BREAKING: U.S. Officials Have Declassified List Of Obama Officials Who Were Involved In ‘Unmasking’ General Flynn

[Coyote]

Any day now

normally i agree. but the charges on flynn bring dropped started dominos. it does sound like barr reached way back and anyone going outside of process for the purpose of inflating this "problem" is going to be held responsible.

good.

until people are held accountable, and in this case kicking and screaming NO I AM RIGHT I AM RIGHT (like children do) this will only get worse. if you're upset that people who did in fact do improper / illegal things are getting punished, that's on you. trying to say BUT THE OTHER GUY DID IT when nothing was found in years of looking is simply deflection to the core.

Why would you care about accountability when Trump got away with obstruction and attempting to coerce a foreign leader for political dirt on his private rival went uncontested? This desire for "accountability" is partisan driven

Here we go with the BUT OTHER GUY stuff you seem to hate. We'll when others do it.

When you are not emotionally invested, I'll listen to you, Coyote. I just feel you hate Trump so much you are looking past a mountain to see a hill.

But I don't want any more bitter discussions with people I do in fact hold respect for. I disagree. This is NOT defending Trump, but you take it however you need to.

That is part of the problem. Say something critical of Trump, it is promptly chalked up to hate. My feelings on what he got away with are no different than the anger of those who feel Hilary got away with something or Obama got away with something. But when it comes to Trump it gets chalked up to "hate".

except you *always* say something critical of trump. when i say "hey, i see this differently, THE PROBLEM then reverts to I'm defending trump and validating all the things you hate about him. the attack comes to me because i dared defend trump. no - i am defending the process and procedures we all agree are the foundation upon which we all agree to live and abide. trump is a subset of that yes but not what nor who i am defending. i am defending the base of right and wrong we've all agreed to go by when i see it abused to get to 1 person.

so,no, coyote. i just disagree with you on THIS point and THIS is why. i would feel the same for anyone going around laws to get at who they don't care for. not who are we but it sure is what we're becoming.

to me, you have an absolute refusal to even consider that the obama camp may have been pulling anything. your can't/won't accept it and that drives you to push most conversations to an extreme. when i say "flynn wasn't treated properly" for example, you reply that i am defending trump and all you hate about him.

when i tell you this happened, lord all mighty do we dove tail and the claws come out. both sides.

i hate hillary. i do. but if the press was making up lies about her i would hate that more. i would also not allow the side going after her to bypass whatever they felt was necessary in order to GET to her. we have laws and processes and they must be followed.

by you.
by me.
by the president
by the fbi

by all of us.

it's the foundation of how we've all agreed to govern ourselves and if that is abused or tossed aside by 1 side, how can the other side say "ok you do what you want we will play by the rules". would you do that? the right sure is NOT going to do that and will in time react in the same manner in which things are given.

if your mind is closed to the idea that the FBI and/or Obama / the Dems did something wrong, how can you be open to discussion on it? that's not discussion, coyote.

that's simply out and out defense and defense seldom rationalizes it's own behavior, it just defends.

so i can see where you're coming from when I (and others) say it's TDS.

what *is* TDS? to me i define it by hating hate him so much they're unwilling or unable to accept anything that doesn't prove them correct in how bad a person trump is. anything taking you off the focus of ORANGE MAN BAD sets you off.

now - since i feel you *are* in this camp, unwilling to call comey and others to the carpet for their activities and defend them to your dying breath, where do you put yourself, based on this definition?

then, how do you define TDS? lets try to define what it is and then see if behavior matches that or not. cool with trying that?

Sets me off?

I have often discussed (and started threads) on Trump’s policies.

Media has lied about Hilary. The RW media. If you are asking me to condemn Comey .. well....what about when Comey announced he was reopening an investigation shortly before the election? And soon closed because he found nothing...was wrong or is it ok because everyone hates her?

Here is what I think you don’t see and why we clash.

You want to label it TDS, but no different than your dislike for Hilary or Obama, despite what you say. Using the TDS card is no different than using the race card when people criticize Obama, and it performs the same function: shuts down debate.

Where we really clash is we don’t agree on the facts and if don’t agree on the facts, there is no way to discuss “right” and “wrong”.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

He was never unmasked.

You don't know what the term means if you think that is true.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Any day now

normally i agree. but the charges on flynn bring dropped started dominos. it does sound like barr reached way back and anyone going outside of process for the purpose of inflating this "problem" is going to be held responsible.

good.

until people are held accountable, and in this case kicking and screaming NO I AM RIGHT I AM RIGHT (like children do) this will only get worse. if you're upset that people who did in fact do improper / illegal things are getting punished, that's on you. trying to say BUT THE OTHER GUY DID IT when nothing was found in years of looking is simply deflection to the core.

Why would you care about accountability when Trump got away with obstruction and attempting to coerce a foreign leader for political dirt on his private rival went uncontested? This desire for "accountability" is partisan driven

Well, except that never happened.

 

[Coyote]

I answered in a more general way, but I'll try to address each point.

except you *always* say something critical of trump. when i say "hey, i see this differently, THE PROBLEM then reverts to I'm defending trump and validating all the things you hate about him. the attack comes to me because i dared defend trump. no - i am defending the process and procedures we all agree are the foundation upon which we all agree to live and abide. trump is a subset of that yes but not what nor who i am defending. i am defending the base of right and wrong we've all agreed to go by when i see it abused to get to 1 person.

What you don't understand about Trump and how I feel about hims is this. His character sucks. You've seen. I think you've even said you can't really defend it. That's one thing. But unlike you, he has put forth NO policies I can get behind and in fact, most of them are the antithesis of what I value and support. I am a leftist. That should be pretty obvious. So why this constant expectation that I should be supporting his policies?

