"I'm not hearing about any consequences for their breaking law"... LOL! Durham got "big fish" Kevin Clinesmith but Igor Danchenko and Michael Sussmann were both acquitted. They faced no legal consequences because they did nothing illegal. As determined in a court of law (the Qtard standard of proof).
This was not (as devin alleges) a "plot by the HRC campaign". donald tRump took that allegation to court -- and the judge threw his lawsuit out. And ordered tRump to pay HRC $1 million. Because the lawsuit was frivolous. Yet Qtard says bringing the suit was proof that dotard donald "has balls". Because RB Qtard is a huge hypocrite.
RB Qtard wrote (in another thread), "You USA general prosecutor stated that whole idea of dRumps collusion with Russian was FAKE"... but this is FALSE.
What Durham Report actually says: The Department of Justice and the FBI did not have "any actual evidence of collusion" between Russian officials and Donald Trump's 2016 presidential campaign, and began their Crossfire Hurricane probe of Trump's campaign based on "raw, unanalyzed, and uncorroborated intelligence"...
Does the logic-challenged RB Qtard believe Durham not liking the intelligence used to open the investigation is the same as "whole idea of dRumps collusion with Russian was FAKE"? Because it factually is not.
Bullplop. You're the one who ignored my comment. Minus FJ's White Supremacist values only allow him to accept a very limited set of "facts" that support them. All other facts must be ignored.
I responded to Qtard writing that he laughed. He described HIS laughter as "forced". I didn't attribute my laughter to him.
It's funny that your values MUST falsely characterize MY values as "white supremacist". How could the DNC even EXIST without their white supremacist boogeymen? For the same reasons that the NAZI party couldn't exist w/o Jews (a fake enemy within). They've nothing else to hold their diverse constituents (LGBTQ, women, minorities) together but an externalized threat.
\\Don't pop his bubble, Q. His hyper-reality might collapse and crush him.
Thereś nothing bad in losing oneś faith. ;-P
That is natural. And healthy.
Like not beliving in Santa any more.
Besides, even in case of losing... one still can pretend believing. ;-P
\\I responded to Qtard writing that he laughed. He described HIS laughter as "forced". I didn't attribute my laughter to him.
Counter-factual. As always.
Yawn.
\\For the same reasons that the NAZI party couldn't exist w/o Jews (a fake enemy within). They've nothing else to hold their diverse constituents (LGBTQ, women, minorities) together but an externalized threat.
Man is not a “herd animal” but a “horde animal,” Freud writes at the conclusion of his lengthy critical discussion of other theorists of group psychology. A herd animal has an instinctual affinity for closeness, primary gregariousness, while the horde animal is constituted by an external organizing principle that brokers a complex need for, rivalry with, endangerment by, and aggression toward others.
“[the primitive men] hated their father, who presented such a formidable obstacle to their craving for power and sexual desires, but they loved and admired him too. After they got rid of him, had satisfied their hatred and had put into effect their wish to identify themselves with him, the affection which had all this time been pushed under was bound to make itself felt. It did so in the form of remorse. A sense of guilt made its appearance, which in this incident coincided with the remorse felt by the whole group. The dead father became stronger than the living had been.” (p. 14
\\“[the primitive men] hated their father, who presented such a formidable obstacle to their craving for power and sexual desires, but they loved and admired him too.
That's your Western story. Yawn.
\\Man is not a “herd animal” but a “horde animal,” Freud writes...
Minus: It's funny that your values MUST falsely characterize MY values as "white supremacist".
maga is White Supremacist. "maga" is in your blogger display name. You characterize yourself as White Supremacist. If this characterize is false you should renounce trump and his White Supremacist movement.
Qtard: Counter-factual. As always.
I don't recall writting anything that could be called "counter-factual". Maybe you could give ONE example? "As always" is definitely false.
\\I don't recall writting anything that could be called "counter-factual". Maybe you could give ONE example? "As always" is definitely false.
\\\\I responded to Qtard writing that he laughed. He described HIS laughter as "forced". I didn't attribute my laughter to him
ALL three claims ARE counter-factual. ;-P
1. I have not write emo of laughing here in this thread.
2. You did it. With LOL.
3. And trying to present it as MY laughter.
4. While that is your own try of gaslighting.
ALL is absolutely transparent and purely counter-factual lies. From you. ;-P
What you trying to achieve with such idiotic lies -- I dunno. But please, continue-continue. :-)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) (<-- that is FIRST emo of ME laughing here in this thread will be... and I'm ready to laugh more ;-P )
"And trying to present it as MY laughter"... Counter-factual. YOU wrote, "forced laughter". My laughter was not forced. Clearly you were describing YOUR laughter.
