The Old Man posted:

No. There was no finding of collusion  because there is no crime called collusion. Mueller said, "We did not address ‘collusion,’ which is not a legal term."

You do know that irwin is an attorney, no??  Think that's why he has "no collusion" in quotes.

PH

I think I might have actually felt a little bad for Maguire today.  Just a little, though.

He seems like a stand-up guy.  I'd bet a few bucks that he didn't want the DNI slot, but as a career military guy, probably felt he had to salute and say yes.  I think he made some bad calls, but kind of understand the quagmire he was in.  Could you imagine being in this job for just a few weeks and having a whistleblower complaint about the CIC hit your desk.  Yikes!

PH

Not commenting on the substance but my favorite line of today was when Maguire was asked if to his knowledge Giuliani had security clearance and he said he was neither aware or unaware if he had security clearance - 

I was at the dentist and I started laughing uncontrollably.  If you are not aware of something you are unaware of it.  So in fact, he is unaware of whether Giuliani has security clearance. I don't know why I found this so funny.

They thought I was crazy, and someone asked if I was a Trumper - and I started laughing even harder and said UH NO and left it there.

purplehaze posted:
The Old Man posted:

No. There was no finding of collusion  because there is no crime called collusion. Mueller said, "We did not address ‘collusion,’ which is not a legal term."

You do know that irwin is an attorney, no??  Think that's why he has "no collusion" in quotes.

PH

I am aware. And you are misquoting what he said and changing the meaning. "He said, 'Mueller's folks found, 'no EVIDENCE of collusion...'" He was in no way using quote marks as you suggest to mean "so-called" collusion.

 

 

The Old Man posted:
purplehaze posted:
The Old Man posted:

No. There was no finding of collusion  because there is no crime called collusion. Mueller said, "We did not address ‘collusion,’ which is not a legal term."

You do know that irwin is an attorney, no??  Think that's why he has "no collusion" in quotes.

PH

I am aware. And you are misquoting what he said and changing the meaning. "He said, 'Mueller's folks found, 'no EVIDENCE of collusion...'" He was in no way using quote marks as you suggest to mean "so-called" collusion.

 

 

I'm quite certain that irwin doesn't need me as defense counsel on this, so I'll let him take it from here.    

PH

jcocktosten posted:

Not commenting on the substance but my favorite line of today was when Maguire was asked if to his knowledge Giuliani had security clearance and he said he was neither aware or unaware if he had security clearance - 

I was at the dentist and I started laughing uncontrollably.  If you are not aware of something you are unaware of it.  So in fact, he is unaware of whether Giuliani has security clearance. I don't know why I found this so funny.

They thought I was crazy, and someone asked if I was a Trumper - and I started laughing even harder and said UH NO and left it there.

Does your dentist use nitrous oxide?  

PH

The transfer of the data on this Ukraine call to a server usually reserved for top secret data is also a bit of a tell on how wrong the rumpster's staff knew this call to be.  I'm a little queasy on this, but I think that now that the Dems have opened this can of worms, they have no choice but to pursue it aggressively, thoroughly and honestly.  

If, 8 years from now we still have an orange bag of Crisco in a badly tailored suit as our chief executive, they will at least be able to look back and say, "We tried."  I just hope that the Dems are retaining top-notch legal advisers on this.  This is no time to let politicians handle the legal stuff.

PH

 I don't know of anyone who thinks asking Ukraine to go after Biden was appropriate.  Trump supporters say that this is not enough for impeachment. What bugs me, apart from the phone call itself, is that the President doesn't recognize that this was inappropriate. He says it was "a beautiful phone call."  That is, he doesn't think he was wrong (has he ever?) and thus, shows no remorse and, inferentially would do it again.  So, our national security remains at risk until this fellow is out of office, one way or the other.

 

 

irwin posted:

 I don't know of anyone who thinks asking Ukraine to go after Biden was appropriate.  Trump supporters say that this is not enough for impeachment. What bugs me, apart from the phone call itself, is that the President doesn't recognize that this was inappropriate. He says it was "a beautiful phone call."  That is, he doesn't think he was wrong (has he ever?) and thus, shows no remorse and, inferentially would do it again.  So, our national security remains at risk until this fellow is out of office, one way or the other.

 

 

He simply doesn't understand, or perhaps accept, or both, the limits on his authority.  Reminds me of when Nixon said if the President did it, it's not illegal.  We know how that ended up!

irwin posted:

 I don't know of anyone who thinks asking Ukraine to go after Biden was appropriate.  Trump supporters say that this is not enough for impeachment. What bugs me, apart from the phone call itself, is that the President doesn't recognize that this was inappropriate. He says it was "a beautiful phone call."  That is, he doesn't think he was wrong (has he ever?) and thus, shows no remorse and, inferentially would do it again.  So, our national security remains at risk until this fellow is out of office, one way or the other.

