There is an argument to be made that playing by the rules makes you a loser. Republicans gave up on the rules years ago and continue to win where it matters. Democrats can hang their hat on their high morals and will probably still lose. Historically the whole political spectrum in the US has been shifted right. The right is winning the war by playing dirty.
The argument is that you can't win against a moraly corrupt GOP if you continue to play by the rules and expect them to meet you halfway. All while the left continues to eat its own over petty stuff. I totally understand what Halifax is saying.
The Lisa Page testimony just released yesterday says that the Obama DOJ overruled the FBI on charging Hillary. So who exactly is playing by the rules?
Given who I'm hearing this from I need a source.
Don't you read the news?
lol your back and when is HRC getting convicted since the Baffoon is off the hook as far as your concerned..
One picture is a person with a sign. The other is a person with a fucking severed head. Is this conversation for real? Am I missing something?
.... It's not a real severed head, lol. Yes, I think you're missing something. You seem to think that the conversation is about the shock-level of the subject. It's not.
Thanks for clarifying - here I was under the impression the person in the oval office was an imposter because I thought Griffin truly beheaded Trump.
That woman's sign is not worthy of condemnation, it's worthy of a laugh. And no - I don't think the conversation is about the shock level of the subject, I think it's about proportional responses to words/actions. I feel that 'no comment' is exactly the proportional response appropriate for an idiot with a meaningless sign and will now practice what I preach and stop wasting my time on this. You guys have fun.
I wish it were an imposter - I think I would find that comforting!
I figure the real story behind that sign is that 1) MAGA fans feel the need for safe space (ironically), and whether or not the reason they feel that way is justified (in other words, is the backlash against the MAGA fans justified), and 2) how MAGA fans now think Dems are all psycho and/or socialist.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
There is an argument to be made that playing by the rules makes you a loser. Republicans gave up on the rules years ago and continue to win where it matters. Democrats can hang their hat on their high morals and will probably still lose. Historically the whole political spectrum in the US has been shifted right. The right is winning the war by playing dirty.
The argument is that you can't win against a moraly corrupt GOP if you continue to play by the rules and expect them to meet you halfway. All while the left continues to eat its own over petty stuff. I totally understand what Halifax is saying.
The Lisa Page testimony just released yesterday says that the Obama DOJ overruled the FBI on charging Hillary. So who exactly is playing by the rules?
Given who I'm hearing this from I need a source.
Don't you read the news?
lol your back and when is HRC getting convicted since the Baffoon is off the hook as far as your concerned..
The court ordered depositions were just announced.
Who ?
As most of you ignore any media sources on the right I'm not surprised that this is news to you all. Here's some backstory on the federal judge's ruling and the upcoming depositions if you are interested in bringing yourselves up to speed...
Every time I open the Moving Train up and see a lot of posts on this thread, I know it's mostly going to be infighting and hair-splitting on who said what about whom. (Not sure I nailed the who/whom there.)
1995 Milwaukee 1998 Alpine, Alpine 2003 Albany, Boston, Boston, Boston 2004 Boston, Boston 2006 Hartford, St. Paul (Petty), St. Paul (Petty) 2011 Alpine, Alpine 2013 Wrigley 2014 St. Paul 2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley 2018 Missoula, Wrigley, Wrigley 2021 Asbury Park 2022 St Louis 2023 Austin, Austin
Your collective responses are so telling. Are any of you capable of introspection? Completely serious question. A federal judge ordered under oath depositions. It is irrelevant that Judicial Watch is the one requesting the depositions other then it allows you to look away under some type of “they’re conservative!” lens. And yes...Fox News reported it. But you can’t trust them because they reported a story on a judges order? As PJSoul correctly pointed out the Washington Post reported on this story as well. Nothing to “trust” or “not trust”. A judge is ordering unde oath depositions because members of the Obama State Department lied. You all constantly laugh “when is someone being locked up? Benghazi is stupid! But the emails!”. And what I’m pointing out is that the truth is coming. It is on it’s way. Look away if you don’t have the stomach. But don’t pretend it doesn’t exist. You will be forced to eat your vegetables.