There have been a number of policies I start to support, and think, ya, I can get behind this - and then goes off in left field, or reverses himself. Get tougher on China. Yup, I support that - in particular with multi-lateral pressure. (I'm not a America-go-it-alone-against-all-others type, I value our international alliances and believe we gain strength from cooperation). But Trump insists on tariffs (a blunt force instrument that doesn't address detail - ie intellectual property for example). And that shoots the support from me. I think broad scale tariffs - especially aimed at our allies - is a terrible idea and has not really helped us.

DACA. At one point, Trump said he would support DACA in exchange for some wall funding. I thought great! super! I can get behind that. But then he reversed and said no. So much for that.

In the meantime he is continuing his attacks on our national preserves, parks, endangered species, anti-pollution efforts, green technology development, abortion etc. etc.

Now...when you get set off by my accusing you of defending Trump...consider this...it's no different than being accused of TDS whenever I criticize Trump's policies.

so,no, coyote. i just disagree with you on THIS point and THIS is why. i would feel the same for anyone going around laws to get at who they don't care for. not who are we but it sure is what we're becoming.

to me, you have an absolute refusal to even consider that the obama camp may have been pulling anything. your can't/won't accept it and that drives you to push most conversations to an extreme. when i say "flynn wasn't treated properly" for example, you reply that i am defending trump and all you hate about him.

It isn't an "absolute refusal" it's that the facts don't support the claims in my view. What they DO support sloppy and even wrong work by the FBI under Comey's leadership, for example in all those FISA warrants (not even related to Trump) that were improperly done. I agree, and accept as facts what the IG investigation found - IG's are non-partisan.

when i tell you this happened, lord all mighty do we dove tail and the claws come out. both sides.

i hate hillary. i do. but if the press was making up lies about her i would hate that more. i would also not allow the side going after her to bypass whatever they felt was necessary in order to GET to her. we have laws and processes and they must be followed.

by you.
by me.
by the president
by the fbi

by all of us.

And that I agree with. Yet Comey violated that when it came to Clinton didn't he?

it's the foundation of how we've all agreed to govern ourselves and if that is abused or tossed aside by 1 side, how can the other side say "ok you do what you want we will play by the rules". would you do that? the right sure is NOT going to do that and will in time react in the same manner in which things are given.

if your mind is closed to the idea that the FBI and/or Obama / the Dems did something wrong, how can you be open to discussion on it? that's not discussion, coyote.

that's simply out and out defense and defense seldom rationalizes it's own behavior, it just defends.

Where we disagree is what the facts are and what they do and do not support.

 

[beagle9]

He was never unmasked.

piece by piece this is coming together; this "truth". and i don't think many on the left who are so emotionally invested are going to like it. we will hear barr is a stooge (yet there were no "stooges" helping the left when obama was in power; got it. unless that's a BUT OBAMA i can't do but you can; those do happen i know) and the right is making stuff up.

but what is becoming painfully obvious is a lot of people went way beyond the law to stop trump. now hating trump seems to make it ok.

piece by piece, the "facts" to hold onto are getting smaller and smaller and in time we are going to find what you likely already knew.

russia was total and complete bullshit.

I said all this before Trump got elected, and definitely right after he got elected that the undermining of his presidency would be unbelievable going foward, I said it here. It's taken this long for it all to unfold that proved I was right about alot of this stuff. The Bengazi bullcrap with blaming the film guy for some sort of protest gone crazy was another eye opener to the corruption of an administration willing to cover up that situation, and to do it by using that bullcrap excuse, and then there was fast and furious etc. Was Obama one of the worst choices ever to have for the first African American President of which he was not ???????

 

[Leo123]

Any day now

normally i agree. but the charges on flynn bring dropped started dominos. it does sound like barr reached way back and anyone going outside of process for the purpose of inflating this "problem" is going to be held responsible.

good.

until people are held accountable, and in this case kicking and screaming NO I AM RIGHT I AM RIGHT (like children do) this will only get worse. if you're upset that people who did in fact do improper / illegal things are getting punished, that's on you. trying to say BUT THE OTHER GUY DID IT when nothing was found in years of looking is simply deflection to the core.

Why would you care about accountability when Trump got away with obstruction and attempting to coerce a foreign leader for political dirt on his private rival went uncontested? This desire for "accountability" is partisan driven

The declassified documents will show that the Russians were trying to help Hillary not Trump.

 

[Coyote]

Any day now

normally i agree. but the charges on flynn bring dropped started dominos. it does sound like barr reached way back and anyone going outside of process for the purpose of inflating this "problem" is going to be held responsible.

good.

until people are held accountable, and in this case kicking and screaming NO I AM RIGHT I AM RIGHT (like children do) this will only get worse. if you're upset that people who did in fact do improper / illegal things are getting punished, that's on you. trying to say BUT THE OTHER GUY DID IT when nothing was found in years of looking is simply deflection to the core.

Why would you care about accountability when Trump got away with obstruction and attempting to coerce a foreign leader for political dirt on his private rival went uncontested? This desire for "accountability" is partisan driven

The declassified documents will show that the Russians were trying to help Hillary not Trump.

That is just too funny Given that all the evidence to the contrary. But conspiracy theories usually ignore that.

 

[Leo123]

Any day now

normally i agree. but the charges on flynn bring dropped started dominos. it does sound like barr reached way back and anyone going outside of process for the purpose of inflating this "problem" is going to be held responsible.

good.

until people are held accountable, and in this case kicking and screaming NO I AM RIGHT I AM RIGHT (like children do) this will only get worse. if you're upset that people who did in fact do improper / illegal things are getting punished, that's on you. trying to say BUT THE OTHER GUY DID IT when nothing was found in years of looking is simply deflection to the core.

Why would you care about accountability when Trump got away with obstruction and attempting to coerce a foreign leader for political dirt on his private rival went uncontested? This desire for "accountability" is partisan driven

The declassified documents will show that the Russians were trying to help Hillary not Trump.

That is just too funny Given that all the evidence to the contrary. But conspiracy theories usually ignore that.

There is no real evidence to the contrary.

