$130,000

Your Virginia Tech Politics and Religion source
Forum rules
Be Civil. Go Hokies.
Post Reply
Once
Posts: 856
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 3:48 pm
Location: San Diego, Ca

Re: $130,000

Post by Once »

cwtcr hokie wrote:
Once wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
Once wrote:
cwtcr hokie wrote:
Once wrote:Oh who cares? Is anyone here really surprised? Trump is a scumbag. So is his lawyer. His wife isn’t dumb as a rock so she entered into this transactional relationship knowing what she was getting. He isn’t good looking or particularly fascinating in any way. She didn’t marry him because he’s sensitive or writes poetry. I don’t feel sympathetic at all.

The only thing I find repulsive here is the lies. Just own it. We all know he and his cronies are lying. His base doesn’t care, so why? Does he really think we’re all so effing stupid?

Yes, Clinton was a scumbag too. His desperate wife accepted the same deal. I don’t feel sympathetic at all. He also had to be dragged kicking and screaming toward the truth and it was just moronic. Apparently he thought we were all effing stupid too.

Americans are being served up excrement. The only difference is the color of the plate upon which that excrement festers - red or blue.
I did not realize Trump was in politics before 2016...who knew? No I don't go check out everything a person seeking office did BEFORE they were ever in politics. Of course if you did we would have exactly ZERO elected people.
How is it relevant what he was doing for a living? That’s an irrelevant turn right. He could have been be a CEO or a carnie. Makes no difference to my point, which was ‘who cares and is anyone really surprised?’ He gets no pass from me for the moronic and pathetic lying just like any politician. I don’t care if it’s day one on the job for him or day 1000. His job NOW is the same job Clinton the predator had. I don’t care if they were both handing out frostys at Wendy’s prior to this. Hold them both to the same standard. He needs to get his addled crap together. As for going and checking out everything a person did before seeking office, you’d have to be living under a rock in 2016 to miss his crapfest of a life. He was chief among the parties putting it out there with the Howard Stern interviews, crazy comments in the press, TMI about his sexual history, messy public divorces and affairs, etc. So, his base knew what they were getting. Whining about it being splashed all over the news NOW is a waste of time.
Of course we knew, we get the same BS with every Republican candidate. We ran a guy in 2012 who drinks whole milk when he wants to live life dangerously. What happened? He got curb stomped with "binders full of women" and "haircut rape."

Besides that, don't understand where you're going with this. I don't disagree with what you said, but I don't see anyone complaining.

Trump is a pit bull. You don't buy a pit bull to play with the kids. I think he should act ethically and lawfully in Office (not perjuring himself, for example), but I'm not looking for him to be a role model for my kids as DC is, apparently. That's my job, maybe it's different for others. In a practical sense, he's a lot more moral outcome to the Mitt Romney (or pick a candidate) who would have lost to Hillary. He wasn't my first choice but I'm sure as hell glad he won.
My point was simply and clearly “why are people acting like this is shocking? He slept with a porn star. Big deal. Is anyone here on UWS or in the world in general still holding on to a clearly ridiculous position that he didn’t?”

It’s the lying about it I find insulting and idiotic. My second post was specifically to CWTR who took some crazy turn off into the bushes.
No, we know there is a payoff and an allegation, how in the world would you KNOW what happened between the two humans involved. I agree assumptions are great, except when they are not correct. But you know for sure...ok.

I know you slept with Margaret Thatcher....trust me, I know
Oh please. The lying is pathetic. I’m simply stating that. His lawyer did not pay her for her thoughts on campaign finance reform or an official job as Campaign Liaison to the Horny and Desperate. I simply said and stand by my original never-changing, incredibly consistent, non-goalpost-moving question of “why is anyone shocked and who cares?” No one who voted for him did so because they thought he was being a faithful husband. Even his wife didn’t expect that. Snort.

It’s the pathetic and rookie-level lying I find objectionable. His base is whining and sputtering about Clinton the creepy lothario and predictably pretending to believe that anything other than what it was is plausible or possible. You don’t have to care what he did to be annoyed with his incredibly obvious attempts to recreate the “these aren’t the droids you’re looking for.” If you want to get on board with that crap and adamantly insist that the sky is red when it is in fact clearly not, that’s your deal.
cwtcr hokie
Posts: 13399
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 1:25 pm

Re: $130,000

Post by cwtcr hokie »

How is it relevant what he was doing for a living? That’s an irrelevant turn right. He could have been be a CEO or a carnie. Makes no difference to my point, which was ‘who cares and is anyone really surprised?’ He gets no pass from me for the moronic and pathetic lying just like any politician. I don’t care if it’s day one on the job for him or day 1000. His job NOW is the same job Clinton the predator had. I don’t care if they were both handing out frostys at Wendy’s prior to this. Hold them both to the same standard. He needs to get his addled crap together. As for going and checking out everything a person did before seeking office, you’d have to be living under a rock in 2016 to miss his crapfest of a life. He was chief among the parties putting it out there with the Howard Stern interviews, crazy comments in the press, TMI about his sexual history, messy public divorces and affairs, etc. So, his base knew what they were getting. Whining about it being splashed all over the news NOW is a waste of time.[/quote]

Of course we knew, we get the same BS with every Republican candidate. We ran a guy in 2012 who drinks whole milk when he wants to live life dangerously. What happened? He got curb stomped with "binders full of women" and "haircut rape."

Besides that, don't understand where you're going with this. I don't disagree with what you said, but I don't see anyone complaining.

Trump is a pit bull. You don't buy a pit bull to play with the kids. I think he should act ethically and lawfully in Office (not perjuring himself, for example), but I'm not looking for him to be a role model for my kids as DC is, apparently. That's my job, maybe it's different for others. In a practical sense, he's a lot more moral outcome to the Mitt Romney (or pick a candidate) who would have lost to Hillary. He wasn't my first choice but I'm sure as hell glad he won.[/quote]

My point was simply and clearly “why are people acting like this is shocking? He slept with a porn star. Big deal. Is anyone here on UWS or in the world in general still holding on to a clearly ridiculous position that he didn’t?”

It’s the lying about it I find insulting and idiotic. My second post was specifically to CWTR who took some crazy turn off into the bushes.[/quote]

No, we know there is a payoff and an allegation, how in the world would you KNOW what happened between the two humans involved. I agree assumptions are great, except when they are not correct. But you know for sure...ok.

I know you slept with Margaret Thatcher....trust me, I know[/quote]

Oh please. The lying is pathetic. I’m simply stating that. His lawyer did not pay her for her thoughts on campaign finance reform or an official job as Campaign Liaison to the Horny and Desperate. I simply said and stand by my original never-changing, incredibly consistent, non-goalpost-moving question of “why is anyone shocked and who cares?” No one who voted for him did so because they thought he was being a faithful husband. Even his wife didn’t expect that. Snort.

It’s the pathetic and rookie-level lying I find objectionable. His base is whining and sputtering about Clinton the creepy lothario and predictably pretending to believe that anything other than what it was is plausible or possible. You don’t have to care what he did to be annoyed with his incredibly obvious attempts to recreate the “these aren’t the droids you’re looking for.” If you want to get on board with that crap and adamantly insist that the sky is red when it is in fact clearly not, that’s your deal.[/quote]

And yet you have not said how you know what occurred? simple question, yes he could have banged the shirt out of her, but you nor I have any idea what occurred. We know there is a picture of them fully clothed taken at some time, so I guess anyone you take a picture with you bang for days? really?

