Comey just lit Asshole's bitch ass up! Originally Posted by Little MonsterMore like he lit his own ass up as a lying leaker. How does a seven foot tall pussy become director of the FBI?
Oh, yeah. A six foot tall pussy hired him.
- gfejunkie
- 06-09-2017, 07:36 AM
Oh, yeah. A six foot tall pussy hired him.
- actionjackson647
- 06-09-2017, 02:33 PM
who to belive...
a man who served 3 presidents in both parties
or a man who believe obama was born in kenya...
a man who served 3 presidents in both parties
or a man who believe obama was born in kenya...
- gfejunkie
- 06-09-2017, 02:41 PM
You want to believe a disgruntled ex-employee who calls a criminal investigation a "matter"? 
- gfejunkie
- 06-10-2017, 09:19 AM
Gfe, how many time has FOX had to recant a story vs CNN and MSN combined? Originally Posted by FirePhoenixToday I feel as vindicated as the President does. Under oath, James Comey called out both CNN and the New York Times as FAKE NEWS. They've all gone correction crazy ever since.
And, this shit's really funny...
http://money.cnn.com/2017/06/09/medi...ion/index.html
LMAO!
- Austin Dude
- 06-10-2017, 10:08 AM
Today I feel as vindicated as the President does. Under oath, James Comey called out both CNN and the New York Times as FAKE NEWS. They've all gone correction crazy ever since.Wait show me where Comey says CNN and NYT are FAKE NEWS???
And, this shit's really funny...
http://money.cnn.com/2017/06/09/medi...ion/index.html
LMAO! Originally Posted by gfejunkie
However I do feel vindicated because under oath, Comey called Trump a liar multiple times. Something majority of the country knows but others won't admit. It's finally on the record.
As for the article you posted, if it were a Fox News person in the same situation, he wouldn't be fired. It's funny the hypocrisy. Same with the Katy Griffin thing. She was wrong. But no one was talking about how bad it was having Ted Nugemt in the oval after Nugent said Obama can suck on his machine gun. Odd to want this guy gone for tweeting brash things when Trump lives to tweet brash things.
But back to the best thing, Comey gave truth to the fact that Trump is a liar.
- FirePhoenix
- 06-10-2017, 10:10 AM
Um , that's not what Comey was implying. BTW,he also said that trump has out right lied to just about everybody on just about everything? So trying to say that's some sort of vindication is ludicrous.Lets also not forget that this is only the BEGINNING of the hearings. How long did repubs drag out the B.S. emails? 6 fucking YEARS, so don't think this is over by a long shot. You really don't think that there isnt more scandals to come?
Also you didn't answer my question on how many times has FOX had to recant a story vs CNN and MSN combined?
In the end actually post something that's real to back up what you say. Anything I post I can back up with proof. It's called backing my shit up. Try to do the same please.
Also you didn't answer my question on how many times has FOX had to recant a story vs CNN and MSN combined?
In the end actually post something that's real to back up what you say. Anything I post I can back up with proof. It's called backing my shit up. Try to do the same please.
- gfejunkie
- 06-10-2017, 11:55 AM
Wait show me where Comey says CNN and NYT are FAKE NEWS??? Originally Posted by Austin Dudehttp://thehill.com/policy/national-s...russia-stories
- Austin Dude
- 06-10-2017, 12:02 PM
http://thehill.com/policy/national-s...russia-stories Originally Posted by gfejunkieHahahaha you've posted an article that again didn't say anything about CNN or NYT being called out by Comey. He said reports. Let me guess you're going to point to The Hill, not Comey, saying CNN had to issue a correction. Good on them issuing a correction. You know who's been wrong A LOT and hasn't issued ANY corrections? Trump. Guess he's the FAKEST of FAKE NEWS.
- lustylad
- 06-10-2017, 12:40 PM
How long did repubs drag out the B.S. emails? 6 fucking YEARS, so don't think this is oveR by a long shot...Hmmm... in that case, Ms. FirePhony, how about backing up your claim that Republicans dragged out hildebeest's email scandal for "6 fucking years"?
Anything I post I can back up with proof. It's called backing my shit up. Originally Posted by FirePhoenix
- lustylad
- 06-10-2017, 01:24 PM
Hahahaha you've posted an article that again didn't say anything about... NYT being called out by Comey... Originally Posted by Austin DudeHaving reading comprehension problems again, millsy? He put the proof right in front of you and you still want to deny and argue it?
This is why you can't debate with the Big Dogs. You don't know when to hold 'em and when to fold 'em!
"Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) asked the former FBI director about a bombshell New York Times report from Feb. 14 titled 'Trump Campaign Aides Had Repeated Contacts With Russian Intelligence.'
'In the main it was not true,' Comey said."
- Austin Dude
- 06-10-2017, 01:43 PM
Hey guys. Under oath Comey called the president a liar multiple times. But the FAKE stuff comes from the media?? Yeah nice try. If CNN who was again not called out. And NYT who he never called fake are so wrong. When do you call out the guy who lies all the time and never issues a correction? Oh you won't call out the POTUS but CNN? I guess you believe his lies or you're ok with lies as long as it's the guy you like? Got it.