Qtard makes fun of himself with counter-factual comments like, "clearly, that is DAMN forced laughter". My laughter could not "clearly" be forced. Because it wasn't.
I did not use a "sad face emo". I was not "laughing while being in sorrow". I used a "frowny face" emoticon, indicating displeasure. Also because the linked article is bad news for the false Durham narrative, which should have caused YOU to be "in sorrow". Why I laughed.
White Frowning Face Emoji - Emojipedia emojipedia.org › frowning-face A classic sad face. A yellow face with simple, open eyes and wide, steep frown. May convey such feelings as moderate concern or disappointment and ...
\\Also because the linked article is bad news for the false Durham narrative, which should have caused YOU to be "in sorrow".
And why so?
I AM NOT invoilved in your inner political affeirs. Which MEANS -- I have NO emotional attachments to anything that happens in USA.
Especially when it about some people names of which I see for the first time.
And that would be easy to understood and obvious to comprehend... if not for some... repeated many times already, reason. ;-P
There was no emoji (or emo) in my comment. It was a "frowny face" emoticon.
As for "why so?"... Because you said, "You USA general prosecutor stated that whole idea of dRumps collusion with Russian was FAKE".
Article I linked to says otherwise.
Re, "I AM NOT invoilved in your inner political affeirs"... But you do like to comment on them. And you are clearly very invested in the false narrative "that whole idea of dRumps collusion with Russian was FAKE".
Your "I AM NOT" primal scream sounds very emotional to me.
"...why anything said by that link matters..."... It does not matter -- to you. Because facts do not matter to you. If they contradict what you want to believe -- you just call them "Demn propaganda".
Qtard: I'm glad... that you AT LAST admitted that *I* -- uninvolved in your inner political quarrels. ;-P That's right -- I uninvolved. And therefore -- don't care.
I made no such "admission". You ARE involved. In discussions about them. Also, if you did not care, you would not comment here. So that is a lie. There may be certain specific things you may not care about, but this isn't one of them. PROVEN by the fact that YOU brought it up.
Qtard quoted ACCURATELY and PRECISELY: "You USA general prosecutor stated that whole idea of dRumps collusion with Russian was FAKE".
This is proof positive that you do care. Further proof that you care is the FACT that you have defended donald tRump (re Russian collusion) ENDLESSLY (by falsely describing the proven collusion as "garbage" and "throwing of feces").
btw, when I wrote, "It does not matter -- to you", I meant because the info at the end of the link presents FACTS that don't fit your preferred narrative. These facts are what do not matter to you, not the topic of donald tRump's Russian collusion. So you misquoted me. I suspect on purpose. Because you are a dishonest POS.
\\I made no such "admission". You ARE involved. In discussions about them.
That is your delusion you trying to yoke me with. ;-P
\\ Also, if you did not care, you would not comment here.
Why not?
Dare to explain?
\\PROVEN by the fact that YOU brought it up.
What?
What exactly I "brought up"??? Dare to quote? ;-P
\\This is proof positive that you do care.
Ahh??? And what base... you claim it?
YOU... seems to care about it. TOO MUCH.
And I "brought it up" -- to poke you with such info.
Which visible opposite to all what you was claiming all the road here.
But.
DO *I* care about it? :-))))))))))))))))))))))))))
Naah, I don't.
I only "care" (well, somewhat, only as much as it piquing my interest) about -- YOUR reaction to it.
Do you get it, at last? Or not... cause it is definitely impossible for a u.u.r.b. -- to admit that there is other people, and they have other interests -- NOT the same as own u.u.r.b.'s.
\\Further proof that you care is the FACT that you have defended donald tRump (re Russian collusion) ENDLESSLY (by falsely describing the proven collusion as "garbage" and "throwing of feces").
But.
It was based on facts.
Like -- there is NEITHER trial NOR court judgment. And even facts NOT provided.
And I... CARE about things based on facts and logic -- yes, guilty as hell. ;-P
Unlike... one certain u.u.r.b.
Who trying to smear me into some shameful thing (like "defending dRump")... on the base that I DO NOT LIKE to postpone Logic and Facts based rational thinking -- and unite with it in its bonkery and religious non-factual, no, ANTI-factual delusions. ;-P
\\btw, when I wrote, "It does not matter -- to you", I meant because the info at the end of the link presents FACTS... So you misquoted me. I suspect on purpose. Because you are a dishonest POS.
No.
Because you disqualifed yourself as a honest opponent in a discussion. With almost every your quote incorrect. And your claims not based on facts. And your missives having no explanation, and even less logic.
