State of the Union - pre/post election & whatever...

[kyotebue2]

Hey, John. I'm very very cautious this year, while the polling looks good for the Dems and I'm optimistic about the House the Senate is still just out of reach. Shrug 49 days.

[Guest]

...just regurgitating extreme right-wing talking points and lies,...

Sure does. Like the articles from CBS. And Time. Newsweek. The BBC. All regular and reliable sources of extreme RW talking points. Got it, Rebelyell.

Some folks can't grasp that any position that doesn't agree with them is not alt-right, extreme right-wing, racist, or any of the other labels that get gratuitously thrown around here. It's just a position that disagrees with theirs. Unlike many here I don't just hurl shit at the wall to see what sticks, I make my claim and back it up with sources. Like those extreme right-wing sites mentioned above.

Rebelyell does nothing but, so any post will do. McKinstry made some very specific unsupported statements about the Rosenstein recommendation letter. I disagreed and supplied the evidence from the BBC.

This IS Frothers and not a normal site but even here just because you can post some shit you think should be true, it doesn't change what is true and can be proven.

[¯_(ツ)_/¯]

But who's truth? But who's proof? Both true and proven should be written thus

it doesn't change what is 'true' and can be 'proven'.

More dishonesty from Crooked JJ. I wish I could say it was down to the dick worms gnawing on his frontal lobe, but alas…

[¯_(ツ)_/¯]

As it's as relevant to the conversation as anything JJ can puke up, I'll just leave this here.

[Guest]

But who's truth? But who's proof? Both true and proven should be written thus

Well the examples I gave had neither from opposite posters while what I provided was the BBC's presentation of the actual document in question. Pretty crooked, eh?

[Bronshtein]

But who's truth? But who's proof? Both true and proven should be written thus

it doesn't change what is 'true' and can be 'proven'.

Whose - pronoun of possession; not who's - contraction of who is

Carry on.

[rebelyell2006]

This IS Frothers and not a normal site but even here just because you can post some shit you think should be true, it doesn't change what is true and can be proven.

He says without a hint of irony.

[Exactly!]

Well, seeing how he's documented proofs for his argument and all you've done is post shit, what is ironic is you posting on the matter at all.

Figure out what the term "author" means yet?

[rebelyell2006]

How cute, Tiny Dick Dogfucker is referring to himself in the third person.

[Americunt Finker]

Be a big brave Conservative and take a swipe at woman alleging sexual assault.

Troll, there is a difference between taking a swipe (see: "Bimbo Eruptions", "Drag a dollar bill through a trailer park" and what the DEMs are doing to Ellison's accuser) and observing that:
1. There are some underhanded things in the way this whole thing transpired.
2. It is hard to investigate an incident that is decades old, an uncooperative accuser, no identifiable date, no identifiable location, and thus far no corroboration by anyone else.
3. There are effects on Kavanaugh's family, just as there are effects on anyone accused of things like this in a public forum, particularly when you have the "If you are male, you are a liar and guilty" (unless you are a Clinton or Kennedy, or...) crowd who, incidentally are ready to convict the judge based on nothing but those same people don't even want to hear from Ellison's accuser.

As for John Kerry, who lied under oath after coming back from 'NAN in the congressional hearings, was so committed to making a statement that he threw back (someone else's) medals, capitulated to the Iranians and participated in the lies selling the deal to the US citizens, and appears to have admitted to be working in violation of the Logan Act to undermine this administration, the US Government and the world balance of power with one of the US's biggest adversaries, his record speaks for itself. Traitor? I didn't call him that. There are enough other things to call him for which there is easily proven material that there is no need.

Look at you, joining the pack rapists.

1: Seems that you are better informed of the details of whatever transpired than the accused or the victim.
2: The DEM'S are behind this? They somehow set this up?
2: You have CONSISTENTLY SCREAMED "OBAMA IS A CRIMINAL", "HILLARY IS A CRIMINAL" "KENNEDY KILLED THAT GIRL" when they have never been charged with a crime.
3: You are defending those who are attacking someone that is claiming a serious sexual assault took place. This sort of shit is a major reason that rape complainants hesitate in coming forward, being publicly questioned and victim blamed.

You are a real cunt JJ Parus, a real fucking cunt. A hypocritical misogynist, rapist defending cunt. A total shithole rancid cunt. A dog fucking right wing talking point regurgitating motherfucking cunt.

Ever talked to your wife about your attitude to this?