Digest for rec.sport.golf@googlegroups.com - 25 updates in 8 topics

Wednesday, May 17, 2017

Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net>: May 17 04:04PM -0700

On 2017-05-17 4:02 PM, Moderate wrote:
 
> They did the same thing. It is a parallel.
 
> History means nothing to you, because you can't remember to wipe
> after taking a shit.
 
History won't change what is happening in the present.
 
You only use it to deflect.
Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net>: May 17 04:07PM -0700

On 2017-05-17 4:04 PM, Moderate wrote:
>> the time.
 
> I got my time line wrong, but if it wasn't a problem then how is
> it a problem now?
 
I think he wanted to give the president the benefit of the doubt if
Trump had actually let the investigation move forward unhindered, but
that he wanted to be able to record his interactions with Trump if it
should ever become necessary to substantiate that Trump was interfering
with the investigation.
 
That became necessary when Trump fired Comey.
Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net>: May 17 04:28PM -0700

On 2017-05-17 4:26 PM, Moderate wrote:
 
>> History won't change what is happening in the present.
 
>> You only use it to deflect.
 
> Wrong. A precedent has been set.
 
No. You're just trying to avoid talking about what Trump has done.
Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net>: May 17 04:44PM -0700

On 2017-05-17 4:33 PM, Moderate wrote:
 
>> That became necessary when Trump fired Comey.
 
> Obviously the President did allow the investigation to continue
> unhindered. It is at the grand jury.
 
No. A grand jury has issued some subpoenas.
 
There is literally nothing you can point to show the investigation is
complete now, let alone that it was complete back when Trump was telling
Comey to drop it.
 
Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net>: May 17 04:45PM -0700

On 2017-05-17 4:43 PM, Moderate wrote:
 
>>> Wrong. A precedent has been set.
 
>> No. You're just trying to avoid talking about what Trump has done.
 
> Happy to talk about what Trump did.
 
No. You'll do anything but.
 
 
> The same thing Obama did.
 
Nope.
Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net>: May 17 05:01PM -0700

On 2017-05-17 4:59 PM, Moderate wrote:
>> Comey to drop it.
 
> Do you forget your previous posts when you engage in these
> circular arguments or are you simply stupid?
 
I cannot forget what has not happened.
 
There is no case "at the grand jury". Period.
Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net>: May 17 05:58PM -0700

On 2017-05-17 5:34 PM, Moderate wrote:
 
>> I cannot forget what has not happened.
 
>> There is no case "at the grand jury". Period.
 
> Liar.
 
Too bad you can't produce a single thing that supports your position, huh?
 
:-)
Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net>: May 17 05:57PM -0700

...but it is damning:
 
'A month before Donald Trump clinched the Republican nomination, one of
his closest allies in Congress — House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy —
made a politically explosive assertion in a private conversation on
Capitol Hill with his fellow GOP leaders: that Trump could be the
beneficiary of payments from Russian President Vladimir Putin.
 
"There's two people I think Putin pays: Rohrabacher and Trump," McCarthy
(R-Calif.) said, according to a recording of the June 15, 2016,
exchange, which was listened to and verified by The Washington Post.
Rep. Dana Rohrabacher is a Californian Republican known in Congress as a
fervent defender of Putin and Russia.
 
House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.) immediately interjected, stopping
the conversation from further exploring McCarthy's assertion, and swore
the Republicans present to secrecy.'
 
<https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/house-majority-leader-to-colleagues-in-2016-i-think-putin-pays-trump/2017/05/17/515f6f8a-3aff-11e7-8854-21f359183e8c_story.html>
 
Oh, and I LOVED this:
 
'When initially asked to comment on the exchange, Brendan Buck, a
spokesman for Ryan, said: "That never happened," and Matt Sparks, a
spokesman for McCarthy, said: "The idea that McCarthy would assert this
is absurd and false."
 
After being told that The Post would cite a recording of the exchange,
Buck, speaking for the GOP House leadership, said: "This entire year-old
exchange was clearly an attempt at humor. No one believed the majority
leader was seriously asserting that Donald Trump or any of our members
were being paid by the Russians. What's more, the speaker and leadership
team have repeatedly spoken out against Russia's interference in our
election, and the House continues to investigate that activity."
 
"This was a failed attempt at humor," Sparks said.'
 
Straight from "false" to "Oh! Did I say false? I meant to say it
happened but it was just an attempt at humor!"
 
 
 
<https://www.washingtonpost.com/apps/g/page/national/read-the-transcript-of-the-conversation-among-gop-leaders-obtained-by-the-post/2209/?tid=a_inl>
 
Last page (in it's entirety):
 
[Unintelligible]
 
McCarthy: There's...there's two people, I think, Putin pays: Rohrabacher
and Trump...[laughter]...swear to God.
 
 
Laugh that off, wingnuts.
 
:-)
 
 
Ryan: This is off the record...[laughter]...NO LEAKS...[laughter]...alright?
 
 
[Laughter]
 
 
Ryan: This is how we know we're a real family here.
 
 
Scalise: That's how you know that we're tight.
 
 
[Laughter]
 
 
Ryan: What's said in the family stays in the family.
 