But.
If you'd make correct quotes... of that FACTS you proclaimed exist somewhere.
AND.
Will give some input -- why that facts matter and what they need?
I'll try to reconcider.
But.
I will not be holding my breatch waiting while you'd do that. Naturally.
You have built that castle of lies and distrust -- with your own hands and burning delusioned mind -- and it is you are one who conDEMNed to live in it. ;-P
"I'm not hearing about any consequences for their breaking law"... LOL! Durham got "big fish" Kevin Clinesmith but Igor Danchenko and Michael Sussmann were both acquitted. They faced no legal consequences because they did nothing illegal. As determined in a court of law (the Qtard standard of proof).
ReplyDeleteThis was not (as devin alleges) a "plot by the HRC campaign". donald tRump took that allegation to court -- and the judge threw his lawsuit out. And ordered tRump to pay HRC $1 million. Because the lawsuit was frivolous. Yet Qtard says bringing the suit was proof that dotard donald "has balls". Because RB Qtard is a huge hypocrite.
RB Qtard wrote (in another thread), "You USA general prosecutor stated that whole idea of dRumps collusion with Russian was FAKE"... but this is FALSE.
What Durham Report actually says: The Department of Justice and the FBI did not have "any actual evidence of collusion" between Russian officials and Donald Trump's 2016 presidential campaign, and began their Crossfire Hurricane probe of Trump's campaign based on "raw, unanalyzed, and uncorroborated intelligence"...
Does the logic-challenged RB Qtard believe Durham not liking the intelligence used to open the investigation is the same as "whole idea of dRumps collusion with Russian was FAKE"? Because it factually is not.
You think I care about anything you said here???
ReplyDeleteQtard hates the facts I presented and can't refute them. So he utilizes his "I don't care" dodge and runs away.
ReplyDelete:)
ReplyDeleteBe my guest, De-Ru-Pi ;-P
ReplyDelete"De-Ru-Pi"??? Who the f*ck is that? Qtard's imaginary enemy?
ReplyDelete:(
Run, Qtard, run! LOL!
Forced laughter. De-Ru-Pi. ;-P
ReplyDeleteIt is good that you can laugh at yourself :)
ReplyDeleteYou have written "LOL"... but that is MY??? laughter???
ReplyDeletePecular cognitive disorder you have. ;-P
Don't pop his bubble, Q. His hyper-reality might collapse and crush him.
ReplyDeleteBesides, his values only allow him to accept a very limited set of "facts" that support them. All other facts must be ignored.
ReplyDeleteBullplop. You're the one who ignored my comment. Minus FJ's White Supremacist values only allow him to accept a very limited set of "facts" that support them. All other facts must be ignored.
ReplyDeleteI responded to Qtard writing that he laughed. He described HIS laughter as "forced". I didn't attribute my laughter to him.
It's funny that your values MUST falsely characterize MY values as "white supremacist". How could the DNC even EXIST without their white supremacist boogeymen? For the same reasons that the NAZI party couldn't exist w/o Jews (a fake enemy within). They've nothing else to hold their diverse constituents (LGBTQ, women, minorities) together but an externalized threat.
ReplyDelete\\Don't pop his bubble, Q. His hyper-reality might collapse and crush him.
ReplyDeleteThereś nothing bad in losing oneś faith. ;-P
That is natural. And healthy.
Like not beliving in Santa any more.
Besides, even in case of losing... one still can pretend believing. ;-P
\\I responded to Qtard writing that he laughed. He described HIS laughter as "forced". I didn't attribute my laughter to him.
Counter-factual. As always.
Yawn.
\\For the same reasons that the NAZI party couldn't exist w/o Jews (a fake enemy within). They've nothing else to hold their diverse constituents (LGBTQ, women, minorities) together but an externalized threat.
Well... people like mobbing. ;-P
That is our trait as herding animals.
No. Hoard animals.
ReplyDeleteMan is not a “herd animal” but a “horde animal,” Freud writes at the conclusion of his lengthy critical discussion of other theorists of group psychology. A herd animal has an instinctual affinity for closeness, primary gregariousness, while the horde animal is constituted by an external organizing principle that brokers a complex need for, rivalry with, endangerment by, and aggression toward others.
This is man's nature.
ReplyDelete“[the primitive men] hated their father, who presented such a formidable obstacle to their craving for power and sexual desires, but they loved and admired him too. After they got rid of him, had satisfied their hatred and had put into effect their wish to identify themselves with him, the affection which had all this time been pushed under was bound to make itself felt. It did so in the form of remorse. A sense of guilt made its appearance, which in this incident coincided with the remorse felt by the whole group. The dead father became stronger than the living had been.” (p. 14
ReplyDeleteHow? The "new law". The black monolith.