Again, How do you know what occurred? waiting patiently for an answer. Of course if nothing occurred then he is not lying about anything, correct? Yes people have sex, I agree
Once
Posts: 856
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 3:48 pm
Location: San Diego, Ca

Re: $130,000

Post by Once »

cwtcr hokie wrote:How is it relevant what he was doing for a living? That’s an irrelevant turn right. He could have been be a CEO or a carnie. Makes no difference to my point, which was ‘who cares and is anyone really surprised?’ He gets no pass from me for the moronic and pathetic lying just like any politician. I don’t care if it’s day one on the job for him or day 1000. His job NOW is the same job Clinton the predator had. I don’t care if they were both handing out frostys at Wendy’s prior to this. Hold them both to the same standard. He needs to get his addled crap together. As for going and checking out everything a person did before seeking office, you’d have to be living under a rock in 2016 to miss his crapfest of a life. He was chief among the parties putting it out there with the Howard Stern interviews, crazy comments in the press, TMI about his sexual history, messy public divorces and affairs, etc. So, his base knew what they were getting. Whining about it being splashed all over the news NOW is a waste of time.
Of course we knew, we get the same BS with every Republican candidate. We ran a guy in 2012 who drinks whole milk when he wants to live life dangerously. What happened? He got curb stomped with "binders full of women" and "haircut rape."

Besides that, don't understand where you're going with this. I don't disagree with what you said, but I don't see anyone complaining.

Trump is a pit bull. You don't buy a pit bull to play with the kids. I think he should act ethically and lawfully in Office (not perjuring himself, for example), but I'm not looking for him to be a role model for my kids as DC is, apparently. That's my job, maybe it's different for others. In a practical sense, he's a lot more moral outcome to the Mitt Romney (or pick a candidate) who would have lost to Hillary. He wasn't my first choice but I'm sure as hell glad he won.[/quote]

My point was simply and clearly “why are people acting like this is shocking? He slept with a porn star. Big deal. Is anyone here on UWS or in the world in general still holding on to a clearly ridiculous position that he didn’t?”

It’s the lying about it I find insulting and idiotic. My second post was specifically to CWTR who took some crazy turn off into the bushes.[/quote]

No, we know there is a payoff and an allegation, how in the world would you KNOW what happened between the two humans involved. I agree assumptions are great, except when they are not correct. But you know for sure...ok.

I know you slept with Margaret Thatcher....trust me, I know[/quote]

Oh please. The lying is pathetic. I’m simply stating that. His lawyer did not pay her for her thoughts on campaign finance reform or an official job as Campaign Liaison to the Horny and Desperate. I simply said and stand by my original never-changing, incredibly consistent, non-goalpost-moving question of “why is anyone shocked and who cares?” No one who voted for him did so because they thought he was being a faithful husband. Even his wife didn’t expect that. Snort.

It’s the pathetic and rookie-level lying I find objectionable. His base is whining and sputtering about Clinton the creepy lothario and predictably pretending to believe that anything other than what it was is plausible or possible. You don’t have to care what he did to be annoyed with his incredibly obvious attempts to recreate the “these aren’t the droids you’re looking for.” If you want to get on board with that crap and adamantly insist that the sky is red when it is in fact clearly not, that’s your deal.[/quote]

And yet you have not said how you know what occurred? simple question, yes he could have banged the shirt out of her, but you nor I have any idea what occurred. We know there is a picture of them fully clothed taken at some time, so I guess anyone you take a picture with you bang for days? really?

Again, How do you know what occurred? waiting patiently for an answer. Of course if nothing occurred then he is not lying about anything, correct? Yes people have sex, I agree[/quote]

He’s a bonafide demonstrated liar. That point isn’t debatable despite your impotent attempts to make it so. If you want to believe in unicorns, knock yourself out. I don’t know what your motivation is: maybe you are embarrassed and you’ve decided the response to that is to ‘go all in’. Maybe you just like to argue the ridiculous. Maybe you actually believe he’s just a tortured innocent soul. If that last one is the closest to the truth, I hear timeshares (or maybe magic beans, Jack) are an excellent financial opportunity these days. No idea what your deal is. That said, I’m sure enough that if pressed, my money is on that he’s lying again like he did last time and the time before that and the time before that and the time before that and the time before that and the time before that and the time before that on any number of subjects, including this one. Insert torture of metaphor of a tiger losing his stripes, getting your hand burned by repeatedly putting it over the gas flame on your oven, Lucy and Charlie brown and the football, etc. etc. etc. Have a nice day.
cwtcr hokie
Posts: 13399
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 1:25 pm

Re: $130,000

Post by cwtcr hokie »

Once wrote:
cwtcr hokie wrote:How is it relevant what he was doing for a living? That’s an irrelevant turn right. He could have been be a CEO or a carnie. Makes no difference to my point, which was ‘who cares and is anyone really surprised?’ He gets no pass from me for the moronic and pathetic lying just like any politician. I don’t care if it’s day one on the job for him or day 1000. His job NOW is the same job Clinton the predator had. I don’t care if they were both handing out frostys at Wendy’s prior to this. Hold them both to the same standard. He needs to get his addled crap together. As for going and checking out everything a person did before seeking office, you’d have to be living under a rock in 2016 to miss his crapfest of a life. He was chief among the parties putting it out there with the Howard Stern interviews, crazy comments in the press, TMI about his sexual history, messy public divorces and affairs, etc. So, his base knew what they were getting. Whining about it being splashed all over the news NOW is a waste of time.
Of course we knew, we get the same BS with every Republican candidate. We ran a guy in 2012 who drinks whole milk when he wants to live life dangerously. What happened? He got curb stomped with "binders full of women" and "haircut rape."

Besides that, don't understand where you're going with this. I don't disagree with what you said, but I don't see anyone complaining.

Trump is a pit bull. You don't buy a pit bull to play with the kids. I think he should act ethically and lawfully in Office (not perjuring himself, for example), but I'm not looking for him to be a role model for my kids as DC is, apparently. That's my job, maybe it's different for others. In a practical sense, he's a lot more moral outcome to the Mitt Romney (or pick a candidate) who would have lost to Hillary. He wasn't my first choice but I'm sure as hell glad he won.
My point was simply and clearly “why are people acting like this is shocking? He slept with a porn star. Big deal. Is anyone here on UWS or in the world in general still holding on to a clearly ridiculous position that he didn’t?”

It’s the lying about it I find insulting and idiotic. My second post was specifically to CWTR who took some crazy turn off into the bushes.[/quote]

No, we know there is a payoff and an allegation, how in the world would you KNOW what happened between the two humans involved. I agree assumptions are great, except when they are not correct. But you know for sure...ok.

I know you slept with Margaret Thatcher....trust me, I know[/quote]

Oh please. The lying is pathetic. I’m simply stating that. His lawyer did not pay her for her thoughts on campaign finance reform or an official job as Campaign Liaison to the Horny and Desperate. I simply said and stand by my original never-changing, incredibly consistent, non-goalpost-moving question of “why is anyone shocked and who cares?” No one who voted for him did so because they thought he was being a faithful husband. Even his wife didn’t expect that. Snort.

It’s the pathetic and rookie-level lying I find objectionable. His base is whining and sputtering about Clinton the creepy lothario and predictably pretending to believe that anything other than what it was is plausible or possible. You don’t have to care what he did to be annoyed with his incredibly obvious attempts to recreate the “these aren’t the droids you’re looking for.” If you want to get on board with that crap and adamantly insist that the sky is red when it is in fact clearly not, that’s your deal.[/quote]

And yet you have not said how you know what occurred? simple question, yes he could have banged the shirt out of her, but you nor I have any idea what occurred. We know there is a picture of them fully clothed taken at some time, so I guess anyone you take a picture with you bang for days? really?

