Steve Videtich said:

---

I'm not going to argue with you Chem, because I've learned that it's a complete waste of time. I just want to point out the fact that I used the phrase "is the problem" not "part of the problem."

I've also been on record saying that Trump is his own worst enemy and is a complete ass many times. But, it doesn't change my point of view on the state of politics in this country and what the man has revealed about the powers that be. If some of the actions taken in recent years aren't the least but worrisome, then I don't know what to say.

Now go argue with someone else...

---

He's a lying waste of time. Good decision.

TheStorm said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

PackFansXL said:

---

have admonished people trying to read too much into the nuclear comments

---

---

---

Chem... and yet, we've not heard one more single word from you about this after the other night?

Corner of your mouth still hurting from where that hook was set?

C'mon now... you've always got an opinion on anything and everything... even when you are flipping back and forth on a topic, as you are "wont" to do from time to time.

Please expound a little more about the "nuclear secrets" angle for us... Please?

---

You mean my comments that he was arrogant enough to take too secret documents (he did)? Or that we should be skeptical u til after we learn more (still true)?
It taht Trumps lawyers comments could very well be like UNCs lawyers?

All of those things are still true.

DrummerboyWolf said:

---

I have said this before and will say it again. If the Patriots had wanted to seize the Capitol on January 6th, they would still be holding it. The only person shot and killed on that day was shot by a Capitol Police officer. One officer died of natural causes and I believe it was 3 others were all severely beaten by the Police. The FBI was in on that and tried to stoke violence. Somebody had to open the 20,000 lb magnetic doors to let people in. You see officers opening the doors for people to come in. It was a set up. Not to mention the prisoners who have been held for 18 months with no hearings and no charges. At least 3 have committed suicide because of their plight. This is Banana Republic stuff and that is where we are heading.

---

No way would our government craft such an un-plausible plan as bolded. No way would we be living in a Banana Republic.

But… did they? Are we?

This stuff is made for TV, only. Not real life…

packgrad said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

I'm not going to argue with you Chem, because I've learned that it's a complete waste of time. I just want to point out the fact that I used the phrase "is the problem" not "part of the problem."

I've also been on record saying that Trump is his own worst enemy and is a complete ass many times. But, it doesn't change my point of view on the state of politics in this country and what the man has revealed about the powers that be. If some of the actions taken in recent years aren't the least but worrisome, then I don't know what to say.

Now go argue with someone else...

---

He's a lying waste of time. Good decision.

---

"The rape story is not true". "Well, I only meant the political part of that, of course the girl was telling the truth".

You can make all the allegations against me you want, I'll stand by my statement that both you and Fox (mr Carlson) called that story a lie, and both of you were wrong

I respond only for context of your allegations….I have no interest in going back and forth on the topic with you again

Packchem91 said:

---

TheStorm said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

PackFansXL said:

---

have admonished people trying to read too much into the nuclear comments

---

---

---

Chem... and yet, we've not heard one more single word from you about this after the other night?

Corner of your mouth still hurting from where that hook was set?

C'mon now... you've always got an opinion on anything and everything... even when you are flipping back and forth on a topic, as you are "wont" to do from time to time.

Please expound a little more about the "nuclear secrets" angle for us... Please?

---

You mean my comments that he was arrogant enough to take too secret documents (he did)? And you know this how? And, you also know they were still classified, how?

Or that we should be skeptical until after we learn more (still true)? Still true or you still are?

That Trumps lawyers comments could very well be like UNCs lawyers? Still true or you are holding reservation until further information?

All of those things are still true. Again, see above…

---

See above..

The petty war, BBW has with you is warranted, according to me, for the way you come off. We all know where you stand! I wish you would be just a little more controlled, kind of like you say about Trump. The irony, huh?

caryking said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

PackFansXL said:

---

https://www.nationalreview.com/2022/08/trump-warrant-furthers-justice-departments-january-6-investigation/

Quote:

---

The Mar-a-Lago search warrant has been unsealed. Turns out it is what I told you it was going to be: an open-ended license to grab any item that might be relevant to the Justice Department's Capitol-riot investigation.

To be sure, the government is very interested in reclaiming every bit of classified information or, at least, information that it claims is classified in Donald Trump's possession at his Mar-a-Lago estate. The warrant, however, is not limited to evidence of classified-information crimes, not even close.

---

Quote:

---

Where things get really, shall we say, elastic is subsection (c). It permits the seizure of "any government and/or Presidential Records created" throughout the four years of Trump's presidency.

Plainly, this has nothing to do with classified information. It is mainly designed to use the criminal law the search warrant, an intrusive tactic for retrieving evidence of crimes to enforce the Presidential Records Act, which is not a criminal statute.

My point for present purposes is that subsection (c) authorized the FBI agents to seize every scrap of paper from the Trump administration. There is no limitation to classified information. There is no limitation to the Presidential Records Act. There is no limitation to the unmentioned Capitol riot. Indeed, there is no requirement that any scrap of paper be connected in any way to any crime whatsoever. No restriction at all. If it was arguably a government record of any kind generated during the Trump presidency, the judge said the bureau could take it.

