|
Post by vilepagan on Oct 7, 2019 3:33:49 GMT -8
You have no basis to make such claims.
See, this is why your claims about a corrupt news media are so meaningless. When you have no ethics your claims about the lack of ethics in others are just laughable. Your penchant for telling lies also undercuts your claims to being a good Christian, but that's another topic.
|
|
Credo
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 6,242
|
Post by Credo on Oct 7, 2019 19:55:19 GMT -8
Did a mouse sneak in here? Or maybe a chihuahua? All I can hear is this whining.......
|
|
Credo
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 6,242
|
Post by Credo on Oct 7, 2019 20:00:06 GMT -8
Joe Biden is done and if the Democrats insist on defending him--they're done in 2020 also.
|
|
Credo
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 6,242
|
Post by Credo on Oct 7, 2019 20:34:58 GMT -8
I already posted this on the first page of this thread, but it bears repeating: It was the Democrats who first enlisted the Ukrainian government to "dig up dirt" on their political opponent (Donald Trump) in 2016.
But maybe Politico was just "making stuff up."
|
|
Credo
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 6,242
|
Post by Credo on Oct 7, 2019 21:05:59 GMT -8
The first "whistle blower" made false claims about Trump's phone call with Zelensky, based on hearsay. The second "whistle blower" is likely the source for the first one. Bottom line: Neither one can tell us anything we don't know already about the phone call, since the transcript has already been released. (A rather inconvenient fact for the plotters, as I suspect they never expected it.)
So what we have here is a liar and a leaker, whom the Democrats propose to anonymously use to bring down the President of the United States, who, under Article II - Section 3 of the Constitution, serves as the chief law enforcement officer of the nation and can therefore legally order the DOJ to conduct any sort of investigation to "take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed." (I assume that includes concerns about taxpayer money being used as leverage by a Vice-President to get a foreign prosecutor fired who just happens to be investigating the same V.P.'s son.)
Good luck with that.
Expect some lame cherry-picked response in about 6 hours that will imply that my support for Trump, my "lack of ethics", and my alleged "lies" contradict my never heretofore claim to "be a good Christian." (But I'm the one "making stuff up.")
Yes, I am a Christian--and so I recognize that I am a sinner in need of God's mercy. Anyone calling themselves a "good Christian" might be lacking a little humility, IMHO.
|
|
|
Post by vilepagan on Oct 8, 2019 3:52:49 GMT -8
Well, if you don't have anything new just keep repeating yourself. Maybe if you repeat it often enough people will start to believe you.
|
|
|
Post by vilepagan on Oct 8, 2019 3:55:26 GMT -8
Are you going to tell us what claims he made that were false, or do you expect people to just accept your word for it?
|
|
|
Post by vilepagan on Oct 8, 2019 3:59:46 GMT -8
You're not just a sinner who makes a mistake and asks the lord for forgiveness. You're an unrepentant sinner who repeatedly tells falsehoods and feels no remorse about it. You make baby Jesus cry.
|
|
MDDad
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 6,734
|
Post by MDDad on Oct 8, 2019 7:48:30 GMT -8
Well, if you don't have anything new just keep repeating yourself. Maybe if you repeat it often enough people will start to believe you. This coming from a guy who is part of a small group on OCConnect that has been repeating the same tired old crap thousands of times in the last three years. Jesus, man, look in the mirror before you post stuff like this.
|
|
Luca
Master Statesman
Posts: 1,296
|
Post by Luca on Oct 8, 2019 9:52:08 GMT -8
You're not just a sinner who makes a mistake and asks the lord for forgiveness. You're an unrepentant sinner who repeatedly tells falsehoods and feels no remorse about it. You make baby Jesus cry. You know, Pagan, we communicate more effectively and convey our perspective when we acknowledge that there are currently different versions of reality being reported by the media and politicians. The media itself can’t seem to agree on a single version of many events. So how do you know that Credo is repeating “falsehoods”? If they are not demonstrably false, why should he feel remorse, far less “baby Jesus”.........leaving aside the question of how you could possibly know that.Rational debate - if that’s the goal - must start with a mutually accepted reality, and the debate then hinges on the interpretation of those reports the validity of which are in question. If you assume from the outset that all your interpretations of debatable reports are true and your opponent’s are false, then the discussion is pointless. It’s entirely subjective and you might as well be arguing over what is the “best” color................Luca
|
|
|
Post by vilepagan on Oct 8, 2019 10:34:48 GMT -8
If only you had something to say about the topic of the thread. But apparently all you want to do is make stupid personal remarks. What a pity.
|
|
|
Post by vilepagan on Oct 8, 2019 10:41:57 GMT -8
Let's start with a mutually accepted reality. This seems to be very difficult for some people here.
Ok, so why didn't you say this to Credo when he wrote: "The first "whistle blower" made false claims about Trump's phone call with Zelensky, based on hearsay."
Credo certainly has no way of knowing if the whistleblower made false claims...yet you said nothing.
|
|
Luca
Master Statesman
Posts: 1,296
|
Post by Luca on Oct 8, 2019 11:11:09 GMT -8
First, because I’m not sure I ever read the post.
But mostly because I have no way of knowing whether false claims were made. That’s one of the many variations on reality being reported by the media. We don’t know who the accuser is, we don’t know what the accuser said, we therefore don’t know if it was false, and we don’t know verbatim the original conversation between the President and the Ukrainian. If you can draw certainty from all that and confidently state how “baby Jesus” would respond, you are far more insightful than I am......................Luca
|
|
davidsf
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 5,252
|
Post by davidsf on Oct 8, 2019 11:58:23 GMT -8
Rational debate - if that’s the goal - must start with a mutually accepted reality, and the debate then hinges on the interpretation of those reports the validity of which are in question. If you assume from the outset that all your interpretations of debatable reports are true and your opponent’s are false, then the discussion is pointless. It’s entirely subjective and you might as well be arguing over what is the “best” color................Luca It is not. its goal is try to antagonize and try to goad Bick into banning him. nothing he has written suggests he even knows what is rational debate, never mind intention to engage it. rational argumentation and debate is what got most of us kicked out of his other community cretins and he has had no interest in it since I first ran afoul of him before “butterfly” asked him to help rid OCConnect of me.
|
|
davidsf
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 5,252
|
Post by davidsf on Oct 8, 2019 12:01:33 GMT -8
Let's start with a mutually accepted reality. This seems to be very difficult for some people here. Ok, so why didn't you say this to Credo when he wrote: "The first "whistle blower" made false claims about Trump's phone call with Zelensky, based on hearsay." Credo certainly has no way of knowing if the whistleblower made false claims...yet you said nothing. WELL, that is not entirely accurate... when the allegation first broke, we were told the whistle-blower did not have first-hand information. you're welcome to your own opinion, but facts are facts and you don’t get to change them to suit your warped opinion.
|
|