Trump - 4 more years of this at least...

[Bonez]

Hmmmm.

It has been reported that the CapiTol Police requested National Guard assistance before the roits happened. Palosi and her sargent in Arms denied the request. An hour later after the riots had started the Capitol police made another request for National Guard assistance. it was then approved.

Why an hour delay until the riots were well under way did Palosi act? I'm less injuries would have occure if she and her Sargent at Arms approved the first request.

[pritch]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1nob6QDVutk

[pritch]

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/18/n...manhattan.html

[Kickaha]

Hmmmm.

It has been reported that the CapiTol Police requested National Guard assistance before the roits happened. Palosi and her sargent in Arms denied the request. An hour later after the riots had started the Capitol police made another request for National Guard assistance. it was then approved.

Why an hour delay until the riots were well under way did Palosi act? I'm less injuries would have occure if she and her Sargent at Arms approved the first request.

The only thing wrong with that is that Pelosi is not in charge of the Capitol police so it isn't her call

Capitol police had a also turned down help offered from the FBI prior to the event

[1/32 man]

Did Boner get his knitting needles crossed up again?

[Laava]

Did Boner get his knitting needles crossed up again?

Outta control!

[pritch]

A little Trump history:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ioEdeghaD78


A glimpse of Trump's future:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zCC3De4OJmA

[TheDemonLord]

I totally missed this post:

Even toad face McConnell says he did it. Your words are pure horseshit mate. Keep clinging onto that one shrewd utterance of the word peaceful and avoid the rest. No more discussion from me on this on rubbish of yours.

McConnell says he did it? Well, why didn't the Democrats submit that at the Impeachment trial and case closed!

Again - I'll cling to it, because it's the single line in the speech where he directs the crowd to an action. It's also clear and unambiguous.

I mean, why would someone cling to the objective evidence.....

Probably the same reason that the Democrats had to Fabricate their 'Evidence'...

You seem to have no problem with a man that runs his mouth sooooo much no one knows when he is serious - not worthy of running a country. But no probs for you Trump boy.

Anyone, with a natural understanding of the English language and an understanding of Contexts knows exactly when he's serious. Anyone who is familiar with American, and particularly New York, Mannerisms and linguistic habits can successfully parse the remaining 5% to derive the meaning.

Those who have axes to grind and ulterior motives on the other hand are quite happy to play fast and loose with editing, context removal etc.

The reason you have so very, very much to say about everything else, but strangely doing everything to avoid commenting on what clearly sums up the mans character. Par of the course for a trumper.

It's a Red Herring, which is why I'm ignoring it.

[pritch]

McConnell says he did it? Well, why didn't the Democrats submit that at the Impeachment trial and case closed!

Because McConnell stood up in the Senate and read it into the record after the Impeachment trial concluded. That was a major news item, you need to start taking an intelligent interest.
Or stop arguing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kj5pvgXAgMs

[Bonez]

Because McConnell stood up in the Senate and read it into the record after the Impeachment trial concluded. That was a major news item, you need to start taking an intelligent interest.
Or stop arguing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kj5pvgXAgMs

And prey tell what was the outcome of that impeachmemt trail pritch? I know you will read this. You can't help yourself..

[TheDemonLord]

Because McConnell stood up in the Senate and read it into the record after the Impeachment trial concluded. That was a major news item, you need to start taking an intelligent interest.
Or stop arguing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kj5pvgXAgMs

two words:

Hear Say.

[1/32 man]

trump... the man who has people to explain what he really meant after he says something in public.

[TheDemonLord]

trump... the man who has people to explain what he really meant after he says something in public.

So, a Politician then?

[sugilite:Me]

I totally missed this post:

That is because I have been put in the naughty corner for abuse, I think it was because of a post in reply to one of yours
I know I get fiesty, esp when people use wordplay to avoid what is clearlry going on, now who could that be referencing lol and I maybe guilty of that from time to time myself

McConnell says he did it? Well, why didn't the Democrats submit that at the Impeachment trial and case closed!

As Pritch said, the crafty repub said it right after the "trial". Had it been a dimwitted dem, they would of pulled out a 6 shooter and pumped all 6 rounds straight into their own foot while screaming take that mofo
I despise McConnell, but in this case with all his vast network of internal knowledge, as in there aint nothing going on in Washington he does not know about - I'll take his opinion on Trumps culpability over some IT Auckland guy with way to much time on his hands and a penchant for arguing.

Again - I'll cling to it, because it's the single line in the speech where he directs the crowd to an action. It's also clear and unambiguous.

Apparently the Duck Dynasty mob could not surgically extract that one small morsel of goodness from the rest of Trumps "Booo hooo, wahh, wahhh, wahhhh, they stole the election from me and I want you idiots to go stop the process for me" speech

I mean, why would someone cling to the objective evidence.....

Probably the same reason that the Democrats had to Fabricate their 'Evidence'...

Ok, Since I've been placed in the naughty corner, I've not actually paid a lot of attention to this, but from what I skim read, some sort of "this is a legit" tweet logo or somthingarather got put on a tweet post production?
So this "trial" was for senators right? Have you seen senators asking big tech CEO's questions about tech? They are amazingly ignorant and the majority clearly do not have a clue, and are not enthusiastic about their jobs enough to learn about IT shit to become informed enough to ask pertinent educated questions. How may senators would of even noticed whether said logo was there or not? I'm guessing if you held up one hand, with one finger raised, you can guess which finger - would still be one finger to many! Clearly some over zealous dem IT freak put it there in a gross overestimate of senators give a fuckability.

Anyone, with a natural understanding of the English language

Stop right there, you know this is America we are talking about right?

It's a Red Herring, which is why I'm ignoring it.

Oh, no, no, no Mr Demonlord, you are incapable of ignoring anything, every point must be argued for the win, even if it means producing a wall of text to fall upon the other poor poster, crushing any will to reply - I think to your mind this translates into a technical knockout lol
No, what we have here I feel is a Trump sentence/action or lack thereof that is completely indefensible even for you - red herring indeed

[pritch]

two words:

Hear Say.

Obviously you have no idea what 'hear say' is. Although that hardly comes as a surprise.

That is the guy who led the vote to acquit Trump admitting Trump was as guilty as sin. He was acquited on a technicality - which may or may not exist. There is no sane argument to support your view, but that won't stop you trying.