<end>
 
That's
Moderate <nospam@noemail.com>: May 17 06:02PM -0500


> You rightwingers can't stay on subject. We're discussing Trump, not
> Obama. All you're doing is not showing any realization that he's ever
> fuckedl up. Well, he has.
 
They did the same thing. It is a parallel.
 
History means nothing to you, because you can't remember to wipe
after taking a shit.
--
Moderate <nospam@noemail.com>: May 17 06:04PM -0500


>>What do you think is more likely?
 
> Very likely that he didn't think of Trump's asking him as a problem at
> the time.
 
I got my time line wrong, but if it wasn't a problem then how is
it a problem now?
--
Moderate <nospam@noemail.com>: May 17 06:08PM -0500

> lie. Just because I, and others, shoot your wild ass propositions
> they aren't lies. But you have to have an excuse. It would bother me
> except you're beneath respect.
 
I bother you plenty. :-)
--
Moderate <nospam@noemail.com>: May 17 06:17PM -0500


> And Comey didn't have a "white hat", did he?
 
> That's not what the Republicans said about him earlier.
 
> :-)
 
Really? You forgot the blow back of Comey giving Hillary a pass?
How stupid are you?
--
Moderate <nospam@noemail.com>: May 17 06:26PM -0500

>> after taking a shit.
 
> History won't change what is happening in the present.
 
> You only use it to deflect.
 
Wrong. A precedent has been set.
--
Moderate <nospam@noemail.com>: May 17 06:33PM -0500

> should ever become necessary to substantiate that Trump was interfering
> with the investigation.
 
> That became necessary when Trump fired Comey.
 
Obviously the President did allow the investigation to continue
unhindered. It is at the grand jury.
 
If Comey felt Trump was obstructing justice he was duty bound to
report it. He did not and he testified nobody influenced the
investigation.
 
Fake news.
--
Moderate <nospam@noemail.com>: May 17 06:33PM -0500


>> I bother you plenty. :-)
 
> You're easily impressed with yourself...
 
I am honest.
--
Moderate <nospam@noemail.com>: May 17 06:41PM -0500

> to the moon.
 
> And yes: I have the quotes if you insist.
 
> :-)
 
Are you really that stupid? That is like posting favorable
comments made about a person before they stabbed you in the
back.
 
Which is what Comey did.
 
 
--
Moderate <nospam@noemail.com>: May 17 06:43PM -0500

> On 2017-05-17 4:26 PM, Moderate wrote:
 
>> Wrong. A precedent has been set.
 
> No. You're just trying to avoid talking about what Trump has done.
 
Happy to talk about what Trump did.
 
The same thing Obama did.
--
Moderate <nospam@noemail.com>: May 17 06:59PM -0500


> There is literally nothing you can point to show the investigation is
> complete now, let alone that it was complete back when Trump was telling
> Comey to drop it.
 
Do you forget your previous posts when you engage in these
circular arguments or are you simply stupid?
Moderate <nospam@noemail.com>: May 17 07:34PM -0500

>> circular arguments or are you simply stupid?
 
> I cannot forget what has not happened.
 
> There is no case "at the grand jury". Period.
 
Liar.
--
Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net>: May 17 04:19PM -0700

On 2017-05-17 4:17 PM, Moderate wrote:
 
>> That's not what the Republicans said about him earlier.
 
>> :-)
 
> Really? You forgot the blow back of Comey giving Hillary a pass?
 
I'm speaking of BEFORE that, doofus.
 
When they had no reason to speak out of partisanship, they praised Comey
to the moon.
 
And yes: I have the quotes if you insist.
 
:-)
 
Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net>: May 17 04:45PM -0700

On 2017-05-17 4:41 PM, Moderate wrote:
 
> Are you really that stupid? That is like posting favorable
> comments made about a person before they stabbed you in the
> back.
 
LOL!
 
 
> Which is what Comey did.
 
Or he just acted with integrity and regard for the best traditions of
his job.
Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net>: May 17 04:09PM -0700

On 2017-05-17 4:08 PM, Moderate wrote:
>> they aren't lies. But you have to have an excuse. It would bother me
>> except you're beneath respect.
 
> I bother you plenty. :-)
 
You're easily impressed with yourself...
Carbon <nobrac@nospam.tampabay.rr.com>: May 17 07:07PM -0400

On 05/17/2017 05:01 PM, Dene wrote:
>> making is going on.
 
> He's done more in the last hundred days then your empty suit did in six
> years.
 
Agree! Trump got caught committing two impeachable offenses just this past
week and Obama didn't get caught even once in his eight years in office.
 
Lame!
Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net>: May 17 04:03PM -0700

On 2017-05-17 3:59 PM, Moderate wrote:
>> it or agree that you're FOS.
 
> Please list the unlawful actions.
> :-)
 
Where does stating that his actions COULD be unlawful become a lie?
 
What's more, you posted your statement about lies before that was ever
posted to the thread.
 
So what lie did I post?
Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net>: May 17 03:18PM -0700

"Schoolhouse Rock – I'm Just a Lie"
 
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E6LZ8G992pA>
You received this digest because you're subscribed to updates for this group. You can change your settings on the group membership page.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it send an email to rec.sport.golf+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

0 comments:

Post a Comment