Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1KIKI:
What mental tick are you exercising with this post? ^^^

---

Quote:

---

You know, if you read my book — there was a book just before the World Trade Center came down. And I don’t get any credit for this, but that’s okay. I never do. But here we are. I wrote a book — a, really, very successful book. And in that book, about a year before the World Trade Center was blown up, I said, “There is somebody named Osama bin Laden. You better kill him or take him out.” Something to that effect. ”He’s big trouble.”

...

Nobody ever heard of. I mean, al-Baghdadi everybody hears because he’s built this monster for a long time. But nobody ever heard of Osama bin Laden until, really, the World Trade Center. But about a year — you’ll have to check — a year, year and a half before the World Trade Center came down, the book came out. I was talking about Osama bin Laden. I said, “You have to kill him. You have to take him out.” Nobody listened to me.

And to this day, I get people coming up to me, and they said, “You know what one of the most amazing things I’ve ever seen about you? Is that you predicted that Osama bin Laden had to be killed before he knocked down the World Trade Center.” It’s true. Now, most of the press doesn’t want to write that, but you know — but it is true. If you go back, look at my book. I think it was “The America We Deserve.” I made a prediction, and I — let’s put it this way: If they would have listened to me, a lot of things would have been different.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1KIKI:
Is this post ^^^^ part of any real discussion, SLOPPY, or just more of your trolling? (Or did you just answer that you're merely exercising a mental tick here and not discussing, because, yanno, you are a troll, and it's not just what you do.)


So, what mental tick are you exercising with your post?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1KIKI:

Is this post ^^^^ part of any real discussion, SLOPPY, or just more of your trolling? (YANNO, "What mental tick are you exercising with this post?" "That I am going to miss the huge turds dropped by Trump on TV.")


So, what mental tick are you exercising with your post?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1KIKI:
How about mustard, ketchup, hot sauce, sriracha and the like? When I'm looking for a quick meal I just grab some plain-cooked meat and throw some of that on top.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:
Is Trump too stupid to be impeached? What he said about Syrian oil on Sunday:

“What I intend to do, perhaps, is make a deal with an ExxonMobil or one of our great companies to go in there and do it properly ... and spread out the wealth,” Trump said during a news conference about the U.S. special forces operation that led to the death of Islamic State leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi.

Exxon Mobil Corp and Chevron Corp, the two largest U.S. oil companies operating in the Middle East, declined to comment on his remarks. They knew Trump was running his mouth without engaging his brain.

“International law seeks to protect against exactly this sort of exploitation,” said Laurie Blank, an Emory Law School professor and director of its Center for International and Comparative Law. The professor knew Trump is stupid.

“It is not only a dubious legal move, it sends a message to the whole region and the world that America wants to steal the oil,” said Bruce Riedel, a former national security advisor and now senior fellow at the Brookings Institution think-tank. The advisor knew Trump is stupid.

“The idea that the United States would ‘keep the oil’ in the hands of ExxonMobil or some other U.S. company is immoral and possibly illegal,” said Jeff Colgan, an associate professor of political science and international studies at Brown University. The professor knew Trump was immoral and stupid. But that is no reason to impeach Trump -- if you are a Trump lover.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1KIKI:

Is this post ^^^^ part of any real discussion, SLOPPY, or just more of your trolling? (YANNO, "What mental tick are you exercising with this post?" "That I am going to miss the huge turds dropped by Trump on TV.")


So, what mental tick are you exercising with your post?

The insane never-Trumpers will be driven even more insane in the wash/rinse/spin/repeat/ cycle they mistake for reality.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Trump Wants Impeachment Defense Based on Substance, Not Process

President Trump said he has encouraged his Republican allies to defend him on the substance of the impeachment probe, instead of focusing on criticizing the process, ahead of another week of scheduled testimony from administration officials.

Doesn’t Trump realize that the reason his allies are whining about process is because they have no defense to offer on substance? Maybe not. Maybe Trump is so delusional he actually believes that there’s some substantive defense of extorting a foreign country to smear a political rival.

Luckily for him, the rest of the Republican Party is smarter. They’ll stick to carping about the unfairness of the hearings and, in a pinch, claiming that Trump’s extortion of Ukraine is just a minor slap-on-the-wrist kind of thing, certainly nowhere near an impeachable offense.

How long will this work? Forever, if the Republican Party is shameless. We’ll see if it is.

www.wsj.com/articles/trump-wants-impeachment-defense-based-on-substanc
e-not-process-11572275094

---

It's sad SECOND how you post updated information on what's being reported on by the media, and get nothing but insults and derogatory remarks made about you by jack kiki and sig.

They never contradict what you post by posting an intelligent response back. No, it's just insults, lies and propaganda conspiracies' they offer up as their alternative to the facts.

T

Quote:

---

Originally posted by THG:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Trump Wants Impeachment Defense Based on Substance, Not Process

President Trump said he has encouraged his Republican allies to defend him on the substance of the impeachment probe, instead of focusing on criticizing the process, ahead of another week of scheduled testimony from administration officials.