 

[Coyote]

Any day now

normally i agree. but the charges on flynn bring dropped started dominos. it does sound like barr reached way back and anyone going outside of process for the purpose of inflating this "problem" is going to be held responsible.

good.

until people are held accountable, and in this case kicking and screaming NO I AM RIGHT I AM RIGHT (like children do) this will only get worse. if you're upset that people who did in fact do improper / illegal things are getting punished, that's on you. trying to say BUT THE OTHER GUY DID IT when nothing was found in years of looking is simply deflection to the core.

Why would you care about accountability when Trump got away with obstruction and attempting to coerce a foreign leader for political dirt on his private rival went uncontested? This desire for "accountability" is partisan driven

The declassified documents will show that the Russians were trying to help Hillary not Trump.

That is just too funny Given that all the evidence to the contrary. But conspiracy theories usually ignore that.

There is no real evidence to the contrary.

There is plenty.

 

[iceberg]

Any day now

normally i agree. but the charges on flynn bring dropped started dominos. it does sound like barr reached way back and anyone going outside of process for the purpose of inflating this "problem" is going to be held responsible.

good.

until people are held accountable, and in this case kicking and screaming NO I AM RIGHT I AM RIGHT (like children do) this will only get worse. if you're upset that people who did in fact do improper / illegal things are getting punished, that's on you. trying to say BUT THE OTHER GUY DID IT when nothing was found in years of looking is simply deflection to the core.

Why would you care about accountability when Trump got away with obstruction and attempting to coerce a foreign leader for political dirt on his private rival went uncontested? This desire for "accountability" is partisan driven

Here we go with the BUT OTHER GUY stuff you seem to hate. We'll when others do it.

When you are not emotionally invested, I'll listen to you, Coyote. I just feel you hate Trump so much you are looking past a mountain to see a hill.

But I don't want any more bitter discussions with people I do in fact hold respect for. I disagree. This is NOT defending Trump, but you take it however you need to.

That is part of the problem. Say something critical of Trump, it is promptly chalked up to hate. My feelings on what he got away with are no different than the anger of those who feel Hilary got away with something or Obama got away with something. But when it comes to Trump it gets chalked up to "hate".

except you *always* say something critical of trump. when i say "hey, i see this differently, THE PROBLEM then reverts to I'm defending trump and validating all the things you hate about him. the attack comes to me because i dared defend trump. no - i am defending the process and procedures we all agree are the foundation upon which we all agree to live and abide. trump is a subset of that yes but not what nor who i am defending. i am defending the base of right and wrong we've all agreed to go by when i see it abused to get to 1 person.

so,no, coyote. i just disagree with you on THIS point and THIS is why. i would feel the same for anyone going around laws to get at who they don't care for. not who are we but it sure is what we're becoming.

to me, you have an absolute refusal to even consider that the obama camp may have been pulling anything. your can't/won't accept it and that drives you to push most conversations to an extreme. when i say "flynn wasn't treated properly" for example, you reply that i am defending trump and all you hate about him.

when i tell you this happened, lord all mighty do we dove tail and the claws come out. both sides.

i hate hillary. i do. but if the press was making up lies about her i would hate that more. i would also not allow the side going after her to bypass whatever they felt was necessary in order to GET to her. we have laws and processes and they must be followed.

by you.
by me.
by the president
by the fbi

by all of us.

it's the foundation of how we've all agreed to govern ourselves and if that is abused or tossed aside by 1 side, how can the other side say "ok you do what you want we will play by the rules". would you do that? the right sure is NOT going to do that and will in time react in the same manner in which things are given.

if your mind is closed to the idea that the FBI and/or Obama / the Dems did something wrong, how can you be open to discussion on it? that's not discussion, coyote.

that's simply out and out defense and defense seldom rationalizes it's own behavior, it just defends.

so i can see where you're coming from when I (and others) say it's TDS.

what *is* TDS? to me i define it by hating hate him so much they're unwilling or unable to accept anything that doesn't prove them correct in how bad a person trump is. anything taking you off the focus of ORANGE MAN BAD sets you off.

now - since i feel you *are* in this camp, unwilling to call comey and others to the carpet for their activities and defend them to your dying breath, where do you put yourself, based on this definition?

then, how do you define TDS? lets try to define what it is and then see if behavior matches that or not. cool with trying that?

Sets me off?

I have often discussed (and started threads) on Trump’s policies.

Media has lied about Hilary. The RW media. If you are asking me to condemn Comey .. well....what about when Comey announced he was reopening an investigation shortly before the election? And soon closed because he found nothing...was wrong or is it ok because everyone hates her?

Here is what I think you don’t see and why we clash.

You want to label it TDS, but no different than your dislike for Hilary or Obama, despite what you say. Using the TDS card is no different than using the race card when people criticize Obama, and it performs the same function: shuts down debate.

Where we really clash is we don’t agree on the facts and if don’t agree on the facts, there is no way to discuss “right” and “wrong”.

Except talking about Hillary doesn't set me off into a LOCK HER UP rage.

I'll be glad to debate or discuss what she did, but people need to get over the fact no one is going to get everything they want and learn to live with it.

And so I am 100% clear "BUT WHAT ABOUT THIS GUY" is OK again? You get mad at me when I do it.

 

[iceberg]

Any day now

normally i agree. but the charges on flynn bring dropped started dominos. it does sound like barr reached way back and anyone going outside of process for the purpose of inflating this "problem" is going to be held responsible.

good.

until people are held accountable, and in this case kicking and screaming NO I AM RIGHT I AM RIGHT (like children do) this will only get worse. if you're upset that people who did in fact do improper / illegal things are getting punished, that's on you. trying to say BUT THE OTHER GUY DID IT when nothing was found in years of looking is simply deflection to the core.

Why would you care about accountability when Trump got away with obstruction and attempting to coerce a foreign leader for political dirt on his private rival went uncontested? This desire for "accountability" is partisan driven

Here we go with the BUT OTHER GUY stuff you seem to hate. We'll when others do it.