The FBI and Justice Department will be doing what I told you they'd be doing: Poring over everything and anything from Trump's presidency to try to make a January 6 case. What was executed at Monday's historically unprecedented search of a former American president's home was not a traditional search warrant to find evidence of specific crimes. It was certainly not a search warrant solely to retrieve vital national-defense secrets. This search warrant was a license for a fishing expedition. In an ocean.

The Justice Department is hoping the Trump trove will yield proof that he did not believe his stop-the-steal rhetoric and was willfully trying to steal by fraud and political pressure an election he knew he lost. I believe that is what the Justice Department thinks it needs to charge the former president with corruptly obstructing Congress's count of state-certified electoral votes, and with conspiring to defraud the government.

Whether they will find the needles in the haystack remains to be seen. But they made sure to get control of the haystack.

---

McCarthy, a former prosecutor who is familiar with these techniques, says the warrant clearly proves his guess about the raid was spot on.

---

Just shows that they are looking for anything they can to smear a former president and stop him from being reelected. Shows exactly what Cary is referring to when he talks about Trump being over the target. Scary and sad.... yet some think Trump is the problem. SMH

---

Well you are reading the thoughts of a biased article / opinion piece, so of course it's going to reach this conclusion, but just as the Trump-stans here have admonished people trying to read too much into the nuclear comments, people will read too much into this guys guesses as well.

As for your last comment, yes, no doubt, Trump is part of the problem. Im more amazed at this point that you'd disagree with that thought

---

Chem, Trump, in my opinion, is not part of the problem. I believe he is damn near all of the problem!!

Now, we need to define the problem! That's where, the bid and the ask, is probably too far a part for, you and I.

---

First, I don't they only purposely seeking divide is a good thing.

1) he could have won over a large % of black vote, but gave that away after Charlottesville
2) he admitted to lying about how serious Covid was because he didn't want to scare people
3) Covid became very political on both "sides"…he was right there in the mud contributing to that
4) the much discussed post-election actions

None of the other things are insurmountable…the final one, IMO, invalidates him to run again (rather, it should, but of course too many people will stand by home regardless)

Packchem91 said:

---

caryking said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

PackFansXL said:

---

https://www.nationalreview.com/2022/08/trump-warrant-furthers-justice-departments-january-6-investigation/

Quote:

---

The Mar-a-Lago search warrant has been unsealed. Turns out it is what I told you it was going to be: an open-ended license to grab any item that might be relevant to the Justice Department's Capitol-riot investigation.

To be sure, the government is very interested in reclaiming every bit of classified information or, at least, information that it claims is classified in Donald Trump's possession at his Mar-a-Lago estate. The warrant, however, is not limited to evidence of classified-information crimes, not even close.

---

Quote:

---

Where things get really, shall we say, elastic is subsection (c). It permits the seizure of "any government and/or Presidential Records created" throughout the four years of Trump's presidency.

Plainly, this has nothing to do with classified information. It is mainly designed to use the criminal law the search warrant, an intrusive tactic for retrieving evidence of crimes to enforce the Presidential Records Act, which is not a criminal statute.

My point for present purposes is that subsection (c) authorized the FBI agents to seize every scrap of paper from the Trump administration. There is no limitation to classified information. There is no limitation to the Presidential Records Act. There is no limitation to the unmentioned Capitol riot. Indeed, there is no requirement that any scrap of paper be connected in any way to any crime whatsoever. No restriction at all. If it was arguably a government record of any kind generated during the Trump presidency, the judge said the bureau could take it.

The FBI and Justice Department will be doing what I told you they'd be doing: Poring over everything and anything from Trump's presidency to try to make a January 6 case. What was executed at Monday's historically unprecedented search of a former American president's home was not a traditional search warrant to find evidence of specific crimes. It was certainly not a search warrant solely to retrieve vital national-defense secrets. This search warrant was a license for a fishing expedition. In an ocean.

The Justice Department is hoping the Trump trove will yield proof that he did not believe his stop-the-steal rhetoric and was willfully trying to steal by fraud and political pressure an election he knew he lost. I believe that is what the Justice Department thinks it needs to charge the former president with corruptly obstructing Congress's count of state-certified electoral votes, and with conspiring to defraud the government.

Whether they will find the needles in the haystack remains to be seen. But they made sure to get control of the haystack.

---

McCarthy, a former prosecutor who is familiar with these techniques, says the warrant clearly proves his guess about the raid was spot on.

---

Just shows that they are looking for anything they can to smear a former president and stop him from being reelected. Shows exactly what Cary is referring to when he talks about Trump being over the target. Scary and sad.... yet some think Trump is the problem. SMH

---

Well you are reading the thoughts of a biased article / opinion piece, so of course it's going to reach this conclusion, but just as the Trump-stans here have admonished people trying to read too much into the nuclear comments, people will read too much into this guys guesses as well.

As for your last comment, yes, no doubt, Trump is part of the problem. Im more amazed at this point that you'd disagree with that thought

---

Chem, Trump, in my opinion, is not part of the problem. I believe he is damn near all of the problem!!

Now, we need to define the problem! That's where, the bid and the ask, is probably too far a part for, you and I.

---

First, I don't they only purposely seeking divide is a good thing.