- lustylad
- 06-10-2017, 03:05 PM
Your type (racist, bigoted white trash inbred losers) are not even self-aware... Originally Posted by Cap'n Crunch
Retardlicans are a party of mostly pissed off, uneducated, blue collar white men who act & argue like children... Originally Posted by Little MonsterThanks, girls! I love your pseudo-elitist condescencion! Keep it up!
Insults, labels, stereotypes, and name-calling - that's your tradecraft, all you have. You can't help it, can you? Like moths drawn to a flame, you can 't help sneering at and pretending to be superior to everyone who dares to disagree with your lib-retarded pablum. Sad. You wear your pathetic, deep-seated insecurity on your sleeves!
But hey, keep trashing everyone! It soothes your weak self-esteem! Plus it's a real vote-getter! And it's baked into your libtard identity politics - see next post.
You go, girls!
- lustylad
- 06-10-2017, 03:12 PM
Why Elites Hate
The liberal contempt for middle America is baked into the idea of identity politics.
By William McGurn
June 5, 2017 6:33 p.m. ET
Nine years after Barack Obama accused small-towners of clinging to guns or religion, nearly three years after Jonathan Gruber was shown to have attributed ObamaCare’s passage to the stupidity of the American voter, and eight months after Hillary Clinton pronounced half of Donald Trump’s voters “irredeemable,” Democrats are now getting some sophisticated advice: You don’t win votes by showing contempt for voters.
In the last week or so a flurry of articles have appeared arguing for toning down the looking-down. In the New Republic Michael Tomasky writes under the heading “Elitism Is Liberalism’s Biggest Problem.” Over at the New York Times , Joan C. Williams weighs in with “The Dumb Politics of Elite Condescension.” Slate goes with a Q&A on “advice on how to talk to the white working class without insulting them.” Stanley Greenberg at the American Prospect writes on “The Democrats’ ‘Working-Class Problem,’ ” and Kevin Drum at Mother Jones asks for “Less Liberal Contempt, Please.”
None of these pieces are directed at Trump Nation. To the contrary, they are pitched to progressives still having a hard time coming to grips with The Donald’s victory last November. Much of what these authors write is sensible. But it can also be hilarious, particularly when the effort to explain ordinary Americans to progressive elites reads like a Margaret Mead entry on the exotic habits of the Samoans.
Mr. Tomasky, for example, informs progressives that middle Americans—wait for it—“go to church.” They have friends (“and sometimes even spouses”) “who are Republicans.” “They don’t feel self-conscious saluting the flag.” Who knew?
Most of these writers allow that there is at least some fraction of Trump voters who are not deplorable. What they do not appreciate is how condescending they can be while advising their fellow Democrats to be less condescending. Exhibit A: Mr. Drum’s recommendation that Democrats can “broaden [their] appeal” because these are “persuadable, low information folks.”
Still, Mr. Drum comes across as Gandhi when set against the writer at Slate who interviews Ms. Williams. The following question conveys the tone: “What attitude should we be taking toward people who voted for a racist buffoon who is scamming them?”
Ms. Williams, a University of California law professor who has written a new book on the white working class, generously avoids telling her interviewer he is a perfect instance of the problem. But the larger progressive dilemma here is that contempt is baked into the identity politics that defines today’s Democratic Party.
When Mrs. Clinton labeled Trump voters deplorable (“racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic, you name it”) she was simply following identity politics to its logical conclusion. Because identity politics transforms those on the other side of the argument—i.e., Americans who are pro-life, who respect the military, who may work in the coal industry—from political opponents into oppressors.
Which is precisely how they are treated: as bigots whose retrograde views mean they have no rights. So when the Supreme Court unilaterally imposes gay marriage on the entire nation, a baker who doesn’t want to cater a gay reception must be financially ruined. Ditto for two Portland women who ran a burrito stand that they shut down after accusations of cultural appropriation regarding their recipes.
No small part of the attraction of identity politics is its usefulness in silencing those who do not hew to progressive orthodoxy. This dynamic is most visible on campuses, where identity politics is also most virulent. It’s no accident, in other words, that the mob at Middlebury resorted to violence to try to keep Charles Murray ; after all, he’s been called a “white nationalist.” In much the same way identity politics has led Democrats to regard themselves as the “resistance” rather than the loyal opposition.
The great irony here is that this has left Democrats increasingly choosing undemocratic means to get what they want. From President Obama’s boast that he would use his pen and phone to bypass Congress to the progressive use of the Supreme Court as its preferred legislature to the Iran and climate deals that made end runs around the Constitution, it all underscores one thing: The modern American progressive has no faith in the democratic process because he has no trust in the American people.
Here it helps to remember the tail end of Mr. Obama’s snipe about guns and religion: it was a crack about voters clinging to “antipathy toward people who aren’t like them.” Sounds like a pretty accurate indictment of contemporary American liberalism, judging by all these articles begging progressives to be a little more broad-minded.
