Digest for rec.sport.golf@googlegroups.com - 25 updates in 5 topics

Monday, July 10, 2017

-hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com>: Jul 10 01:34PM -0700

On Monday, July 10, 2017 at 3:13:12 PM UTC-4, John B. wrote:
> Where you get the idea that "normal Americans" don't care
> is beyond me.
 
His "normal Americans" is merely a "No True Scotsman" fallacy.
 
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman>
 
 
> have said repeatedly that these was no contact between them
> and any Russians. If you don't care about that, then you're
> the one who isn't normal.
 
Failure to disclose can be problematic, even if there aren't
any actual indictments for illegal collusion/etc.
 
Greg> The WH said there was no collusion between Russia and
Greg> the Trump Campaign. There were appropriate contacts.
 
But "said" means utterly nothing. If the contacts were
indeed done in a legally fully "appropriate" (disclosure
compliance) fashion, then there's a documentation trail.
 
So then where's their documentation? Did the dog eat it?
 
 
-hh
"DumbedDownUSA" <dumb.america@gmail.com>: Jul 10 08:44PM

Moderate wrote:
 
> face and don't mind sticking their heads right down in it
> again.
 
> Political theater, nothing more.
 
/sigh/
 
Repeating what I have just countered without rebutting the salient
points is just wasting my time.
 
Wait until you find a topic on which you can contribute.
"DumbedDownUSA" <dumb.america@gmail.com>: Jul 10 08:52PM

Moderate wrote:
 
> > is doing to degrade the presidency and fuck over his supporters and
> > non-supporters alike.
 
> The people who do know have said repeatedly there is nothing to it.
 
I'm not interested in what you claim. You spend to much time posting
shit you make up or do not understand. It's pointless.
"DumbedDownUSA" <dumb.america@gmail.com>: Jul 10 08:59PM

Dene wrote:
 
> Furthermore....most Americans know this is a BS red herring story.
 
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jun/15/poll-most-americans-believe-trump-interfered-russia-election-investigation
 
If it's a BS red herring it's definitely a Trump BS red herring.
BK@Onramp.net: Jul 10 04:30PM -0500

On Mon, 10 Jul 2017 20:06:06 -0000 (UTC), "DumbedDownUSA"
>> check with the Republican senators who caught hell in meeting with
>> their constituents.\
 
>About Russia?
Yep
>Were they Republican voters?
Some were. They all were upset.
BK@Onramp.net: Jul 10 04:32PM -0500

On Mon, 10 Jul 2017 15:31:07 -0500 (CDT), Moderate
 
>It is Dems who keep this nonsense alive. They have egg on their
> face and don't mind sticking their heads right down in it
> again.
 
Wrong.
 
>Political theater, nothing more.
 
You wish.
BK@Onramp.net: Jul 10 04:34PM -0500

On Mon, 10 Jul 2017 15:33:42 -0500 (CDT), Moderate
>> to degrade the presidency and fuck over his supporters and
>> non-supporters alike.
 
>The people who do know have said repeatedly there is nothing to it.
 
You and Greg.
 
>Go ahead and wallow in it again.
 
We'll go with the findings of the nonpartisan committee.
Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net>: Jul 10 03:14PM -0700

>>> non-supporters alike.
 
>> The people who do know have said repeatedly there is nothing to it.
 
> You and Greg.
 
That would imply he knows something when the truth is he is not just
ignorant, but willfully so.
 
Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net>: Jul 10 03:54PM -0700

On 2017-07-10 1:34 PM, -hh wrote:
> compliance) fashion, then there's a documentation trail.
 
> So then where's their documentation? Did the dog eat it?
 
> -hh
 
And since they first denied that the contacts had happened, why should
we believe them now?
 
:-)
Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net>: Jul 10 05:41PM -0700

On 2017-07-10 5:38 PM, Moderate wrote:
>> shit you make up or do not understand. It's pointless.
 
> Sorry, I thought you kept up with testimony. You really aren't
> prepared to understand.
 
What testimony is that?
 
There is a difference between the answer "I have seen no evidence" and
"I've seen everything and there is nothing to it".
 
No one has testified in the latter form.
BK@Onramp.net: Jul 10 07:53PM -0500

On Mon, 10 Jul 2017 19:38:38 -0500 (CDT), Moderate
>> shit you make up or do not understand. It's pointless.
 
>Sorry, I thought you kept up with testimony. You really aren't
> prepared to understand.
 
He's more knowledgeable than you.
Moderate <nospam@noemail.com>: Jul 10 03:31PM -0500

> might have been, especially if there were no collusion; it is the
> misrepresenations, the lies and the abuse of position that has been the
> signature of the administration.
 
It is Dems who keep this nonsense alive. They have egg on their
face and don't mind sticking their heads right down in it
again.
 
