Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
6 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

nobody demanded a decade, homey.  people are just interested in transparency because of who's in the white house.

like it or not, trump changed everything regarding financial records and public office.  forever.

I said I was done but if you really want to have some fun ask him if a federal grand jury investigation into book-cooking counts as "legal testimony or legal proceeding that indicates financial entanglements or crimes"

Posted
1 minute ago, BradInATX said:

I said I was done but if you really want to have some fun ask him if a federal grand jury investigation into book-cooking counts as "legal testimony or legal proceeding that indicates financial entanglements or crimes"

A federal grand jury investigation is a "legal proceeding", so, yes, the answer is obvious.

Posted
1 minute ago, bad_teammate said:

A federal grand jury investigation is a "legal proceeding", so, yes, the answer is obvious.

Well, at risk of getting you all wound up again, wouldn't your standard apply to Bernie and Jane?

Posted
2 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

A federal grand jury investigation is a "legal proceeding", so, yes, the answer is obvious.

i think his point is that there's always a gray area, and we as a country need to start erring on the side of transparency.

Posted
Just now, BradInATX said:

Well, at risk of getting you all wound up again, wouldn't your standard apply to Bernie and Jane?

In what way did the loan application for the college's expansion relate to the personal finances of Jane or Bernie Sanders? I'm not even sure how her tax returns would have probative value on a legal or financial question that didn't involve her personal finances.

Can you explain or are you just a bad faith troll?

(The answer is obvious.)

Posted
In what way did the loan application for the college's expansion relate to the personal finances of Jane or Bernie Sanders? I'm not even sure how her tax returns would have probative value on a legal or financial question that didn't involve her personal finances.
Can you explain or are you just a bad faith troll?
(The answer is obvious.)
The standard you laid out applies.
Posted
Just now, BradInATX said:
2 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:
In what way did the loan application for the college's expansion relate to the personal finances of Jane or Bernie Sanders? I'm not even sure how her tax returns would have probative value on a legal or financial question that didn't involve her personal finances.
Can you explain or are you just a bad faith troll?
(The answer is obvious.)

The standard you laid out applies.

The standard I laid out says: "legal testimony or legal proceeding that indicates financial entanglements or crimes"

You didn't answer the question:

In what way did the loan application for the college's expansion relate to the personal finances of Jane or Bernie Sanders?

The tax returns would have no probative value.

You're a bad-faith troll.

Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

The standard I laid out says: "legal testimony or legal proceeding that indicates financial entanglements or crimes"

You didn't answer the question:

In what way did the loan application for the college's expansion relate to the personal finances of Jane or Bernie Sanders?

The tax returns would have no probative value.

You're a bad-faith troll.

Me "so a grand jury investigation into financial crimes would count?"

You "of course"

Jane Sanders: was under a grand jury investigation into financial crimes

 

You: wait...

 

Who is arguing in bad faith? LOL. I'm out. You should have just taken the W with Bernie's release of his returns. Commence the b_t spin/deflect/attack cycle. 

Edited by BradInATX
Posted
1 hour ago, BradInATX said:

You can't be this stupid.

Says the person asking for tax returns from a sitting president 3 years into his term. You sound a lot like the previous idiots asking for Obama’s birth certificate.

  • Like 1
  • Fuck You 1
Posted
13 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

It's presumed

Ah.

Just now, Enchubben said:

Says the person asking for tax returns from a sitting president 3 years into his term. You sound a lot like the previous idiots asking for Obama’s birth certificate.

Do you have any idea what we're talking about in this thread? Are you lost? 

Posted
2 hours ago, Enchubben said:

Says the person asking for tax returns from a sitting president 3 years into his term. You sound a lot like the previous idiots asking for Obama’s birth certificate.

One of whom is now the sitting president.  

Posted
7 hours ago, Enchubben said:

Says the person asking for tax returns from a sitting president 3 years into his term. You sound a lot like the previous idiots asking for Obama’s birth certificate.

You're an idiot.  But, we already knew that. 

  • Like 5
  • Fuck You 1
Posted
6 minutes ago, DigglerontheHoof said:

You're an idiot.  But, we already knew that. 

Negged for name calling, like a 6 year old. You can do better, probably.

