Digest for rec.sport.golf@googlegroups.com - 25 updates in 3 topics

Wednesday, June 7, 2017

"John B." <johnb505@gmail.com>: Jun 07 01:14PM -0700

On Wednesday, June 7, 2017 at 3:18:20 PM UTC-4, Dene wrote:
> Sorry haters. No crime with Trump's request regarding Flynn. Naive yes....crime no.
 
Who says?
Dene <gdstrue@aol.com>: Jun 07 01:54PM -0700

On Wednesday, June 7, 2017 at 3:18:20 PM UTC-4, Dene wrote:
> Sorry haters. No crime with Trump's request regarding Flynn. Naive yes....crime no.
 
Who says?
 
Believe it or not, an hours worth of commentary on the Clinton news network. CNN. Plenty of partisan criticism but insufficient evidence to indict.
BK@Onramp.net: Jun 07 04:07PM -0500


>Sorry haters. No crime with Trump's request regarding Flynn. Naive yes....crime no.
 
Quick. Call Richard Burr and tell him to call off the committee.
You've made the decision for them.
Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net>: Jun 07 03:01PM -0700

On 2017-06-07 1:54 PM, Dene wrote:
 
> Who says?
 
> Believe it or not, an hours worth of commentary on the Clinton news network. CNN. Plenty of partisan criticism but insufficient evidence to indict.
 
On the basis of Comey's statement alone...
Dene <gdstrue@aol.com>: Jun 07 03:32PM -0700


>Sorry haters. No crime with Trump's request regarding Flynn. Naive yes....crime no.
 
Quick. Call Richard Burr and tell him to call off the committee.
You've made the decision for them.
 
Did the RAT hack into BK's account? Mindless retort is straight out of his playbook.
Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net>: Jun 07 03:45PM -0700

On 2017-06-07 3:32 PM, Dene wrote:
 
> Quick. Call Richard Burr and tell him to call off the committee.
> You've made the decision for them.
 
> Did the RAT hack into BK's account? Mindless retort is straight out of his playbook.
 
Will he be hacking into your playbook, Greg, when he starts hiding
behind a killfile and taking cheap shots?
 
:-)
"John B." <johnb505@gmail.com>: Jun 07 03:46PM -0700

On Wednesday, June 7, 2017 at 4:54:04 PM UTC-4, Dene wrote:
> > Sorry haters. No crime with Trump's request regarding Flynn. Naive yes....crime no.
 
> Who says?
 
> Believe it or not, an hours worth of commentary on the Clinton news network. CNN. Plenty of partisan criticism but insufficient evidence to indict.
 
I'm not saying Trump is guilty of anything, but CNN is not the
arbiter of his guilt or innocence. Comey's opening statement does
not say he is or isn't guilty of a crime.
BK@Onramp.net: Jun 07 05:51PM -0500


>Quick. Call Richard Burr and tell him to call off the committee.
>You've made the decision for them.
 
>Did the RAT hack into BK's account? Mindless retort is straight out of his playbook.
 
Whose playbook is making a statement of fact without detailed
knowledge of the situation?
Dene <gdstrue@aol.com>: Jun 07 03:56PM -0700

I'm not saying Trump is guilty of anything, but CNN is not the
arbiter of his guilt or innocence. Comey's opening statement does
not say he is or isn't guilty of a crime.
 
Completely agree...but if there was a criminal case, CNN would be the first to jump on the impeachment or lock him up bandwagon.
 
IMO...Comey's testimony is the one sided account of a disgruntled, incompetent Federal employee.
Dene <gdstrue@aol.com>: Jun 07 03:57PM -0700

- show quoted text -
Whose playbook is making a statement of fact without detailed
knowledge of the situation?
 
The playbook you two have in common is criticizing what others say without really saying anything yourself.
Carbon <nobrac@nospam.tampabay.rr.com>: Jun 07 07:21PM -0400

On 06/07/2017 03:18 PM, Dene wrote:
 
> Sorry haters. No crime with Trump's request regarding Flynn. Corrupt yes....crime no.

Fixed it for you.
Carbon <nobrac@nospam.tampabay.rr.com>: Jun 07 07:27PM -0400

On 06/07/2017 06:56 PM, Dene wrote:
 
> IMO...Comey's testimony is the one sided account of a disgruntled, incompetent Federal employee.

It's not just your opinion. It's shared by millions of far-right extremists all across the country. However, the people who matter are going to take what Comey has to say very seriously.
 
Trump's aggregated approval rating is now at 38.3%. Once that dips into the 20's he's going to have a very difficult time keeping a lid on things.
 
