Another nail in the traitors coffin.

[JimL]

Jim - PLEASE learn the difference between 'your' (possessive) and 'you're' (contraction), OK? Especially when you're accusing somebody else of being dumb.

Lemme give you a little hint... if you can break it into two words, it's a contraction.

Here's an example - when you say "like your too dumb", you really mean "like you are too dumb" -- see? Two words represented by the contraction "you're". So that would be "like you're too dumb".

Otherwise, you expose yourself as the idiot you're accusing others of being.

I'll be glad to point you to some good resources on Grammar to help you out, since you're too lazy to Google things yourself.

CP, please learn to stay on topic. I don't mind your pointing out of my spelling errors at all, I understand it makes you feel better about yourself, it's okay, doesnt bother me, but when attacking me personally please try to at least stay focused on the topic at hand. I gave you the source you all cried for and then this is the response that the article gets. And then you wonder why I don't bother posting a source that you can easily google for yourself if you had any real interest in those fact thingies.

[Cow Poke]

CP, please learn to stay on topic. I don't mind your pointing out of my spelling errors at all, I understand it makes you feel better about yourself, it's okay, doesnt bother me,

Doesn't seem to help you, either.

but when attacking me personally

Awwwwww, dud poor widdle Jimmy feel attacked?

please try to at least stay focused on the topic at hand. I gave you the source you all cried for and then this is the response that the article gets. And then you wonder why I don't bother posting a source that you can easily google for yourself if you had any real interest in those fact thingies.

Can you PLEASE get back on topic, Jim, and stop this silliness?

[JimL]

Doesn't seem to help you, either.



Awwwwww, dud poor widdle Jimmy feel attacked?



Can you PLEASE get back on topic, Jim, and stop this silliness?

I see, just as I said, CP can't handle the truth.

[rogue06]

I see, just as I said, CP can't handle the truth.

You've shown no ability to recognize truth even if it came up and bit you on the butt. You just make assertions that you cannot back up.

[JimL]

You've shown no ability to recognize truth even if it came up and bit you on the butt. You just make assertions that you cannot back up.

Well, we shall see who was, and who was not, able to recognize truth once this investigation ends.

[Tassman]

NO, JimL let me see if if I can put this simply and give you a warning. YOU make the assertion of something with no facts it is not up to us to find the facts it is up to you to show those facts with cites. Any more assertions without cites to your source will be called for what they are hot air from an idiot who lets others do the thinking for him.

Don't want to be called an idiot stop acting like one.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry...b0b15aba8b9da8http://www.businessinsider.com/trump...rts-say-2018-7

[rogue06]

Well, we shall see who was, and who was not, able to recognize truth once this investigation ends.

Truth is not wishful thinking since you continue to pontificate without ever offering a scintilla of evidence to support your allegations.

[rogue06]

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry...b0b15aba8b9da8http://www.businessinsider.com/trump...rts-say-2018-7

Again, if Trump were to have condemned the Russians for meddling the MSM would have merely twisted that and the headlines would read "Trump Admits His Election Is Illegitimate" and "Trump Admits Election Was Tainted"

[Cow Poke]

I see, just as I said, CP can't handle the truth.

A) The fact that you said it puts it in extreme doubt
2) JimL can't handle Sesame Street

[Mountain Man]

Jim - PLEASE learn the difference between 'your' (possessive) and 'you're' (contraction), OK? Especially when you're accusing somebody else of being dumb.

Lemme give you a little hint... if you can break it into two words, it's a contraction.

Here's an example - when you say "like your too dumb", you really mean "like you are too dumb" -- see? Two words represented by the contraction "you're". So that would be "like you're too dumb".

Otherwise, you expose yourself as the idiot you're accusing others of being.

I'll be glad to point you to some good resources on Grammar to help you out, since you're too lazy to Google things yourself.

What's funny is that he got "to" and "too" correct, so it does seem he put at least some effort into his composition.

[Mountain Man]

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry...b0b15aba8b9da8

As I've pointed out before, if you dig down to the original New York Times story, you'll notice that it is 100% anonymously sourced which should raise all kinds of red flags, especially when dealing with a disreputable rag like The New York Times.

Meanwhile, a named source has gone on the record to accuse Obama of turning a blind eye to Russian election meddling, and yet we're supposed to believe that it's all Trump's fault? Yeah, OK.

[One Bad Pig]

Well, we shall see who was, and who was not, able to recognize truth once this investigation ends.

One side here has rushed to verdict without evidence; the other side is waiting for evidence before deciding on a verdict. You might be right in the end, but not because of any ability to "recognize truth."

[One Bad Pig]

As I've pointed out before, if you dig down to the original New York Times story, you'll notice that it is 100% anonymously sourced which should raise all kinds of red flags, especially when dealing with a disreputable rag like The New York Times.

Meanwhile, a named source has gone on the record to accuse Obama of turning a blind eye to Russian election meddling, and yet we're supposed to believe that it's all Trump's fault? Yeah, OK.

Who needs authoritative sources when you've got an opinion site to rely on?

[rogue06]

What's funny is that he got "to" and "too" correct, so it does seem he put at least some effort into his composition.

Stopped clock and all that.

[rogue06]

As I've pointed out before, if you dig down to the original New York Times story, you'll notice that it is 100% anonymously sourced which should raise all kinds of red flags, especially when dealing with a disreputable rag like The New York Times.

Meanwhile, a named source has gone on the record to accuse Obama of turning a blind eye to Russian election meddling, and yet we're supposed to believe that it's all Trump's fault? Yeah, OK.

Let's not forget that in Mueller's most recent incitement announced by Rod Rosenstein the latter stated matter-of-factly that not a single vote was changed nor was the election outcome affected by any of this. Yet the TDS squad here keeps squawking and squeaking about collusion and Putin getting Trump elected.

Moreover, FBI director Christopher Wray declared at a conference held at the Aspen Institute for Humanistic Studies (a think tank that US News & World Report ranks as centrist) that "[The Russians] do not tamper in our infrastructure. They try to destabilize the integrity of our system by usually backing losers and getting the losers all upset claiming something went awry, and that promotes disharmony and distrust of the election system."