One Political PlazaSM - Home of politics
Anyone watching Acting AG Whitaker testifying before House Judiciary????
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Page: <<prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 next>>
Feb 9, 2019 18:10:00   #
permafrost (a regular here)
 
padremike wrote:
You formed an opinion about him based on what someone else wrote. That was certainly objective and clear thinking of you. Of course from that point on anything negative supported your "opinion." MSNBC and CNN cemented your forever opinion. I wonder why those who really know him say he's a very sincere, genuine and warm person?




Mike, do you think I would wait to meet the guy before forming an opinion of him???

How else does one form an opinion in nearly all cases other then on what someone else wrote??

As it was, at the time I read the article in reader digest, I had never heard of him.

I never expected to hear of him again..He was simply emoting on how he should own all of Manhattan..

I cared no a bit. I did see him in real life. about 20 feet away at the final 4 basketball in Minneapolis..

He had some companions fawning over him and doing his "I am so great" act in the lobby of Target center..

Or maybe it was NBA playoff.. ???

It no doubt surprises you, but I consider all news slanted and I have from my U of MN days..

So while I do get a lot of input from CNN, i like the layout of their pages, I get no cable and also watch BBC, PBS and networks..

I try to see logic and hence truth in the news casts and have dismissed some from CNN.. They do not like trump and his demeaning them and trying to forbid them from gaining access did not help the relationship..

| Reply
Feb 9, 2019 18:15:58   #
byronglimish (a regular here)
 
Kevyn wrote:
He dodged and refused to answer simple direct questions and looked like a crook.


And this pundancy was without you even watching.

| Reply
Feb 9, 2019 18:24:52   #
padremike (a regular here)
 
permafrost wrote:
Mike, do you think I would wait to meet the guy before forming an opinion of him???

How else does one form an opinion in nearly all cases other then on what someone else wrote??

As it was, at the time I read the article in reader digest, I had never heard of him.

I never expected to hear of him again..He was simply emoting on how he should own all of Manhattan..

I cared no a bit. I did see him in real life. about 20 feet away at the final 4 basketball in Minneapolis..

He had some companions fawning over him and doing his "I am so great" act in the lobby of Target center..

Or maybe it was NBA playoff.. ???

It no doubt surprises you, but I consider all news slanted and I have from my U of MN days..

So while I do get a lot of input from CNN, i like the layout of their pages, I get no cable and also watch BBC, PBS and networks..

I try to see logic and hence truth in the news casts and have dismissed some from CNN.. They do not like trump and his demeaning them and trying to forbid them from gaining access did not help the relationship..
Mike, do you think I would wait to meet the guy be... (show quote)


The answer to your question is that you get opinions from the other side, from people who know him. However, that time is past because your opinion is now solidly chipped in stone. The only thing he can do that Progressives will approve is to suddenly die.

| Reply
Feb 9, 2019 18:32:25   #
eagleye13
 
padremike wrote:
The answer to your question is that you get opinions from the other side, from people who know him. However, that time is past because your opinion is now solidly chipped in stone. The only thing he can do that Progressives will approve is to suddenly die.


"So while I do get a lot of input from CNN, i like the layout of their pages, I get no cable and also watch BBC, PBS and networks..

I try to see logic and hence truth in the news casts and have dismissed some from CNN.. They do not like trump and his demeaning them and trying to forbid them from gaining access did not help the relationship.." - permaclueless

That splains why you are sooo clueless.

| Reply
Feb 9, 2019 19:34:31   #
archie bunker (a regular here)
 
padremike wrote:
The answer to your question is that you get opinions from the other side, from people who know him. However, that time is past because your opinion is now solidly chipped in stone. The only thing he can do that Progressives will approve is to suddenly die.


That'll piss em off too because he will have a funeral, and dirt will be turned over to bury him. If he's cremated, then they'll bitch about the carbon emissions from his cremation. It's a no winner.

| Reply
Feb 9, 2019 20:18:35   #
cbpat1 (a regular here)
 
Kevyn wrote:
He dodged and refused to answer simple direct questions and looked like a crook.



The democrats looked like angry, hysterical, fools for the most part. They deserved no respect, because they showed no respect. This seems to be the new normal with the democrats. There is no civil discourse anymore, only histeria from the left. It’s scary that our country has been reduced to this.

| Reply
Feb 9, 2019 20:48:32   #
cbpat1 (a regular here)
 
proud republican wrote:
They just deleted my post because i called someone dimwit,can you believe it???



Yeah, I believe it. I wonder how many of kevyn’s, badbob’s, Airforceone’s, Kemmer and the bunch have their posts deleted for such trivial things? I certainly have seen much worse from them. And myself and you at times frankly, that is pretty petty really. They call Trump the most vile names you can imagine and that’s perfectly fine, but don’t call one of them a dimwit, God forbid!

| Reply
Feb 9, 2019 20:56:54   #
crazylibertarian (a regular here)
 
Kevyn wrote:
He dodged and refused to answer simple direct questions and looked like a crook.