When you are not emotionally invested, I'll listen to you, Coyote. I just feel you hate Trump so much you are looking past a mountain to see a hill.

But I don't want any more bitter discussions with people I do in fact hold respect for. I disagree. This is NOT defending Trump, but you take it however you need to.

That is part of the problem. Say something critical of Trump, it is promptly chalked up to hate. My feelings on what he got away with are no different than the anger of those who feel Hilary got away with something or Obama got away with something. But when it comes to Trump it gets chalked up to "hate".

Isn't that the same said for your messiah Barry?

In all fairness that's as grating as watching people assume Trump worship.

Stupid is stupid yet we keep feeding off stupid never realizing how stupid it is.

 

[Coyote]

Any day now

normally i agree. but the charges on flynn bring dropped started dominos. it does sound like barr reached way back and anyone going outside of process for the purpose of inflating this "problem" is going to be held responsible.

good.

until people are held accountable, and in this case kicking and screaming NO I AM RIGHT I AM RIGHT (like children do) this will only get worse. if you're upset that people who did in fact do improper / illegal things are getting punished, that's on you. trying to say BUT THE OTHER GUY DID IT when nothing was found in years of looking is simply deflection to the core.

Why would you care about accountability when Trump got away with obstruction and attempting to coerce a foreign leader for political dirt on his private rival went uncontested? This desire for "accountability" is partisan driven

Here we go with the BUT OTHER GUY stuff you seem to hate. We'll when others do it.

When you are not emotionally invested, I'll listen to you, Coyote. I just feel you hate Trump so much you are looking past a mountain to see a hill.

But I don't want any more bitter discussions with people I do in fact hold respect for. I disagree. This is NOT defending Trump, but you take it however you need to.

That is part of the problem. Say something critical of Trump, it is promptly chalked up to hate. My feelings on what he got away with are no different than the anger of those who feel Hilary got away with something or Obama got away with something. But when it comes to Trump it gets chalked up to "hate".

except you *always* say something critical of trump. when i say "hey, i see this differently, THE PROBLEM then reverts to I'm defending trump and validating all the things you hate about him. the attack comes to me because i dared defend trump. no - i am defending the process and procedures we all agree are the foundation upon which we all agree to live and abide. trump is a subset of that yes but not what nor who i am defending. i am defending the base of right and wrong we've all agreed to go by when i see it abused to get to 1 person.

so,no, coyote. i just disagree with you on THIS point and THIS is why. i would feel the same for anyone going around laws to get at who they don't care for. not who are we but it sure is what we're becoming.

to me, you have an absolute refusal to even consider that the obama camp may have been pulling anything. your can't/won't accept it and that drives you to push most conversations to an extreme. when i say "flynn wasn't treated properly" for example, you reply that i am defending trump and all you hate about him.

when i tell you this happened, lord all mighty do we dove tail and the claws come out. both sides.

i hate hillary. i do. but if the press was making up lies about her i would hate that more. i would also not allow the side going after her to bypass whatever they felt was necessary in order to GET to her. we have laws and processes and they must be followed.

by you.
by me.
by the president
by the fbi

by all of us.

it's the foundation of how we've all agreed to govern ourselves and if that is abused or tossed aside by 1 side, how can the other side say "ok you do what you want we will play by the rules". would you do that? the right sure is NOT going to do that and will in time react in the same manner in which things are given.

if your mind is closed to the idea that the FBI and/or Obama / the Dems did something wrong, how can you be open to discussion on it? that's not discussion, coyote.

that's simply out and out defense and defense seldom rationalizes it's own behavior, it just defends.

so i can see where you're coming from when I (and others) say it's TDS.

what *is* TDS? to me i define it by hating hate him so much they're unwilling or unable to accept anything that doesn't prove them correct in how bad a person trump is. anything taking you off the focus of ORANGE MAN BAD sets you off.

now - since i feel you *are* in this camp, unwilling to call comey and others to the carpet for their activities and defend them to your dying breath, where do you put yourself, based on this definition?

then, how do you define TDS? lets try to define what it is and then see if behavior matches that or not. cool with trying that?

Sets me off?

I have often discussed (and started threads) on Trump’s policies.

Media has lied about Hilary. The RW media. If you are asking me to condemn Comey .. well....what about when Comey announced he was reopening an investigation shortly before the election? And soon closed because he found nothing...was wrong or is it ok because everyone hates her?

Here is what I think you don’t see and why we clash.

You want to label it TDS, but no different than your dislike for Hilary or Obama, despite what you say. Using the TDS card is no different than using the race card when people criticize Obama, and it performs the same function: shuts down debate.

Where we really clash is we don’t agree on the facts and if don’t agree on the facts, there is no way to discuss “right” and “wrong”.

Except talking about Hillary doesn't set me off into a LOCK HER UP rage.

Except talking about Trump doesn't set me off into a LOCK HIM UP rage either. But having it constantly labeled TDS, does. As I pointed out - it's like using the race card to shut down debate.

I'll be glad to debate or discuss what she did, but people need to get over the fact no one is going to get everything they want and learn to live with it.

Of course they won't.

And so I am 100% clear "BUT WHAT ABOUT THIS GUY" is OK again? You get mad at me when I do it.

I don't really care. You can't totally shut down comparisons and contrasts - that's part of the debate.

 

[iceberg]

Any day now

normally i agree. but the charges on flynn bring dropped started dominos. it does sound like barr reached way back and anyone going outside of process for the purpose of inflating this "problem" is going to be held responsible.

good.

until people are held accountable, and in this case kicking and screaming NO I AM RIGHT I AM RIGHT (like children do) this will only get worse. if you're upset that people who did in fact do improper / illegal things are getting punished, that's on you. trying to say BUT THE OTHER GUY DID IT when nothing was found in years of looking is simply deflection to the core.