Your collective responses are so telling. Are any of you capable of introspection? Completely serious question. A federal judge ordered under oath depositions. It is irrelevant that Judicial Watch is the one requesting the depositions other then it allows you to look away under some type of “they’re conservative!” lens. And yes...Fox News reported it. But you can’t trust them because they reported a story on a judges order? As PJSoul correctly pointed out the Washington Post reported on this story as well. Nothing to “trust” or “not trust”. A judge is ordering unde oath depositions because members of the Obama State Department lied. You all constantly laugh “when is someone being locked up? Benghazi is stupid! But the emails!”. And what I’m pointing out is that the truth is coming. It is on it’s way. Look away if you don’t have the stomach. But don’t pretend it doesn’t exist. You will be forced to eat your vegetables.
Over 13 investigations. You may want to get prepared for your veggies too.
Your collective responses are so telling. Are any of you capable of introspection? Completely serious question. A federal judge ordered under oath depositions. It is irrelevant that Judicial Watch is the one requesting the depositions other then it allows you to look away under some type of “they’re conservative!” lens. And yes...Fox News reported it. But you can’t trust them because they reported a story on a judges order? As PJSoul correctly pointed out the Washington Post reported on this story as well. Nothing to “trust” or “not trust”. A judge is ordering unde oath depositions because members of the Obama State Department lied. You all constantly laugh “when is someone being locked up? Benghazi is stupid! But the emails!”. And what I’m pointing out is that the truth is coming. It is on it’s way. Look away if you don’t have the stomach. But don’t pretend it doesn’t exist. You will be forced to eat your vegetables.
Don’t you mean fruit from the poisonous tree? Judicial Watch is a partisan hack organization and a judge granted them a request to depose witnesses. Part of the checks and balances and every citizen should have such recourse. Wake me when their law suit results in indictments and convictions. Come to think of it, they’re like those libertarians that file liens on people. Because the lien was filed, doesn’t mean there’s merit to their claim. Plus, you’ll be lucky if the 4th string Team Trump Treason Administration state Department folks know how to open the file cabinet, never mind find the files.
Your collective responses are so telling. Are any of you capable of introspection? Completely serious question. A federal judge ordered under oath depositions. It is irrelevant that Judicial Watch is the one requesting the depositions other then it allows you to look away under some type of “they’re conservative!” lens. And yes...Fox News reported it. But you can’t trust them because they reported a story on a judges order? As PJSoul correctly pointed out the Washington Post reported on this story as well. Nothing to “trust” or “not trust”. A judge is ordering unde oath depositions because members of the Obama State Department lied. You all constantly laugh “when is someone being locked up? Benghazi is stupid! But the emails!”. And what I’m pointing out is that the truth is coming. It is on it’s way. Look away if you don’t have the stomach. But don’t pretend it doesn’t exist. You will be forced to eat your vegetables.
I have no issues with you posting it or that it's from Fox News. But to think that this will amount to anything meaningful or a prosecution against HRC is delusional. That's over.
Your collective responses are so telling. Are any of you capable of introspection? Completely serious question. A federal judge ordered under oath depositions. It is irrelevant that Judicial Watch is the one requesting the depositions other then it allows you to look away under some type of “they’re conservative!” lens. And yes...Fox News reported it. But you can’t trust them because they reported a story on a judges order? As PJSoul correctly pointed out the Washington Post reported on this story as well. Nothing to “trust” or “not trust”. A judge is ordering unde oath depositions because members of the Obama State Department lied. You all constantly laugh “when is someone being locked up? Benghazi is stupid! But the emails!”. And what I’m pointing out is that the truth is coming. It is on it’s way. Look away if you don’t have the stomach. But don’t pretend it doesn’t exist. You will be forced to eat your vegetables.
