Rangel's Tragic End

[Sallow]

Not at all, it means you posted it, and based on your commentary others derived meaning from it. Since you now say that that meaning is incorrect, and you have not bothered to provide any clarification, it is perfectly logical to assume that you really didn't to make any point with your post whatsoever. Of course, you're certainly free to provide clarification of your post.

No.

I didn't post it.

Find the quote.

Verbatim.

Nope. I've posted it twice already. If you wish to clarify your own post, feel free to go find it, but I'm not playing your little game. It's pretty obvious to me and others that your intent from your own post was to give Rangel a pass based on actions in the military 60 years ago. Refute that.

It's not in the post. I don't have to clarify shit.

You are making accusations you simply can't back up.

And it's patently stupid for me to address this any further. Unless you find a quote, verbatim, that I said anything LIKE that.

It's basically a falsehood.

 

[Sallow]

And you are making excuses for aborant behaviour from a Congresscritter that should be above board and an example.

Some example.

Not making any "excuses" at all.

Just pointing out the facts.

If you want to find a case prior to this one where the circumstances line up and the congress person was expelled..feel free.

There have been under 10 people that have had this sort of thing bubble up so far..and their cases were far worse.

So..if you find one..post it.

Have at it.

And you tried to excuse it with his military record. Sorry...I am not that stupid. And then pretend he's going to get censured for no apparent reason. Son? Get off Fantasy Island.

I'll take that as a "no"..you can't.

 

[daveman]

Nope. I've posted it twice already. If you wish to clarify your own post, feel free to go find it, but I'm not playing your little game. It's pretty obvious to me and others that your intent from your own post was to give Rangel a pass based on actions in the military 60 years ago. Refute that.

Let me help, Sallow.

"Nuh-UH!!"

 

[The T]

Not making any "excuses" at all.

Just pointing out the facts.

If you want to find a case prior to this one where the circumstances line up and the congress person was expelled..feel free.

There have been under 10 people that have had this sort of thing bubble up so far..and their cases were far worse.

So..if you find one..post it.

Have at it.

And you tried to excuse it with his military record. Sorry...I am not that stupid. And then pretend he's going to get censured for no apparent reason. Son? Get off Fantasy Island.

I'll take that as a "no"..you can't.

Your arguement was yours to lose. You passed with flying colours. I'll give you that much.

 

[Moon]

No.

I didn't post it.

Find the quote.

Verbatim.

Nope. I've posted it twice already. If you wish to clarify your own post, feel free to go find it, but I'm not playing your little game. It's pretty obvious to me and others that your intent from your own post was to give Rangel a pass based on actions in the military 60 years ago. Refute that.

It's not in the post. I don't have to clarify shit.

You are making accusations you simply can't back up.

And it's patently stupid for me to address this any further. Unless you find a quote, verbatim, that I said anything LIKE that.

It's basically a falsehood.

I'll accept this as your admission that you don't wish to clarify your earlier post, and are willing to let it stand as is. That's fine, and I feel free to interpret it as to what I believe your intent was based on that post. You had a chance to expound on your transparent attempt to excuse Rangel based on his military record, but chose not to.

 

[Moon]

Nope. I've posted it twice already. If you wish to clarify your own post, feel free to go find it, but I'm not playing your little game. It's pretty obvious to me and others that your intent from your own post was to give Rangel a pass based on actions in the military 60 years ago. Refute that.

Let me help, Sallow.

"Nuh-UH!!"

Pretty much. Seems to be the norm with him, though.

 

[daveman]

Nope. I've posted it twice already. If you wish to clarify your own post, feel free to go find it, but I'm not playing your little game. It's pretty obvious to me and others that your intent from your own post was to give Rangel a pass based on actions in the military 60 years ago. Refute that.

Let me help, Sallow.

"Nuh-UH!!"

Pretty much. Seems to be the norm with him, though.

Odd, considering he's such a witty, erudite independent thinker.

 

[Sallow]

Let me help, Sallow.