Again, How do you know what occurred? waiting patiently for an answer. Of course if nothing occurred then he is not lying about anything, correct? Yes people have sex, I agree[/quote]

He’s a bonafide demonstrated liar. That point isn’t debatable despite your impotent attempts to make it so. If you want to believe in unicorns, knock yourself out. I don’t know what your motivation is: maybe you are embarrassed and you’ve decided the response to that is to ‘go all in’. Maybe you just like to argue the ridiculous. Maybe you actually believe he’s just a tortured innocent soul. If that last one is the closest to the truth, I hear timeshares (or maybe magic beans, Jack) are an excellent financial opportunity these days. No idea what your deal is. That said, I’m sure enough that if pressed, my money is on that he’s lying again like he did last time and the time before that and the time before that and the time before that and the time before that and the time before that and the time before that on any number of subjects, including this one. Insert torture of metaphor of a tiger losing his stripes, getting your hand burned by repeatedly putting it over the gas flame on your oven, Lucy and Charlie brown and the football, etc. etc. etc. Have a nice day.[/quote]

Again, a non answer but a demonstrated great use of cliches...bravo. I have no idea what occurred is all, you apparently do. Yes Trump has lied in his life, same as 100% of the humans on the planet. congrats for pointing out the obvious.

You made the statement "you know what occurred in 2006 between Trump and the Stormy chick" but I think that was a lie
Once
Posts: 856
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 3:48 pm
Location: San Diego, Ca

Re: $130,000

Post by Once »

cwtcr hokie wrote:
Once wrote:
cwtcr hokie wrote:How is it relevant what he was doing for a living? That’s an irrelevant turn right. He could have been be a CEO or a carnie. Makes no difference to my point, which was ‘who cares and is anyone really surprised?’ He gets no pass from me for the moronic and pathetic lying just like any politician. I don’t care if it’s day one on the job for him or day 1000. His job NOW is the same job Clinton the predator had. I don’t care if they were both handing out frostys at Wendy’s prior to this. Hold them both to the same standard. He needs to get his addled crap together. As for going and checking out everything a person did before seeking office, you’d have to be living under a rock in 2016 to miss his crapfest of a life. He was chief among the parties putting it out there with the Howard Stern interviews, crazy comments in the press, TMI about his sexual history, messy public divorces and affairs, etc. So, his base knew what they were getting. Whining about it being splashed all over the news NOW is a waste of time.
Of course we knew, we get the same BS with every Republican candidate. We ran a guy in 2012 who drinks whole milk when he wants to live life dangerously. What happened? He got curb stomped with "binders full of women" and "haircut rape."

Besides that, don't understand where you're going with this. I don't disagree with what you said, but I don't see anyone complaining.

Trump is a pit bull. You don't buy a pit bull to play with the kids. I think he should act ethically and lawfully in Office (not perjuring himself, for example), but I'm not looking for him to be a role model for my kids as DC is, apparently. That's my job, maybe it's different for others. In a practical sense, he's a lot more moral outcome to the Mitt Romney (or pick a candidate) who would have lost to Hillary. He wasn't my first choice but I'm sure as hell glad he won.
My point was simply and clearly “why are people acting like this is shocking? He slept with a porn star. Big deal. Is anyone here on UWS or in the world in general still holding on to a clearly ridiculous position that he didn’t?”

It’s the lying about it I find insulting and idiotic. My second post was specifically to CWTR who took some crazy turn off into the bushes.
No, we know there is a payoff and an allegation, how in the world would you KNOW what happened between the two humans involved. I agree assumptions are great, except when they are not correct. But you know for sure...ok.

I know you slept with Margaret Thatcher....trust me, I know[/quote]

Oh please. The lying is pathetic. I’m simply stating that. His lawyer did not pay her for her thoughts on campaign finance reform or an official job as Campaign Liaison to the Horny and Desperate. I simply said and stand by my original never-changing, incredibly consistent, non-goalpost-moving question of “why is anyone shocked and who cares?” No one who voted for him did so because they thought he was being a faithful husband. Even his wife didn’t expect that. Snort.

It’s the pathetic and rookie-level lying I find objectionable. His base is whining and sputtering about Clinton the creepy lothario and predictably pretending to believe that anything other than what it was is plausible or possible. You don’t have to care what he did to be annoyed with his incredibly obvious attempts to recreate the “these aren’t the droids you’re looking for.” If you want to get on board with that crap and adamantly insist that the sky is red when it is in fact clearly not, that’s your deal.[/quote]

And yet you have not said how you know what occurred? simple question, yes he could have banged the shirt out of her, but you nor I have any idea what occurred. We know there is a picture of them fully clothed taken at some time, so I guess anyone you take a picture with you bang for days? really?

Again, How do you know what occurred? waiting patiently for an answer. Of course if nothing occurred then he is not lying about anything, correct? Yes people have sex, I agree[/quote]

He’s a bonafide demonstrated liar. That point isn’t debatable despite your impotent attempts to make it so. If you want to believe in unicorns, knock yourself out. I don’t know what your motivation is: maybe you are embarrassed and you’ve decided the response to that is to ‘go all in’. Maybe you just like to argue the ridiculous. Maybe you actually believe he’s just a tortured innocent soul. If that last one is the closest to the truth, I hear timeshares (or maybe magic beans, Jack) are an excellent financial opportunity these days. No idea what your deal is. That said, I’m sure enough that if pressed, my money is on that he’s lying again like he did last time and the time before that and the time before that and the time before that and the time before that and the time before that and the time before that on any number of subjects, including this one. Insert torture of metaphor of a tiger losing his stripes, getting your hand burned by repeatedly putting it over the gas flame on your oven, Lucy and Charlie brown and the football, etc. etc. etc. Have a nice day.[/quote]

Again, a non answer but a demonstrated great use of cliches...bravo. I have no idea what occurred is all, you apparently do. Yes Trump has lied in his life, same as 100% of the humans on the planet. congrats for pointing out the obvious.

You made the statement "you know what occurred in 2006 between Trump and the Stormy chick" but I think that was a lie[/quote]

I don’t recall making that statement. You ascribed that statement to me. I used the words possible and probable. That said, I COMPLETELY (lol you can quote that) believe he banged her 4 months after his youngest kid was born. The preponderance of evidence suggest I’m right. You keep at it CWTR. I think you’re deluded or lying to yourself or both.

Oooohhhhh witchy woman... once is clairvoyant... wooooooooo
133743Hokie
Posts: 11220
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 12:29 am

Re: $130,000

Post by 133743Hokie »

Once wrote:Oh who cares? Is anyone here really surprised? Trump is a scumbag. So is his lawyer. His wife isn’t dumb as a rock so she entered into this transactional relationship knowing what she was getting. He isn’t good looking or particularly fascinating in any way. She didn’t marry him because he’s sensitive or writes poetry. I don’t feel sympathetic at all.

The only thing I find repulsive here is the lies. Just own it. We all know he and his cronies are lying. His base doesn’t care, so why? Does he really think we’re all so effing stupid?

Yes, Clinton was a scumbag too. His desperate wife accepted the same deal. I don’t feel sympathetic at all. He also had to be dragged kicking and screaming toward the truth and it was just moronic. Apparently he thought we were all effing stupid too.

