Whitmer verdict

Pervis Muldoon wrote: How long have you been frequenting radical cult websites?

I've been a New York Times subscriber for about 10 years now.

RQA wrote:

Pervis Muldoon wrote: How long have you been frequenting radical cult websites?

I've been a New York Times subscriber for about 10 years now.

Even after they informed you that Hunter Biden's laptop was a Russian plant?

RQA wrote:

Trapper Gus wrote:

This case, with all the coverage for months before the trial, was going to be difficult to try, as an unbiased jury was unlikely.

Given the extent and tone of media coverage any jury bias was likely to be in favor of the government.

Uhhh totally not true dude.  These are Trump people at heart, they make their identity attempting with their heart of hearts to "be" contrary to whatever media is saying.  It's completely politicized and absurd.  The danger that people were warning of all along with Trump doing what he was doing is exactly this - the erosion of any sort of unbiased application of justice.  A side effect of trump is that almost every jury pool will be tainted if it is a remotely political case.  That goes for both sides, but especially so for Trumpites.

Pervis Muldoon wrote:

RQA wrote:

I've been a New York Times subscriber for about 10 years now.

Even after they informed you that Hunter Biden's laptop was a Russian plant?

They've come clean on suppressing that story and seem to be a bit embarrassed by being one upped by the Post.

In any case I still enjoy their restaurant, theatre and museum reporting.

sεяεηιτλ wrote:

..... Trump...... Trump..... trump .... Trumpites......

Trapper Gus wrote:

The "top" of the FBI when this investigation started was, and still is, a Republician.

The "top" of the DOJ when this investigation started was a Republician.

Here we have Trapper puffing up the credibility of the FBI by pointing out their Republican leadership.

RQA wrote:

Pervis Muldoon wrote:

Even after they informed you that Hunter Biden's laptop was a Russian plant?

They've come clean on suppressing that story and seem to be a bit embarrassed by being one upped by the Post.

In any case I still enjoy their restaurant, theatre and museum reporting.  

Gaslighting what tNYT's said is not helping your case.

Somehow, we are told, that Hunter dropped his laptop off for repair and never came back to claim it is plausible.

Dude, there is this bridge I have a title to that I will sell to you cheap. /s

RQA wrote:

Trapper Gus wrote:

The "top" of the FBI when this investigation started was, and still is, a Republician.

The "top" of the DOJ when this investigation started was a Republician.

Here we have Trapper puffing up the credibility of the FBI by pointing out their Republican leadership.

Here we have RQA dodging the fact that he said the Director of the FBI was investigating the Whitmer kidnapping as a political attack.

RQA wrote:

Pervis Muldoon wrote:

Even after they informed you that Hunter Biden's laptop was a Russian plant?

They've come clean on suppressing that story and seem to be a bit embarrassed by being one upped by the Post.

In any case I still enjoy their restaurant, theatre and museum reporting.

But for political reporting, you've chosen the author of "January 6: How Democrats Used the Capitol Protest to Launch a War on Terror Against the Political Right". Because the real terrorism wasn't beating cops, invading the Capitol, and searching for politicians to capture and/or kill; it was the mean ol' Democrats investigating the insurrection.

I haven't been following the Hunter Biden laptop saga. It was hilarious when you MAGAs thought it was the October Surprise that would stop Trump's inevitable defeat. What exactly did the NYT report incorrectly?

Pervis Muldoon wrote:  It was hilarious when you MAGAs thought it was the October Surprise that would stop Trump's inevitable defeat.  

I thought you weren't following the "saga".    

RQA wrote:

Pervis Muldoon wrote:  It was hilarious when you MAGAs thought it was the October Surprise that would stop Trump's inevitable defeat.  

I thought you weren't following the "saga".    

Because I haven't been. I read the extremely entertaining 2020 article about how Hunter flew thousands of miles just to have a blind repairman fix his precious laptop, and how the blind guy was the key "eyewitness" and was totally certain it was Hunter even though he couldn't see shit. And I remember how you and other MAGAs were convinced that it would destroy Joe's campaign.

But since then, I've gone on with my life and lost track of the story. It seems that you're very critical of the NYT over this. What did they print that was incorrect?

Pervis Muldoon wrote:

Because I haven't been.

Sounds like you are!  

 

 I read the extremely entertaining 2020 article about how Hunter ..... 

RQA wrote:

Pervis Muldoon wrote:

Because I haven't been.

Sounds like you are!  

 

 I read the extremely entertaining 2020 article about how Hunter ..... 

You keep dodging. Huh. I'll ask one more time. If you dodge again, I'll take it as your admission that you have no legitimate criticism. What did the NYT print about this story that was incorrect?

Pervis Muldoon wrote: What did the NYT print about this story that was incorrect?

You claim to have no interest in the story.

RQA wrote:

Pervis Muldoon wrote: What did the NYT print about this story that was incorrect?

You claim to have no interest in the story.

Please quote that claim, unless you're lying.

And thank you for confirming that you have no legitimate criticism of the NYT over this.

Pervis Muldoon wrote:

RQA wrote:

You claim to have no interest in the story.

Please quote that claim, unless you're lying.