"Nuh-UH!!"

Pretty much. Seems to be the norm with him, though.

Odd, considering he's such a witty, erudite independent thinker.

That's too funny.

And infantile.

You want to tear apart what I really post...fine. I'm good with that.

But's it's just silly to make shit up.

 

[Sallow]

Nope. I've posted it twice already. If you wish to clarify your own post, feel free to go find it, but I'm not playing your little game. It's pretty obvious to me and others that your intent from your own post was to give Rangel a pass based on actions in the military 60 years ago. Refute that.

It's not in the post. I don't have to clarify shit.

You are making accusations you simply can't back up.

And it's patently stupid for me to address this any further. Unless you find a quote, verbatim, that I said anything LIKE that.

It's basically a falsehood.

I'll accept this as your admission that you don't wish to clarify your earlier post, and are willing to let it stand as is. That's fine, and I feel free to interpret it as to what I believe your intent was based on that post. You had a chance to expound on your transparent attempt to excuse Rangel based on his military record, but chose not to.

Since you can't find and verbatim quote..and you chose to continue in this absurdity..

And since you have trouble reading subsequent posts..I will sum it up for you in a nutshell.

Precedence, protocol and proportionality in relation to proper procedure..not absolution.

That work?

If not..my apologies...English is the only human language I speak.

The others are for machines..and you can't speak them.

 

[The T]

It's not in the post. I don't have to clarify shit.

You are making accusations you simply can't back up.

And it's patently stupid for me to address this any further. Unless you find a quote, verbatim, that I said anything LIKE that.

It's basically a falsehood.

I'll accept this as your admission that you don't wish to clarify your earlier post, and are willing to let it stand as is. That's fine, and I feel free to interpret it as to what I believe your intent was based on that post. You had a chance to expound on your transparent attempt to excuse Rangel based on his military record, but chose not to.

Since you can't find and verbatim quote..and you chose to continue in this absurdity..

And since you have trouble reading subsequent posts..I will sum it up for you in a nutshell.

Precedence, protocol and proportionality in relation to proper procedure..not absolution.

That work?

If not..my apologies...English is the only human language I speak.

The others are for machines..and you can't speak them.

You can forget your rescue mission. You're lost.

 

[LibocalypseNow]

Rangel's alright. He has been a guy who has shown some fairness and mercy towards others in the past. So i'm willing to cut him some slack. However,Maxine Waters should be run out of Congress and fitted for her orange jumpsuit. She is possibly the most partisan and hateful person serving in our Congress. She's a close second to only Nancy Pelosi on that. She was all too quick to hop up on her high horse and viciously condemn Republicans who got in trouble. She never gave mercy to anyone therefore she deserves none. So to hell with her.

 

[Sallow]

I'll accept this as your admission that you don't wish to clarify your earlier post, and are willing to let it stand as is. That's fine, and I feel free to interpret it as to what I believe your intent was based on that post. You had a chance to expound on your transparent attempt to excuse Rangel based on his military record, but chose not to.

Since you can't find and verbatim quote..and you chose to continue in this absurdity..

And since you have trouble reading subsequent posts..I will sum it up for you in a nutshell.

Precedence, protocol and proportionality in relation to proper procedure..not absolution.

That work?

If not..my apologies...English is the only human language I speak.

The others are for machines..and you can't speak them.

You can forget your rescue mission. You're lost.

"Mission Accomplished"?

Give it a rest.

"Declaring" victory doesn't mean you win.

 

[boedicca]

This is funny. Newt Gingrich did far worse..where were Republicans on that guy? What about Tom Delay? They wanted to change to rules for him.

But ol' Charlie? Who won a Bronze Star and a Purple Heart in Korea? They want him "to resign" or be "expelled".

This is the man you guys want to expell.



That's a real life blood and guts American hero..not an actor.

I think they want to Censure him, personally I want him in jail....like I probably would have been, but that just me.

As i said earlier in this thread? The DOJ has the option to persue charges....

The Holder DOJ will never pursue Rangel or Waters.

