Jump to content

Trump’s Comments on Kamala Harris About Pence Backfire Amid Online Mockery


Social Media

Recommended Posts

27 minutes ago, cjinchiangrai said:

He and his cronies said a lot more than that. The riot was clearly planned with the assistance of MAGA minions. He will be convicted in DC, in Florida and in Georgia, but New York gets his criminal ass first.

Yeah yeah, dream on

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, placeholder said:

According to you, all lefties follow it MSNBC and the guardian. That's 100%. So unlessyou got a link to back that number up, you might want to look a little bit closer to home for someone who has a problem computing percentages.

Go harrass somebody else with your nonsense. I don't care what you think.

  • Confused 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, luckymitchell said:

You are watching a different Trump to the rest of us then. He has done hours worth of interviews and speeches in the last month alone and not a sight of this downward trajectory.

But still plenty of visibility on his criminality.

  • Agree 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, rudi49jr said:


A much more important part of the job is not being a complete idiot, and having a handle on what you’re talking about, which Trump obviously doesn’t. Not lying through your teeth every time you open your mouth would also go a long way.

Well then she fails because she wont even do the easy part..answering questions.

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, paddypower said:

Trump hasn't had a real job, since his racist slum landlord Dad gave him a couple of hundred million and sent him on his way.

Neither has Kamala, since her corrupt Democratic machine lover gave her a job and a BMW and sent her on her way

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, RocketDog said:

I dislike Kim Jong Un and putin but I don't live in Korea or Russia.

Is that OK with you?

Do you go on Russian message Boards and trash Putin?

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, wwest5829 said:

jurist. noun. ju·rist ˈju̇r-ist. : an individual having a thorough knowledge of law.

Better check the usage, not the dictionary. But if you need to use a dictionary on the word, you arent an American

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

Better check the usage, not the dictionary. But if you need to use a dictionary on the word, you arent an American

Thanks for offering no evidence to support your claim. After all, who are we to trust? Experts on language or an anonymous member of aseanow.com?

  • Thumbs Up 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Thanks for offering no evidence to support your claim. After all, who are we to trust? Experts on language or an anonymous member of aseanow.com?

Dont need evidence when I have tons of Americans who use the term. Jurists here are judges, and if you think not, when the cop pulls you over ID yourself as a jurist because you read a book on law. Then you can meet a real jurist.

 

Americans dont call AGs jurists. Think what you want.

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

Dont need evidence when I have tons of Americans who use the term. Jurists here are judges, and if you think not, when the cop pulls you over ID yourself as a jurist because you read a book on law. Then you can meet a real jurist.

 

Americans dont call AGs jurists. Think what you want.

For a minute there, I thought you were going to introduce evidence and not just double down on your unsupported assertion. I should have known better.

Thank you self-appointed spokesman for speakers of American English everywhere.

Edited by placeholder
  • Thumbs Up 1
  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, placeholder said:

For a minute there, I thought you were going to introduce evidence and not just double down on your unsupported assertion. I should have known better.

Thank you self-appointed spokesman for speakers of American English everywhere.

Your welcome. Glad I can enlighten you. Try not to use "jurist" in a sentence that does not to refer to a Judge, it marks you as a falang.

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Yagoda said:

Your welcome. Glad I can enlighten you. Try not to use "jurist" in a sentence that does not to refer to a Judge, it marks you as a falang.

Another empty assertion. Are you familiar with the rules of this forum that require assertions of fact to be backed by a link to a credible source? Rational folk consider dictionaries to be such a source. 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Another empty assertion. Are you familiar with the rules of this forum that require assertions of fact to be backed by a link to a credible source? Rational folk consider dictionaries to be such a source. 

Well why dont you just complain, after all, stopping speech you dont like is what your lot does. Notice the Britishism there?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

Well why dont you just complain, after all, stopping speech you dont like is what your lot does. Notice the Britishism there?

I got news for you. This forum doesn't countenance unbridled free speech. And a good thing too. Otherwise, among other misfortunes,it would be overrun with people who make empty contrary to fact assertions citing themselves as authorities. There's a good reason the the rule stipulates links to credible sources. Your philological assertion would be better placed in the fiction forum.

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, placeholder said:

I got news for you. This forum doesn't countenance unbridled free speech. And a good thing too. Otherwise, among other misfortunes,it would be overrun with people who make empty contrary to fact assertions citing themselves as authorities. There's a good reason the the rule stipulates links to credible sources. Your philological assertion would be better placed in the fiction forum.

Well clearly it only allows free speech to the anti Trump crowd, thats pretty obvious

  • Confused 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

Well clearly it only allows free speech to the anti Trump crowd, thats pretty obvious

Not obvious to me who has occasionally experienced such censorship which is their right to exercise. And if they were to allow people such as yourself to make unsupported assertions repeatedly, these pages would be abandoned by sensible people. I suggest you publish your assertions in the Journal of Because I Said So.

  • Like 1
  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, placeholder said:

Not obvious to me who has occasionally experienced such censorship which is their right to exercise. And if they were to allow people such as yourself to make unsupported assertions repeatedly, these pages would be abandoned by sensible people. I suggest you publish your assertions in the Journal of Because I Said So.

Your pedantic overreaction to a correction based on American English usage seems a bit much, perhaps you need to engage in petty wars to satisfy some ego need.

 

But hey based on the dictionary Im an esteemed jurist, like Kamala Harris, except I didnt sleep with an elderly machine politician to further my career.

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...