Another hoax.

https://eu.detroitnews.com/story/news/local/michigan/2019/02/25/gay-rights-leader-accused-burning-down-home/2816523002/

what is it with these people trying to stoke up hatred because they dont like trump

merged

what an absolute fuck to kill their own pets in such a horrible fashion.

yes I just spotted there was already one.

Now you know how Americans feel about Trump declaring an emergency to get his faux border wall. Another hoax, self-inflicted by the putative victim!

Original Quill wrote:Now you know how Americans feel about Trump declaring an emergency to get his faux border wall.  Another hoax, self-inflicted by the putative victim!

So what hoax are you planning?

Maddog wrote:

Original Quill wrote:Now you know how Americans feel about Trump declaring an emergency to get his faux border wall.  Another hoax, self-inflicted by the putative victim!

So what hoax are you planning?

That's an ad homenim fallacious response; it's not about me. You know all about that, don't you?

It's about the elevation of lying to the status of truth and legitimacy under Republican leadership. Trump tells on average some 8 lies a day, and his national emergency on the border is a huge one.

The Democrats and other assorted left scum have turned victim hood into currency

Talking of a hoax

Russian collusion

Now there's a hoax

Original Quill wrote:

Maddog wrote:

So what hoax are you planning?

That's an ad homenim fallacious response; it's not about me.  You know all about that, don't you?

It's about the elevation of lying to the status of truth and legitimacy under Republican leadership.  Trump tells on average some 8 lies a day, and his national emergency on the border is a huge one.

So Trump lies, and someone burns up their pets in response.  

Seems a bit over the top to me.  

That's why it's called Trump Derangement  Syndrome.

Original Quill wrote:

Maddog wrote:

So what hoax are you planning?

That's an ad homenim fallacious response; it's not about me.  You know all about that, don't you?

It's about the elevation of lying to the status of truth and legitimacy under Republican leadership.  Trump tells on average some 8 lies a day, and his national emergency on the border is a huge one.

it's about trying to start race and gender wars by lies.

smelly-bandit wrote:Talking of a hoax

Russian collusion

Now there's a hoax

Tu quoque fallacy. What are going to do about it? Join 'em?

Are you suggesting that lying is all right with you? You don't respond or criticize, but just offer another example? Under your assumptions, you seem to be championing the practice.

As far as Russian collusion, it is 34 indictments and 6 convictions. All of Robert Mueller’s indictments and plea deals in the Russia investigation so far: https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/2/20/17031772/mueller-indictments-grand-jury

The Devil, You Know wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

That's an ad homenim fallacious response; it's not about me.  You know all about that, don't you?

It's about the elevation of lying to the status of truth and legitimacy under Republican leadership.  Trump tells on average some 8 lies a day, and his national emergency on the border is a huge one.

it's about trying to start race and gender wars by lies.

You mean Trump? I don't think race war is his objective, although racial purity is certainly a primary aim of his.

Anyway, I don't think Trump is in charge. Putin is, and his objective is to divide and disrupt a superior power, so he can regain a geopolitical advantage.

smelly-bandit wrote:The Democrats and other assorted left scum have turned victim hood into currency

The victimhood starts with the Russo-Republicans. The Democrats are merely pointing out what is already there.

We are only a month and a half into a new Democratic Congress. Watch the fireworks in the next two years.

Original Quill wrote:

The Devil, You Know wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

That's an ad homenim fallacious response; it's not about me.  You know all about that, don't you?

It's about the elevation of lying to the status of truth and legitimacy under Republican leadership.  Trump tells on average some 8 lies a day, and his national emergency on the border is a huge one.

it's about trying to start race and gender wars by lies.

You mean Trump?  I don't think race war is his objective, although racial purity is certainly a primary aim of his.

Anyway, I don't think Trump is in charge.  Putin is, and his objective is to divide and disrupt a superior power, so he can regain a geopolitical advantage.

And who allows Putin to be in charge? Have you thought that far ahead?

Original Quill wrote:

The Devil, You Know wrote:
it's about trying to start race and gender wars by lies.

You mean Trump?  I don't think race war is his objective, although racial purity is certainly a primary aim of his.

Anyway, I don't think Trump is in charge.  Putin is, and his objective is to divide and disrupt a superior power, so he can regain a geopolitical advantage.

no I mean democrats

Original Quill wrote:

smelly-bandit wrote:The Democrats and other assorted left scum have turned victim hood into currency

The victimhood starts with the Russo-Republicans.  The Democrats are merely pointing out what is already there.

We are only a month and a half into a new Democratic Congress.  Watch the fireworks in the next two years.

its not the white male patriarchy running around faking hate crimes against black democrats

is it???