 

[boedicca]

This is funny. Newt Gingrich did far worse..where were Republicans on that guy? What about Tom Delay? They wanted to change to rules for him.

But ol' Charlie? Who won a Bronze Star and a Purple Heart in Korea? They want him "to resign" or be "expelled".

This is the man you guys want to expell.



That's a real life blood and guts American hero..not an actor.

I think they want to Censure him, personally I want him in jail....like I probably would have been, but that just me.

Did you want to see Newt in Jail? How about Tom Delay?

Hey lets go up the food chain. George W. Bush committed a major crime in the Harken stock deal. You want him in the pokey too? He made much more cash then Rangel did on the deal.

Just wondering if this sense of justice is bi-partisan.

And you do know that most of the time the IRS just fines you for this sort of stuff. Right?

You want that to change? Or just in Rangel's case.

Oh, I get it.

NEEWWWWWWTTTTTT is to the Dems in Congress

what

BOOOOSSSSHHHHHHH is to Obama.

Thanks for clearing that up.

 

[The T]

I think they want to Censure him, personally I want him in jail....like I probably would have been, but that just me.

As i said earlier in this thread? The DOJ has the option to persue charges....

The Holder DOJ will never pursue Rangel or Waters.

Of course they won't.

 

[B. Kidd]

I'll accept this as your admission that you don't wish to clarify your earlier post, and are willing to let it stand as is. That's fine, and I feel free to interpret it as to what I believe your intent was based on that post. You had a chance to expound on your transparent attempt to excuse Rangel based on his military record, but chose not to.

Since you can't find and verbatim quote..and you chose to continue in this absurdity..

And since you have trouble reading subsequent posts..I will sum it up for you in a nutshell.

Precedence, protocol and proportionality in relation to proper procedure..not absolution.

That work?

If not..my apologies...English is the only human language I speak.

The others are for machines..and you can't speak them.

You can forget your rescue mission. You're lost.

USMB pinata of the day......

 

[Sallow]

I think they want to Censure him, personally I want him in jail....like I probably would have been, but that just me.

Did you want to see Newt in Jail? How about Tom Delay?

Hey lets go up the food chain. George W. Bush committed a major crime in the Harken stock deal. You want him in the pokey too? He made much more cash then Rangel did on the deal.

Just wondering if this sense of justice is bi-partisan.

And you do know that most of the time the IRS just fines you for this sort of stuff. Right?

You want that to change? Or just in Rangel's case.

Oh, I get it.

NEEWWWWWWTTTTTT is to the Dems in Congress

what

BOOOOSSSSHHHHHHH is to Obama.

Thanks for clearing that up.

Re-read the post..

Then get back to me.

I think the law should apply to everyone equally.

 

[The T]

Since you can't find and verbatim quote..and you chose to continue in this absurdity..

And since you have trouble reading subsequent posts..I will sum it up for you in a nutshell.

Precedence, protocol and proportionality in relation to proper procedure..not absolution.

That work?

If not..my apologies...English is the only human language I speak.

The others are for machines..and you can't speak them.

You can forget your rescue mission. You're lost.

"Mission Accomplished"?

Give it a rest.

"Declaring" victory doesn't mean you win.

Didn't say that now did I?

You have failed to make your case is more accurate.

 

[boedicca]

No tragic end for Rangel. The Democrats will give him and Waters a slap on the wrist and that will be that. It's their last Fuck You to America before they get the boot in January. "Draining the Swamp" = The biggest Hoax ever perpetrated on America.

Well, to be honest, they did drain the swamp. They drained more dredge into it instead of out of it.

 

[The T]

No tragic end for Rangel. The Democrats will give him and Waters a slap on the wrist and that will be that. It's their last Fuck You to America before they get the boot in January. "Draining the Swamp" = The biggest Hoax ever perpetrated on America.

Well, to be honest, they did drain the swamp. They drained more dredge into it instead of out of it.

And the people had to take up the cause and man the pumps for them.