I welcome any and all hearings to get at the truth and I’m glad to see you do as well.
Your collective responses are so telling. Are any of you capable of introspection? Completely serious question. A federal judge ordered under oath depositions. It is irrelevant that Judicial Watch is the one requesting the depositions other then it allows you to look away under some type of “they’re conservative!” lens. And yes...Fox News reported it. But you can’t trust them because they reported a story on a judges order? As PJSoul correctly pointed out the Washington Post reported on this story as well. Nothing to “trust” or “not trust”. A judge is ordering unde oath depositions because members of the Obama State Department lied. You all constantly laugh “when is someone being locked up? Benghazi is stupid! But the emails!”. And what I’m pointing out is that the truth is coming. It is on it’s way. Look away if you don’t have the stomach. But don’t pretend it doesn’t exist. You will be forced to eat your vegetables.
I have no issues with you posting it or that it's from Fox News. But to think that this will amount to anything meaningful or a prosecution against HRC is delusional. That's over.
I care if something is from Fox News because I know they really can't be trusted to tell the true story. Sometimes they might manage it, but I'm sure never going to count on it. For all I know, whatever they report might be twisted somehow to suit their agenda or it might rely on "alternate facts" or something. Especially if it's related to Benghazi and Clinton emails! It's always better to post news from other more reliable sources.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
Your collective responses are so telling. Are any of you capable of introspection? Completely serious question. A federal judge ordered under oath depositions. It is irrelevant that Judicial Watch is the one requesting the depositions other then it allows you to look away under some type of “they’re conservative!” lens. And yes...Fox News reported it. But you can’t trust them because they reported a story on a judges order? As PJSoul correctly pointed out the Washington Post reported on this story as well. Nothing to “trust” or “not trust”. A judge is ordering unde oath depositions because members of the Obama State Department lied. You all constantly laugh “when is someone being locked up? Benghazi is stupid! But the emails!”. And what I’m pointing out is that the truth is coming. It is on it’s way. Look away if you don’t have the stomach. But don’t pretend it doesn’t exist. You will be forced to eat your vegetables.
I have no issues with you posting it or that it's from Fox News. But to think that this will amount to anything meaningful or a prosecution against HRC is delusional. That's over.
Yeah, I mean they do have a that anchor who tells the truth for one or two hours a few times per week!
"Mostly I think that people react sensitively because they know you’ve got a point"
Your collective responses are so telling. Are any of you capable of introspection? Completely serious question. A federal judge ordered under oath depositions. It is irrelevant that Judicial Watch is the one requesting the depositions other then it allows you to look away under some type of “they’re conservative!” lens. And yes...Fox News reported it. But you can’t trust them because they reported a story on a judges order? As PJSoul correctly pointed out the Washington Post reported on this story as well. Nothing to “trust” or “not trust”. A judge is ordering unde oath depositions because members of the Obama State Department lied. You all constantly laugh “when is someone being locked up? Benghazi is stupid! But the emails!”. And what I’m pointing out is that the truth is coming. It is on it’s way. Look away if you don’t have the stomach. But don’t pretend it doesn’t exist. You will be forced to eat your vegetables.
I have no issues with you posting it or that it's from Fox News. But to think that this will amount to anything meaningful or a prosecution against HRC is delusional. That's over.
Yeah, I mean they do have a that anchor who tells the truth for one or two hours a few times per week!
It never hurts one to read the other side, it bullet proofs your arguments.