Americans are being served up excrement. The only difference is the color of the plate upon which that excrement festers - red or blue.
Timing is everything with a public official.
cwtcr hokie
Posts: 13399
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 1:25 pm

Re: $130,000

Post by cwtcr hokie »

Once wrote:
cwtcr hokie wrote:
Once wrote:
cwtcr hokie wrote:How is it relevant what he was doing for a living? That’s an irrelevant turn right. He could have been be a CEO or a carnie. Makes no difference to my point, which was ‘who cares and is anyone really surprised?’ He gets no pass from me for the moronic and pathetic lying just like any politician. I don’t care if it’s day one on the job for him or day 1000. His job NOW is the same job Clinton the predator had. I don’t care if they were both handing out frostys at Wendy’s prior to this. Hold them both to the same standard. He needs to get his addled crap together. As for going and checking out everything a person did before seeking office, you’d have to be living under a rock in 2016 to miss his crapfest of a life. He was chief among the parties putting it out there with the Howard Stern interviews, crazy comments in the press, TMI about his sexual history, messy public divorces and affairs, etc. So, his base knew what they were getting. Whining about it being splashed all over the news NOW is a waste of time.
Of course we knew, we get the same BS with every Republican candidate. We ran a guy in 2012 who drinks whole milk when he wants to live life dangerously. What happened? He got curb stomped with "binders full of women" and "haircut rape."

Besides that, don't understand where you're going with this. I don't disagree with what you said, but I don't see anyone complaining.

Trump is a pit bull. You don't buy a pit bull to play with the kids. I think he should act ethically and lawfully in Office (not perjuring himself, for example), but I'm not looking for him to be a role model for my kids as DC is, apparently. That's my job, maybe it's different for others. In a practical sense, he's a lot more moral outcome to the Mitt Romney (or pick a candidate) who would have lost to Hillary. He wasn't my first choice but I'm sure as hell glad he won.
My point was simply and clearly “why are people acting like this is shocking? He slept with a porn star. Big deal. Is anyone here on UWS or in the world in general still holding on to a clearly ridiculous position that he didn’t?”

It’s the lying about it I find insulting and idiotic. My second post was specifically to CWTR who took some crazy turn off into the bushes.
No, we know there is a payoff and an allegation, how in the world would you KNOW what happened between the two humans involved. I agree assumptions are great, except when they are not correct. But you know for sure...ok.

I know you slept with Margaret Thatcher....trust me, I know
Oh please. The lying is pathetic. I’m simply stating that. His lawyer did not pay her for her thoughts on campaign finance reform or an official job as Campaign Liaison to the Horny and Desperate. I simply said and stand by my original never-changing, incredibly consistent, non-goalpost-moving question of “why is anyone shocked and who cares?” No one who voted for him did so because they thought he was being a faithful husband. Even his wife didn’t expect that. Snort.

It’s the pathetic and rookie-level lying I find objectionable. His base is whining and sputtering about Clinton the creepy lothario and predictably pretending to believe that anything other than what it was is plausible or possible. You don’t have to care what he did to be annoyed with his incredibly obvious attempts to recreate the “these aren’t the droids you’re looking for.” If you want to get on board with that crap and adamantly insist that the sky is red when it is in fact clearly not, that’s your deal.[/quote]

And yet you have not said how you know what occurred? simple question, yes he could have banged the shirt out of her, but you nor I have any idea what occurred. We know there is a picture of them fully clothed taken at some time, so I guess anyone you take a picture with you bang for days? really?

Again, How do you know what occurred? waiting patiently for an answer. Of course if nothing occurred then he is not lying about anything, correct? Yes people have sex, I agree[/quote]

He’s a bonafide demonstrated liar. That point isn’t debatable despite your impotent attempts to make it so. If you want to believe in unicorns, knock yourself out. I don’t know what your motivation is: maybe you are embarrassed and you’ve decided the response to that is to ‘go all in’. Maybe you just like to argue the ridiculous. Maybe you actually believe he’s just a tortured innocent soul. If that last one is the closest to the truth, I hear timeshares (or maybe magic beans, Jack) are an excellent financial opportunity these days. No idea what your deal is. That said, I’m sure enough that if pressed, my money is on that he’s lying again like he did last time and the time before that and the time before that and the time before that and the time before that and the time before that and the time before that on any number of subjects, including this one. Insert torture of metaphor of a tiger losing his stripes, getting your hand burned by repeatedly putting it over the gas flame on your oven, Lucy and Charlie brown and the football, etc. etc. etc. Have a nice day.[/quote]

Again, a non answer but a demonstrated great use of cliches...bravo. I have no idea what occurred is all, you apparently do. Yes Trump has lied in his life, same as 100% of the humans on the planet. congrats for pointing out the obvious.

You made the statement "you know what occurred in 2006 between Trump and the Stormy chick" but I think that was a lie[/quote]

I don’t recall making that statement. You ascribed that statement to me. I used the words possible and probable. That said, I COMPLETELY (lol you can quote that) believe he banged her 4 months after his youngest kid was born. The preponderance of evidence suggest I’m right. You keep at it CWTR. I think you’re deluded or lying to yourself or both.

Oooohhhhh witchy woman... once is clairvoyant... wooooooooo[/quote]

what evidence, the picture or the payoff? you can determine from that, wow, you are special. All I am asking is for you to be able to defend your statements, that is all. I have said I do not know for sure what happened, is it that hard to substantiate your statement? IF so does that raise a question with you? at all?
Once
Posts: 856
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 3:48 pm
Location: San Diego, Ca

Re: $130,000

Post by Once »

cwtcr hokie wrote:
Once wrote:
cwtcr hokie wrote:
Once wrote:
cwtcr hokie wrote:How is it relevant what he was doing for a living? That’s an irrelevant turn right. He could have been be a CEO or a carnie. Makes no difference to my point, which was ‘who cares and is anyone really surprised?’ He gets no pass from me for the moronic and pathetic lying just like any politician. I don’t care if it’s day one on the job for him or day 1000. His job NOW is the same job Clinton the predator had. I don’t care if they were both handing out frostys at Wendy’s prior to this. Hold them both to the same standard. He needs to get his addled crap together. As for going and checking out everything a person did before seeking office, you’d have to be living under a rock in 2016 to miss his crapfest of a life. He was chief among the parties putting it out there with the Howard Stern interviews, crazy comments in the press, TMI about his sexual history, messy public divorces and affairs, etc. So, his base knew what they were getting. Whining about it being splashed all over the news NOW is a waste of time.
Of course we knew, we get the same BS with every Republican candidate. We ran a guy in 2012 who drinks whole milk when he wants to live life dangerously. What happened? He got curb stomped with "binders full of women" and "haircut rape."

Besides that, don't understand where you're going with this. I don't disagree with what you said, but I don't see anyone complaining.

Trump is a pit bull. You don't buy a pit bull to play with the kids. I think he should act ethically and lawfully in Office (not perjuring himself, for example), but I'm not looking for him to be a role model for my kids as DC is, apparently. That's my job, maybe it's different for others. In a practical sense, he's a lot more moral outcome to the Mitt Romney (or pick a candidate) who would have lost to Hillary. He wasn't my first choice but I'm sure as hell glad he won.
My point was simply and clearly “why are people acting like this is shocking? He slept with a porn star. Big deal. Is anyone here on UWS or in the world in general still holding on to a clearly ridiculous position that he didn’t?”

It’s the lying about it I find insulting and idiotic. My second post was specifically to CWTR who took some crazy turn off into the bushes.
No, we know there is a payoff and an allegation, how in the world would you KNOW what happened between the two humans involved. I agree assumptions are great, except when they are not correct. But you know for sure...ok.

I know you slept with Margaret Thatcher....trust me, I know
Oh please. The lying is pathetic. I’m simply stating that. His lawyer did not pay her for her thoughts on campaign finance reform or an official job as Campaign Liaison to the Horny and Desperate. I simply said and stand by my original never-changing, incredibly consistent, non-goalpost-moving question of “why is anyone shocked and who cares?” No one who voted for him did so because they thought he was being a faithful husband. Even his wife didn’t expect that. Snort.