1) he could have won over a large % of black vote, but gave that away after Charlottesville
2) he admitted to lying about how serious Covid was because he didn't want to scare people
3) Covid became very political on both "sides"…he was right there in the mud contributing to that
4) the much discussed post-election actions

None of the other things are insurmountable…the final one, IMO, invalidates him to run again (rather, it should, but of course too many people will stand by home regardless)

---

Chem, I think you are probably more intellectually thoughtful than I am. To save me anymore embarrassment, I'm going to "try" and bow out of this conversation…

Packchem91 said:

---

packgrad said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

I'm not going to argue with you Chem, because I've learned that it's a complete waste of time. I just want to point out the fact that I used the phrase "is the problem" not "part of the problem."

I've also been on record saying that Trump is his own worst enemy and is a complete ass many times. But, it doesn't change my point of view on the state of politics in this country and what the man has revealed about the powers that be. If some of the actions taken in recent years aren't the least but worrisome, then I don't know what to say.

Now go argue with someone else...

---

He's a lying waste of time. Good decision.

---

"The rape story is not true". "Well, I only meant the political part of that, of course the girl was telling the truth".

You can make all the allegations against me you want, I'll stand by my statement that both you and Fox (mr Carlson) called that story a lie, and both of you were wrong

I respond only for context of your allegations….I have no interest in going back and forth on the topic with you again

---

Lying Chem lying again. lol. Such a waste of time this guy. I'll stop helping him do his usual and making every thread about his personal wars.

caryking said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

caryking said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

PackFansXL said:

---

https://www.nationalreview.com/2022/08/trump-warrant-furthers-justice-departments-january-6-investigation/

Quote:

---

The Mar-a-Lago search warrant has been unsealed. Turns out it is what I told you it was going to be: an open-ended license to grab any item that might be relevant to the Justice Department's Capitol-riot investigation.

To be sure, the government is very interested in reclaiming every bit of classified information or, at least, information that it claims is classified in Donald Trump's possession at his Mar-a-Lago estate. The warrant, however, is not limited to evidence of classified-information crimes, not even close.

---

Quote:

---

Where things get really, shall we say, elastic is subsection (c). It permits the seizure of "any government and/or Presidential Records created" throughout the four years of Trump's presidency.

Plainly, this has nothing to do with classified information. It is mainly designed to use the criminal law the search warrant, an intrusive tactic for retrieving evidence of crimes to enforce the Presidential Records Act, which is not a criminal statute.

My point for present purposes is that subsection (c) authorized the FBI agents to seize every scrap of paper from the Trump administration. There is no limitation to classified information. There is no limitation to the Presidential Records Act. There is no limitation to the unmentioned Capitol riot. Indeed, there is no requirement that any scrap of paper be connected in any way to any crime whatsoever. No restriction at all. If it was arguably a government record of any kind generated during the Trump presidency, the judge said the bureau could take it.

The FBI and Justice Department will be doing what I told you they'd be doing: Poring over everything and anything from Trump's presidency to try to make a January 6 case. What was executed at Monday's historically unprecedented search of a former American president's home was not a traditional search warrant to find evidence of specific crimes. It was certainly not a search warrant solely to retrieve vital national-defense secrets. This search warrant was a license for a fishing expedition. In an ocean.

The Justice Department is hoping the Trump trove will yield proof that he did not believe his stop-the-steal rhetoric and was willfully trying to steal by fraud and political pressure an election he knew he lost. I believe that is what the Justice Department thinks it needs to charge the former president with corruptly obstructing Congress's count of state-certified electoral votes, and with conspiring to defraud the government.

Whether they will find the needles in the haystack remains to be seen. But they made sure to get control of the haystack.

---

McCarthy, a former prosecutor who is familiar with these techniques, says the warrant clearly proves his guess about the raid was spot on.

---

Just shows that they are looking for anything they can to smear a former president and stop him from being reelected. Shows exactly what Cary is referring to when he talks about Trump being over the target. Scary and sad.... yet some think Trump is the problem. SMH

---

Well you are reading the thoughts of a biased article / opinion piece, so of course it's going to reach this conclusion, but just as the Trump-stans here have admonished people trying to read too much into the nuclear comments, people will read too much into this guys guesses as well.

As for your last comment, yes, no doubt, Trump is part of the problem. Im more amazed at this point that you'd disagree with that thought

---

Chem, Trump, in my opinion, is not part of the problem. I believe he is damn near all of the problem!!

Now, we need to define the problem! That's where, the bid and the ask, is probably too far a part for, you and I.

---

First, I don't they only purposely seeking divide is a good thing.