So good luck with the idea that the Democratic Party can restore its relationship with Middle America without addressing the identity politics that fuels it. Especially when it starts from the premise that the Americans they are condescending to will remain too stupid to figure it out.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/why-elites-hate-1496702030
The liberal contempt for middle America is baked into the idea of identity politics.
By William McGurn
June 5, 2017 6:33 p.m. ET
Nine years after Barack Obama accused small-towners of clinging to guns or religion, nearly three years after Jonathan Gruber was shown to have attributed ObamaCare’s passage to the stupidity of the American voter, and eight months after Hillary Clinton pronounced half of Donald Trump’s voters “irredeemable,” Democrats are now getting some sophisticated advice: You don’t win votes by showing contempt for voters.
In the last week or so a flurry of articles have appeared arguing for toning down the looking-down. In the New Republic Michael Tomasky writes under the heading “Elitism Is Liberalism’s Biggest Problem.” Over at the New York Times , Joan C. Williams weighs in with “The Dumb Politics of Elite Condescension.” Slate goes with a Q&A on “advice on how to talk to the white working class without insulting them.” Stanley Greenberg at the American Prospect writes on “The Democrats’ ‘Working-Class Problem,’ ” and Kevin Drum at Mother Jones asks for “Less Liberal Contempt, Please.”
None of these pieces are directed at Trump Nation. To the contrary, they are pitched to progressives still having a hard time coming to grips with The Donald’s victory last November. Much of what these authors write is sensible. But it can also be hilarious, particularly when the effort to explain ordinary Americans to progressive elites reads like a Margaret Mead entry on the exotic habits of the Samoans.
Mr. Tomasky, for example, informs progressives that middle Americans—wait for it—“go to church.” They have friends (“and sometimes even spouses”) “who are Republicans.” “They don’t feel self-conscious saluting the flag.” Who knew?
Most of these writers allow that there is at least some fraction of Trump voters who are not deplorable. What they do not appreciate is how condescending they can be while advising their fellow Democrats to be less condescending. Exhibit A: Mr. Drum’s recommendation that Democrats can “broaden [their] appeal” because these are “persuadable, low information folks.”
Still, Mr. Drum comes across as Gandhi when set against the writer at Slate who interviews Ms. Williams. The following question conveys the tone: “What attitude should we be taking toward people who voted for a racist buffoon who is scamming them?”
Ms. Williams, a University of California law professor who has written a new book on the white working class, generously avoids telling her interviewer he is a perfect instance of the problem. But the larger progressive dilemma here is that contempt is baked into the identity politics that defines today’s Democratic Party.
When Mrs. Clinton labeled Trump voters deplorable (“racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic, you name it”) she was simply following identity politics to its logical conclusion. Because identity politics transforms those on the other side of the argument—i.e., Americans who are pro-life, who respect the military, who may work in the coal industry—from political opponents into oppressors.
Which is precisely how they are treated: as bigots whose retrograde views mean they have no rights. So when the Supreme Court unilaterally imposes gay marriage on the entire nation, a baker who doesn’t want to cater a gay reception must be financially ruined. Ditto for two Portland women who ran a burrito stand that they shut down after accusations of cultural appropriation regarding their recipes.
No small part of the attraction of identity politics is its usefulness in silencing those who do not hew to progressive orthodoxy. This dynamic is most visible on campuses, where identity politics is also most virulent. It’s no accident, in other words, that the mob at Middlebury resorted to violence to try to keep Charles Murray ; after all, he’s been called a “white nationalist.” In much the same way identity politics has led Democrats to regard themselves as the “resistance” rather than the loyal opposition.
The great irony here is that this has left Democrats increasingly choosing undemocratic means to get what they want. From President Obama’s boast that he would use his pen and phone to bypass Congress to the progressive use of the Supreme Court as its preferred legislature to the Iran and climate deals that made end runs around the Constitution, it all underscores one thing: The modern American progressive has no faith in the democratic process because he has no trust in the American people.
Here it helps to remember the tail end of Mr. Obama’s snipe about guns and religion: it was a crack about voters clinging to “antipathy toward people who aren’t like them.” Sounds like a pretty accurate indictment of contemporary American liberalism, judging by all these articles begging progressives to be a little more broad-minded.
So good luck with the idea that the Democratic Party can restore its relationship with Middle America without addressing the identity politics that fuels it. Especially when it starts from the premise that the Americans they are condescending to will remain too stupid to figure it out.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/why-elites-hate-1496702030
- gfejunkie
- 06-11-2017, 10:28 AM
- Cap'n Crunch
- 06-11-2017, 11:36 PM
Insults, labels, stereotypes, and name-calling - that's your tradecraft, all you have...Says the guy who's response to anything is: "you're a LIBTARD!" (so lame)
Plus it's a real vote-getter! And it's baked into your libtard identity politics - see next post. Originally Posted by lustylad
Your post is a classic crybaby response. You only talk about insults and labels because you are getting your ass kicked. You throw out the first insult (usually 'libtard' ad nauseam) and then cry foul when others take you down.
So grow a set of balls, you weak fuck.