Doesn’t Trump realize that the reason his allies are whining about process is because they have no defense to offer on substance? Maybe not. Maybe Trump is so delusional he actually believes that there’s some substantive defense of extorting a foreign country to smear a political rival.

Luckily for him, the rest of the Republican Party is smarter. They’ll stick to carping about the unfairness of the hearings and, in a pinch, claiming that Trump’s extortion of Ukraine is just a minor slap-on-the-wrist kind of thing, certainly nowhere near an impeachable offense.

How long will this work? Forever, if the Republican Party is shameless. We’ll see if it is.

www.wsj.com/articles/trump-wants-impeachment-defense-based-on-substanc
e-not-process-11572275094

---

It's sad SECOND how you post updated information on what's being reported on by the media, and get nothing but insults and derogatory remarks made about you by jack kiki and sig.

They never contradict what you post by posting an intelligent response back. No, it's just insults, lies and propaganda conspiracies' they offer up as their alternative to the facts.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

lol Facts, huh?

Like all of those facts that Trump was supposed to be impeached every day for the last 3 years?

---

Stupid people are always stupid. There is no reprieve. Ok dummy, I started a countdown clock. Do you know what a countdown implies? It means somethings going to happen when the clock winds down to zero moron.

And dick weed. In about a month or so he is going to be impeached by the house. My prediction about this is coming to fruition. He won't even finish his first term before it happens.

Fact asshole. Spin it any way you like. We all know it's bullshit spin and you're doing so because you're a racist like your hero.

T

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by THG:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Trump Wants Impeachment Defense Based on Substance, Not Process

President Trump said he has encouraged his Republican allies to defend him on the substance of the impeachment probe, instead of focusing on criticizing the process, ahead of another week of scheduled testimony from administration officials.

Doesn’t Trump realize that the reason his allies are whining about process is because they have no defense to offer on substance? Maybe not. Maybe Trump is so delusional he actually believes that there’s some substantive defense of extorting a foreign country to smear a political rival.

Luckily for him, the rest of the Republican Party is smarter. They’ll stick to carping about the unfairness of the hearings and, in a pinch, claiming that Trump’s extortion of Ukraine is just a minor slap-on-the-wrist kind of thing, certainly nowhere near an impeachable offense.

How long will this work? Forever, if the Republican Party is shameless. We’ll see if it is.

www.wsj.com/articles/trump-wants-impeachment-defense-based-on-substanc
e-not-process-11572275094

---

It's sad SECOND how you post updated information on what's being reported on by the media, and get nothing but insults and derogatory remarks made about you by jack kiki and sig.

They never contradict what you post by posting an intelligent response back. No, it's just insults, lies and propaganda conspiracies' they offer up as their alternative to the facts.

---

Did you ever hear of the My Lai Massacre? www.history.com/topics/vietnam-war/my-lai-massacre-1

500 murdered. Only one guy convicted, after a Republican party orchestrated cover-up, but very soon the one guy was paroled. Republican politicians and, especially Republican voters, expressed their extreme disapproval of the Democrats for even looking into these 500 blatantly obvious murders.

Now the GOP is protecting Trump like it protected the guilty at My Lai. Trump has not machine-gunned women and children before witnesses, and there are no photos of what Trump did, so the shameless Republicans will pretend there is nothing to discuss and that everything is the fault of Democrats.

Later investigations have revealed that the slaughter at My Lai was not an isolated incident. There were many more, but nobody was punished. The GOP made sure of that.

---

A dark chapter in our past second. The democrats have a lot to answer for but the republicans, the republicans take the cake. They always preach family values and god the loudest, yet practice them in their own lives the least.

T

Quote:

---

Originally posted by THG:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

lol Facts, huh?

Like all of those facts that Trump was supposed to be impeached every day for the last 3 years?

---

Stupid people are always stupid. There is no reprieve. Ok dummy, I started a countdown clock. Do you know what a countdown implies? It means somethings going to happen when the clock winds down to zero moron.

And dick weed. In about a month or so he is going to be impeached by the house. My prediction about this is coming to fruition. He won't even finish his first term before it happens.

Fact asshole. Spin it any way you like. We all know it's bullshit spin and you're doing so because you're a racist like your hero.

T

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by THG:
A dark chapter in our past second. The democrats have a lot to answer for but the republicans, the republicans take the cake. They always preach family values and god the loudest, yet practice them in their own lives the least.

T

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by THG:
Shifting Course, Democrats Plan First Floor Vote on Impeachment Inquiry

Breaking News Update: The House plans to take its first formal vote Thursday on the impeachment inquiry into President Trump, Democratic leaders said Monday, ushering in a new phase as they prepare to go public with their investigation into his dealings with Ukraine.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/shifting-course-democrats-plan
-first-floor-vote-on-impeachment-inquiry/ar-AAJugj3?ocid=spartandhp


tick tock jack, it's looking true to me moron.

T

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JO753:
"The House is expected to vote Thursday on a Democratic resolution that will lay out the next steps in the impeachment inquiry, according to a senior congressional source.