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/trump-approval-ratings/
Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net>: Jun 07 04:29PM -0700

On 2017-06-07 3:56 PM, Dene wrote:
> not say he is or isn't guilty of a crime.
 
> Completely agree...but if there was a criminal case, CNN would be the first to jump on the impeachment or lock him up bandwagon.
 
> IMO...Comey's testimony is the one sided account of a disgruntled, incompetent Federal employee.
 
That's good...
 
...get your mythology in place early.
 
You didn't seem to think he was incompetent when he was revealing emails
that turned out to be nothing just days before the election
BK@Onramp.net: Jun 07 06:30PM -0500

>Whose playbook is making a statement of fact without detailed
>knowledge of the situation?
 
>The playbook you two have in common is criticizing what others say without really saying anything yourself.
 
Some things do not need to be said. One in particular is stating
facts without knowing them.
Dene <gdstrue@aol.com>: Jun 07 05:24PM -0700

On 06/07/2017 03:18 PM, Dene wrote:
 
> Sorry haters. No crime with Trump's request regarding Flynn. Corrupt yes....crime no.

Fixed it for you.
 
Clever...but inaccurate.
Dene <gdstrue@aol.com>: Jun 07 05:27PM -0700

Some things do not need to be said. One in particular is stating
facts without knowing them.
 
By all means all knowing Knight...share your facts. Educate we weedhoppers.
Moderate <nospam@noemail.com>: Jun 07 02:56PM -0500

https://tinyurl.com/yb7dwdmt
Moderate <nospam@noemail.com>: Jun 07 06:39PM -0500


>>The playbook you two have in common is criticizing what others say without really saying anything yourself.
 
> Some things do not need to be said. One in particular is stating
> facts without knowing them.
 
We listen to you do that everyday.
 
I told you the collusion was a dead end.
--
"John B." <johnb505@gmail.com>: Jun 07 01:19PM -0700

On Wednesday, June 7, 2017 at 2:45:37 PM UTC-4, MNMikeW wrote:
 
> >> http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/06/07/fast-and-furious-report-slams-holder-doj-for-deception-in-gun-running-scandal.html
 
> > Please note the word "allegedly" in the first paragraph.
 
> Perhaps it's time for Trump to unseal these records.
 
A) Jeff Sessions is an idiot
B) Townhall is not a trustworthy source
C) Obama isn't president anymore
MNMikeW <mnmiikkew@aol.com>: Jun 07 03:22PM -0500

John B. wrote:
 
>>> Please note the word "allegedly" in the first paragraph.
 
>> Perhaps it's time for Trump to unseal these records.
 
> A) Jeff Sessions is an idiot
Your opinion
> B) Townhall is not a trustworthy source
LOL. More trustworthy than CNN.
> C) Obama isn't president anymore
Thank fucking God.
BK@Onramp.net: Jun 07 04:11PM -0500

> LOL. More trustworthy than CNN.
>> C) Obama isn't president anymore
> Thank fucking God.
Compared to who is in the White House he's a genius.
BK@Onramp.net: Jun 07 05:47PM -0500

On Wed, 07 Jun 2017 15:22:42 -0500, MNMikeW <mnmiikkew@aol.com> wrote:
 
 
<Clip>
>John B. wrote:
>> A) Jeff Sessions is an idiot
> Your opinion
 
Do you know his background Mike? Pretty seedy.
-hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com>: Jun 07 03:58PM -0700

MNMikeW wrote:
> I believe this started in 2015.
 
The article you cited says that the one group has been complaining about the practice
since 2010, so Mike's "2015" is definitely wrong.
 
And since these things take some time to develop patterns of abuse, it seems very
likely that if complaints didn't start until 2010 thst its genesis must have been substantially
earlier ... which makes it a pretty safe bet that it could have been pre-Obama.
 
So how about finding is a good literary cite for its pre-2010 start, with clear attributions?
Thanks!
 
-hh
Dene <gdstrue@aol.com>: Jun 07 03:58PM -0700

On Wed, 07 Jun 2017 15:22:42 -0500, MNMikeW <mnmi...@aol.com> wrote:
 
 
<Clip>
>John B. wrote:
>> A) Jeff Sessions is an idiot
> Your opinion
 
Do you know his background Mike? Pretty seedy.
 
Saintly compared to the two previous idiots that Obama appointed.
BK@Onramp.net: Jun 07 06:33PM -0500

>> Your opinion
 
>Do you know his background Mike? Pretty seedy.
 
>Saintly compared to the two previous idiots that Obama appointed.
 
So you do know his background? Start with his lying about Russian
correspondence and then having to recuse himself from the
investigation of such. Then go back to Alabama in the 50s.
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