Your collective responses are so telling. Are any of you capable of introspection? Completely serious question. A federal judge ordered under oath depositions. It is irrelevant that Judicial Watch is the one requesting the depositions other then it allows you to look away under some type of “they’re conservative!” lens. And yes...Fox News reported it. But you can’t trust them because they reported a story on a judges order? As PJSoul correctly pointed out the Washington Post reported on this story as well. Nothing to “trust” or “not trust”. A judge is ordering unde oath depositions because members of the Obama State Department lied. You all constantly laugh “when is someone being locked up? Benghazi is stupid! But the emails!”. And what I’m pointing out is that the truth is coming. It is on it’s way. Look away if you don’t have the stomach. But don’t pretend it doesn’t exist. You will be forced to eat your vegetables.
I have no issues with you posting it or that it's from Fox News. But to think that this will amount to anything meaningful or a prosecution against HRC is delusional. That's over.
Yeah, I mean they do have a that anchor who tells the truth for one or two hours a few times per week!
It never hurts one to read the other side, it bullet proofs your arguments.
I think most of us get a good dose of the other side, since it's unavoidable... but I don't believe it's wise to actually use them as a source to present a fact-based story.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
Your collective responses are so telling. Are any of you capable of introspection? Completely serious question. A federal judge ordered under oath depositions. It is irrelevant that Judicial Watch is the one requesting the depositions other then it allows you to look away under some type of “they’re conservative!” lens. And yes...Fox News reported it. But you can’t trust them because they reported a story on a judges order? As PJSoul correctly pointed out the Washington Post reported on this story as well. Nothing to “trust” or “not trust”. A judge is ordering unde oath depositions because members of the Obama State Department lied. You all constantly laugh “when is someone being locked up? Benghazi is stupid! But the emails!”. And what I’m pointing out is that the truth is coming. It is on it’s way. Look away if you don’t have the stomach. But don’t pretend it doesn’t exist. You will be forced to eat your vegetables.
I have no issues with you posting it or that it's from Fox News. But to think that this will amount to anything meaningful or a prosecution against HRC is delusional. That's over.
Yeah, I mean they do have a that anchor who tells the truth for one or two hours a few times per week!
It never hurts one to read the other side, it bullet proofs your arguments.
I think most of us get a good dose of the other side, since it's unavoidable... but I don't believe it's wise to actually use them as a source to present a fact-based story.
Did that story misrepresent or lie, or just intermix opinion? Because left wing sources do that in heavy dose as well, and they are posted here all the time. In fact, HuffPo is worse than Fox half the time. They are a total rag
Your collective responses are so telling. Are any of you capable of introspection? Completely serious question. A federal judge ordered under oath depositions. It is irrelevant that Judicial Watch is the one requesting the depositions other then it allows you to look away under some type of “they’re conservative!” lens. And yes...Fox News reported it. But you can’t trust them because they reported a story on a judges order? As PJSoul correctly pointed out the Washington Post reported on this story as well. Nothing to “trust” or “not trust”. A judge is ordering unde oath depositions because members of the Obama State Department lied. You all constantly laugh “when is someone being locked up? Benghazi is stupid! But the emails!”. And what I’m pointing out is that the truth is coming. It is on it’s way. Look away if you don’t have the stomach. But don’t pretend it doesn’t exist. You will be forced to eat your vegetables.
I have no issues with you posting it or that it's from Fox News. But to think that this will amount to anything meaningful or a prosecution against HRC is delusional. That's over.
Yeah, I mean they do have a that anchor who tells the truth for one or two hours a few times per week!
It never hurts one to read the other side, it bullet proofs your arguments.
I think most of us get a good dose of the other side, since it's unavoidable... but I don't believe it's wise to actually use them as a source to present a fact-based story.
Did that story misrepresent or lie, or just intermix opinion? Because left wing sources do that in heavy dose as well, and they are posted here all the time. In fact, HuffPo is worse than Fox half the time. They are a total rag
Source please.