1) he could have won over a large % of black vote, but gave that away after Charlottesville
2) he admitted to lying about how serious Covid was because he didn't want to scare people
3) Covid became very political on both "sides"…he was right there in the mud contributing to that
4) the much discussed post-election actions

None of the other things are insurmountable…the final one, IMO, invalidates him to run again (rather, it should, but of course too many people will stand by home regardless)

---

Chem, I think you are probably more intellectually thoughtful than I am. To save me anymore embarrassment, I'm going to "try" and bow out of this conversation…

---

Crowley rips FBI's Trump raid as 'abominable': Establishment considers him 'existential threat' https://t.co/T0hygfYQjZ

— Fox News (@FoxNews) August 13, 2022

"MONICA CROWLEY: The absurdity of this case tells you that the regime has jumped the shark with this raid, and they are clearly aware of that. That is an outrageous assertion that somehow Donald Trump had our nation's most sensitive nuclear secrets. But they waited a year and a half to go get them. I mean, what's next that he's hiding nuclear missiles under his bed? The whole thing is absurd, and while there is some outstanding questions about classification, and we've been going back and forth on that issue, and perhaps that does need to be litigated all the way to the Supreme Court. We don't know that yet, but what we do know is that this is the latest in a long line of abominable acts against this president to try to undermine them and try to smear him and ultimately try to destroy him, remove him from the US political scene, and everybody is talking about the particulars of the Russia hoax or the two fake impeachments or January 6. But nobody is teasing it out to the broader question of why he is under constant assault, and guys, the only reason for that is because he is an existential threat to the entire ruling class and their absolute grip on power, and therefore, he must be destroyed."

I'm currently listening to a podcast about Youngstown Ohio and Jim Traficant. It's called Crooked City.

Take a listen, especially episode 4 where Traficant demonizes the FBI because they have him on tape taking bribes. Very similar to what you see Trumps lawyers doing the last couple of days.

Now, I'm not saying there's something to the warrant, I honestly don't think we have any clue yet what this is about. But it is fascinating to be listening to this podcast and comparing it to what is going on today and seeing the similarities

hokiewolf said:

---

I'm currently listening to a podcast about Youngstown Ohio and Jim Traficant. It's called Crooked City.

Take a listen, especially episode 4 where Traficant demonizes the FBI because they have him on tape taking bribes. Very similar to what you see Trumps lawyers doing the last couple of days.

Now, I'm not saying there's something to the warrant, I honestly don't think we have any clue yet what this is about. But it is fascinating to be listening to this podcast and comparing it to what is going on today and seeing the similarities

---

Traficant was the guy with the crazy looking haircut, right? BTW, if they have him on tape, from a patriot act, type surveillance, then, I may be having the same complaint.

The Patriot Act was not a good thing; furthermore, it was so unconstitutional..

caryking said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

caryking said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

TheStorm said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

PackFansXL said:

---

have admonished people trying to read too much into the nuclear comments

---

---

---

Chem... and yet, we've not heard one more single word from you about this after the other night?

Corner of your mouth still hurting from where that hook was set?

C'mon now... you've always got an opinion on anything and everything... even when you are flipping back and forth on a topic, as you are "wont" to do from time to time.

Please expound a little more about the "nuclear secrets" angle for us... Please?

---

You mean my comments that he was arrogant enough to take too secret documents (he did)? And you know this how? And, you also know they were still classified, how?

Or that we should be skeptical until after we learn more (still true)? Still true or you still are?

That Trumps lawyers comments could very well be like UNCs lawyers? Still true or you are holding reservation until further information?

All of those things are still true. Again, see above…

---

See above..

The petty war, BBW has with you is warranted, according to me, for the way you come off. We all know where you stand! I wish you would be just a little more controlled, kind of like you say about Trump. The irony, huh?

---

Well, to your point, if you distrust the FBIs documentation on what they took (which indicated too secret documents), I guess my comment is wrong. I'm not questioning whether the documents are top secret, I have no idea. I only question the contextual statement (Civ would say nuanced). Perhaps, they were top secret and Trump, with his authority, de-classified them. Also, if true, what's being reported, the local FBI field office has looked at all the documents and asked them to be sealed and locked behind closed door, then that "could" create the distrust of the FBI. Again, don't know…

As for your 2nd part of that about whether they still are - we don't know. But as I've said since the other night, if authorities were so dumb as to not know that ahead of time, they've given him everything he needs!

We still don't know the answers - we are going on speculation (from both sides) other than the list of the seized docs which don't provide detail. So yes, best to still skeptical. Heck, I'm skeptical of Trump and the Feds! - that's probably a good thing, my opinion…

As for BBW, I've put him on ignore. He's shown not one inclination to participate in discussion. When he's proven wrong, he just pivots and makes up stuff. The fact a bunch of college educated posters don't see him for what it is is beyond me. College educated doesn't warrant people being… educated with common sense

I do find it funny though- you lamented that I am too general and need to state my opinions, but when I do, you get offended that my opinion is too strong, lol. Which is it? State your opinions! Call it that!


A little more controlled? You have an inference of know it all…. That is hilarious. Which comment of mine would you say is most offensive? I'm not offended by you, chem. I'm just letting you know (my opinion) that the way you come off, helps create the attacks you receive. You may not care what I'm saying, and that's your decision; however, a more reasonable debate (some on here are looking for it, like I think Rich is) can be helped by your own actions. BTW, that includes my own actions.

---

---

So I'll ask again, but more specifically, which of my comments / answers to your previous questions would not consider reasonable? Frankly, as much as you enjoy BBW, I'm not sure how you could ever consider another poster unreasonable

Again, you want me to be more exacting in my opinions but then complain that is "a know it all ".