\\“[the primitive men] hated their father, who presented such a formidable obstacle to their craving for power and sexual desires, but they loved and admired him too.
ReplyDeleteThat's your Western story. Yawn.
\\Man is not a “herd animal” but a “horde animal,” Freud writes...
Well. Self-herding.
Minus: It's funny that your values MUST falsely characterize MY values as "white supremacist".
ReplyDeletemaga is White Supremacist. "maga" is in your blogger display name. You characterize yourself as White Supremacist. If this characterize is false you should renounce trump and his White Supremacist movement.
Qtard: Counter-factual. As always.
I don't recall writting anything that could be called "counter-factual". Maybe you could give ONE example? "As always" is definitely false.
\\I don't recall writting anything that could be called "counter-factual". Maybe you could give ONE example? "As always" is definitely false.
ReplyDelete\\\\I responded to Qtard writing that he laughed. He described HIS laughter as "forced". I didn't attribute my laughter to him
ALL three claims ARE counter-factual. ;-P
1. I have not write emo of laughing here in this thread.
2. You did it. With LOL.
3. And trying to present it as MY laughter.
4. While that is your own try of gaslighting.
ALL is absolutely transparent and purely counter-factual lies. From you. ;-P
What you trying to achieve with such idiotic lies -- I dunno. But please, continue-continue. :-)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) (<-- that is FIRST emo of ME laughing here in this thread will be... and I'm ready to laugh more ;-P )
"And trying to present it as MY laughter"... Counter-factual. YOU wrote, "forced laughter". My laughter was not forced. Clearly you were describing YOUR laughter.
ReplyDelete\\My laughter was not forced. Clearly you were describing YOUR laughter.
ReplyDeleteClearly... you are Bizarro. :-)))) (or have Bizarro syndrome)
You gave a sad face to that link -- that disprove all your endless missives.
I'll remind you.
"
"
"De-Ru-Pi"??? Who the f*ck is that? Qtard's imaginary enemy?
:(
Run, Qtard, run! LOL!
"
"
Clearly, that is DAMN forced laughter. From your side. And clearly to the point and witty pointed snark from my side.
That's why you are so grumpy.
And showoing such a conter-factual demial and negativism.
If not... go laugh at yourself. Show that you are not complete imbecile. ;-P
:-)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
But you canNOT.
Stop poking fun at the baizuo, Q...
ReplyDeleteQtard makes fun of himself with counter-factual comments like, "clearly, that is DAMN forced laughter". My laughter could not "clearly" be forced. Because it wasn't.
ReplyDeleteAnd you can give any explanation why it didn't?
ReplyDeleteI can. To show opposite -- you made "sad" face emo, and after that written "LOL!" -- with a bang sign to boot. And some totally unrelated joke.
Laughing while being in sorrow -- that is the definition of forced laugher AKA you are sad, but you trying (to show that) laughing.
PLUS.
You fervently opposed to that -- that is additional clue. ;-P
PS I just trying to be productive partner in a discussion. ;-)
I did not use a "sad face emo". I was not "laughing while being in sorrow". I used a "frowny face" emoticon, indicating displeasure. Also because the linked article is bad news for the false Durham narrative, which should have caused YOU to be "in sorrow". Why I laughed.
ReplyDeleteWhite Frowning Face Emoji - Emojipedia
ReplyDeleteemojipedia.org › frowning-face
A classic sad face. A yellow face with simple, open eyes and wide, steep frown. May convey such feelings as moderate concern or disappointment and ...
\\Also because the linked article is bad news for the false Durham narrative, which should have caused YOU to be "in sorrow".
And why so?
I AM NOT invoilved in your inner political affeirs. Which MEANS -- I have NO emotional attachments to anything that happens in USA.
Especially when it about some people names of which I see for the first time.
And that would be easy to understood and obvious to comprehend... if not for some... repeated many times already, reason. ;-P
There was no emoji (or emo) in my comment. It was a "frowny face" emoticon.
ReplyDeleteAs for "why so?"... Because you said, "You USA general prosecutor stated that whole idea of dRumps collusion with Russian was FAKE".
Article I linked to says otherwise.
Re, "I AM NOT invoilved in your inner political affeirs"... But you do like to comment on them. And you are clearly very invested in the false narrative "that whole idea of dRumps collusion with Russian was FAKE".
Your "I AM NOT" primal scream sounds very emotional to me.
