jakee

Yes. Without calling anyone; stupid, liar, or attacking their belief system, or even their ideology. The problem is that Ron's belief system is intrinsically linked with his political beliefs... or at least he claims it is when it suits him. When democrats are in power he judges them by biblical standards and finds them wanting. When Republicans are in power it doesn't matter what their personal morality is, they are instruments of god's will therefore everything is how it should be! No one should be stopped from calling out the inconsistency (or blatant hypocrisy) in another poster's political argument just because they've wrapped it around their faith. It doesn't provide immunity from criticism. Do you want to have an ideagasm?

Probably ignored as much as having classified documents on a private email server. How many documents did they find that were classified going onto the server vs documents that were retroactively classified? If Kelly was giving Porter classified documents when he had no clearance it's worse than the HRC situation in two was. It's intentional, and it's outrageously hypocritical. Do you want to have an ideagasm?

Now you're just lying again. A huge number of people were against Obama on policy, or just because he had a D next to his name (just like you blindly attack anyone with a D next to his name). But that doesn't obscure the fact that a significant number of people were against him for racist reasons as well. People who called him Barack Hussein Obama all the time? Mostly racist. People who promoted and believed the Kenyan Birth conspiracy theory? Mostly racist. That conspiracy theory would not have gained any traction if Obama was white. Guaranteed. I knew there was a reason I ignored most of your posts. Yep. You hate having to deal wth reality. Do you want to have an ideagasm?

Can you make your mind up? Is he playing their game or not playing their game? Is one of them good and one of them bad, or does it not matter as long as he's the one doing it? All hail the mango messiah.... Context... Yes, that's what I'm talking about. I'm reading your second quote in the context of your first exactly opposite quote. Do you want to have an ideagasm?

Can you make your mind up? Is he playing their game or not playing their game? Is one of them good and one of them bad, or does it not matter as long as he's the one doing it? All hail the mango messiah.... Do you want to have an ideagasm?

Now you're just lying again. A huge number of people were against Obama on policy, or just because he had a D next to his name (just like you blindly attack anyone with a D next to his name). But that doesn't obscure the fact that a significant number of people were against him for racist reasons as well. People who called him Barack Hussein Obama all the time? Mostly racist. People who promoted and believed the Kenyan Birth conspiracy theory? Mostly racist. That conspiracy theory would not have gained any traction if Obama was white. Guaranteed. Do you want to have an ideagasm?

And how many wanted him disqualified from holding office based on a racist conspiracy theory? Do you want to have an ideagasm?

A) What game? B) Do you agree with the Democrats' game? Is it a good way of doing things? Do you want to have an ideagasm?

I gotta be honest, Barack Hussein Communist Kenyan Muslim Terrorist-Fist-Jab Obama might have good reason to disagree with you there. Do you want to have an ideagasm?

Your poll is unbelievably stupid. If Russia interfered but it had no effect, it is not 'just a distraction'. It is a major issue which needs fully investigating to find out what safeguards need to be put in place for the future. If you just ignore it then it will keep happening, they will get better at it, and they will be bolder in their aproach. It is not just about this election but about the next election, the one after that and the one after that. It's also a seperate issue to the Mueller invstigation into how Trump and his team behaved during the election and towards the Russians. Do you want to have an ideagasm?

at realdonaldtrump twitter response should be: "Fuck what Kim Jong Un has to say about anything." A) No it shouldn't. B) Even that would require a level of self control the Don has shown himself to be utterly incapable of. He really doesn't know what he's doing. Do you want to have an ideagasm?

Once again I'm left waiting for Trump Jr to stand by his principles and express his shock at dad's response. Ahhh who am I kidding. The greasy little scumbag never really gave a fuck Do you want to have an ideagasm?

Yeah, the turnover in the Admnistration is hilarious given that it only has the best people. Question is whether Kelly is going to follow Porter into the water, isn't it? Do you want to have an ideagasm?

Stupid economy made another BIG mistake, not listening to Trump. Trump knows more about the economy than anyone. Including the economy. Do you want to have an ideagasm?

The idea that the US doesn't have a firm defense budget is an even bigger fantasy than anything that has come out of Trump's mouth since the election. Further, what the US military currently needs from a budget and what the US really needs from its military are two entirely different things. There's no accounting for lack of taste! And that's the thing about McDs, it doesn't taste bad. It just doesn't taste of anything. It's as bland and dumbed down as daytime TV. Do you want to have an ideagasm?

