It's catching up with him

Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

It's true. And it's not only on CNN.

Where did you wear your VAGA hat today (just kidding, I don't give a shit)?
Get back to me when you can refute the "story".

Yawnnnnnnn..... The Washington Post...call me when some real newspaper writes a believable story. Originally Posted by the_real_Barleycorn

You're just like trump. A keyboard warrior who can't handle the shit you get yourself into.

First off, the article points out trump isn't really handling things
Secondly, why would I think about being in his shoes? I wouldn't find my self in the lying douche-bag's place by counting on trumpys to believe me. As a role model, he is a total piece of shit.
Plus I don't think I could care less about what you "think" about the WaPo. I would love to watch you try to refute their reporting. Start with this story.
Since I can read I don't spend hours watching skewed youtube videos.

the Washington Post another liberal rag that hate's Trump like so many other so called news source's Have you ever thought about what it might be like to be in his shoes "I doubt it" your candy ass wouldn't have lasted 3 months that alone 3 years Originally Posted by Hotrod511

Patrolling alleys? Wearing a red hat?
An uneducated trumpy would say that.
And now we know where your "stories" come from.

Real navy men? You patrolling alleys looking for anyone wearing a Dixie cup? Hint: They're lying to you. Originally Posted by the_real_Barleycorn

Fox news poll.
51% and all you have to say is "blah, blah, blah"?

That cuts to the chase for all your posts.

blah blah blah muncher is losing it. blah blah blah WaPo bullshit. blah blah blah muncher is losing it.


BAHHAAAAAAAAAA






blah blah blah if you say so blah blah blah


BAHHAHHAHAAA Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

It's ironic you have nothing to say about the article or any of the points it brings up.
You accept he has performed the actions in the article. But you're offended I claim his grammar is frequently poor.
Snick.

You're a trumpy. You lie.
And you can't back up your statements.

Ironic the OP is writing about Trump's grammar when his own grammar is usually quite atrocious. Originally Posted by friendly fred

It's true. And it's not only on CNN. Originally Posted by eccieuser9500

if you say so.

Fox news poll.
51% and all you have to say is "blah, blah, blah"?

That cuts to the chase for all your posts.

Originally Posted by Munchmasterman

what cuts to the chase of your posts?


blah blah I HATE TRUMP blah blah WHY DOESN'T EVERYONE HATE TRUMP LIKE I DO blah blah blah


BAHHAHHHAHHAAAAAAAAAA

Get back on topic.

Oh, you can't.

People can make up their own minds....well some of them can.

You have 13 months at most.

if you say so.





what cuts to the chase of your posts?


blah blah I HATE TRUMP blah blah WHY DOESN'T EVERYONE HATE TRUMP LIKE I DO blah blah blah


BAHHAHHHAHHAAAAAAAAAA Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

Get back on topic.

Oh, you can't.

People can make up their own minds....well some of them can.

You have 13 months at most. Originally Posted by Munchmasterman

if you say so.


like Jackie said, you write the most convoluted incomprehensible goonbabble posts then rant like a lunatic when no one agrees with you. in fact, no one can decipher the meanings of your rantings.


"to make out the meaning of despite indistinctness or obscurity"









does not approve your posts.


BAHHAHAHAAAA

You have 13 months at most. Originally Posted by Munchmasterman

What is it with Lefty's and math.

It's 15 months at a minimum.

Wow, is munchie defensive or what? So who wrote the "storie"?

Has anyone seen any smashed TV's at the White House lately?

What is it with Lefty's and math.

. Originally Posted by eccielover

And you can't back up your statements. Originally Posted by Munchmasterman

This is further evidence of your poor grammar.

Also, I concede nothing in the article, since I didn't read it.

Also, I concede nothing in the article, since I didn't read it. Originally Posted by friendly fred

Ditto here!

Munchy's MO is to post 35 paragraphs from WaPo, along with his false gibberish on what it means. Half of us laugh and move on to the next post. The other half wade in, quickly notice WaPo and Munchy are both full of shit but it would take all day to respond and refute the 101 falsehoods contained in Munchy's post. So we shrug and move on to the next post.

Then Munchy stupidly declares victory after he is ignored because no one has the patience to refute his pedantry point by tedious point. (Except IB or me, on occasion.)

Methinks ff has the right way to deal with Munchy's interminable posts - simply say "I concede nothing, since I didn't read it."

Why do you even try to explain your position? You admitted you didn't read the article. So shut the fuck up and scroll to the next thread that doesn't hurt your head to believe. One that has a video.
It comes down to your lack of reading ability and that you're a trumpy. You write the WaPo off as a credible source and claim victory based on your ignorance. You not reading information doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

An example that comes to mind is all the morons who were yammering about the whistleblower complaint. People on this site that claimed he had no first-hand knowledge or that he needed first-hand knowledge to file the claim were quoting the "Federalist" or some other dumbass source.

Yes, I know you don't post examples.

I post the whole article because many people can't see the articles and I'm not going to decide what provides context for the readers. It's a paysite.
I don't cherry pick the content and I read the whole article. I don't ignore content in the article that is self-refuting.
You make typical trumpy claims. You say there are a large number of errors but you can't provide one.


And if you can't make sense out of "trump is starting to lose it." that's your problem.

The fact you cry about a post you didn't read says a lot. Your past attempts at refuting my posts says a lot too. Don't try or claim there are too many to do. I'm pretty sure you must have successfully done it before, but not often.
Your whole post is "bullshit according to the other ll".

It's really funny you included Mr. Last Word/font size-reduction in your "excuse" for not trying to refute a point. He frequently comments on a point or two out of many. At least he doesn't whine like you.

Ditto here!

Munchy's MO is to post 35 paragraphs from WaPo, along with his false gibberish on what it means. Half of us laugh and move on to the next post. The other half wade in, quickly notice WaPo and Munchy are both full of shit but it would take all day to respond and refute the 101 falsehoods contained in Munchy's post. So we shrug and move on to the next post.

Then Munchy stupidly declares victory after he is ignored because no one has the patience to refute his pedantry point by tedious point. (Except IB or me, on occasion.)

Methinks ff has the right way to deal with Munchy's interminable posts - simply say "I concede nothing, since I didn't read it." Originally Posted by lustylad