It’s the pathetic and rookie-level lying I find objectionable. His base is whining and sputtering about Clinton the creepy lothario and predictably pretending to believe that anything other than what it was is plausible or possible. You don’t have to care what he did to be annoyed with his incredibly obvious attempts to recreate the “these aren’t the droids you’re looking for.” If you want to get on board with that crap and adamantly insist that the sky is red when it is in fact clearly not, that’s your deal.
And yet you have not said how you know what occurred? simple question, yes he could have banged the shirt out of her, but you nor I have any idea what occurred. We know there is a picture of them fully clothed taken at some time, so I guess anyone you take a picture with you bang for days? really?

Again, How do you know what occurred? waiting patiently for an answer. Of course if nothing occurred then he is not lying about anything, correct? Yes people have sex, I agree[/quote]

He’s a bonafide demonstrated liar. That point isn’t debatable despite your impotent attempts to make it so. If you want to believe in unicorns, knock yourself out. I don’t know what your motivation is: maybe you are embarrassed and you’ve decided the response to that is to ‘go all in’. Maybe you just like to argue the ridiculous. Maybe you actually believe he’s just a tortured innocent soul. If that last one is the closest to the truth, I hear timeshares (or maybe magic beans, Jack) are an excellent financial opportunity these days. No idea what your deal is. That said, I’m sure enough that if pressed, my money is on that he’s lying again like he did last time and the time before that and the time before that and the time before that and the time before that and the time before that and the time before that on any number of subjects, including this one. Insert torture of metaphor of a tiger losing his stripes, getting your hand burned by repeatedly putting it over the gas flame on your oven, Lucy and Charlie brown and the football, etc. etc. etc. Have a nice day.[/quote]

Again, a non answer but a demonstrated great use of cliches...bravo. I have no idea what occurred is all, you apparently do. Yes Trump has lied in his life, same as 100% of the humans on the planet. congrats for pointing out the obvious.

You made the statement "you know what occurred in 2006 between Trump and the Stormy chick" but I think that was a lie[/quote]

I don’t recall making that statement. You ascribed that statement to me. I used the words possible and probable. That said, I COMPLETELY (lol you can quote that) believe he banged her 4 months after his youngest kid was born. The preponderance of evidence suggest I’m right. You keep at it CWTR. I think you’re deluded or lying to yourself or both.

Oooohhhhh witchy woman... once is clairvoyant... wooooooooo[/quote]

what evidence, the picture or the payoff? you can determine from that, wow, you are special. All I am asking is for you to be able to defend your statements, that is all. I have said I do not know for sure what happened, is it that hard to substantiate your statement? IF so does that raise a question with you? at all?[/quote]

Not at all. Common sense + documented past behavior (from his own mouth) + his transparent and weak commonplace everyday lies + her interview from years before he was in office + $130,000 dollars that reek of guilt and subterfuge + the lengths his lawyer went to to hide the payment + her bizarre situational and coy answers to direct questions + his three divorces where he auditioned a new wife while still in possession of her predecessor ALL lead me to believe I’m right and you’re wrong. Dead wrong. Super wrong. Laughably and comically wrong. So wrong that I think even YOU know you’re wrong but pride or some other affliction keeps you from grabbing yourself by the arse and saying, “I know I’m wrong. I just felt like arguing that sometimes a duck-shaped duck that walks like a duck, eats duck chow, swims like a duck, and is incontinent like a duck is not a duck people! No ducks here! No ma’am!! It’s really just Hot and sexy and dead (RIP) Margaret Thatcher wearing her duck costume.”

IN SHORT - you’re wrong. You know it. You’re just intellectually dishonest about it.

Cheerfully, witchy woo woo woman

:lol:
cwtcr hokie
Posts: 13399
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 1:25 pm

Re: $130,000

Post by cwtcr hokie »

Once wrote:
cwtcr hokie wrote:
Once wrote:
cwtcr hokie wrote:
Once wrote:
cwtcr hokie wrote:How is it relevant what he was doing for a living? That’s an irrelevant turn right. He could have been be a CEO or a carnie. Makes no difference to my point, which was ‘who cares and is anyone really surprised?’ He gets no pass from me for the moronic and pathetic lying just like any politician. I don’t care if it’s day one on the job for him or day 1000. His job NOW is the same job Clinton the predator had. I don’t care if they were both handing out frostys at Wendy’s prior to this. Hold them both to the same standard. He needs to get his addled crap together. As for going and checking out everything a person did before seeking office, you’d have to be living under a rock in 2016 to miss his crapfest of a life. He was chief among the parties putting it out there with the Howard Stern interviews, crazy comments in the press, TMI about his sexual history, messy public divorces and affairs, etc. So, his base knew what they were getting. Whining about it being splashed all over the news NOW is a waste of time.
Of course we knew, we get the same BS with every Republican candidate. We ran a guy in 2012 who drinks whole milk when he wants to live life dangerously. What happened? He got curb stomped with "binders full of women" and "haircut rape."

Besides that, don't understand where you're going with this. I don't disagree with what you said, but I don't see anyone complaining.

Trump is a pit bull. You don't buy a pit bull to play with the kids. I think he should act ethically and lawfully in Office (not perjuring himself, for example), but I'm not looking for him to be a role model for my kids as DC is, apparently. That's my job, maybe it's different for others. In a practical sense, he's a lot more moral outcome to the Mitt Romney (or pick a candidate) who would have lost to Hillary. He wasn't my first choice but I'm sure as hell glad he won.
My point was simply and clearly “why are people acting like this is shocking? He slept with a porn star. Big deal. Is anyone here on UWS or in the world in general still holding on to a clearly ridiculous position that he didn’t?”

It’s the lying about it I find insulting and idiotic. My second post was specifically to CWTR who took some crazy turn off into the bushes.
No, we know there is a payoff and an allegation, how in the world would you KNOW what happened between the two humans involved. I agree assumptions are great, except when they are not correct. But you know for sure...ok.

I know you slept with Margaret Thatcher....trust me, I know
Oh please. The lying is pathetic. I’m simply stating that. His lawyer did not pay her for her thoughts on campaign finance reform or an official job as Campaign Liaison to the Horny and Desperate. I simply said and stand by my original never-changing, incredibly consistent, non-goalpost-moving question of “why is anyone shocked and who cares?” No one who voted for him did so because they thought he was being a faithful husband. Even his wife didn’t expect that. Snort.

It’s the pathetic and rookie-level lying I find objectionable. His base is whining and sputtering about Clinton the creepy lothario and predictably pretending to believe that anything other than what it was is plausible or possible. You don’t have to care what he did to be annoyed with his incredibly obvious attempts to recreate the “these aren’t the droids you’re looking for.” If you want to get on board with that crap and adamantly insist that the sky is red when it is in fact clearly not, that’s your deal.
And yet you have not said how you know what occurred? simple question, yes he could have banged the shirt out of her, but you nor I have any idea what occurred. We know there is a picture of them fully clothed taken at some time, so I guess anyone you take a picture with you bang for days? really?