Why would you care about accountability when Trump got away with obstruction and attempting to coerce a foreign leader for political dirt on his private rival went uncontested? This desire for "accountability" is partisan driven

Here we go with the BUT OTHER GUY stuff you seem to hate. We'll when others do it.

When you are not emotionally invested, I'll listen to you, Coyote. I just feel you hate Trump so much you are looking past a mountain to see a hill.

But I don't want any more bitter discussions with people I do in fact hold respect for. I disagree. This is NOT defending Trump, but you take it however you need to.

That is part of the problem. Say something critical of Trump, it is promptly chalked up to hate. My feelings on what he got away with are no different than the anger of those who feel Hilary got away with something or Obama got away with something. But when it comes to Trump it gets chalked up to "hate".

except you *always* say something critical of trump. when i say "hey, i see this differently, THE PROBLEM then reverts to I'm defending trump and validating all the things you hate about him. the attack comes to me because i dared defend trump. no - i am defending the process and procedures we all agree are the foundation upon which we all agree to live and abide. trump is a subset of that yes but not what nor who i am defending. i am defending the base of right and wrong we've all agreed to go by when i see it abused to get to 1 person.

so,no, coyote. i just disagree with you on THIS point and THIS is why. i would feel the same for anyone going around laws to get at who they don't care for. not who are we but it sure is what we're becoming.

to me, you have an absolute refusal to even consider that the obama camp may have been pulling anything. your can't/won't accept it and that drives you to push most conversations to an extreme. when i say "flynn wasn't treated properly" for example, you reply that i am defending trump and all you hate about him.

when i tell you this happened, lord all mighty do we dove tail and the claws come out. both sides.

i hate hillary. i do. but if the press was making up lies about her i would hate that more. i would also not allow the side going after her to bypass whatever they felt was necessary in order to GET to her. we have laws and processes and they must be followed.

by you.
by me.
by the president
by the fbi

by all of us.

it's the foundation of how we've all agreed to govern ourselves and if that is abused or tossed aside by 1 side, how can the other side say "ok you do what you want we will play by the rules". would you do that? the right sure is NOT going to do that and will in time react in the same manner in which things are given.

if your mind is closed to the idea that the FBI and/or Obama / the Dems did something wrong, how can you be open to discussion on it? that's not discussion, coyote.

that's simply out and out defense and defense seldom rationalizes it's own behavior, it just defends.

so i can see where you're coming from when I (and others) say it's TDS.

what *is* TDS? to me i define it by hating hate him so much they're unwilling or unable to accept anything that doesn't prove them correct in how bad a person trump is. anything taking you off the focus of ORANGE MAN BAD sets you off.

now - since i feel you *are* in this camp, unwilling to call comey and others to the carpet for their activities and defend them to your dying breath, where do you put yourself, based on this definition?

then, how do you define TDS? lets try to define what it is and then see if behavior matches that or not. cool with trying that?

Sets me off?

I have often discussed (and started threads) on Trump’s policies.

Media has lied about Hilary. The RW media. If you are asking me to condemn Comey .. well....what about when Comey announced he was reopening an investigation shortly before the election? And soon closed because he found nothing...was wrong or is it ok because everyone hates her?

Here is what I think you don’t see and why we clash.

You want to label it TDS, but no different than your dislike for Hilary or Obama, despite what you say. Using the TDS card is no different than using the race card when people criticize Obama, and it performs the same function: shuts down debate.

Where we really clash is we don’t agree on the facts and if don’t agree on the facts, there is no way to discuss “right” and “wrong”.

Except talking about Hillary doesn't set me off into a LOCK HER UP rage.

Except talking about Trump doesn't set me off into a LOCK HIM UP rage either. But having it constantly labeled TDS, does. As I pointed out - it's like using the race card to shut down debate.

I'll be glad to debate or discuss what she did, but people need to get over the fact no one is going to get everything they want and learn to live with it.

Of course they won't.

And so I am 100% clear "BUT WHAT ABOUT THIS GUY" is OK again? You get mad at me when I do it.

I don't really care. You can't totally shut down comparisons and contrasts - that's part of the debate.

except there are several times I am talking about flynn and you have literally went BUT TRUMP!!!! when I never once mentioned Trump.

someone makes a lock up Pelosi or something you are right there with "Trump too".

if I don't agree with you on something I'm instantly defending Trump.

I know you think I'm full of shit but think about how all that looks to someone who is more or less neutral on Trump. it gets really old to say I think someone broke laws to attack Trump and have you think I'm apologist.

black.
white.

Now between those 2 extremes is a billion shades of gray I think we all need to get better at seeing.

 

[iceberg]

and I refrained from doing the BUT OTHER GUY at your request. cause you kept getting mad when I did it.

 

[skye]

The stepford wife is sure they got Obama this time

What a sad piece of "human" you are.

 

[candycorn]

The stepford wife is sure they got Obama this time

What a sad piece of "human" you are.

That would be you. Muster some self esteem.

 

[skye]

The stepford wife is sure they got Obama this time

What a sad piece of "human" you are.

That would be you. Muster some self esteem.

Moron. ^^^

 

[iceberg]

Any day now

normally i agree. but the charges on flynn bring dropped started dominos. it does sound like barr reached way back and anyone going outside of process for the purpose of inflating this "problem" is going to be held responsible.

good.

until people are held accountable, and in this case kicking and screaming NO I AM RIGHT I AM RIGHT (like children do) this will only get worse. if you're upset that people who did in fact do improper / illegal things are getting punished, that's on you. trying to say BUT THE OTHER GUY DID IT when nothing was found in years of looking is simply deflection to the core.

Why would you care about accountability when Trump got away with obstruction and attempting to coerce a foreign leader for political dirt on his private rival went uncontested? This desire for "accountability" is partisan driven

Here we go with the BUT OTHER GUY stuff you seem to hate. We'll when others do it.