And weren't you just the iy who (1) told me your daughter knew more about history than I did (though why you brought her into it I have no idea), and (2) challenged another poster to a debate on the constitution…but I'm the know it all? Lol

caryking said:

---

hokiewolf said:

---

I'm currently listening to a podcast about Youngstown Ohio and Jim Traficant. It's called Crooked City.

Take a listen, especially episode 4 where Traficant demonizes the FBI because they have him on tape taking bribes. Very similar to what you see Trumps lawyers doing the last couple of days.

Now, I'm not saying there's something to the warrant, I honestly don't think we have any clue yet what this is about. But it is fascinating to be listening to this podcast and comparing it to what is going on today and seeing the similarities

---

Traficant was the guy with the crazy looking haircut, right? BTW, if they have him on tape, from a patriot act, type surveillance, then, I may be having the same complaint.

The Patriot Act was not a good thing; furthermore, it was so unconstitutional..

---

this is about Traficant in the 70s when he was elected Sheriff

Packchem91 said:

---

caryking said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

caryking said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

TheStorm said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

PackFansXL said:

---

have admonished people trying to read too much into the nuclear comments

---

---

---

Chem... and yet, we've not heard one more single word from you about this after the other night?

Corner of your mouth still hurting from where that hook was set?

C'mon now... you've always got an opinion on anything and everything... even when you are flipping back and forth on a topic, as you are "wont" to do from time to time.

Please expound a little more about the "nuclear secrets" angle for us... Please?

---

You mean my comments that he was arrogant enough to take too secret documents (he did)? And you know this how? And, you also know they were still classified, how?

Or that we should be skeptical until after we learn more (still true)? Still true or you still are?

That Trumps lawyers comments could very well be like UNCs lawyers? Still true or you are holding reservation until further information?

All of those things are still true. Again, see above…

---

See above..

The petty war, BBW has with you is warranted, according to me, for the way you come off. We all know where you stand! I wish you would be just a little more controlled, kind of like you say about Trump. The irony, huh?

---

Well, to your point, if you distrust the FBIs documentation on what they took (which indicated too secret documents), I guess my comment is wrong. I'm not questioning whether the documents are top secret, I have no idea. I only question the contextual statement (Civ would say nuanced). Perhaps, they were top secret and Trump, with his authority, de-classified them. Also, if true, what's being reported, the local FBI field office has looked at all the documents and asked them to be sealed and locked behind closed door, then that "could" create the distrust of the FBI. Again, don't know…

As for your 2nd part of that about whether they still are - we don't know. But as I've said since the other night, if authorities were so dumb as to not know that ahead of time, they've given him everything he needs!

We still don't know the answers - we are going on speculation (from both sides) other than the list of the seized docs which don't provide detail. So yes, best to still skeptical. Heck, I'm skeptical of Trump and the Feds! - that's probably a good thing, my opinion…

As for BBW, I've put him on ignore. He's shown not one inclination to participate in discussion. When he's proven wrong, he just pivots and makes up stuff. The fact a bunch of college educated posters don't see him for what it is is beyond me. College educated doesn't warrant people being… educated with common sense

I do find it funny though- you lamented that I am too general and need to state my opinions, but when I do, you get offended that my opinion is too strong, lol. Which is it? State your opinions! Call it that!


A little more controlled? You have an inference of know it all…. That is hilarious. Which comment of mine would you say is most offensive? I'm not offended by you, chem. I'm just letting you know (my opinion) that the way you come off, helps create the attacks you receive. You may not care what I'm saying, and that's your decision; however, a more reasonable debate (some on here are looking for it, like I think Rich is) can be helped by your own actions. BTW, that includes my own actions.

---

---

So I'll ask again, but more specifically, which of my comments / answers to your previous questions would not consider reasonable? Frankly, as much as you enjoy BBW, I'm not sure how you could ever consider another poster unreasonable

Again, you want me to be more exacting in my opinions but then complain that is "a know it all ".

And weren't you just the iy who (1) told me your daughter knew more about history than I did (though why you brought her into it I have no idea), and (2) challenged another poster to a debate on the constitution…but I'm the know it all? Lol

---

nah your just dumb like me.

TheStorm said:

---

hokiewolf said:

---

nah your just 100% close minded like me.

---

FTFY.

Neither one of you are dumb... sometimes you just act like you are.

---

True, maybe we should be mature and flag dozens of posts like certain other posters here!

Packchem91 said:

---

TheStorm said:

---

High Travoltage said:

---

Do liberals even care that everything is worse under Brandon, or does life not get to factor into the debates?

---

Liberals? LOL. No, they do not... and based upon reading this board, neither do the pretendependants...

Just as long as it's not Trrrruuuummmmpppp!

*And they won't even acknowledge that everything economically and financially was better for them under Trump policy...

---

I can't speak for liberals. But there are plenty of conservatives who (1) can't stand Biden and think he's been terrible and (2) think the US is not well served to have a guy like Trump as potus.

And I know this is difficult for label-guys like PG to understand, but it is also true for people who believe #2 to still want a change back to a GOP leader in the next election.

This is not a difficult concept to understand. I think we are better off without a divisive leader, and there has never been a more divisive leader than Trump.

