Jump to content

HOOK'EMHOOAH

Burnt Ends
  • Posts

    3518
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by HOOK'EMHOOAH

  1. Just now, Tommy Shelby said:

    I will say that Jett Duffey reminds me of Zebbie Lethridge especially in the throwback unis. let's just hope he doesn't want to walk out of Dillard's without paying for things.

    I imagine there is a briefing with all players now because of that incident.

    • Haha 1
  2. Just now, Tommy Shelby said:

    Which fanbase brags the most about their alumni network over the rankings and successes over individual students?

    You asserted that a liberal arts degree is worthless. I didn't get a liberal arts degree from anywhere. But that's beside the point. A degree from Texas opens doors where degrees from elsewhere won't.

  3. Just now, Tommy Shelby said:

    Yeah because that top notch liberal arts degree from UT is going to really open some doors

    The alumni network is among the largest in the country.

  4. 3 minutes ago, NowThis said:

    Tx Tech cheerleaders are the best in the country.  UCLA/Oregon are perennial top 3 but TT is Mt. Everest.

    Not hard to imagine why. Lots of talent with nothing rattling up top to help them get a degree worth more than a 2nd high school diploma.

  5. 11 minutes ago, Tommy Shelby said:

    Yeah, it's pretty much over now. Is there no more tackling in practice?

    It was determined to be too big a risk, so now they play patty-cake.

    • Haha 1
  6. 1 minute ago, texifornia said:

    So while we're at the quarter break, has anyone seen any of the Clemson game? It's only 3-0. Is Lawrence broken?

    Yup. Bojack Horseman is always broken

  7. 1 minute ago, texifornia said:

    Fox seems to have forgotten to queue up the ads for the streaming services, so I get 2-3 minutes of silence every commercial break. It's a bit nice, a bit eerie.

    I'd rather have that than these shitsipping commercials.

  8. 29 minutes ago, texifornia said:

    Oh dang, screw the boring SEC matchup, happy to watch this. No idea who's going to show up on either team - they're both well-coached but a bit schizophrenic.

    Rose's are red

    Violets are blue

    I'm schizophrenic

    And so am I

    • Like 1
  9. 3 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

    Yep, I find it difficult to believe that they bother eavesdropping on the call in an official capacity without creating both (or at least one of) a recording and a transcript of that recording.

    That they are stored on a very secure server is initially not nefarious at all.  

    And, none of this addresses whether any such recording or transcript has been altered or deleted by the Administration.

    One possible explanation as to why the whistleblowers might not have done something like that is it's clear they work in a secure environment. The rules and regulations governing working in such an environment dictate that any device that could possibly be used to record anything that isn't first cleared to be in said environment is prohibited. That wouldn't explain not transcribing the phone call, but it would possibly be increasingly difficult with other people around.

  10. 23 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

    It has to be exhausting for Congressional Republicans to maintain sanity and keep their conspiracy theories straight.  They’ve been at this for several years now going back to Benghazi. 

    I kinda think it's the other way around. The more insane they become, the more they are able to cook up crackpot shitpost ideas.

  11. 40 minutes ago, sheeeit said:

    Lulz.  Where does he make that distinction?  I swear you guys have lost your brains.

    The WH situation room made their transcript of the call.  Using the same exact process that they always use.  Apparently the lawyers here have a hard on for whether it was made from notes, or voice activated software or some other method but everyone seems to acknowledge that the transcript was made in "real time" as the call was happening.

    That transcript was then classified (as all calls are initially) and, according to the whistle blower, placed in a more secure server than some other calls' transcripts.

    The whistle blowers' report comes out and then, after that, the POTUS declassified the call and released the official transcript created by the WH situation room that was on the secure server.  The disclaimer on the situation room transcript is on every single one of them they do.  They have explained it multiple times.  The disclaimer exists because sometimes it is difficult to hear every word of the call.  It does not mean, at all, that there are parts of the call that were omitted.  I realize you dorks think there is some other secret transcript out there but there just isnt.

    The attorney representing the whistle blower, Mark Zaid (who is an outspoken critic of Trump and openly advertised for whistle blowers to come forward- and I mention this not because I think the attorney is not being honest, I think he is, but to demonstrate that he would not hold anything back), also has a second blower that he says has direct knowledge of the call.  So for the latest crack pot conspiracy (that there exists a different transcript of the call that is more complete or has more info or whatever) to be true, then we must all believe that when POTUS said the entire transcript of the call from the WH situation room was released was lying.  That somehow, they altered/doctored the official transcript to hide something.  However, none of you have even tried to respond to the fact that if POTUS is lying about the transcript being the complete call, that this new 2nd whistle blower who is represented by the attorney who hates Trump and who was listening to the call in real time, is just letting the lie by POTUS go unchecked.  That is simply preposterous.  If Trump did lie about the transcript being complete and it comes out that there is, in fact, a longer transcript then that is better grounds for impeachment than the context of the call.  Schiff and  Zaid and the rest would be all over it. 

    I would love for one of you to actually say that you truly think a second more complete copy of the transcript exists.  Lets go on record.  

    How about this, instead of worrying about transcripts or contemporaneous notes about the call, the executive branch retrieve the recording of the call from the clandestine server its stored in - which is in itself against the purpose of said server - and let it stand on it's own with the legislature. That way, whatever couldn't be "transcribed" due to technical issues or anything else. That is really the best way to get to the bottom of the issue regarding the call.

  12. 11 minutes ago, sheeeit said:

    A lot to unpack here.  You really do not understand what you are talking about.

    The whistle blower referred to the " official word-for-word transcript of the call that was produced-as is customary-by the White House Situation Room. "  

    The document that was released by the WH was that exact document.  Not a summary of the transcript, the same transcript.  There is no other document.  The one released is the official situation room document.  The exact document that was classified and placed on the secure server.  The exact one the whistle blower was referring to.

    You are clearly trying to imply that there exists another transcript.  There is zero evidence anywhere that another document exists.  Listen carefully- dozens of people listened to the call, including the very same people that told the whistle blower about the call.  You want us to believe that the WH released a doctored or abbreviated or something similar transcript to the public, and told the public it was the official situation room transcript, and that not one of the dozen people who heard the call- again including the ones that informed the whistle blower about how bad it was- have claimed that it was not the whole transcript.  No one who heard the call has questioned this.  No one.  You are just wrong.  (note- you need to tell the other lawyers hammering me on my word choice that the whistle blower is a "lying, fucking liar" for saying that the situation room transcript is word for word)

    As for the ellipses, once again you are just clinging to speculative nonsense.  The former director of the same situation room for Obama said that the ellipses represented times where the person speaking paused in the course of the conversation.  Nothing was omitted.  

    If you could just think, you wouldnt have these problems.  Just ask yourself if you truly believe that the dozen or so people that listened to the call and decided to take it to the IG and file an official report and communicate with the intelligence committee would just stand by and not hammer the WH if the transcript that was released was not the whole thing.  

    You are avoiding the fact that said server is ONLY to be used for purposes of national security. Besides that, someone with direct knowledge of said phone call did come forward and file a complaint as a whistleblower.

    • Like 1
×
×
  • Create New...