Again, How do you know what occurred? waiting patiently for an answer. Of course if nothing occurred then he is not lying about anything, correct? Yes people have sex, I agree
He’s a bonafide demonstrated liar. That point isn’t debatable despite your impotent attempts to make it so. If you want to believe in unicorns, knock yourself out. I don’t know what your motivation is: maybe you are embarrassed and you’ve decided the response to that is to ‘go all in’. Maybe you just like to argue the ridiculous. Maybe you actually believe he’s just a tortured innocent soul. If that last one is the closest to the truth, I hear timeshares (or maybe magic beans, Jack) are an excellent financial opportunity these days. No idea what your deal is. That said, I’m sure enough that if pressed, my money is on that he’s lying again like he did last time and the time before that and the time before that and the time before that and the time before that and the time before that and the time before that on any number of subjects, including this one. Insert torture of metaphor of a tiger losing his stripes, getting your hand burned by repeatedly putting it over the gas flame on your oven, Lucy and Charlie brown and the football, etc. etc. etc. Have a nice day.[/quote]

Again, a non answer but a demonstrated great use of cliches...bravo. I have no idea what occurred is all, you apparently do. Yes Trump has lied in his life, same as 100% of the humans on the planet. congrats for pointing out the obvious.

You made the statement "you know what occurred in 2006 between Trump and the Stormy chick" but I think that was a lie[/quote]

I don’t recall making that statement. You ascribed that statement to me. I used the words possible and probable. That said, I COMPLETELY (lol you can quote that) believe he banged her 4 months after his youngest kid was born. The preponderance of evidence suggest I’m right. You keep at it CWTR. I think you’re deluded or lying to yourself or both.

Oooohhhhh witchy woman... once is clairvoyant... wooooooooo[/quote]

what evidence, the picture or the payoff? you can determine from that, wow, you are special. All I am asking is for you to be able to defend your statements, that is all. I have said I do not know for sure what happened, is it that hard to substantiate your statement? IF so does that raise a question with you? at all?[/quote]

Not at all. Common sense + documented past behavior (from his own mouth) + his transparent and weak commonplace everyday lies + her interview from years before he was in office + $130,000 dollars that reek of guilt and subterfuge + the lengths his lawyer went to to hide the payment + her bizarre situational and coy answers to direct questions + his three divorces where he auditioned a new wife while still in possession of her predecessor ALL lead me to believe I’m right and you’re wrong. Dead wrong. Super wrong. Laughably and comically wrong. So wrong that I think even YOU know you’re wrong but pride or some other affliction keeps you from grabbing yourself by the arse and saying, “I know I’m wrong. I just felt like arguing that sometimes a duck-shaped duck that walks like a duck, eats duck chow, swims like a duck, and is incontinent like a duck is not a duck people! No ducks here! No ma’am!! It’s really just Hot and sexy and dead (RIP) Margaret Thatcher wearing her duck costume.”

IN SHORT - you’re wrong. You know it. You’re just intellectually dishonest about it.

Cheerfully, witchy woo woo woman

:lol:[/quote]

We are talking about one allegation, I agree that you have nothing to substantiate your belief but your dis-like for the guy, that is ok. Not sure how that is concrete evidence but if it is for you, so be it
Once
Posts: 856
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 3:48 pm
Location: San Diego, Ca

Re: $130,000

Post by Once »

[/quote]
Not at all. Common sense + documented past behavior (from his own mouth) + his transparent and weak commonplace everyday lies + her interview from years before he was in office + $130,000 dollars that reek of guilt and subterfuge + the lengths his lawyer went to to hide the payment + her bizarre situational and coy answers to direct questions + his three divorces where he auditioned a new wife while still in possession of her predecessor ALL lead me to believe I’m right and you’re wrong. Dead wrong. Super wrong. Laughably and comically wrong. So wrong that I think even YOU know you’re wrong but pride or some other affliction keeps you from grabbing yourself by the arse and saying, “I know I’m wrong. I just felt like arguing that sometimes a duck-shaped duck that walks like a duck, eats duck chow, swims like a duck, and is incontinent like a duck is not a duck people! No ducks here! No ma’am!! It’s really just Hot and sexy and dead (RIP) Margaret Thatcher wearing her duck costume.”

IN SHORT - you’re wrong. You know it. You’re just intellectually dishonest about it.

Cheerfully, witchy woo woo woman

:lol:[/quote]

We are talking about one allegation, I agree that you have nothing to substantiate your belief but your dis-like for the guy, that is ok. Not sure how that is concrete evidence but if it is for you, so be it[/quote]

Short of sitting at the end of the bed with opera glasses when the now president was banging her like a screen door, no one can say they have proof. What I'm saying is I'm certain he did it. By any reasonable measure given what we all know of him and what we have learned of this particular liaison, most reasonable people realize he did it.

What do you think Ms. Stormy received $130,000 for? Avon products? Amway? Seriously, why the money? why the article from over a decade ago before he was a presidential candidate? Why the llc set up and dismantled right after the payment? Enlighten me. What specifically and PLAUSIBLY could all that be about?
cwtcr hokie
Posts: 13399
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 1:25 pm

Re: $130,000

Post by cwtcr hokie »

Once wrote:
Not at all. Common sense + documented past behavior (from his own mouth) + his transparent and weak commonplace everyday lies + her interview from years before he was in office + $130,000 dollars that reek of guilt and subterfuge + the lengths his lawyer went to to hide the payment + her bizarre situational and coy answers to direct questions + his three divorces where he auditioned a new wife while still in possession of her predecessor ALL lead me to believe I’m right and you’re wrong. Dead wrong. Super wrong. Laughably and comically wrong. So wrong that I think even YOU know you’re wrong but pride or some other affliction keeps you from grabbing yourself by the arse and saying, “I know I’m wrong. I just felt like arguing that sometimes a duck-shaped duck that walks like a duck, eats duck chow, swims like a duck, and is incontinent like a duck is not a duck people! No ducks here! No ma’am!! It’s really just Hot and sexy and dead (RIP) Margaret Thatcher wearing her duck costume.”

IN SHORT - you’re wrong. You know it. You’re just intellectually dishonest about it.

Cheerfully, witchy woo woo woman

:lol:[/quote]

We are talking about one allegation, I agree that you have nothing to substantiate your belief but your dis-like for the guy, that is ok. Not sure how that is concrete evidence but if it is for you, so be it[/quote]

Short of sitting at the end of the bed with opera glasses when the now president was banging her like a screen door, no one can say they have proof. What I'm saying is I'm certain he did it. By any reasonable measure given what we all know of him and what we have learned of this particular liaison, most reasonable people realize he did it.

What do you think Ms. Stormy received $130,000 for? Avon products? Amway? Seriously, why the money? why the article from over a decade ago before he was a presidential candidate? Why the llc set up and dismantled right after the payment? Enlighten me. What specifically and PLAUSIBLY could all that be about?[/quote]

my point is you do not know what occurred, again, if you are worth a excrement ton of money $130k is pocket change. You do realize people pay people to go away don't you. I agree in this day and age if an allegation is made it is to be 100 beleived, sorry I require some evidence to make a decision. Again, your nor I do not know what occurred between them, it is impossible you or I would know.
User avatar
ip_law-hokie
Posts: 19133
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:20 pm
Alma Mater: Manchester
Location: New York, NY

Re: $130,000

Post by ip_law-hokie »

cwtcr hokie wrote:
Once wrote:
Not at all. Common sense + documented past behavior (from his own mouth) + his transparent and weak commonplace everyday lies + her interview from years before he was in office + $130,000 dollars that reek of guilt and subterfuge + the lengths his lawyer went to to hide the payment + her bizarre situational and coy answers to direct questions + his three divorces where he auditioned a new wife while still in possession of her predecessor ALL lead me to believe I’m right and you’re wrong. Dead wrong. Super wrong. Laughably and comically wrong. So wrong that I think even YOU know you’re wrong but pride or some other affliction keeps you from grabbing yourself by the arse and saying, “I know I’m wrong. I just felt like arguing that sometimes a duck-shaped duck that walks like a duck, eats duck chow, swims like a duck, and is incontinent like a duck is not a duck people! No ducks here! No ma’am!! It’s really just Hot and sexy and dead (RIP) Margaret Thatcher wearing her duck costume.”

