3 minutes ago, FritsSikkink said:

You don't responds because you don't know, just parroting Trump remarks.

There you go again, with fatuous remarks that add nothing to the conversation and are completely off topic.

I won't put you on ignore because we all need a laugh now and then.

36 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Sooooo, if it's minor issue that will not impact the trial very much why put her up there at all? Sounds like prosecution dirty tricks at work to me.

You seem unfamiliar with how prosecutors conduct trials.

32 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Baiting gets boring when it happens so much.

So I will ask you, since the other Trump fan couldn't answer:

 

What number of the 91 charges against Trump do you think are bogus?

36 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

 

 

I do try not to respond to baiting, so I will not be responding to that.

 

Because you cannot answer the question.

 

Your problem is that all you have are talking points supplied by the MAGA machine.

 

If there is no talking point available, you can't answer.

 

13 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

You seem unfamiliar with how prosecutors conduct trials.

Perhaps, not having been convicted of anything myself, but certainly seems like prosecution dirty tricks to me. I don't put anything too low or devious for lawyers to do.

I assume you know what is a good place for a bunch of lawyers? ( an old joke ).

12 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

Because you cannot answer the question.

 

Your problem is that all you have are talking points supplied by the MAGA machine.

 

If there is no talking point available, you can't answer.

 

There you go again with the baiting.

Yawn.

17 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

So I will ask you, since the other Trump fan couldn't answer:

 

What number of the 91 charges against Trump do you think are bogus?

You really should change the record. That one is almost worn out.

6 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Perhaps, not having been convicted of anything myself, but certainly seems like prosecution dirty tricks to me. I don't put anything too low or devious for lawyers to do.

I assume you know what is a good place for a bunch of lawyers? ( an old joke ).

Who do you think is representing Trump in court? Girl scouts?

4 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

You really should change the record. That one is almost worn out.

 

4 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

You really should change the record. That one is almost worn out.

Why do you not answer? It is not baiting, but you just troll from your alternative, I know all, universe.

22 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Perhaps, not having been convicted of anything myself, but certainly seems like prosecution dirty tricks to me. I don't put anything too low or devious for lawyers to do.

I assume you know what is a good place for a bunch of lawyers? ( an old joke ).

To explain, the job of a prosecutor is to lay out a case. This may entail interviewing witnesses on relatively minor points.

 

It seems when a prosecutor in a Trump trial simply does their job, you think its a dirty trick, whereas if a congressman declares an overwhelming case against Joe Biden, but never produces evidence, that's okay with you.

 

As the French say  "estandard duble" (or something).

Edited October 31, 20232 yr by Danderman123

20 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

You really should change the record. That one is almost worn out.

Not answering simple questions gets old fast.

1 hour ago, JonnyF said:

 

My side? The only place I have "a side" is in your head. 😃

 

It's interesting that when I criticize Biden I am called MAGA, a Trump fan etc. But when I criticize Trump nobody calls me a leftist, Biden supporting Liberal. I guess the Trump supporters on here are a lot more level headed...

Oh I dunno, but it might have something to do with the fact that you NEVER actually criticise Trump. Never. You say you do all the time but you never actually criticise him (including this post), prefering to come across as some sort of Switzerland in the debate when your actual posts tell a very different story.

Show us all a post (anything in the last 2 years will do) that shows you criticising Trump and I'll stand corrected.
 

Again, AN reverts to personal attacks. The question is simple - did he stop doing what he was told to stop, or did he carry on regardless?

It always amazes me how 'nasty' people who suffer from left wing delusions are, and yet they dont see it in themselves.

If any of them are 'listening' - allow me tell you something to prove that point.

At both funerals of Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan there were left wing protesters throwing abuse and things at their cavalcades.

Their hatred and abuse was unbelievable - it was totally 'inhuman' and a disgrace.

I have never seen right wing supporters do that - and they will not when Obama and Pelosi and Biden etc die.

 

Being left wing is OK - one of my best mates was left wing (RIP) - but there are many who have gone far too far.

As my mate said - they are doing nothing for the cause, if anything they are damaging it.

The liberal left wing media and woke organisations and the Politicians has caused this divide in people. 

But that is no excuse for the absolute vitriolic abuse that comes out of left wingers sometimes (especially when they lose).

Just look at all the protests after the Supreme Court overturned Wade Vs Roe - they hate losing and never accept it.

 

12 minutes ago, TroubleandGrumpy said:

It always amazes me how 'nasty' people who suffer from left wing delusions are, and yet they dont see it in themselves.

If any of them are 'listening' - allow me tell you something to prove that point.

At both funerals of Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan there were left wing protesters throwing abuse and things at their cavalcades.

Their hatred and abuse was unbelievable - it was totally 'inhuman' and a disgrace.

I have never seen right wing supporters do that - and they will not when Obama and Pelosi and Biden etc die.

 

Being left wing is OK - one of my best mates was left wing (RIP) - but there are many who have gone far too far.

As my mate said - they are doing nothing for the cause, if anything they are damaging it.

The liberal left wing media and woke organisations and the Politicians has caused this divide in people. 