When you are not emotionally invested, I'll listen to you, Coyote. I just feel you hate Trump so much you are looking past a mountain to see a hill.

But I don't want any more bitter discussions with people I do in fact hold respect for. I disagree. This is NOT defending Trump, but you take it however you need to.

That is part of the problem. Say something critical of Trump, it is promptly chalked up to hate. My feelings on what he got away with are no different than the anger of those who feel Hilary got away with something or Obama got away with something. But when it comes to Trump it gets chalked up to "hate".

except you *always* say something critical of trump. when i say "hey, i see this differently, THE PROBLEM then reverts to I'm defending trump and validating all the things you hate about him. the attack comes to me because i dared defend trump. no - i am defending the process and procedures we all agree are the foundation upon which we all agree to live and abide. trump is a subset of that yes but not what nor who i am defending. i am defending the base of right and wrong we've all agreed to go by when i see it abused to get to 1 person.

so,no, coyote. i just disagree with you on THIS point and THIS is why. i would feel the same for anyone going around laws to get at who they don't care for. not who are we but it sure is what we're becoming.

to me, you have an absolute refusal to even consider that the obama camp may have been pulling anything. your can't/won't accept it and that drives you to push most conversations to an extreme. when i say "flynn wasn't treated properly" for example, you reply that i am defending trump and all you hate about him.

when i tell you this happened, lord all mighty do we dove tail and the claws come out. both sides.

i hate hillary. i do. but if the press was making up lies about her i would hate that more. i would also not allow the side going after her to bypass whatever they felt was necessary in order to GET to her. we have laws and processes and they must be followed.

by you.
by me.
by the president
by the fbi

by all of us.

it's the foundation of how we've all agreed to govern ourselves and if that is abused or tossed aside by 1 side, how can the other side say "ok you do what you want we will play by the rules". would you do that? the right sure is NOT going to do that and will in time react in the same manner in which things are given.

if your mind is closed to the idea that the FBI and/or Obama / the Dems did something wrong, how can you be open to discussion on it? that's not discussion, coyote.

that's simply out and out defense and defense seldom rationalizes it's own behavior, it just defends.

so i can see where you're coming from when I (and others) say it's TDS.

what *is* TDS? to me i define it by hating hate him so much they're unwilling or unable to accept anything that doesn't prove them correct in how bad a person trump is. anything taking you off the focus of ORANGE MAN BAD sets you off.

now - since i feel you *are* in this camp, unwilling to call comey and others to the carpet for their activities and defend them to your dying breath, where do you put yourself, based on this definition?

then, how do you define TDS? lets try to define what it is and then see if behavior matches that or not. cool with trying that?

Sets me off?

I have often discussed (and started threads) on Trump’s policies.

Media has lied about Hilary. The RW media. If you are asking me to condemn Comey .. well....what about when Comey announced he was reopening an investigation shortly before the election? And soon closed because he found nothing...was wrong or is it ok because everyone hates her?

Here is what I think you don’t see and why we clash.

You want to label it TDS, but no different than your dislike for Hilary or Obama, despite what you say. Using the TDS card is no different than using the race card when people criticize Obama, and it performs the same function: shuts down debate.

Where we really clash is we don’t agree on the facts and if don’t agree on the facts, there is no way to discuss “right” and “wrong”.

Except talking about Hillary doesn't set me off into a LOCK HER UP rage.

Except talking about Trump doesn't set me off into a LOCK HIM UP rage either. But having it constantly labeled TDS, does. As I pointed out - it's like using the race card to shut down debate.

I'll be glad to debate or discuss what she did, but people need to get over the fact no one is going to get everything they want and learn to live with it.

Of course they won't.

And so I am 100% clear "BUT WHAT ABOUT THIS GUY" is OK again? You get mad at me when I do it.

I don't really care. You can't totally shut down comparisons and contrasts - that's part of the debate.

then i simply ask - why did you ask me to stop? you did and we agreed to try and stop. now you flip flop cause you can't. in the end that's fine because the comparisons *are* valid.

but it's very difficult to have a conversation with someone who changes the rules at will. you now in effect asked me to stop using a tactic you had zero intention of using.

to me that's a sign someone is taking their emotions too far.

you can't talk about this w/o making it a personal attack on trump that i have see. TO ME that is text book TDS. maybe not in a "level 10" sense but it does have those tendencies.

so fine - you come at trump now for his character and a "lie" - REST ASSURED i will hold you to be just as upset at the lies of schiff and company for orchestrating this RUSSIA bullshit.

or are you going to duck over to trump is making all this up?

like i said, when you don't give a fuck out one mans lies but the other tears you up - that's deranged about a singular person.

 

[Coyote]

Any day now

normally i agree. but the charges on flynn bring dropped started dominos. it does sound like barr reached way back and anyone going outside of process for the purpose of inflating this "problem" is going to be held responsible.

good.

until people are held accountable, and in this case kicking and screaming NO I AM RIGHT I AM RIGHT (like children do) this will only get worse. if you're upset that people who did in fact do improper / illegal things are getting punished, that's on you. trying to say BUT THE OTHER GUY DID IT when nothing was found in years of looking is simply deflection to the core.

Why would you care about accountability when Trump got away with obstruction and attempting to coerce a foreign leader for political dirt on his private rival went uncontested? This desire for "accountability" is partisan driven

Here we go with the BUT OTHER GUY stuff you seem to hate. We'll when others do it.

When you are not emotionally invested, I'll listen to you, Coyote. I just feel you hate Trump so much you are looking past a mountain to see a hill.

But I don't want any more bitter discussions with people I do in fact hold respect for. I disagree. This is NOT defending Trump, but you take it however you need to.