"Mostly I think that people react sensitively because they know you’ve got a point"
Your collective responses are so telling. Are any of you capable of introspection? Completely serious question. A federal judge ordered under oath depositions. It is irrelevant that Judicial Watch is the one requesting the depositions other then it allows you to look away under some type of “they’re conservative!” lens. And yes...Fox News reported it. But you can’t trust them because they reported a story on a judges order? As PJSoul correctly pointed out the Washington Post reported on this story as well. Nothing to “trust” or “not trust”. A judge is ordering unde oath depositions because members of the Obama State Department lied. You all constantly laugh “when is someone being locked up? Benghazi is stupid! But the emails!”. And what I’m pointing out is that the truth is coming. It is on it’s way. Look away if you don’t have the stomach. But don’t pretend it doesn’t exist. You will be forced to eat your vegetables.
I have no issues with you posting it or that it's from Fox News. But to think that this will amount to anything meaningful or a prosecution against HRC is delusional. That's over.
Yeah, I mean they do have a that anchor who tells the truth for one or two hours a few times per week!
It never hurts one to read the other side, it bullet proofs your arguments.
I think most of us get a good dose of the other side, since it's unavoidable... but I don't believe it's wise to actually use them as a source to present a fact-based story.
Did that story misrepresent or lie, or just intermix opinion? Because left wing sources do that in heavy dose as well, and they are posted here all the time. In fact, HuffPo is worse than Fox half the time. They are a total rag
Source please.
You are unable to decipher both sarcasm and opinion? @me when you have something meaningful to say.
Your collective responses are so telling. Are any of you capable of introspection? Completely serious question. A federal judge ordered under oath depositions. It is irrelevant that Judicial Watch is the one requesting the depositions other then it allows you to look away under some type of “they’re conservative!” lens. And yes...Fox News reported it. But you can’t trust them because they reported a story on a judges order? As PJSoul correctly pointed out the Washington Post reported on this story as well. Nothing to “trust” or “not trust”. A judge is ordering unde oath depositions because members of the Obama State Department lied. You all constantly laugh “when is someone being locked up? Benghazi is stupid! But the emails!”. And what I’m pointing out is that the truth is coming. It is on it’s way. Look away if you don’t have the stomach. But don’t pretend it doesn’t exist. You will be forced to eat your vegetables.
I have no issues with you posting it or that it's from Fox News. But to think that this will amount to anything meaningful or a prosecution against HRC is delusional. That's over.
Yeah, I mean they do have a that anchor who tells the truth for one or two hours a few times per week!
It never hurts one to read the other side, it bullet proofs your arguments.
I think most of us get a good dose of the other side, since it's unavoidable... but I don't believe it's wise to actually use them as a source to present a fact-based story.
Did that story misrepresent or lie, or just intermix opinion? Because left wing sources do that in heavy dose as well, and they are posted here all the time. In fact, HuffPo is worse than Fox half the time. They are a total rag
Source please.
You are unable to decipher both sarcasm and opinion? @me when you have something meaningful to say.
@mrussel1 -- Hey dude, hitting you up looking for a source for you statement about HuffPo being worse than Fox (half the time - "in fact"). Nothing I've seen, heard or read on the subject seem to show this to be the case. Some clarification on the subject would be great. Thanks. XOXO.
"Mostly I think that people react sensitively because they know you’ve got a point"
Your collective responses are so telling. Are any of you capable of introspection? Completely serious question. A federal judge ordered under oath depositions. It is irrelevant that Judicial Watch is the one requesting the depositions other then it allows you to look away under some type of “they’re conservative!” lens. And yes...Fox News reported it. But you can’t trust them because they reported a story on a judges order? As PJSoul correctly pointed out the Washington Post reported on this story as well. Nothing to “trust” or “not trust”. A judge is ordering unde oath depositions because members of the Obama State Department lied. You all constantly laugh “when is someone being locked up? Benghazi is stupid! But the emails!”. And what I’m pointing out is that the truth is coming. It is on it’s way. Look away if you don’t have the stomach. But don’t pretend it doesn’t exist. You will be forced to eat your vegetables.