But that is no excuse for the absolute vitriolic abuse that comes out of left wingers sometimes (especially when they lose).

Just look at all the protests after the Supreme Court overturned Wade Vs Roe - they hate losing and never accept it.

 

I have a hard time believing a word you just said.  But nevermind the past.  The modern day Republican party--particularly the MAGA wing--are some of the most vile, repulsive, dishonest, cruel, and ignorant Americans alive. 

Edited October 31, 20232 yr by Berkshire

2 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

There you go again, with fatuous remarks that add nothing to the conversation and are completely off topic.

I won't put you on ignore because we all need a laugh now and then.

Just answer the question which of the 91 indictments are wrong and give some facts why. Stop hiding with nothing burger answers.

1 hour ago, thaibeachlovers said:

You really should change the record. That one is almost worn out.

trolling

3 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Sooooo, if it's minor issue that will not impact the trial very much why put her up there at all? Sounds like prosecution dirty tricks at work to me.

Why has Trump involved her in his misdeeds? A decent father would not do that.

On 10/27/2023 at 3:21 PM, JonnyF said:

 

You shouldn't keep skipping your meds. 

 

 

I either criticize him or defend him, depending on the incident. Unlike you I have no obsession with the guy so I make my judgements based on his behaviour, not simply by the fact he is Trump. It's called objectivity, you should google it to find the meaning and then maybe give it a go. 

Most reveal who they are in time. You did when you posted that comment you found Trump, Entertaining.For all the sickness I read by MAGA, you say you find his action best describe in that term lets us all understand you.

Edited October 31, 20232 yr by earlinclaifornia

On 10/31/2023 at 6:20 PM, Danderman123 said:

To explain, the job of a prosecutor is to lay out a case. This may entail interviewing witnesses on relatively minor points.

 

It seems when a prosecutor in a Trump trial simply does their job, you think its a dirty trick, whereas if a congressman declares an overwhelming case against Joe Biden, but never produces evidence, that's okay with you.

 

As the French say  "estandard duble" (or something).

You'll need to quote a "congressman that declares an overwhelming case against Joe Biden" as I'm not aware of any such.

On 10/31/2023 at 7:35 PM, FritsSikkink said:

trolling

Yes you do.

On 10/31/2023 at 7:07 PM, Berkshire said:

I have a hard time believing a word you just said.  But nevermind the past.  The modern day Republican party--particularly the MAGA wing--are some of the most vile, repulsive, dishonest, cruel, and ignorant Americans alive. 

Add Democrat party and I'll agree with you.

On 10/31/2023 at 6:22 PM, Danderman123 said:

Not answering simple questions gets old fast.

As does asking questions that you know I'm not going to answer, because they are personal, off topic, abusive or baiting.

1 hour ago, thaibeachlovers said:

You'll need to quote a "congressman that declares an overwhelming case against Joe Biden" as I'm not aware of any such.

And given your penchant for putting members on IGNORE, even after I post this you probably still won't be.

 

One day after the bombshell reversal in Hunter Biden’s federal plea deal, a Republican congressman has provided an update on the GOP's efforts to pursue impeachment against President Joe Biden.

"The evidence is overwhelming, the nail's in the coffin" Rep. Tim Burchett, R-Tenn., said on "Mornings with Maria" Thursday.

https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/gop-lawmaker-biden-impeachment-evidence-overwhelming

Edited November 4, 20232 yr by placeholder

1 hour ago, thaibeachlovers said:

As does asking questions that you know I'm not going to answer, because they are personal, off topic, abusive or baiting.

There's also this. It's from a press release issued by the House Oversight and Accountability Committee chaired by Rep Comer

At today’s hearing on “The Basis for an Impeachment Inquiry of President Joseph R. Biden, Jr.,” House Committee on Oversight and Accountability Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.) detailed how overwhelming evidence shows President Joe Biden lied to the American people about his knowledge of and participation in his family’s corrupt international and domestic business schemes.

https://oversight.house.gov/release/comer-mountain-of-evidence-reveals-joe-biden-abused-his-public-office-for-his-familys-financial-gain/

3 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Yes you do.

Answer the question instead of trolling.

4 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

You'll need to quote a "congressman that declares an overwhelming case against Joe Biden" as I'm not aware of any such.

Comer: there’s ‘overwhelming evidence’ Biden’s involved in Hunter’s business dealings

4 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

Comer: there’s ‘overwhelming evidence’ Biden’s involved in Hunter’s business dealings

Actually, the one that absolutely literally provides a retort to his claim is this link:

https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/gop-lawmaker-biden-impeachment-evidence-overwhelming

 

15 hours ago, Danderman123 said:

Comer: there’s ‘overwhelming evidence’ Biden’s involved in Hunter’s business dealings

Thank you for that, but I was in error for not including your full sentence- ie I should have said "You'll need to quote a "congressman that declares an overwhelming case against Joe Biden without evidence as I'm not aware of any such." 

 

From your linked post, Comer has the evidence and he noted it.

16 hours ago, FritsSikkink said:

Answer the question instead of trolling.

Thank you for introducing some humour into the thread. Keep 'em coming.