Back on topic, although I detest pretty much every actual policy of sanders, based on that interview I can see the appeal for democrats. It’s too bad the DNC and Joe Biden are going to eat him alive.

Posted
13 hours ago, Enchubben said:

Says the person asking for tax returns from a sitting president 3 years into his term. You sound a lot like the previous idiots asking for Obama’s birth certificate.

Negged for extreme idiocy and obvious trolling.

So now trumps tax tax returns are equivalent to Obama’s birth certificate? You trolls never change. I suppose trump should just go ahead and release them like Obama did. Don’t you think dumbass? 

Posted
2 minutes ago, AeroHorn said:

Second place I am seeing this WSJ tweet. Am I missing something? The date is 10/21/2015.

 

Aero, Hank. Hank, Aero. That’s about it.

Posted

Beto can steal this moment if he wants. Do some speech about "listening and learning" and then cut a huge check to a charity and challenge everyone else, including MILLIONAIRE BERNIE to do the same.

  • Like 1
Posted

Early Fund-Raising Divides the Democratic Field Into Haves and Have-Nots

Mr. Buttigieg raised $2.5 million from larger donors in the first quarter. Several connected fund-raisers, including Orin Kramer, a longtime fund-raising bundler and hedge fund founder, have recently signed on to help Mr. Buttigieg.

The Obama playbook isn't Beto's, it's Pete's, all the way down to guys like Orin Kramer. Amazing.

Posted
4 hours ago, Fozzz said:

I like Warren but I think she has too much Jeb Bush energy to make much of a dent in the primary.

 

Agreed, I am not saying you need a great personality to win (clearly with the current occupant) but when the field has this many players in it you need news coverage or great performances to have a shot. I don't think she will get either. 

Posted
On 4/16/2019 at 10:05 PM, Js1 said:

Lulz I seem to have stumbled into 2015. Y’all think that Trump feller will run? 

As a Royals fan I like this idea to return to 2015.

Posted
21 hours ago, bad_teammate said:

Early Fund-Raising Divides the Democratic Field Into Haves and Have-Nots

Mr. Buttigieg raised $2.5 million from larger donors in the first quarter. Several connected fund-raisers, including Orin Kramer, a longtime fund-raising bundler and hedge fund founder, have recently signed on to help Mr. Buttigieg.

The Obama playbook isn't Beto's, it's Pete's, all the way down to guys like Orin Kramer. Amazing.

Is Pete a duck? Sadly certainly starting to appear so. Don’t roll around in too much shit Pete. You’re young and the smell has a tendency to stick for entire political careers these days. 

Posted

It’s obvious by now right? Not like I expected them to go quietly but know supporters of Bernie didn’t want to play this game of chicken leading up to 2020. We won’t blink.

https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2019/04/18/cenk-uygur-on-why-democrats-are-afraid-of-bernie-sanders.html

Uygur's point is that big money donors who back mainstream candidates will lose their positions of power in the face of a Sanders win. A political system corrupted by corporate cash and influence, he said, will finally fall if the democratic socialist who has proposed "Medicare for All," free college education and a $15 minimum wage is elected.

"The people with the most money will lose all power, they will not be rewarded," he said. "All their power is in giving money to politicians and controlling them. Bernie Sanders doesn't want their money. They are going to fight Bernie Sanders harder than any Republican will."

That could be a dangerous game: Attacking Sanders will "force everyone to rally around him," Uygur said. "That's why Bernie has always stood an excellent chance of winning. They can't take away a small donor base. The more they attack him, the more he will raise."

Indeed, the Sanders' campaign is already fundraising on the party conflict, dashing off a pitch this week that read in part: "The Democratic establishment and high-dollar donors are already planning how to stop our campaign. They are terrified of our movement - as they should be."

  • Like 2
Posted
16 hours ago, Bruh Man said:

Queen Elizabeth calling for impeachment. 

 

I guess since discussing real shit is getting her nowhere she has decided to pivot into radlib territory. 

Posted

That shit is a dead end. It’s simply not going to happen and the only reason to rail about it is to feed red meat to the wine mom crowd. 

Posted

Impeachment is actually very likely to happen, IMO.  The reason to rail about it is to take an actual stand on unprecedented abuses of power by the president.   And having some guts will pay off in 2020.



×
×
  • Create New...