
Do you think there's a certain point where they realize that they're just not very good at lying and stop? A: are you seeing another girl? B: uh no you're the only one A: are you sure because C told me that ya'll met on a dating app B: oh yeah we talked a bit A: she said ya'll went on a date B: just friends, promise A: oh but then she told me you took her home B: it was just to hang out A: but she said ya'll hooked up B: it was only once A: she said it was 5 times B: uh
B: You must be confusing me with the wrong guy or girl.
|
On May 18 2017 08:55 ShoCkeyy wrote:Show nested quote +On May 18 2017 08:53 ticklishmusic wrote:On May 18 2017 08:44 KwarK wrote: Buck: "it never happened"
Washington Post: "we have a recording of it, would you like to revise that statement?"
Buck: "I misspoke, what I was trying to say is that it did happen but it's fine"
Do you think there's a certain point where they realize that they're just not very good at lying and stop? A: are you seeing another girl? B: uh no you're the only one A: are you sure because C told me that ya'll met on a dating app B: oh yeah we talked a bit A: she said ya'll went on a date B: just friends, promise A: oh but then she told me you took her home B: it was just to hang out A: but she said ya'll hooked up B: it was only once A: she said it was 5 times B: uh B: You must be confusing me with the wrong guy or girl.
based on real life scenario where A and B were dating
but anyways, its an example of shit lying, not trying to turn this into the dating thread
|
So far today: Confirmed that Manafort and Flynn are now officially both under criminal investigation, former FBI director appointed special prosecutor, Ryan on tape talking about Russians paying Trump and Rorabacher (sp?).
This is going to get much bigger. I can't wait for the full reveal in several decades hence.
|
At the least, things have taken a major downturn for Trump in the past two weeks.
|
|
So is taking money/coordinating from/with a foreign power to gain a political advantage in an election illegal?
|
|
On May 18 2017 09:20 biology]major wrote: So is taking money/coordinating from/with a foreign power to gain a political advantage in an election illegal?
Yes.
Federal election rules prohibit candidates from taking donations from foreign sources. Any sources.
The Federal Election Campaign Act prohibits “any foreign national from contributing, donating, or spending funds in connection with any federal, state, or local election in the United States, either directly or indirectly. It is also unlawful to help foreign nationals violate that ban or to solicit, receive or accept contributions or donations from them.
That's not even including the hacking/leaking part etc, the money taking part alone is illegal.
|
On May 18 2017 09:20 biology]major wrote: So is taking money/coordinating from/with a foreign power to gain a political advantage in an election illegal? Super illegal. Boarderline treason.
|
On May 18 2017 08:44 KwarK wrote: Buck: "it never happened"
Washington Post: "we have a recording of it, would you like to revise that statement?"
Buck: "I misspoke, what I was trying to say is that it did happen but it's fine"
Do you think there's a certain point where they realize that they're just not very good at lying and stop? If they stopped lying then the justifications for a good 90% of their policies would fall to pieces.
Also :
|
Lord Turtle is displeased.
|
On May 18 2017 07:30 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On May 18 2017 07:23 Gorsameth wrote:On May 18 2017 07:19 Danglars wrote:On May 18 2017 06:53 Mohdoo wrote:On May 18 2017 06:48 Danglars wrote:On May 18 2017 06:34 Nevuk wrote:Former Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) is among the candidates President Trump is considering for FBI director, the White House said Wednesday. White House press secretary Sean Spicer said Trump is meeting in the afternoon with the ex-Connecticut senator and three other possible replacements for ousted FBI Director James Comey at the White House. Unlike past FBI directors, Lieberman has no experience as an FBI agent or as a federal judge or prosecutor. The Democrat-turned-Independent was Connecticut attorney general before being elected to the Senate in 1988. Lieberman endorsed Hillary Clinton in the 2016 presidential campaign. Trump is also meeting with acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe, former Oklahoma Gov. Frank Keating (R) and former FBI official Richard McFeely. Keating worked as an FBI special agent before entering politics. He also served as a U.S. attorney and top Justice Department official during the Reagan administration. The administration has been interviewing candidates in recent days to replace Comey amid continued fallout over the FBI chief's firing early last week.
thehill.com I don't think Lieberman is the right guy to tamp down on the leaks and restore some credibility in the department. I think the perspective that leaks are something that can be prevented through force or orders or anything of that nature, is very, very misguided. The only way to stop leaks is to remove people's motivation to leak. Nonsense. The motivation is political opposition, always has been. The administrative state is politicized and the incentive structure is perverse. Lawbreaking in this case has to actually be investigated and punished, otherwise it's a tacit admission that though you lose the White House, Democrats will never lose the fourth branch of government. It's becoming too much to expect civil servants to do their jobs in a Republican administration. Right, because the government is Democratic and has no Republicans. Or maybe the reason the government is a full of holes right now is because while Obama was hated by Republicans he was a competent politician and at least somewhat respected. Trump on the other hand is Trump. ps. It probably also helps that Obama (and his predecessors) were competent enough to not cause a major incident on a weekly basis. Remind me what percent in DC and close areas of Virginia voted Trump. It's full of holes because Trump ran against the Washington establishment and they're willing to fight dirty to get results. Obama was a nice little liberal and his politics agreed with the prevailing order, so the executive departments and agencies acted like they were employed to do their jobs. Trump, almost through no fault of his own, is revealing just how politically driven the fourth branch, courts, and media are.
Have you actually heard yourself talk? Do you realize how ridiculous you sound when you say things like this? Please try and rejoin us in the actual reality sometime.
User was warned for this post
|
On May 18 2017 09:20 biology]major wrote: So is taking money/coordinating from/with a foreign power to gain a political advantage in an election illegal?
Even if it wasn't, these are evil soviets we're talking about
+ Show Spoiler +In news unrelated to this thread, Brazil is now officially gonna go to shit, you heard it here first
|
On May 18 2017 09:54 Sbrubbles wrote:Show nested quote +On May 18 2017 09:20 biology]major wrote: So is taking money/coordinating from/with a foreign power to gain a political advantage in an election illegal? Even if it wasn't, these are evil soviets we're talking about + Show Spoiler +In news unrelated to this thread, Brazil is now officially gonna go to shit, you heard it here first
There's no "even if it wasn't", it is. Regardless of russia or not.
|
|
|
|