---

I actually agree with this and I'm probably a little higher on Trump than you but I think we need a new face, I just don't see how Trump can ever win a general election again. To me if he's the candidate, the libs get 4 more years and our primary goal should be getting the best candidate with the best chance of stopping the damage being done to our country right now.

I know that's not popular with everyone here but just my opinion

Packchem91 said:

---

TheStorm said:

---

hokiewolf said:

---

nah your just 100% close minded like me.

---

FTFY.

Neither one of you are dumb... sometimes you just act like you are.

---

True, maybe we should be mature and flag dozens of posts like certain other posters here!

---

You know exactly who I flagged... as it was very openly and very well documented here..

While I may disagree with both yours and hokie's "very apologetic" past allegiance to "conservative leaning" candidates...the people that I confessed to flagging, were not either of you. And of course you already know that. Period.

They are "extreme right wing" loons, that I want nothing to do with.

So, please continue...

Next question?

Packchem91 said:

---

caryking said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

caryking said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

TheStorm said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

PackFansXL said:

---

have admonished people trying to read too much into the nuclear comments

---

---

---

Chem... and yet, we've not heard one more single word from you about this after the other night?

Corner of your mouth still hurting from where that hook was set?

C'mon now... you've always got an opinion on anything and everything... even when you are flipping back and forth on a topic, as you are "wont" to do from time to time.

Please expound a little more about the "nuclear secrets" angle for us... Please?

---

You mean my comments that he was arrogant enough to take too secret documents (he did)? And you know this how? And, you also know they were still classified, how?

Or that we should be skeptical until after we learn more (still true)? Still true or you still are?

That Trumps lawyers comments could very well be like UNCs lawyers? Still true or you are holding reservation until further information?

All of those things are still true. Again, see above…

---

See above..

The petty war, BBW has with you is warranted, according to me, for the way you come off. We all know where you stand! I wish you would be just a little more controlled, kind of like you say about Trump. The irony, huh?

---

Well, to your point, if you distrust the FBIs documentation on what they took (which indicated too secret documents), I guess my comment is wrong. I'm not questioning whether the documents are top secret, I have no idea. I only question the contextual statement (Civ would say nuanced). Perhaps, they were top secret and Trump, with his authority, de-classified them. Also, if true, what's being reported, the local FBI field office has looked at all the documents and asked them to be sealed and locked behind closed door, then that "could" create the distrust of the FBI. Again, don't know…

As for your 2nd part of that about whether they still are - we don't know. But as I've said since the other night, if authorities were so dumb as to not know that ahead of time, they've given him everything he needs!

We still don't know the answers - we are going on speculation (from both sides) other than the list of the seized docs which don't provide detail. So yes, best to still skeptical. Heck, I'm skeptical of Trump and the Feds! - that's probably a good thing, my opinion…

As for BBW, I've put him on ignore. He's shown not one inclination to participate in discussion. When he's proven wrong, he just pivots and makes up stuff. The fact a bunch of college educated posters don't see him for what it is is beyond me. College educated doesn't warrant people being… educated with common sense

I do find it funny though- you lamented that I am too general and need to state my opinions, but when I do, you get offended that my opinion is too strong, lol. Which is it? State your opinions! Call it that!


A little more controlled? You have an inference of know it all…. That is hilarious. Which comment of mine would you say is most offensive? I'm not offended by you, chem. I'm just letting you know (my opinion) that the way you come off, helps create the attacks you receive. You may not care what I'm saying, and that's your decision; however, a more reasonable debate (some on here are looking for it, like I think Rich is) can be helped by your own actions. BTW, that includes my own actions.

---

---

So I'll ask again, but more specifically, which of my comments / answers to your previous questions would not consider reasonable? I don't have an issue with your comment; rather, it's your tone


Frankly, as much as you enjoy BBW, I'm not sure how you could ever consider another poster unreasonable. How do you know that I enjoy BBW? You really don't have one clue how/what and who I enjoy. Additionally, you don't know what goes on behind the scene. You are asking about what's unreasonable, so here goes…. It's your "no it all" assertion assertion that I enjoy BBW!

Again, you want me to be more exacting in my opinions but then complain that is "a know it all " see above…

And weren't you just the iy who (1) told me your daughter knew more about history than I did (though why you brought her into it I have no idea), yes, I brought her in because I thought you were "my opinion" being petulant. and (2) challenged another poster to a debate on the constitution…but I'm the know it all? Lol yes I did. You know, I could have lost; however, wouldn't it be fascinating to have a discussion/debate on something other than what we typically do?

---

hokiewolf said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

caryking said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

caryking said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

TheStorm said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

PackFansXL said:

---

have admonished people trying to read too much into the nuclear comments

---

---

---

Chem... and yet, we've not heard one more single word from you about this after the other night?

Corner of your mouth still hurting from where that hook was set?

C'mon now... you've always got an opinion on anything and everything... even when you are flipping back and forth on a topic, as you are "wont" to do from time to time.

Please expound a little more about the "nuclear secrets" angle for us... Please?

---

You mean my comments that he was arrogant enough to take too secret documents (he did)? And you know this how? And, you also know they were still classified, how?

Or that we should be skeptical until after we learn more (still true)? Still true or you still are?