That is part of the problem. Say something critical of Trump, it is promptly chalked up to hate. My feelings on what he got away with are no different than the anger of those who feel Hilary got away with something or Obama got away with something. But when it comes to Trump it gets chalked up to "hate".

except you *always* say something critical of trump. when i say "hey, i see this differently, THE PROBLEM then reverts to I'm defending trump and validating all the things you hate about him. the attack comes to me because i dared defend trump. no - i am defending the process and procedures we all agree are the foundation upon which we all agree to live and abide. trump is a subset of that yes but not what nor who i am defending. i am defending the base of right and wrong we've all agreed to go by when i see it abused to get to 1 person.

so,no, coyote. i just disagree with you on THIS point and THIS is why. i would feel the same for anyone going around laws to get at who they don't care for. not who are we but it sure is what we're becoming.

to me, you have an absolute refusal to even consider that the obama camp may have been pulling anything. your can't/won't accept it and that drives you to push most conversations to an extreme. when i say "flynn wasn't treated properly" for example, you reply that i am defending trump and all you hate about him.

when i tell you this happened, lord all mighty do we dove tail and the claws come out. both sides.

i hate hillary. i do. but if the press was making up lies about her i would hate that more. i would also not allow the side going after her to bypass whatever they felt was necessary in order to GET to her. we have laws and processes and they must be followed.

by you.
by me.
by the president
by the fbi

by all of us.

it's the foundation of how we've all agreed to govern ourselves and if that is abused or tossed aside by 1 side, how can the other side say "ok you do what you want we will play by the rules". would you do that? the right sure is NOT going to do that and will in time react in the same manner in which things are given.

if your mind is closed to the idea that the FBI and/or Obama / the Dems did something wrong, how can you be open to discussion on it? that's not discussion, coyote.

that's simply out and out defense and defense seldom rationalizes it's own behavior, it just defends.

so i can see where you're coming from when I (and others) say it's TDS.

what *is* TDS? to me i define it by hating hate him so much they're unwilling or unable to accept anything that doesn't prove them correct in how bad a person trump is. anything taking you off the focus of ORANGE MAN BAD sets you off.

now - since i feel you *are* in this camp, unwilling to call comey and others to the carpet for their activities and defend them to your dying breath, where do you put yourself, based on this definition?

then, how do you define TDS? lets try to define what it is and then see if behavior matches that or not. cool with trying that?

Sets me off?

I have often discussed (and started threads) on Trump’s policies.

Media has lied about Hilary. The RW media. If you are asking me to condemn Comey .. well....what about when Comey announced he was reopening an investigation shortly before the election? And soon closed because he found nothing...was wrong or is it ok because everyone hates her?

Here is what I think you don’t see and why we clash.

You want to label it TDS, but no different than your dislike for Hilary or Obama, despite what you say. Using the TDS card is no different than using the race card when people criticize Obama, and it performs the same function: shuts down debate.

Where we really clash is we don’t agree on the facts and if don’t agree on the facts, there is no way to discuss “right” and “wrong”.

Except talking about Hillary doesn't set me off into a LOCK HER UP rage.

Except talking about Trump doesn't set me off into a LOCK HIM UP rage either. But having it constantly labeled TDS, does. As I pointed out - it's like using the race card to shut down debate.

I'll be glad to debate or discuss what she did, but people need to get over the fact no one is going to get everything they want and learn to live with it.

Of course they won't.

And so I am 100% clear "BUT WHAT ABOUT THIS GUY" is OK again? You get mad at me when I do it.

I don't really care. You can't totally shut down comparisons and contrasts - that's part of the debate.

then i simply ask - why did you ask me to stop? you did and we agreed to try and stop. now you flip flop cause you can't. in the end that's fine because the comparisons *are* valid.

but it's very difficult to have a conversation with someone who changes the rules at will. you now in effect asked me to stop using a tactic you had zero intention of using.

to me that's a sign someone is taking their emotions too far.

you can't talk about this w/o making it a personal attack on trump that i have see. TO ME that is text book TDS. maybe not in a "level 10" sense but it does have those tendencies.

What "personal attacks" on Trump am I making by pointing out his policies?

As far as "changing rules" - I can't keep up with it. You have no problem bringing in other actors yourself, and we've been banging on over this for a number of late night postings. I do not care any longer. Your mind is made up. If I criticize Trump it is emotional TDS. But Obama and Hilary are fare game.

 

[iceberg]

Any day now

normally i agree. but the charges on flynn bring dropped started dominos. it does sound like barr reached way back and anyone going outside of process for the purpose of inflating this "problem" is going to be held responsible.

good.

until people are held accountable, and in this case kicking and screaming NO I AM RIGHT I AM RIGHT (like children do) this will only get worse. if you're upset that people who did in fact do improper / illegal things are getting punished, that's on you. trying to say BUT THE OTHER GUY DID IT when nothing was found in years of looking is simply deflection to the core.

Why would you care about accountability when Trump got away with obstruction and attempting to coerce a foreign leader for political dirt on his private rival went uncontested? This desire for "accountability" is partisan driven

Here we go with the BUT OTHER GUY stuff you seem to hate. We'll when others do it.

When you are not emotionally invested, I'll listen to you, Coyote. I just feel you hate Trump so much you are looking past a mountain to see a hill.

But I don't want any more bitter discussions with people I do in fact hold respect for. I disagree. This is NOT defending Trump, but you take it however you need to.