When she asked for a one word answer, yes or no, he should have giver her a two word answer, the same one you deserve for your predictable, bigoted, cliche-ridden, mindless postings.

| Reply
Feb 9, 2019 21:06:05   #
1ProudAmerican
 
Kevyn wrote:
He dodged and refused to answer simple direct questions and looked like a crook.


...and the questioners looked like Chimps and Chumps !!!

| Reply
Feb 9, 2019 21:09:14   #
cbpat1 (a regular here)
 
1ProudAmerican wrote:
...and the questioners looked like Chimps and Chumps !!!


🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸

| Reply
Feb 9, 2019 21:37:34   #
Smedley_buzkill (a regular here)
 
permafrost wrote:
HA HA HA,,<< STUCK in the world of make believe... are you having fun yet? court rooms ahead, will the color them orange??

There's only one particularly prominent investigation going on in the US right now, and it's one that Trump is right in the middle of. Sadly for him, it can't really be considered partisan: traditionally, an investigation with a Republican administration involved would be run by a Democrat. Instead, a Republican President appointed a Republican AG, who in turn appointed an Assistant AG who thereby empowered a Republican Special Investigator to look into the possibility of foreign interference in a Presidential election, and to follow any leads, direct or otherwise, that might stem from that investigation.

Partisan? No: what we have now is a Republican President as a subject of a Republican-led investigation.

Bear in mind that this is the same man who (still) often leads his supporters in chants of "Lock her up!" at his political rallies, and who has often used suggestion of criminal misconduct by those who disagree with him as a means of slander. He has attacked President Obama, Hilary Clinton, even James Comey, all suggesting that they have engaged in high levels of criminal activity, yet without providing any evidence of this that would trigger the DOJ to act on it. For someone who is apparently against 'partisan investigations', he sure seems quick to point the finger - particularly for a man who has many close allies and colleagues currently under indictment, and for a man who has even been implicated in several criminal activities himself. Funny, that.

Trump is well aware that his actions both before and during his time as President have not been particularly above-board. He also knows that the priority of the Democrats in the House is now to reassert the oversight prerogatives that the Republicans have largely been ignoring (in their complicity of Trump's actions) over the past two years. If any President had done half of what Trump has done, you could guarantee that hearings and impeachments would have been the result - hell, look at what was done to Bill Clinton. The restoration of the Democrats to congressional authority was largely on the basis of trying to regulate the President's overreach of authority, and ensure that he is held responsible for his actions - and the Democrats would be failing in their duty to the electorate not to follow through.
HA HA HA,,<< STUCK in the world of make bel... (show quote)

I take it you think presidential overreach is just peachy as long as it's a Democrat president doing the overreaching.

| Reply
Feb 9, 2019 21:39:28   #
teabag09 (a regular here)
 
Lara, they have put words in my posts and then suspended me so be glad they just deleted a mild rebuke. Mike
proud republican wrote:
They just deleted my post because i called someone dimwit,can you believe it???

| Reply
Feb 9, 2019 22:40:06   #
Hadenough (a regular here)
 
Kevyn wrote:
He dodged and refused to answer simple direct questions and looked like a crook.


Kevie,

He confused you because he was responding like a dem, comey, Lynch, holder, KilLIARy, lerner, strzok, page, rosenstien or any other dem. But then again it doesn’t take much to confuse you.
Dem mantra, Hate Trump, hate Trump, orange man bad, pant pant pant, wipe drool say again.

Tick Tock Tick Tock TDS boom
MAGA

| Reply
Feb 9, 2019 23:02:00   #
nwtk2007 (a regular here)
 
Weasel wrote:
If it is the mission of this committee to get to the real truth, I would prefer to see Robert Mueller sitting in this chair in order to bring this whole thing to a close and get on with the business of running this country.


Apparently all those guys "nailed" by Mueller in the Enron/Arthur Anderson debacle were freed on appeal. Hmm.

| Reply
Feb 10, 2019 07:43:42   #
slatten49 (a regular here)
 
https://www.yahoo.com/news/fox-news-apos-chris-wallace-073338881.html

Fox News’ Chris Wallace has knocked Republicans’ double standard over House investigations into the Trump White House.

Wallace said on Friday’s broadcast of “Outnumbered” that he found it “kind of rich that Republicans are so outraged that there would be this kind of a hearing of the other party’s president and administration.”
It came during an analysis of acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker’s testimony before the House Judiciary Committee.

“You know, it’s not like Republicans sat on their hands when Barack Obama was president,” Wallace said. “They investigated Benghazi, they investigated Fast & Furious, they investigated the IRS, and you know, look, those were all legitimate issues to investigate. Sometimes they found some things, sometimes they didn’t find things.”

Wallace noted how it was all “part of oversight.”

“When Republicans are, have oversight of a branch of Congress or a house of Congress and they’re investigating a Democratic president, they’re gonna make life difficult for them, and now the Democrats are in control of the House and have the control of these committees,” he said.

“That’s the way it works.”

IMO, On the merry-go-round of DC's 'tit for tat,' "What goes around comes around."

| Reply
Page: <<prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 next>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2019 IDF International Technologies, Inc.