But what's in the letter? According to these senior Justice Department officials: · Career attorneys initially planned to build their case against Mikerin based on evidence provided by this individual. However, they began to have “serious credibility concerns” because of “inconsistencies” between the individual’s statements and documents they obtained as part of the investigation. · After interviewing the individual and reviewing the documents they had obtained, prosecutors determined that there was a “high chance” that he had begun engaging in illegal activity earlier than he initially disclosed—and that he had concealed those actions from the FBI. · As a result, Justice Department officials working the case began to have “serious concerns” with using the individual as a witness. They “assessed” that the individual “would not present as a good witness” and “did not want to rely on him at trial.” · Because Justice Department officials could not trust this individual, they decided instead to pursue alternate charges against Mikerin that would not rely on his testimony. · Justice Department officials said it was a “godsend” that they had another avenue to charge Mikerin that relied on evidence other than this individual’s testimony. Mikerin ultimately was sentenced to 48 months in prison in 2015 for money laundering and violating the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. · Justice Department officials confirmed that they do not plan to use the testimony of this individual in any future prosecution. · Most importantly, Justice Department officials explained that this individual never provided any evidence or made any allegations regarding Secretary Clinton or the Clinton Foundation in any of their interactions with him. · They stated unequivocally: “at no point did [the individual] provide any allegation of corruption, illegality, or impropriety on Clinton, the Clinton Foundation, President Clinton, the Uranium One deal, or CFIUS.” They also confirmed that there were “no allegations of impropriety or illegality” regarding Secretary Clinton in any of the documents they reviewed. The republicans have been using this individual to advance political rhetoric against the democrats and for the republicans, despite the fact he was considered so unreliable that the justice dept felt using his testimony would undermine the credibility of the case they were prosecuting. Do you want to have an ideagasm?

So you agree that the Mueller investigation is fully justified and the FISA memo has absolutely zero impact on it? Do you want to have an ideagasm?

What did he do wron? He spoke for a few minutes with people who phoned him, gave nothing away, and then reported the call to the FBI. Do you think it's ironic and sadly funny that Republicans think it's ok to discuss US policy with them? "The Atlantic reported that when Kuznetsov and Stolyarov called McConnell, he told them that new sanctions against Russia were unlikely." Do you want to have an ideagasm?

I was wondering about the claim that Steele said he was committed to opposing Trump - if he had that mindset going in it's one thing, but if he came to that conclusion as a result of researching the dossier then surely it strengthens the credibilty of the document, right? Do you want to have an ideagasm?

Given that Trump is currently in government and the Democrats aren't I would fully agree. Trump's reliance on emotion instead of party platforms, and his continuing petulance and loser emotion every time he doesn't get his way does come across as him being far more involved with perpetuating BS instead of governing. Do you want to have an ideagasm?

Its not that hard to connect the dots. Start at 1:20 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rtqIiYRm0XI Ok, starting there... "...We have to trust our instincts". Ok, so the dots are instinct based dots, not fact based dots. Right then. "Mueller accepted the position just one day after being interviewed by President Trump, who was looking for a replacement for fired FBI director James Comey. But Mueller, Rosenstein and Comey go further back than that." OMG!!!1!!! Mueller, Rosenstein and Comey have known each other for more than one day! How can he possibly investi - oh wait he's not investigating either of them anyway. They then go on to state that Mueller had solid evidence that Russian officials were using bribery to "compromise the Uranium one deal" and use Paul Lambert's indictment as proof. When in fact Lambert, an American, was indicted for bribing a Russian official in return for transportation contracts your video heavily implies that it is the other way around. At that point, I stopped watching. If that's the best they've got it's pure tinfoil territory to suggest that Mueller is compromised. Do you want to have an ideagasm?

Coming from a Conservative whose own party's stated goal for 8 years was to block everything? Did you ever compare Clinton's election manifesto with Trump's? One of them had plans, policies and budgets on multiple important issues... the other had a wall. Do you want to have an ideagasm?

What makes you bet that? Do you want to have an ideagasm?

Every now and then I'm amazed at how Ron can support the way that Trump is abusing the and undermining the structures of law and justice to prop up his own personal power base, since it should fly in the face of everything Ron believes is right. Then I remember that Ron actually wants his nation to collapse, since it would mean the Rapture is on the way. Hence he'd love nothing more than for Trump's abuses of power to become more and more egregious until government as you know it collapses entirely. Do you want to have an ideagasm?

What is good at there is parroting democratic talking points A show that is good at parroting democratic talking points is the best reporting you've seen? I guess the democratic talking points must be pretty damn accurate then. Cool! Do you want to have an ideagasm?