IN SHORT - you’re wrong. You know it. You’re just intellectually dishonest about it.

Cheerfully, witchy woo woo woman

:lol:
We are talking about one allegation, I agree that you have nothing to substantiate your belief but your dis-like for the guy, that is ok. Not sure how that is concrete evidence but if it is for you, so be it[/quote]

Short of sitting at the end of the bed with opera glasses when the now president was banging her like a screen door, no one can say they have proof. What I'm saying is I'm certain he did it. By any reasonable measure given what we all know of him and what we have learned of this particular liaison, most reasonable people realize he did it.

What do you think Ms. Stormy received $130,000 for? Avon products? Amway? Seriously, why the money? why the article from over a decade ago before he was a presidential candidate? Why the llc set up and dismantled right after the payment? Enlighten me. What specifically and PLAUSIBLY could all that be about?[/quote]

my point is you do not know what occurred, again, if you are worth a excrement ton of money $130k is pocket change. You do realize people pay people to go away don't you. I agree in this day and age if an allegation is made it is to be 100 beleived, sorry I require some evidence to make a decision. Again, your nor I do not know what occurred between them, it is impossible you or I would know.[/quote]

TDB.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
With their Cap’n and Chief Intelligence Officer having deserted them, River, Ham and Joe valiantly continue their whataboutismistic last stand of the DJT apology tour.
User avatar
awesome guy
Posts: 54187
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 7:10 pm
Party: After 10
Location: Plastic Flotilla:Location Classified

Re: $130,000

Post by awesome guy »

Why can't people use reply with quotes?
Unvaccinated,. mask free, and still alive.
User avatar
Major Kong
Posts: 15726
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:35 pm
Alma Mater: Ferrum VT ASU
Party: Independent
Location: Somewhere between Marion and Seven Mile Ford

Re: $130,000

Post by Major Kong »

awesome guy wrote:Why can't people use reply with quotes?
My head is hurting trying to keep up with all of this. :D
I only post using 100% recycled electrons.

Image
User avatar
HokieHam
Posts: 26367
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 2:50 pm
Location: Kicking over crayons in a safe space for libruls....

Re: $130,000

Post by HokieHam »

Major Kong wrote:
awesome guy wrote:Why can't people use reply with quotes?
My head is hurting trying to keep up with all of this. :D
Yeah. I’ve given up.
Image
"if you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face-forever."

ip believes you can dial in a 78 year old man who suffers from deminishing mental function
nolanvt
Posts: 13116
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 9:01 pm
Alma Mater: Marshall Univ.

Re: $130,000

Post by nolanvt »

This thread went accordingly.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Fully vaccinated, still not dead
User avatar
USN_Hokie
Posts: 30831
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:58 pm
Party: Draintheswamp

Re: $130,000

Post by USN_Hokie »

HokieFanDC wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
LOL, you're the one who voted for a spook, right? You know, the people who are paid to steal, corrupt, and even kill? That's right.

You don't have a problem with that since he was employed by the government, which is the same place your morality comes from.

I'll also add that your routine of complaining about everything is unconvincing. A man who stands for nothing stands for everything (you wouldn't even admit you voted for mcmuffin until after the election).

Have a nice day.
That's your response? I'm not moral b/c I voted for a CIA guy? I don't have a problem with that b/c I respect the work that the CIA does.
Like I said, you're a statist, so your morals come from the state. Glad we agree.
Yeh, we don't agree. You know that, because you cherry picked one statement, and ignored your entire professional life that is built upon, and beholden to, statism. And you're a man who fully supports Trump, and fully hates Clinton, and only bemoans the morals of one of them. Talk about standing for nothing.
If you'd like to try and explain how the statement I quoted is missing some essential context, go ahead.

I love how you say fully support Trump in one sentence of your spittle-fueled rant, then say I stand for nothing in the other. You're a hoot.
It's simple. I voted for McMullin. He's a private citizen who worked for the CIA. None of that even remotely equates to me being a statist, or that my morals come from the state.

But, if you're going to make that argument, then a person who chose a government profession is the highest form of statist, including your morals.

And unequivocally supporting Trump, or anyone, means you don't have your own morals - you're using someone else's morals to guide you.
You're a lefty because you admitted as much in your spittle-filled rant earlier in this thread.

I'm going to have to see your jump to conclusions mat for the rest of that mess. Your support for CIA spook mcmuffin (poor judgment aside) shows that you don't really care about morals you profess to care about in a leader - and no, I wasn't a spy...yawn. Finally, your characterization of me having unequivocal support for Trump is cute, but completely false.

You're blinded by hate and falling off the turnip truck.
User avatar
ip_law-hokie
Posts: 19133
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:20 pm
Alma Mater: Manchester
Location: New York, NY

Re: $130,000

Post by ip_law-hokie »

USN_Hokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote: That's your response? I'm not moral b/c I voted for a CIA guy? I don't have a problem with that b/c I respect the work that the CIA does.
Like I said, you're a statist, so your morals come from the state. Glad we agree.
Yeh, we don't agree. You know that, because you cherry picked one statement, and ignored your entire professional life that is built upon, and beholden to, statism. And you're a man who fully supports Trump, and fully hates Clinton, and only bemoans the morals of one of them. Talk about standing for nothing.
If you'd like to try and explain how the statement I quoted is missing some essential context, go ahead.

I love how you say fully support Trump in one sentence of your spittle-fueled rant, then say I stand for nothing in the other. You're a hoot.
It's simple. I voted for McMullin. He's a private citizen who worked for the CIA. None of that even remotely equates to me being a statist, or that my morals come from the state.

But, if you're going to make that argument, then a person who chose a government profession is the highest form of statist, including your morals.

And unequivocally supporting Trump, or anyone, means you don't have your own morals - you're using someone else's morals to guide you.
You're a lefty because you admitted as much in your spittle-filled rant earlier in this thread.

I'm going to have to see your jump to conclusions mat for the rest of that mess. Your support for CIA spook mcmuffin (poor judgment aside) shows that you don't really care about morals you profess to care about in a leader - and no, I wasn't a spy...yawn. Finally, your characterization of me having unequivocal support for Trump is cute, but completely false.

You're blinded by hate and falling off the turnip truck.
Why is he a spook?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
With their Cap’n and Chief Intelligence Officer having deserted them, River, Ham and Joe valiantly continue their whataboutismistic last stand of the DJT apology tour.
nolanvt
Posts: 13116
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 9:01 pm
Alma Mater: Marshall Univ.

Re: $130,000

Post by nolanvt »

USN_Hokie wrote:You guys already set the standards for a Presidential between Slick Willy and Barrack "sperm on face" Obama...
Do what now?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Fully vaccinated, still not dead
HokieFanDC
Posts: 18547
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 8:57 pm

Re: $130,000

Post by HokieFanDC »

USN_Hokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
Like I said, you're a statist, so your morals come from the state. Glad we agree.
Yeh, we don't agree. You know that, because you cherry picked one statement, and ignored your entire professional life that is built upon, and beholden to, statism. And you're a man who fully supports Trump, and fully hates Clinton, and only bemoans the morals of one of them. Talk about standing for nothing.
If you'd like to try and explain how the statement I quoted is missing some essential context, go ahead.

I love how you say fully support Trump in one sentence of your spittle-fueled rant, then say I stand for nothing in the other. You're a hoot.
It's simple. I voted for McMullin. He's a private citizen who worked for the CIA. None of that even remotely equates to me being a statist, or that my morals come from the state.