\\There was no emoji (or emo) in my comment. It was a "frowny face" emoticon.
ReplyDeleteKhm???
Like there's any difference...
\\Article I linked to says otherwise.
Why you met it with sad/frownung emo... well, emoticon????
Well... I have no reasons to belive to any your word or explore links you give -- too many distrust piled up.
But... you can give proper quote and logical explanation -- why anything said by that link matters, and confirm any of your claims...
But... I will no be holding my breath waiting. ;-P
\\Your "I AM NOT" primal scream sounds very emotional to me.
I made it in capital latters to show my emotion.
Your Captain Obvious. ;-P
But... Ou'Key -- you wanna praise? I'll praise you here -- what a deep, wise and intrinsic observation you did. Not. :-)))))))))))))))
"...why anything said by that link matters..."... It does not matter -- to you. Because facts do not matter to you. If they contradict what you want to believe -- you just call them "Demn propaganda".
ReplyDelete\\"...why anything said by that link matters..."... It does not matter -- to you.
ReplyDeleteI'm glad... that you AT LAST admitted that *I* -- uninvolved in your inner political quarrels. ;-P
That's right -- I uninvolved. And therefore -- don't care.
Qtard: I'm glad... that you AT LAST admitted that *I* -- uninvolved in your inner political quarrels. ;-P That's right -- I uninvolved. And therefore -- don't care.
ReplyDeleteI made no such "admission". You ARE involved. In discussions about them. Also, if you did not care, you would not comment here. So that is a lie. There may be certain specific things you may not care about, but this isn't one of them. PROVEN by the fact that YOU brought it up.
Qtard quoted ACCURATELY and PRECISELY: "You USA general prosecutor stated that whole idea of dRumps collusion with Russian was FAKE".
This is proof positive that you do care. Further proof that you care is the FACT that you have defended donald tRump (re Russian collusion) ENDLESSLY (by falsely describing the proven collusion as "garbage" and "throwing of feces").
btw, when I wrote, "It does not matter -- to you", I meant because the info at the end of the link presents FACTS that don't fit your preferred narrative. These facts are what do not matter to you, not the topic of donald tRump's Russian collusion. So you misquoted me. I suspect on purpose. Because you are a dishonest POS.
\\I made no such "admission". You ARE involved. In discussions about them.
ReplyDeleteThat is your delusion you trying to yoke me with. ;-P
\\ Also, if you did not care, you would not comment here.
Why not?
Dare to explain?
\\PROVEN by the fact that YOU brought it up.
What?
What exactly I "brought up"??? Dare to quote? ;-P
\\This is proof positive that you do care.
Ahh??? And what base... you claim it?
YOU... seems to care about it. TOO MUCH.
And I "brought it up" -- to poke you with such info.
Which visible opposite to all what you was claiming all the road here.
But.
DO *I* care about it? :-))))))))))))))))))))))))))
Naah, I don't.
I only "care" (well, somewhat, only as much as it piquing my interest) about -- YOUR reaction to it.
Do you get it, at last? Or not... cause it is definitely impossible for a u.u.r.b. -- to admit that there is other people, and they have other interests -- NOT the same as own u.u.r.b.'s.
\\Further proof that you care is the FACT that you have defended donald tRump (re Russian collusion) ENDLESSLY (by falsely describing the proven collusion as "garbage" and "throwing of feces").
But.
It was based on facts.
Like -- there is NEITHER trial NOR court judgment. And even facts NOT provided.
And I... CARE about things based on facts and logic -- yes, guilty as hell. ;-P
Unlike... one certain u.u.r.b.
Who trying to smear me into some shameful thing (like "defending dRump")... on the base that I DO NOT LIKE to postpone Logic and Facts based rational thinking -- and unite with it in its bonkery and religious non-factual, no, ANTI-factual delusions. ;-P
\\btw, when I wrote, "It does not matter -- to you", I meant because the info at the end of the link presents FACTS...
So you misquoted me. I suspect on purpose. Because you are a dishonest POS.
No.
Because you disqualifed yourself as a honest opponent in a discussion.
With almost every your quote incorrect. And your claims not based on facts. And your missives having no explanation, and even less logic.
But.
If you'd make correct quotes... of that FACTS you proclaimed exist somewhere.
AND.
Will give some input -- why that facts matter and what they need?
I'll try to reconcider.
But.
I will not be holding my breatch waiting while you'd do that. Naturally.
You have built that castle of lies and distrust -- with your own hands and burning delusioned mind -- and it is you are one who conDEMNed to live in it. ;-P
Derpy Derpy Doo, Where R U???
ReplyDelete