Original Quill wrote:

smelly-bandit wrote:The Democrats and other assorted left scum have turned victim hood into currency

The victimhood starts with the Russo-Republicans.  The Democrats are merely pointing out what is already there.

We are only a month and a half into a new Democratic Congress.  Watch the fireworks in the next two years.

would the clinton foundation donations count as collusion?

Original Quill wrote:

smelly-bandit wrote:Talking of a hoax

Russian collusion

Now there's a hoax

Tu quoque fallacy.  What are going to do about it?  Join 'em?

Are you suggesting that lying is all right with you?  You don't respond or criticize, but just offer another example?  Under your assumptions, you seem to be championing the practice.

As far as Russian collusion, it is 34 indictments and 6 convictions.  All of Robert Mueller’s indictments and plea deals in the Russia investigation so far:  https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/2/20/17031772/mueller-indictments-grand-jury

winning is winning.................bitch

its not personal its politics, fuck off back to amateurville if you cant handle the big leagues

The Devil, You Know wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

The victimhood starts with the Russo-Republicans.  The Democrats are merely pointing out what is already there.

We are only a month and a half into a new Democratic Congress.  Watch the fireworks in the next two years.

would the clinton foundation donations count as collusion?

since you mentioned the clintons, lets talk about the collusion between obama/clinton and ISIS vis-a-vis the attack on the american embassy in libya, and how clinton knew about and allowed the attack to happen and helped it succeed.

lets talk about collusion shall we??

smelly-bandit wrote:

The Devil, You Know wrote:
would the clinton foundation donations count as collusion?

since you mentioned the clintons, lets talk about the collusion between obama/clinton and ISIS vis-a-vis the attack on the american embassy in libya, and how clinton knew about and allowed the attack to happen and helped it succeed.

lets talk about collusion shall we??

That's all been proven a lie, put out by Faux News. That's why nothing ever came of it. First, Benghazi was a CIA base, not an embassy. Second, because it was a CIA base no one could talk about it, leaving Faux News free to run on at the mouth. Ms. Clinton, as Secretary of State, wasn't even involved.

That is why the first person to definitively say anything about it was Gen. Petraeus, then Director of the CIA. The military detachment was too far away to do anything.

Original Quill wrote:

smelly-bandit wrote:

since you mentioned the clintons, lets talk about the collusion between obama/clinton and ISIS vis-a-vis the attack on the american embassy in libya, and how clinton knew about and allowed the attack to happen and helped it succeed.

lets talk about collusion shall we??

That's all been proven a lie, put out by Faux News.  That's why nothing ever came of it.  First, Benghazi was a CIA base, not an embassy.  Second, because it was a CIA base no one could talk about it, leaving Faux News free to run on at the mouth.  Ms. Clinton, as Secretary of State, wasn't even involved.

That is why the first person to definitively say anything about it was Gen. Petraeus, then Director of the CIA.  The military detachment was too far away to do anything.

tut tut

you really should get your facts straight

the embassy and the CIA base were in seperate locations, the embassy was attacked first and then the CIA base was hit after private security assest from teh CIA base went to help the embassy and compromised the CIA base.

clinton knew what was happening, and she let it happen, she even instructed the official mouthpieces for the administration to say it was in response to the muhhamad movie/cartoons incident when it actual fact it was a co-ordinated attack preplanned to coincide with other incidents of unrest over the cartoons/movie to make it look like it was spontaneous.

clinton took full responsibility for the security oversight, and the reason nothing happened is becaseu obama swept it under the rug and clinton bleached her harddrives and all her emails.

clinton and obama colluded with islamic terrorists to attack a US embassy and kill a US embassador.

thats the only colluson in american politics

Maybe the pets paid their master to stage the event and it went awry?

smelly b wrote:clinton knew what was happening, and she let it happen, she even instructed the official mouthpieces for the administration to say it was in response to the muhhamad movie/cartoons incident when it actual fact it was a co-ordinated attack preplanned to coincide with other incidents of unrest over the cartoons/movie to make it look like it was spontaneous.

There was confusion of the motivating purpose of the attackers. There was much speculation going on. Apparently, Clinton didn't get the same memo that you did.

The real attack was on the CIA base, because the attackers were of the mind that the CIA was working against their interests. The riots were just beginning and caught everyone by surprise. The US military was too far away, and had to be flown in. The damage was already done by the time the military got there.

Because it was a CIA affair, Clinton was not in the loop. She doesn't even belong in the discussion, really. But it was an opportunity for the Republicans. They knew that Ms. Clinton would surely be the next Democratic offer for president, so the campaign to discredit her began early and hard. They jiggled and twisted the story, and came up blaming her. In fact, she was not even involved and had no responsibility. That much was proven.