Page 3 of 4
Re: Trump's conflicts of interest
Posted: Fri Feb 03, 2017 1:34 pm
by edwardmurphy
Hortator wrote:The plural form of "anecdote" is data.
Nice try, but no.
Hortator wrote:How many stories like Berkely does it take before these isolated spots on a map start to form a constellation that looks like a familiar shape? Not many, considering the Greeks thought 5 stars was a cow.
So...
- How many racist Trump supporters does it take to show that Trump supporters are racist?
- How many ignorant Christians does it take to demonstrate that Christians are ignorant?
- How many philandering reverends and pedophile priests does it take to show that clergy tend to be sexual deviants?
- How many white men need to be convicted of rape before we can declare that white men are predisposed to be rapists?
In each instance there are surely enough of the former to "start to form a constellation" that looks like the latter, particularly if the viewer already sees those patterns everywhere he looks. That doesn't make any of them true. All it proves is that punditry is easy. Hell, if I was as immoral as some here have claimed I'd be making good money peddling conspiratorial nonsense to the Breitbart and Infowars crowd.
Re: Trump's conflicts of interest
Posted: Fri Feb 03, 2017 1:51 pm
by edwardmurphy
Stu wrote:Man some of these letists are really losing their minds now. Threatening woman and innocent children is easy, why don't they come after a harder target. If I would get my hands on people like this I would twist their necks until they go blue.
ANTIFA THREATENS YOUNG DAUGHTER OF PRO-TRUMP JOURNALIST
The thing about crazy people is that they're crazy. Hopefully these people will get their accounts banned. And hopefully the people freaking out about this will say exactly what I just said next time some alt-right crackpot does
precisely the same thing.
Seriously, enough of this tit-for-tat, they-did-it-first [nonsense]. Be a decent human being and condemn it where ever you see it, regardless of who's side the scumbag claims to be on.
Re: Trump's conflicts of interest
Posted: Fri Feb 03, 2017 2:17 pm
by RickD
edwardmurphy wrote:Stu wrote:Man some of these letists are really losing their minds now. Threatening woman and innocent children is easy, why don't they come after a harder target. If I would get my hands on people like this I would twist their necks until they go blue.
ANTIFA THREATENS YOUNG DAUGHTER OF PRO-TRUMP JOURNALIST
The thing about crazy people is that they're crazy. Hopefully these people will get their accounts banned. And hopefully the people freaking out about this will say exactly what I just said next time some alt-right crackpot does
precisely the same thing.
Seriously, enough of this tit-for-tat, they-did-it-first [nonsense]. Be a decent human being and condemn it where ever you see it, regardless of who's side the scumbag claims to be on.
Ed,
You're actually making sense. You feeling ok?
Re: Trump's conflicts of interest
Posted: Sat Feb 04, 2017 9:23 am
by edwardmurphy
I always make sense, Rick. The fact that you're noticing it now indicates that you're having a moment of clarity.
Re: Trump's conflicts of interest
Posted: Sat Feb 04, 2017 10:38 am
by RickD
edwardmurphy wrote:I always make sense, Rick. The fact that you're noticing it now indicates that you're having a moment of clarity.
You always make sense
to yourself. What I meant, was that you're making sense to someone besides yourself.
Re: Trump's conflicts of interest
Posted: Mon Feb 06, 2017 8:42 pm
by abelcainsbrother
Dem Rep Waters: Trump investigation underway; Evidence not required for impeachment.
http://www.breitbart.com/video/2017/02/ ... peachment/
Re: Trump's conflicts of interest
Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2017 2:03 am
by Stu
Re: Trump's conflicts of interest
Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2017 7:04 am
by edwardmurphy
The Dems don't have the votes to impeach Sideshow Don. The Republicans do, though, and I think that most of them would prefer to have Mike Pence in the Oval Office. Right now, all over Washington, Republican lawmakers are calculating whether or not they can jettison him without losing their base in the process. If he strings together enough scandals, fights, and instances of erratic behavior they might just decide to roll the dice.
There's no connection between Brady-hate - which has been a thing since America learned about the tuck rule - and Sideshow Don. Brady hate is no different than Aikman, Jordan, Bryant, Clemens, or Gretzky hate. Sports fans hate dominant players from rival teams. It has nothing to do with politics. Infowars is spoon-feeding you [nonsense] and you're thoughtlessly lapping it up because it fits with your silly, paranoid narrative.