That is part of the problem. Say something critical of Trump, it is promptly chalked up to hate. My feelings on what he got away with are no different than the anger of those who feel Hilary got away with something or Obama got away with something. But when it comes to Trump it gets chalked up to "hate".

except you *always* say something critical of trump. when i say "hey, i see this differently, THE PROBLEM then reverts to I'm defending trump and validating all the things you hate about him. the attack comes to me because i dared defend trump. no - i am defending the process and procedures we all agree are the foundation upon which we all agree to live and abide. trump is a subset of that yes but not what nor who i am defending. i am defending the base of right and wrong we've all agreed to go by when i see it abused to get to 1 person.

so,no, coyote. i just disagree with you on THIS point and THIS is why. i would feel the same for anyone going around laws to get at who they don't care for. not who are we but it sure is what we're becoming.

to me, you have an absolute refusal to even consider that the obama camp may have been pulling anything. your can't/won't accept it and that drives you to push most conversations to an extreme. when i say "flynn wasn't treated properly" for example, you reply that i am defending trump and all you hate about him.

when i tell you this happened, lord all mighty do we dove tail and the claws come out. both sides.

i hate hillary. i do. but if the press was making up lies about her i would hate that more. i would also not allow the side going after her to bypass whatever they felt was necessary in order to GET to her. we have laws and processes and they must be followed.

by you.
by me.
by the president
by the fbi

by all of us.

it's the foundation of how we've all agreed to govern ourselves and if that is abused or tossed aside by 1 side, how can the other side say "ok you do what you want we will play by the rules". would you do that? the right sure is NOT going to do that and will in time react in the same manner in which things are given.

if your mind is closed to the idea that the FBI and/or Obama / the Dems did something wrong, how can you be open to discussion on it? that's not discussion, coyote.

that's simply out and out defense and defense seldom rationalizes it's own behavior, it just defends.

so i can see where you're coming from when I (and others) say it's TDS.

what *is* TDS? to me i define it by hating hate him so much they're unwilling or unable to accept anything that doesn't prove them correct in how bad a person trump is. anything taking you off the focus of ORANGE MAN BAD sets you off.

now - since i feel you *are* in this camp, unwilling to call comey and others to the carpet for their activities and defend them to your dying breath, where do you put yourself, based on this definition?

then, how do you define TDS? lets try to define what it is and then see if behavior matches that or not. cool with trying that?

Sets me off?

I have often discussed (and started threads) on Trump’s policies.

Media has lied about Hilary. The RW media. If you are asking me to condemn Comey .. well....what about when Comey announced he was reopening an investigation shortly before the election? And soon closed because he found nothing...was wrong or is it ok because everyone hates her?

Here is what I think you don’t see and why we clash.

You want to label it TDS, but no different than your dislike for Hilary or Obama, despite what you say. Using the TDS card is no different than using the race card when people criticize Obama, and it performs the same function: shuts down debate.

Where we really clash is we don’t agree on the facts and if don’t agree on the facts, there is no way to discuss “right” and “wrong”.

Except talking about Hillary doesn't set me off into a LOCK HER UP rage.

Except talking about Trump doesn't set me off into a LOCK HIM UP rage either. But having it constantly labeled TDS, does. As I pointed out - it's like using the race card to shut down debate.

I'll be glad to debate or discuss what she did, but people need to get over the fact no one is going to get everything they want and learn to live with it.

Of course they won't.

And so I am 100% clear "BUT WHAT ABOUT THIS GUY" is OK again? You get mad at me when I do it.

I don't really care. You can't totally shut down comparisons and contrasts - that's part of the debate.

then i simply ask - why did you ask me to stop? you did and we agreed to try and stop. now you flip flop cause you can't. in the end that's fine because the comparisons *are* valid.

but it's very difficult to have a conversation with someone who changes the rules at will. you now in effect asked me to stop using a tactic you had zero intention of using.

to me that's a sign someone is taking their emotions too far.

you can't talk about this w/o making it a personal attack on trump that i have see. TO ME that is text book TDS. maybe not in a "level 10" sense but it does have those tendencies.

What "personal attacks" on Trump am I making by pointing out his policies?

As far as "changing rules" - I can't keep up with it. You have no problem bringing in other actors yourself, and we've been banging on over this for a number of late night postings. I do not care any longer. Your mind is made up. If I criticize Trump it is emotional TDS. But Obama and Hilary are fare game.

above you were saying you hated his character. do i need to go back and quote that?

forgive my poor mans quoting - but you:
"What you don't understand about Trump and how I feel about hims is this. His character sucks. You've seen. I think you've even said you can't really defend it. That's one thing. But unlike you, he has put forth NO policies I can get behind and in fact, most of them are the antithesis of what I value and support. I am a leftist. That should be pretty obvious. So why this constant expectation that I should be supporting his policies?"

if that is your take then fine. yet one of your issues is how "badly" obama was and no one on the right backed him up. yet given what you just said, you don't back trump and most of the (R) policies are the antithesis of what you value and support.

so you are "entitling yourself" to hate w/o consequence and go after trump and his "character" and call it your right. yet your point of contention is the right did this to obama when he came into office and you hated that because the R's attacked him immediately.

much like you are attacking trump. can we agree on that?

in my mind what the R's did was business as usual as we've always done in our government, illustrated by your doing it openly now. yet you call for support and get mad when its not there and call it not fair; yet you do the very same thing you are saying the R's never should have done.

i don't care if you want to attack trump. you continue to mistake my not liking it when people do the very thing they claim to hate as a defense of trump when it's simply pointing out how hypocritical it looks to allow something your way, claws out the other.

that is simply only acting in an extreme manner. you ONLY see trump as vile and the antithesis of what you value and support. but you freely mix attacks on policy as personal but cry foul when done to your side.

you either get what i'm saying or you do not and i'm simply "attacking" you. all i am saying is you do the very things you bitch at being done to you.

take it as you will.

as for changing the rules
1. it was YOUR rule cause you got mad at me for comparing your rage at trump to obamas actions. we agreed to try and stop
2. since that time i did not WITH YOU bring up BUT SOMEONE ELSE.
3. you did. many times.
4. you got mad at me for daring to say you shouldn't do this, even though it was your rule i continued to abide by out of courtesy.
5. when you brought up my doing it previously - yes. i did. i've always felt it was a fair comparison but it bugged you so i did not WITH YOU.
6. at no time did you ever attempt to follow your own rule and even now you rage on about other things simply because i ask you to follow the rules you set forth in our discussions yet have again, zero intent to do the same.

to me this illustrates clearly why we have discussion issues. you want considerations you are not willing to give.

to me, that kinda sums up "The left's" mindset.