The measure — whose language has not yet been released — is expected to detail procedures going forward in the investigation, not to formalize it."

In other wordz, they are blowing it. It alredy went stale, now they are working on a museum exibit.

They need to woc a sezon uv 24 to get an idea uv how to factor in pase!
Make thingz happen wen it still counts!

----------------------------
DUZ XaT SEM RiT TQ YQ? - Jubal Early

http://www.7532020.com .

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by CAPTAINCRUNCH:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

You do, huh? Got some old Russian buddies you keep in regular contact with there?

---

Your mom for one.


T

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1KIKI:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by THG:
A dark chapter in our past second. The democrats have a lot to answer for but the republicans, the republicans take the cake. They always preach family values and god the loudest, yet practice them in their own lives the least.

T

---

And yet, My Lai happened March 16, 1968 and Lyndon Johnson was president.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:
Trump must remove his thumb from the scale of military justice

Officials who have watched Trump’s vigorous backing of former Special Operations Chief Edward Gallagher — an officer charged with shooting civilians and murdering a captured Islamic State fighter — thought twice about plans to punish him for misconduct revealed during his court-martial, including rampant drug use and theft.

Given Trump’s vocal championing of Gallagher, who was subsequently acquitted of murder but found guilty and demoted over a lesser charge, Navy leaders are afraid the SEAL chief is untouchable. Trump had already spoken of pardoning him and ordered the withdrawal of military awards for the Navy attorneys who led the unsuccessful prosecution.

This goes beyond unlawful command influence and brings up another military term the president ignores at our peril: command responsibility.

The President is responsible for ensuring that troops follow the law of armed conflict, as well as holding them accountable if they don’t. This is essential for high morale and upholding the honor of military service.

Our military supremacy doesn’t simply depend on us having the most firepower, it comes from us taking our values into battle. This is lost on President Trump, who seems to reduce war to its most basic element of one side killing another — of carnage with no regard for morality.

More at www.houstonchronicle.com/opinion/editorials/article/Trump-must-remove-
his-thumb-from-the-scale-of-14569192.php

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

---

Quote:

---

“Why are people that I never even heard of testifying about the call,” Trump tweeted. “Just READ THE CALL TRANSCRIPT AND THE IMPEACHMENT HOAX IS OVER! Ukrain said NO PRESSURE.”

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Mueller "investigation"?

Kavanaugh hearing?

How did those turn out?

Didn't you learn ANYTHING?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Mueller "investigation"?

Kavanaugh hearing?

How did those turn out?

Didn't you learn ANYTHING?

---

This is a real question, and it's an important one.
WHAT HAPPENED?

You were breathing flames over "collusion" and "kompromat" that you were SO SURE existed. Did real-time hostile spying on the Trump campaign fail to turn up solid, legally-admissible, court-worthy evidence? Or was it Mueller's hostile after-the-fact investigations that went horribly awry? Was the media biased against you? Did Trump destroy evidence? Does he have too many powerful Republican friends who had influence over the spying and/orthe investigations? What should have been done that was left undone?

Whatever happened to all of the testimony against Kavanaugh? Was it time-pressure derailed any follow-up investigation Did anyone follow up on the testimony to see if more evidence of wrongdoing was found after-the-fact?

Or were the original premises WRONG, on the basis of all of the evidence that could be gathered? Were the accusations fundamentally baseless... and the press fundametnally dishonest ... or perhaps mis-directed? Instead of accusing Trump of "collusion" with Russians, for example, might it have been more realistic to accuse Trump of simply being unfit for the job? Or more honest to say that you disagreed with his policies?

Seriously, this was a learning opportunity that should have been too good to pass up. it would be a shame if you did't learn anything from it.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by THG:
I just spoke with a representative of a US Senator running for president. I suggested that if the republicans vote not to impeach Trump, it may have to go to the courts.

Why, because what Trump did is specifically mentioned in the constitution as being against the law. And if the evidence of Trumps guilt is overwhelming, then by virtue of their vote the Senate would be changing the constitution. For that you need a two thirds majority.

This would also apply to violations of the emolument's clause. Haven't thought about this long enough to see if it applies elsewhere but it may be the way forward.

tick tock donnie

---

Ok, I just called Adam Shiff and Pelosi. Enough, I just want this idea to be heard by one of them. May be gibberish but you never know.

T

Quote:

---

Originally posted by THG:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by THG:
I just spoke with a representative of a US Senator running for president. I suggested that if the republicans vote not to impeach Trump, it may have to go to the courts.

Why, because what Trump did is specifically mentioned in the constitution as being against the law. And if the evidence of Trumps guilt is overwhelming, then by virtue of their vote the Senate would be changing the constitution. For that you need a two thirds majority.

This would also apply to violations of the emolument's clause. Haven't thought about this long enough to see if it applies elsewhere but it may be the way forward.

tick tock donnie

---

Ok, I just called Adam Shiff and Pelosi. Enough, I just want this idea to be heard by one of them. May be gibberish but you never know.

---