But, if you're going to make that argument, then a person who chose a government profession is the highest form of statist, including your morals.

And unequivocally supporting Trump, or anyone, means you don't have your own morals - you're using someone else's morals to guide you.
You're a lefty because you admitted as much in your spittle-filled rant earlier in this thread.

I'm going to have to see your jump to conclusions mat for the rest of that mess. Your support for CIA spook mcmuffin (poor judgment aside) shows that you don't really care about morals you profess to care about in a leader - and no, I wasn't a spy...yawn. Finally, your characterization of me having unequivocal support for Trump is cute, but completely false.

You're blinded by hate and falling off the turnip truck.
I didn't admit anything of the sort. You, making up things in your own head, has no bearing on reality. You also said that I supported Clinton and Obama, which is a ridiculous pile of nonsense. When you can come to conclusions like that, you have less than zero credibility.

Now, I'll cede that you have criticized Trump a few times in the past, but very mildly. But, you keep saying I support McMuffin, as if me voting for him in a the worst POTUS election lineup in our lifetime, is highly meaningful. Since Nov. 8th, the only one of us who has even thought about McMullin, is you. I don't support him, or care about him. And voting for him has nothing to do with my morals. But if you want to go down that path, then I'll take my choice over yours every day of the week. Comparing the morals of McMullin and Trump is not even close.
As for you being a spy, no kidding, no one has ever thought you would be. But, you call me a statist for supporting the CIA. If I'm a statist, I'm not sure where someone who chose to work for a government entity, falls, but it's several levels above me saying I respect the CIA. The CIA and Navy occupy the same government morality that you seem to be denigrating.
User avatar
USN_Hokie
Posts: 30831
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:58 pm
Party: Draintheswamp

Re: $130,000

Post by USN_Hokie »

HokieFanDC wrote: I didn't admit anything of the sort. You, making up things in your own head, has no bearing on reality. You also said that I supported Clinton and Obama, which is a ridiculous pile of nonsense. When you can come to conclusions like that, you have less than zero credibility.

Now, I'll cede that you have criticized Trump a few times in the past, but very mildly. But, you keep saying I support McMuffin, as if me voting for him in a the worst POTUS election lineup in our lifetime, is highly meaningful. Since Nov. 8th, the only one of us who has even thought about McMullin, is you. I don't support him, or care about him. And voting for him has nothing to do with my morals. But if you want to go down that path, then I'll take my choice over yours every day of the week. Comparing the morals of McMullin and Trump is not even close.
As for you being a spy, no kidding, no one has ever thought you would be. But, you call me a statist for supporting the CIA. If I'm a statist, I'm not sure where someone who chose to work for a government entity, falls, but it's several levels above me saying I respect the CIA. The CIA and Navy occupy the same government morality that you seem to be denigrating.
1. You outed yourself as a liberal when you mocked conservatives earlier in this thread.
2. Never said you supported them, but it's odd you seem to criticize everyone but liberals (or when you do, it's vague flippant one liners. You save all your real effort for attacking conservatives.)
3. Thank you for admitting you lied in your characterization of my support for Trump.
4. Funny that you say you don't care about the candidate whose whole candidacy was a lie to help Hillary by (trying to) stealing Utah's electoral votes, then defend him. :lol: Thankfully, the good people of Utah have better judgment than you.
5. You keep missing (or more likely, ignoring) the point, bucko. You pretend to care about ethics while supporting a candidate whose job was to deceive, steal, lie, etc.. (all things I never was asked to do, thanks). You don't give a shirt, you just hate Drumpf.

Stop embarrassing yourself.
ElbertoHokie
Posts: 1355
Joined: Thu Jun 18, 2015 4:24 pm
Alma Mater: Virginia Tech
Party: Independent

Re: $130,000

Post by ElbertoHokie »

Forget all the accusations. Who here thinks trump did or did not sleep with the porn star? Does anyone here think he's actually been faithful to Melania for the extent of their marriage?
HokieFanDC
Posts: 18547
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 8:57 pm

Re: $130,000

Post by HokieFanDC »

USN_Hokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote: I didn't admit anything of the sort. You, making up things in your own head, has no bearing on reality. You also said that I supported Clinton and Obama, which is a ridiculous pile of nonsense. When you can come to conclusions like that, you have less than zero credibility.

Now, I'll cede that you have criticized Trump a few times in the past, but very mildly. But, you keep saying I support McMuffin, as if me voting for him in a the worst POTUS election lineup in our lifetime, is highly meaningful. Since Nov. 8th, the only one of us who has even thought about McMullin, is you. I don't support him, or care about him. And voting for him has nothing to do with my morals. But if you want to go down that path, then I'll take my choice over yours every day of the week. Comparing the morals of McMullin and Trump is not even close.
As for you being a spy, no kidding, no one has ever thought you would be. But, you call me a statist for supporting the CIA. If I'm a statist, I'm not sure where someone who chose to work for a government entity, falls, but it's several levels above me saying I respect the CIA. The CIA and Navy occupy the same government morality that you seem to be denigrating.
1. You outed yourself as a liberal when you mocked conservatives earlier in this thread.
2. Never said you supported them, but it's odd you seem to criticize everyone but liberals (or when you do, it's vague flippant one liners. You save all your real effort for attacking conservatives.)
3. Thank you for admitting you lied in your characterization of my support for Trump.
4. Funny that you say you don't care about the candidate whose whole candidacy was a lie to help Hillary by (trying to) stealing Utah's electoral votes, then defend him. :lol: Thankfully, the good people of Utah have better judgment than you.
5. You keep missing (or more likely, ignoring) the point, bucko. You pretend to care about ethics while supporting a candidate whose job was to deceive, steal, lie, etc.. (all things I never was asked to do, thanks). You don't give a shirt, you just hate Drumpf.

Stop embarrassing yourself.
Mocking conversations who have ceded the moral high ground, doesn’t make me a liberal. It makes me a conservative who is consistent in condemning anyone who exhibits poor behavior.
I don’t criticize everyone but liberals, you’re just too deep in your clouded reality to realize that. When I agree with the general board consensus, it’s one post and move on. When everyone agrees, it’s a short thread.

That’s your opinion of McMullin, not fact. Your whole mcmullin attack angle is simply pitiful.

And even though I’ve said it many times, I think a lot of Trumps policies are good, but Trump the person, severely lacking. If you want to call that hate, have a it. I hate Hillary, everything about her.
I don’t hate everything about Trump, but he is a deceitful liar, and that’s a fault of his that you seem to think has meaning for a POTUs candidate nobody, but not for the guy you strongly support.

That’s why you lack moral high ground.
User avatar
ip_law-hokie
Posts: 19133
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:20 pm
Alma Mater: Manchester
Location: New York, NY

Re: $130,000

Post by ip_law-hokie »

ElbertoHokie wrote:Forget all the accusations. Who here thinks trump did or did not sleep with the porn star? Does anyone here think he's actually been faithful to Melania for the extent of their marriage?
I think we’ve moved on (unless we are discussing Obama’s gay lover).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
With their Cap’n and Chief Intelligence Officer having deserted them, River, Ham and Joe valiantly continue their whataboutismistic last stand of the DJT apology tour.
User avatar
awesome guy
Posts: 54187
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 7:10 pm
Party: After 10
Location: Plastic Flotilla:Location Classified

Re: $130,000

Post by awesome guy »

ElbertoHokie wrote:Forget all the accusations. Who here thinks trump did or did not sleep with the porn star? Does anyone here think he's actually been faithful to Melania for the extent of their marriage?

More rocksolid logic, he either sleep with a porn star or never cheated on his wife. LOL
Unvaccinated,. mask free, and still alive.
Post Reply