That Trumps lawyers comments could very well be like UNCs lawyers? Still true or you are holding reservation until further information?

All of those things are still true. Again, see above…

---

See above..

The petty war, BBW has with you is warranted, according to me, for the way you come off. We all know where you stand! I wish you would be just a little more controlled, kind of like you say about Trump. The irony, huh?

---

Well, to your point, if you distrust the FBIs documentation on what they took (which indicated too secret documents), I guess my comment is wrong. I'm not questioning whether the documents are top secret, I have no idea. I only question the contextual statement (Civ would say nuanced). Perhaps, they were top secret and Trump, with his authority, de-classified them. Also, if true, what's being reported, the local FBI field office has looked at all the documents and asked them to be sealed and locked behind closed door, then that "could" create the distrust of the FBI. Again, don't know…

As for your 2nd part of that about whether they still are - we don't know. But as I've said since the other night, if authorities were so dumb as to not know that ahead of time, they've given him everything he needs!

We still don't know the answers - we are going on speculation (from both sides) other than the list of the seized docs which don't provide detail. So yes, best to still skeptical. Heck, I'm skeptical of Trump and the Feds! - that's probably a good thing, my opinion…

As for BBW, I've put him on ignore. He's shown not one inclination to participate in discussion. When he's proven wrong, he just pivots and makes up stuff. The fact a bunch of college educated posters don't see him for what it is is beyond me. College educated doesn't warrant people being… educated with common sense

I do find it funny though- you lamented that I am too general and need to state my opinions, but when I do, you get offended that my opinion is too strong, lol. Which is it? State your opinions! Call it that!


A little more controlled? You have an inference of know it all…. That is hilarious. Which comment of mine would you say is most offensive? I'm not offended by you, chem. I'm just letting you know (my opinion) that the way you come off, helps create the attacks you receive. You may not care what I'm saying, and that's your decision; however, a more reasonable debate (some on here are looking for it, like I think Rich is) can be helped by your own actions. BTW, that includes my own actions.

---

---

So I'll ask again, but more specifically, which of my comments / answers to your previous questions would not consider reasonable? Frankly, as much as you enjoy BBW, I'm not sure how you could ever consider another poster unreasonable

Again, you want me to be more exacting in my opinions but then complain that is "a know it all ".

And weren't you just the iy who (1) told me your daughter knew more about history than I did (though why you brought her into it I have no idea), and (2) challenged another poster to a debate on the constitution…but I'm the know it all? Lol

---

nah your just dumb like me.

---

Hokie, I don't think You or Chem are dumb at all…

I think you two "major on the minors" and "minor on the majors" in the debates. That said, we all do that, at times…

Packchem91 said:

---

TheStorm said:

---

hokiewolf said:

---

nah your just 100% close minded like me.

---

FTFY.

Neither one of you are dumb... sometimes you just act like you are.

---

True, maybe we should be mature and flag dozens of posts like certain other posters here!

---

Chem, again.. why stoop to a level, you accuse Trump of doing? Typically, a person is losing when they start ad hominem attacks. No need to answer… were you there when posting that?

caryking said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

TheStorm said:

---

hokiewolf said:

---

nah your just 100% close minded like me.

---

FTFY.

Neither one of you are dumb... sometimes you just act like you are.

---

True, maybe we should be mature and flag dozens of posts like certain other posters here!

---

Chem, again.. why stoop to a level, you accuse Trump of doing? Typically, a person is losing when they start ad hominem attacks. No need to answer… were you there when posting that?

---

Lol. Look above your post. I was answering a criticism from Storm. Amd he knows exactly who I was talking about, because it was him. So, I'll wait for you to call him out as a know it all or saying things that arent conducive to a good discussions.

Or I'll await for you to do same to PG, who pretty much responds the same negative way t anything Civ, Hokie, me or anyone not as right as him posts….I don't think I've ever seen you lecture him?

Packchem91 said:

---

caryking said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

TheStorm said:

---

hokiewolf said:

---

nah your just 100% close minded like me.

---

FTFY.

Neither one of you are dumb... sometimes you just act like you are.

---

True, maybe we should be mature and flag dozens of posts like certain other posters here!

---

Chem, again.. why stoop to a level, you accuse Trump of doing? Typically, a person is losing when they start ad hominem attacks. No need to answer… were you there when posting that?

---

Lol. Look above your post. I was answering a criticism from Storm. Amd he knows exactly who I was talking about, because it was him. So, I'll wait for you to call him out as a know it all or saying things that arent conducive to a good discussions.

Or I'll await for you to do same to PG, who pretty much responds the same negative way t anything Civ, Hokie, me or anyone not as right as him posts….I don't think I've ever seen you lecture him?

---

Chem, why make it about others? Why not think about you?

Chem, you remind me of a former co-worker. He was raised in a staunchly Republican household but married a very opinionated liberal Democrat. After years with her, he would behave like you with lots of Democrat talking points laced with disgust at his parent's viewpoints. The more he talked, the more the images conjured up by Rush Limbaugh's "feminazi" pejorative would appear in my brain.

Is your spouse an outspoken Democrat?

caryking said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

caryking said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

TheStorm said:

---

hokiewolf said:

---

nah your just 100% close minded like me.