And thank you for confirming that you have no legitimate criticism of the NYT over this.

You said you haven't followed the story. Forgive me if I took that as meaning you weren't interested in the story. So what are you actually saying? That you are interested in the story but aren't following it?

Oh, and I hope it's okay that I used "story" and not "saga".

RQA wrote:

Pervis Muldoon wrote:

Please quote that claim, unless you're lying.

And thank you for confirming that you have no legitimate criticism of the NYT over this.

You said you haven't followed the story. Forgive me if I took that as meaning you weren't interested in the story. So what are you actually saying? That you are interested in the story but aren't following it?

Oh, and I hope it's okay that I used "story" and not "saga".

So no quote. Thank you.

I have shown two things to be true of you:

1. Despite your whining, you have no legitimate criticism of the NYT when it comes to Hunter Biden.

2. When you struggle with an argument (as you often do), you'll lie.

I've never understood the lies, especially the really obvious ones. They don't help you; they only make you less credible.

Pervis Muldoon wrote:



I have shown two things to be true of you:

1. Despite your whining, you have no legitimate criticism of the NYT when it comes to Hunter Biden.

2. When you struggle with an argument (as you often do), you'll lie.

I've never understood the lies, especially the really obvious ones. They don't help you; they only make you less credible.

1. If you are paying attention just a little there is ample legitimate criticism of the NYT and their coverage of the laptop story. I am flattered that you are so interested in my opinion of the coverage of a story/saga that you are not following (or was it not interested?) from a media outlet you don't subscribe to.

2. When you are losing an argument (which is usually the case) you find some semantic disparity (in this case my use of the term "interested" instead of "followng" (or was it the other way around?)) and declare it a LIE!

Never change Pervis, you amuse me.

RQA wrote:

Pervis Muldoon wrote:



I have shown two things to be true of you:

1. Despite your whining, you have no legitimate criticism of the NYT when it comes to Hunter Biden.

2. When you struggle with an argument (as you often do), you'll lie.

I've never understood the lies, especially the really obvious ones. They don't help you; they only make you less credible.

1. If you are paying attention just a little there is ample legitimate criticism of the NYT and their coverage of the laptop story. I am flattered that you are so interested in my opinion of the coverage of a story/saga that you are not following (or was it not interested?) from a media outlet you don't subscribe to.

2. When you are losing an argument (which is usually the case) you find some semantic disparity (in this case my use of the term "interested" instead of "followng" (or was it the other way around?)) and declare it a LIE!

Never change Pervis, you amuse me.

Or when you're losing an argument, you deflect in every single thread and go off-topic...

RQA wrote:

Pervis Muldoon wrote:



I have shown two things to be true of you:

1. Despite your whining, you have no legitimate criticism of the NYT when it comes to Hunter Biden.

2. When you struggle with an argument (as you often do), you'll lie.

I've never understood the lies, especially the really obvious ones. They don't help you; they only make you less credible.

1. If you are paying attention just a little there is ample legitimate criticism of the NYT and their coverage of the laptop story. I am flattered that you are so interested in my opinion of the coverage of a story/saga that you are not following (or was it not interested?) from a media outlet you don't subscribe to.

2. When you are losing an argument (which is usually the case) you find some semantic disparity (in this case my use of the term "interested" instead of "followng" (or was it the other way around?)) and declare it a LIE!

Never change Pervis, you amuse me.

So it's not a lie; there's just a "disparity" between what you said and the truth. That, my friend, is truly inspired.

Pervis Muldoon wrote:

So it's not a lie

Nope.

It is a weird thing to call me a lair for saying you weren't interested in the story rather than you weren't following the story (or was it the other way around?).

When Biden said he wouldn't mandate COVID vaccinations was that a lie?

Leftists pervert language.

RQA wrote:

Pervis Muldoon wrote:

So it's not a lie

Nope.

It is a weird thing to call me a lair for saying  you weren't interested in the story rather than you weren't following the story (or was it the other way around?).

When Biden said he wouldn't mandate COVID vaccinations was that a lie?

Leftists pervert language.  

I have never called you a lair.

RQA wrote:
Leftists pervert language.

There's plenty of blame to go around for political rhetoric.

For example:

Defense of Marriage Act

Pro Life

maybe the best ever: Alternative Facts

The RussianQuislingAgent just can’t stop calling folks perverts.

But then anyone Trumps’s sycophants don’t like are child molesters.

GRR Spartan wrote:The RussianQuislingAgent just can’t stop calling folks perverts.

Please quote me calling anyone here a pervert.

RQA wrote:

Pervis Muldoon wrote:

So it's not a lie

Nope.

It is a weird thing to call me a lair for saying you weren't interested in the story rather than you weren't following the story (or was it the other way around?).

When Biden said he wouldn't mandate COVID vaccinations was that a lie?

Leftists pervert language.

Fake News

Stop the Steal

[tw]1562110555963400193[/tw]

Floyd Robertson wrote:[tw]1562110555963400193[/tw]

Good. They can share a cell with Trump.

PennSpartan wrote:

Floyd Robertson wrote:[tw]1562110555963400193[/tw]

Good. They can share a cell with Trump.

They are sharing a cell…. A brain cell.