 

 

Exactly as I said before this whole nonsense began having litigated against him for years and deposed him multiple times.  All entirely predictable to anyone with half a brain

President Trump told two senior Russian officials in a 2017 Oval Office meeting that he was unconcerned about Moscow’s interference in the U.S. election because the United States did the same in other countries...

The dRump ship is springing leaks like a sieve now.  More to come.  Stay tuned.  

PH

I think to all those people who declined offers to work in the Trump administration, and then to those who did. And I remember George Carlin once remarking, "Think about how stupid the 'average' American is. Then realize that half the people are more stupid than that."

billhike posted:
mikemann posted:

No hate for two days? Yer slippin 

No wine related posts or contributions? Right on track. Scrotelicker.

Pretty sure it's either scrote-licker or scrote licker.  Just one pedant's opinion.  

Funny, but I'm kind of with irwin on this.  I don't think it's Marc.

PH

mikemann posted:

No hate for two days? Yer slippin 

No hate here, just awareness and incredulity.  Here's a quote from the late great Philip Roth, posted with love just for you!

"Trump is: ignorant of government, of history, of science, of philosophy, of art, incapable of expressing or recognizing subtlety or nuance, destitute of all decency, and wielding a vocabulary of 77 words that is better called Jerkish than English,"

PH

purplehaze posted:
billhike posted:
mikemann posted:

No hate for two days? Yer slippin 

No wine related posts or contributions? Right on track. Scrotelicker.

Pretty sure it's either scrote-licker or scrote licker.  Just one pedant's opinion.  

Funny, but I'm kind of with irwin on this.  I don't think it's Marc.

PH

Check out what's for dinner thread to remove any doubt. We've seen that "both excellent" style review several hundred times from him8C732DE9-8A6D-4D21-8084-5FC73E9391BF

Attachments

Photos (1)
purplehaze posted:
mikemann posted:

No hate for two days? Yer slippin 

No hate here, just awareness and incredulity.  Here's a quote from the late great Philip Roth, posted with love just for you!

"Trump is: ignorant of government, of history, of science, of philosophy, of art, incapable of expressing or recognizing subtlety or nuance, destitute of all decency, and wielding a vocabulary of 77 words that is better called Jerkish than English,"

PH

Interestingly I have just begun reading all of Roth's books in order. Possibly the most important author of our lifetime. And oh yeah, a horrible person. But so were Frank Sinatra and Frank Lloyd Wright so what can you do?

As for Prince Myschkin's statement about hate--you'll got to be kidding me. You haven't been hearing hate here, just amazement of how corrupt and stupid the president and his sycophants are. Blackmail a foreign leader for dirt on your political opponents? That's OK? Or do you believe the lies and conspiracy theories his bootlickers and State Run television are feeding you?

And what if Obama did it? I guess you'd be applauding him right? Sure you would.

bomba503 posted:
purplehaze posted:
billhike posted:
mikemann posted:

No hate for two days? Yer slippin 

No wine related posts or contributions? Right on track. Scrotelicker.

Pretty sure it's either scrote-licker or scrote licker.  Just one pedant's opinion.  

Funny, but I'm kind of with irwin on this.  I don't think it's Marc.

PH

Check out what's for dinner thread to remove any doubt. We've seen that "both excellent" style review several hundred times from him8C732DE9-8A6D-4D21-8084-5FC73E9391BF

Not saying you're wrong, bomba.  But did a search for "both excellent" going back 30 months, and only return came up with a post from him containing both words.  The context of the usage was not congruent with your assertion.  Post a link or two to support, if you'd be so kind.  Cheers.

PH

purplehaze posted:
mikemann posted:

No hate for two days? Yer slippin 

No hate here, just awareness and incredulity.  Here's a quote from the late great Philip Roth, posted with love just for you!

"Trump is: ignorant of government, of history, of science, of philosophy, of art, incapable of expressing or recognizing subtlety or nuance, destitute of all decency, and wielding a vocabulary of 77 words that is better called Jerkish than English,"

PH

I’m happy to say it - I fucking HATE 45.

bomba503 posted:

https://forums.winespectator.c...557#2863188075597557

Sentence structure and the way we write is very revealing. Nevermind that he went back to posting on the dining thread that was home to countless of his 40K plus posts

https://forums.winespectator.c...016#6387066436519016

 

Im sure I could find plenty more but think its pretty obvious

Interesting, but not probative.  Good pulls, regardless.  Thanks!

Ph

Add Reply

Likes (0)
×
×
×
×