---

FTFY.

Neither one of you are dumb... sometimes you just act like you are.

---

True, maybe we should be mature and flag dozens of posts like certain other posters here!

---

Chem, again.. why stoop to a level, you accuse Trump of doing? Typically, a person is losing when they start ad hominem attacks. No need to answer… were you there when posting that?

---

Lol. Look above your post. I was answering a criticism from Storm. Amd he knows exactly who I was talking about, because it was him. So, I'll wait for you to call him out as a know it all or saying things that arent conducive to a good discussions.

Or I'll await for you to do same to PG, who pretty much responds the same negative way t anything Civ, Hokie, me or anyone not as right as him posts….I don't think I've ever seen you lecture him?

---

Chem, why make it about others? Why not think about you?

---

Just pointing out your hypocrisy. I've noticed those you give your lectures to tend to be the folks who disagree with you…which, in my opinion (see that) makes it more about you than me.

PackFansXL said:

---

Chem, you remind me of a former co-worker. He was raised in a staunchly Republican household but married a very opinionated liberal Democrat. After years with her, he would behave like you with lots of Democrat talking points laced with disgust at his parent's viewpoints. The more he talked, the more the images conjured up by Rush Limbaugh's "feminazi" pejorative would appear in my brain.

Is your spouse an outspoken Democrat?

---

Lol, no. Heck no. My wife is the daughter of old school southern baptist who is as nice as day is long but intimidated me when dating (at SVHS!).
She's still very conservative.

I am as well in many ways - I lean that way but just not as strongly. And to be clear, I have no disgust for my parents views either…they treat everyone they meet equally and fairly, regardless of political view…a pattern I've tried to emulate in my life (more successfully in person than on this board)

ETA: and I'll not apologize for calling out Trumps behavior again and again. Guy has made his own bed. He can't get out of his own way. Amd as I've said over and over, at some point a POTUS should have to meet certain behavioral standards. IMO, he does not

TheStorm said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

TheStorm said:

---

hokiewolf said:

---

nah your just 100% close minded like me.

---

FTFY.

Neither one of you are dumb... sometimes you just act like you are.

---

True, maybe we should be mature and flag dozens of posts like certain other posters here!

---

You know exactly who I flagged... as it was very openly and very well documented here..

While I may disagree with both yours and hokie's "very apologetic" past allegiance to "conservative leaning" candidates...the people that I confessed to flagging, were not either of you. And of course you already know that. Period.

They are "extreme right wing" loons, that I want nothing to do with.

So, please continue...

Next question?

---

So which of my answers to your question ms about the latest Trump news do you actually disagree with?

If I act like I'm dumb, clearly there must be an example in my answers?

caryking said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

caryking said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

TheStorm said:

---

hokiewolf said:

---

nah your just 100% close minded like me.

---

FTFY.

Neither one of you are dumb... sometimes you just act like you are.

---

True, maybe we should be mature and flag dozens of posts like certain other posters here!

---

Chem, again.. why stoop to a level, you accuse Trump of doing? Typically, a person is losing when they start ad hominem attacks. No need to answer… were you there when posting that?

---

Lol. Look above your post. I was answering a criticism from Storm. Amd he knows exactly who I was talking about, because it was him. So, I'll wait for you to call him out as a know it all or saying things that arent conducive to a good discussions.

Or I'll await for you to do same to PG, who pretty much responds the same negative way t anything Civ, Hokie, me or anyone not as right as him posts….I don't think I've ever seen you lecture him?

---

Chem, why make it about others? Why not think about you?

---

They lying hypocrite is infallible. Please stop allowing him to make every thread about him.

Quote:

---

ETA: and I'll not apologize for calling out Trumps behavior again and again. Guy has made his own bed. He can't get out of his own way. Amd as I've said over and over, at some point a POTUS should have to meet certain behavioral standards. IMO, he does not

---

Chem, I am glad you don't have to tolerate that angry lib attitude from your spouse.

We agree that he brings much of what piles on him by his abrupt and often rude approach to dealing with the media. I will say though, perhaps you can understand a little of how he feels about the constant witch hunt and attack pieces he is subjected to by being on the receiving end of BBW's attacks. Magnify that with the fact that the media attacks Trump personally (as opposed to a screen name) in person, in print, and without remorse 24/7, partly because he defeated their chosen heir Hillary and partly because he overreacts to nearly any provocation.

I think one of W's greatest attributes was his ability to stay above the fray and ignore the relentless attacks on him and his policies. I think Trump could be so much more effective if he used that approach, although he may have tried it and found that method fruitless.

Priceless. pic.twitter.com/Jigyj5noeT

— Ted Cruz (@tedcruz) August 13, 2022

Former President Trump's lawyer certified in June no classified material remained at Mar-a-Lago, two sources with knowledge of investigation tell Fox News https://t.co/lpQnYX1ZEh

— Fox News (@FoxNews) August 13, 2022

All I wants are the facts here, if he is found to have done something pretty serious then he needs to face the consequences…however I don't trust this administration and media to give us those facts. I'm guessing we'll never know 100% what this was all about

This has helped Trump tremendously (thus far) which in turn hurts DeSantis which is a huge bummer to me.