Political theater, nothing more.
--
Moderate <nospam@noemail.com>: Jul 10 03:33PM -0500

> attention on Russia is distracting for all the other things he is doing
> to degrade the presidency and fuck over his supporters and
> non-supporters alike.
 
The people who do know have said repeatedly there is nothing to it.
 
Go ahead and wallow in it again.
 
--
Moderate <nospam@noemail.com>: Jul 10 07:35PM -0500


> ...but...but... BENGAZI! er, HILLARY!
 
> -hh
 
No kidding. We haven't seen Trump make any judgements as poor as
Hillary.
--
Moderate <nospam@noemail.com>: Jul 10 07:38PM -0500


>> The people who do know have said repeatedly there is nothing to it.
 
> I'm not interested in what you claim. You spend to much time posting
> shit you make up or do not understand. It's pointless.
 
Sorry, I thought you kept up with testimony. You really aren't
prepared to understand.
--
Moderate <nospam@noemail.com>: Jul 10 07:42PM -0500

> <nospam@noemail.com> wrote:
 
>>The people who do know have said repeatedly there is nothing to it.
 
> You and Greg.
 
... and Comey, Feinstein, Pelosi, Schiff, Intelligence Chiefs of
both Administrations, CNN contributors...
Moderate <nospam@noemail.com>: Jul 10 07:44PM -0500


> ...and what do you make of that?
 
> I mean, even for you it's pretty stupid. It demonstrates your very poor
> comprehension of English if not politics and geography.
 
The evidence is clear. Trump is not drawing erasable red lines.
 
 
--
"John B." <johnb505@gmail.com>: Jul 10 01:33PM -0700

On Monday, July 10, 2017 at 3:38:03 PM UTC-4, MNMikeW wrote:
 
> > Not when the program was initiated.
 
> The program DID NOT ALLOW FOR CELL PHONES UNTIL 2008. What happened to
> the program once cell phones were allowed?
 
Gee, I don't know, Mike. But this is obviously a hugely important
issue that merits our intense scrutiny. That will provide a nice
distraction from the disastrous Trump administration.
MNMikeW <mnmiikkew@aol.com>: Jul 10 03:35PM -0500

John B. wrote:
 
> Gee, I don't know, Mike. But this is obviously a hugely important
> issue that merits our intense scrutiny. That will provide a nice
> distraction from the disastrous Trump administration.
 
B-b-b-but...but...
-hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com>: Jul 10 01:38PM -0700

On Monday, July 10, 2017 at 4:35:43 PM UTC-4, MNMikeW wrote:
> > issue that merits our intense scrutiny. That will provide a nice
> > distraction from the disastrous Trump administration.
 
> B-b-b-but...but...
 
 
...but...but... BENGAZI! er, HILLARY!
 
 
-hh
"DumbedDownUSA" <dumb.america@gmail.com>: Jul 10 08:39PM


> On Mon, 10 Jul 2017 19:23:22 -0000 (UTC), "DumbedDownUSA"
> <dumb.america@gmail.com> wrote:
 
> > BK@Onramp.net wrote:
 
http://www.knowyourmobile.com/nokia/nokia-3310/19848/history-mobile-phones-1973-2008-handsets-made-it-all-happen
> > resident troll.
 
> Surely you aren't referring to me as a troll. I posted the
> original comment for a specific reason.
 
No, I misremembered. Sorry.
 
A little frustration with these non-stories that you guys like to dwell
on.
Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net>: Jul 10 05:37PM -0700

On 2017-07-10 5:35 PM, Moderate wrote:
 
>> -hh
 
> No kidding. We haven't seen Trump make any judgements as poor as
> Hillary.
 
We haven't seen Trump make a single judgement that isn't terrible.
Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net>: Jul 10 05:26PM -0700

Then:
 
In March, Donald Trump Jr. told the New York Times,
 
"Did I meet with people that were Russian? I'm sure, I'm sure I did,"
Don Jr. said. "But none that were set up. None that I can think of at
the moment. And certainly none that I was representing the campaign in
any way."
 
Now:
 
"Obviously I'm the first person on a campaign to ever take a meeting to
hear info about an opponent... went nowhere but had to listen."
 
<https://twitter.com/DonaldJTrumpJr/status/884395618784993280?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fthinkprogress.org%2Fmedia%2Fcaabe6d6115d4f961198e6ac8bc3a34e%3FpostId%3Dce10237a6ce9>
Carbon <nobrac@nospam.tampabay.rr.com>: Jul 10 04:59PM -0400

>>> those.
 
>> I have told you five times.
 
> Told me what?

That he's incapable of rational thought.
Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net>: Jul 10 02:57PM -0700

On 2017-07-10 1:12 PM, MNMikeW wrote:
 
>> Good to know who you consider someone who really was knowledgeable
>> about the program.
 
> That is where the term originated. She's clueless. Like most liberals.
 
You don't know that...
 
 
...but honesty doesn't matter as long as you believe in your cause.
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