Re: Trump's conflicts of interest
Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2017 12:08 pm
by abelcainsbrother
edwardmurphy wrote:
The Dems don't have the votes to impeach Sideshow Don. The Republicans do, though, and I think that most of them would prefer to have Mike Pence in the Oval Office. Right now, all over Washington, Republican lawmakers are calculating whether or not they can jettison him without losing their base in the process. If he strings together enough scandals, fights, and instances of erratic behavior they might just decide to roll the dice.
There's no connection between Brady-hate - which has been a thing since America learned about the tuck rule - and Sideshow Don. Brady hate is no different than Aikman, Jordan, Bryant, Clemens, or Gretzky hate. Sports fans hate dominant players from rival teams. It has nothing to do with politics. Infowars is spoon-feeding you [nonsense] and you're thoughtlessly lapping it up because it fits with your silly, paranoid narrative.
The establishment in both parties was soundly rejected in this election.Even before Trump won we knew politicians in both parties would try to stifle Trump's agenda and that our fight was just beginning once Trump wins. We know how these politicians work in Washington and anything they try to stifle Trump will only hurt themselves,but impeachment? Not going to happen. Trump already has a plan to deal with Republicans if he has to.He is giving them a fair chance right now. They already can't keep up with Trump and how much he works.As long as Trump fights for what he ran on,he will be fine.
Re: Trump's conflicts of interest
Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2017 3:20 pm
by edwardmurphy
abelcainsbrother wrote:Trump already has a plan to deal with Republicans if he has to.He is giving them a fair chance right now.
Really? What's his plan?
Re: Trump's conflicts of interest
Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2017 3:35 pm
by RickD
edwardmurphy wrote:abelcainsbrother wrote:Trump already has a plan to deal with Republicans if he has to.He is giving them a fair chance right now.
Really? What's his plan?
His plan for the Republicans, is to ban them from remaining in the country...and make Mexico pay for it. Then blame the media.
Re: Trump's conflicts of interest
Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2017 3:44 pm
by abelcainsbrother
edwardmurphy wrote:abelcainsbrother wrote:Trump already has a plan to deal with Republicans if he has to.He is giving them a fair chance right now.
Really? What's his plan?
Trump has been planning this for a long time including if he ever actually won and becomes the President.I don't actually know what he will do,I just know he's been planing this for a long time.He is not faking it and intends to do what he's ran on. This is how he defeated so many people,especially on the Republican side and won. He has done his homework.You have to have an understanding of Trump to understand how he has planned out everything,including how to deal with politicians if he wins. He's been using it throughout the whole election. You just have'nt been paying attention to how he operates,I have.It is from observation of paying attention to Trump and seeing how he operates that I know he has a plan to deal with politicians if he has to,even those in his own party.
Re: Trump's conflicts of interest
Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2017 7:15 pm
by edwardmurphy
abelcainsbrother wrote:He has done his homework.
Re: Trump's conflicts of interest
Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2017 10:15 pm
by abelcainsbrother
edwardmurphy wrote:abelcainsbrother wrote:He has done his homework.
Whatever,I did'nt expect you to believe me. Believe what you want to but you do realize an outsider,political novice like Trump,he went up against the establishment in both parties with both parties trying to undermine him with 24/7 Trump bashing with the MSM firing everything they have at Trump,with all of the political experts,billions of dollars,political think tanks and their political strategies,with the usual liberal lies and slander they use against Republicans every election and he won. He won because he did his homework and knew their weaknesses and he exploited them and they still have not hurt him politically at all.It backfires on them actually.He is running rings around them and exposing them even now. People no longer trust the MSM and he has weakened them and their influence,their credibility is in the tank.You don't do this what Trump has did spending only millions of dollars,alot less money,unless you know what you are going up against and Trump does and he exploits them. And you doubt he has a plan on how to deal with Republicans if he needs to? What election were you watching?
Re: Trump's conflicts of interest
Posted: Wed Feb 08, 2017 7:54 am
by edwardmurphy
In the election that I watched a know-nothing demagogue used lies and hyperbole to exploit peoples' fear of chance and fear of the unknown. He repeatedly demonstrated that he knows nothing about history, the responsibilities of the office of President, or the Constitution. His ignorance was exposed time and again, and he never took any steps to address it. Trump knows how to whip a crowd into a frenzy, how to spread distrust and lies, and how to utilize chaos and fear to his own advantage.
So no, I don't think he has a plan for anything other than, perhaps, how to use the Presidency to enrich himself and his family.
Honestly, ACB, I'm rooting for him to do a decent job. This is my country, after all. This is where my daughter's will grow up. But based on everything that I've seen, Donald J. Trump is a clueless, divisive stooge who lacks the intellect, temprament, work ethic, and knowledge to successfully lead our country.