I have no issues with you posting it or that it's from Fox News. But to think that this will amount to anything meaningful or a prosecution against HRC is delusional. That's over.
Yeah, I mean they do have a that anchor who tells the truth for one or two hours a few times per week!
It never hurts one to read the other side, it bullet proofs your arguments.
I think most of us get a good dose of the other side, since it's unavoidable... but I don't believe it's wise to actually use them as a source to present a fact-based story.
Did that story misrepresent or lie, or just intermix opinion? Because left wing sources do that in heavy dose as well, and they are posted here all the time. In fact, HuffPo is worse than Fox half the time. They are a total rag
Source please.
You are unable to decipher both sarcasm and opinion? @me when you have something meaningful to say.
@mrussel1 -- Hey dude, hitting you up looking for a source for you statement about HuffPo being worse than Fox (half the time - "in fact"). Nothing I've seen, heard or read on the subject seem to show this to be the case. Some clarification on the subject would be great. Thanks. XOXO.
Think he just told you he was stating an opinion. Really cute with the XOXO.
'05 - TO, '06 - TO 1, '08 - NYC 1 & 2, '09 - TO, Chi 1 & 2, '10 - Buffalo, NYC 1 & 2, '11 - TO 1 & 2, Hamilton, '13 - Buffalo, Brooklyn 1 & 2, '15 - Global Citizen, '16 - TO 1 & 2, Chi 2
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
Your collective responses are so telling. Are any of you capable of introspection? Completely serious question. A federal judge ordered under oath depositions. It is irrelevant that Judicial Watch is the one requesting the depositions other then it allows you to look away under some type of “they’re conservative!” lens. And yes...Fox News reported it. But you can’t trust them because they reported a story on a judges order? As PJSoul correctly pointed out the Washington Post reported on this story as well. Nothing to “trust” or “not trust”. A judge is ordering unde oath depositions because members of the Obama State Department lied. You all constantly laugh “when is someone being locked up? Benghazi is stupid! But the emails!”. And what I’m pointing out is that the truth is coming. It is on it’s way. Look away if you don’t have the stomach. But don’t pretend it doesn’t exist. You will be forced to eat your vegetables.
I have no issues with you posting it or that it's from Fox News. But to think that this will amount to anything meaningful or a prosecution against HRC is delusional. That's over.
Yeah, I mean they do have a that anchor who tells the truth for one or two hours a few times per week!
It never hurts one to read the other side, it bullet proofs your arguments.
I think most of us get a good dose of the other side, since it's unavoidable... but I don't believe it's wise to actually use them as a source to present a fact-based story.
Did that story misrepresent or lie, or just intermix opinion? Because left wing sources do that in heavy dose as well, and they are posted here all the time. In fact, HuffPo is worse than Fox half the time. They are a total rag
Source please.
You are unable to decipher both sarcasm and opinion? @me when you have something meaningful to say.
@mrussel1 -- Hey dude, hitting you up looking for a source for you statement about HuffPo being worse than Fox (half the time - "in fact"). Nothing I've seen, heard or read on the subject seem to show this to be the case. Some clarification on the subject would be great. Thanks. XOXO.
Don't be a troll. Contribute something meaningful. Your statement on the democratic page was idiotic, but no reason to double down.
Comments
Let it go.
Lol
Cincinnati 2014
Greenville 2016
(Raleigh 2016)
Columbia 2016
2013 Wrigley 2014 St. Paul 2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley 2018 Missoula, Wrigley, Wrigley 2021 Asbury Park 2022 St Louis 2023 Austin, Austin
Pearl Jam bootlegs:
http://wegotshit.blogspot.com
newsmax
rt
infowars
B
breitbart
focksnooze
daily caller
daily stormer
ny post
etc etc
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
https://apple.news/AOIiiuQWJTailkZjETOp2XA
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2019/03/13/paul-manaforts-sentencing-mystery-man-cryptic-sign-that-reads-this-is-sign/
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©