Manafort Trial Thread Part II

#351
#351
carlos86 said:
1) Ben Shapiro isn't a journalist he's an opinion writer who goes around colleges getting people to debate him.
2) He accepted dirty foreign money to push pro-Russian propaganda. Now the question is why he was regurgitating straight-up Kremlin propaganda attacking Ukraine for cash????
Click to expand...
1) oh he definitely meets the requirements for journalist with regards to 1a protections.
2) prove knowledge and intent on that!
😂😂
 
#353
#353
Orange_Crush said:
What speaks volumes is the fact that you either can't read, or can't process information as given. I never said one way or the other. I merely pointed out the fact that you are what you accused of being. It's appropriate that you are showing a lack of cognitive function after the post you made, and I responded to.

(For the record, you doubled down on your own idiocy and your cognitive function was apparently defunct enough to not realize it. You doubled down on accepting one narrative based solelty on who wrote it, and denying its opposite narrative based solely on who said it. lol In case your cognitive function has completely vacated. I'll help by reminding you of the post I responded to.
Click to expand...
Yeah, you did discredit Woodward by declaring that his subjects had denied it, as if that's not the expected reasonable reaction. I think you're pretty confused. I'll wait until you start feeling better. I hope you rest up and get back to normal.
 
#355
#355
TennTom said:
Yeah, you did discredit Woodward by declaring that his subjects had denied it, as if that's not the expected reasonable reaction. I think you're pretty confused. I'll wait until you start feeling better. I hope you rest up and get back to normal.
Click to expand...

Like I said, your cognitive abilities seem to be the worse for wear. I pointed out that the objects of his narrative had denied his narrative. That's pertinent to the argument that you accept a narrative that has been denied by those the author wrote about. It bolsters the FACT that you accept the book based on the source (and your wishes) as opposed to the argument, which is in question (denial).

You claimed that I denied his narrative (which I never said) and you said that I accepted the narrative of Trump's staff (again, which I never said). An average cognitive ability would have recognized what I wrote and what I didn't write, as well as understanding that there is the middle ground stance that I do actually hold, despite your unfounded attributions of me.

I have no idea. I don't trust any of them. I hope to one day know the truth, bust suspect I never will.

I'm feeling well enough to recognize, in excruciating detail, just how hypocritical and undeservedly arrogant you've been over the last hour. Thanks for your concern.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SLICKYINC and NorthDallas40
#356
#356
Orange_Crush said:
Like I said, your cognitive abilities seem to be the worse for wear. I pointed out that the objects of his narrative had denied his narrative. That's pertinent to the argument that you accept a narrative that has been denied by those the author wrote about. It bolsters the FACT that you accept the book based on the source (and your wishes) as opposed to the argument, which is in question (denial).

You claimed that I denied his narrative (which I never said) and you said that I accepted the narrative of Trump's staff (again, which I never said). An average cognitive ability would have recognized what I wrote and what I didn't write, as well as understanding that there is the middle ground stance that I do actually hold, despite your unfounded attributions of me.

I have no idea. I don't trust any of them. I hope to one day know the truth, bust suspect I never will.

I'm feeling well enough to recognize, in excruciating detail, just how hypocritical and undeservedly arrogant you've been over the last hour. Thanks for your concern.
Click to expand...


That’s a whole lot of words just to say “you’re dumb as a bag of hammers
 
  • Like
Reactions: AirVol
#367
#367
0nelilreb said:
I just considered the source and laughed . This is the same one who quotes vanity fair . 😂
The other one will be along shortly to post from the other source of truth and justice , the Huff ( paint ) post .
Click to expand...

Its quite laughable actually. Most of the liberals on this board are completely illogical. I mean if anyone tends to lean conservative, they automatically have zero credibility. I mean denugrating Shapiro for offering opinions? I have to assume most have never really listened to him. Shapiro rips Trump quite a bit. I like listening to him. Its hilarious to watch him destroy the snowflakes on the idiot liberal campuses across the country.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Orangeslice13 and 0nelilreb
#368
#368
BigOrangeTrain said:
Its quite laughable actually. Most of the liberals on this board are completely illogical. I mean if anyone tends to lean conservative, they automatically have zero credibility. I mean denugrating Shapiro for offering opinions? I have to assume most have never really listened to him. Shapiro rips Trump quite a bit. I like listening to him. Its hilarious to watch him destroy the snowflakes on the idiot liberal campuses across the country.
Click to expand...

I agree , if the little genius would just slow down a little when he’s talking it would help lol
 
  • Like
Reactions: BigOrangeTrain
#369
#369
hog88 said:
Who knows anymore, I can see journalists being prosecuted by the Muel and POS like Carlos celebrating it.
Click to expand...

What's funny is that it's Carlos and the clan that call Trump a fascist for threatening to add more teeth to journalist libel laws. I actually saw some using that as just cause for impeachment. Now they're all giddy at the thought of legal troubles for a journalist writing articles.

It's mind boggling--not that they're so hypocritical, just that they seem either blind to it, or OK with it.
 
#370
#370
Orange_Crush said:
What's funny is that it's Carlos and the clan that call Trump a fascist for threatening to add more teeth to journalist libel laws. I actually saw some using that as just cause for impeachment. Now they're all giddy at the thought of legal troubles for a journalist writing articles.

It's mind boggling--not that they're so hypocritical, just that they seem either blind to it, or OK with it.
Click to expand...

They are all party above all, country be damned.
 
#371
#371
carlos86 said:
One of the laws broken, to begin with, was FARA. And let's not forget what the implications of pushing pro-Kremlin op eds for cash are. And yes. Shapiro is identified by the Special Counsel filings as "Person D". Looks like he's an
an unindicted co-conspirator in "Conspiracy against the United States"
DnHCDaSU4AINHxM.jpg
Click to expand...

So, do you think he was being paid to be a propagandist, or what? Maybe the indictment doesn't have anything to do with his professional work.

Is it spelled out anywhere, or maybe a clue in there somewhere?
 
#375
#375
Stew Cook said:
Well it has me curious anyway. Money laundering, would that qualify as conspiracy against the US?
Click to expand...
I haven't brushed up on the broohaha with Shapiro. I was under the impression he's been accused of writing Russia-friendly editorials. Where do you get money laundering?
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top