[Continuation] House Impeachment Inquiry - part 3

Belz... · 22nd January 2020, 03:47 AM

Again, why does Moscow Mitch have so much power if Republicans disagree with him? Or are they just paying lip service to the idea of a fair process?

Thread continued from here.

Posted By:kmortis

ChristianProgressive · 22nd January 2020, 04:45 AM

Originally Posted by Norman Alexander

No. Quite the opposite.

They are TRYING, despite all the opposition from Trump, to give him a fair trial. That includes the opportunity to bring refutations, his evidence, his witnesses and even to step up and attempt to refute the accusations in person should he so wish. Is that not fair?

But the people who are attempting to prevent this happening are NOT the Dems or the Senate. It's the GOP and specifically The Turtle, who has already proudly stated he is taking his marching orders from the White House, i.e. Donny himself.

So Donny is bitching about a situation that he himself is creating. Nobody else. It's almost like he is trying to get sympathy for "Look what you made me do!"

Bingo. GOP 101. Make a mess, then use the mess you made to argue that the system is broken and against you.

ChristianProgressive · 22nd January 2020, 04:46 AM

Originally Posted by alfaniner

I get the distinct impression that some of the Republican Senators are hearing the details of this case for the first time. "Holy ****, he did that? I'm going to have to think about this some more..."

But they're still voting to support McConnell's whitewash.

alfaniner · 22nd January 2020, 06:11 AM

Originally Posted by ChristianProgressive

But they're still voting to support McConnell's whitewash.

Yes, and I find that terribly disappointing. Not one Democratic Amendment was approved. But I think they're looking better onstage than the Republicans.

Fast Eddie B · 22nd January 2020, 06:24 AM

Regarding “Being Bobbed”...

I appreciate a well-rounded and appropriate “Argumentum ad Adsurdum.” They have their time and place to show the possible implications of a flawed position. I’ve used them myself when appropriate.

But they should be used as a scalpel, not a bludgeon. Absurdity for the sake of absurdity accomplishes little, which is what I think we see in Bob’s case.

TofuFighter · 22nd January 2020, 06:36 AM

It's off-topic, but i've never liked the accusation being made about a thread being 'bobbed'. it's personal by definition. my view is that BTC's arguments are sometimes confusing because we make assumptions about his base logic that are wrong. He is always civil and that counts for far more, in my view, than anything else. I've felt frustrated in arguments with him, only to realise that it was my own misunderstanding that caused it. [/o-t]

JoeMorgue · 22nd January 2020, 06:41 AM

Originally Posted by Belz...

Again, why does Moscow Mitch have so much power if Republicans disagree with him? Or are they just paying lip service to the idea of a fair process?

Gut feeling?

Because "disagree" is not purely binary. Very few if any Senators are actually going to come down as against McConnell, but I think at least some (no I can't put anything resembling a X percent of Republican Senators kind of number to it) at least recognize that this could still go bad for them so are... softening their blows a little bit?

We will get some token resistant from some Republicans, most probably never on any thing that actually matters, never in a way that's actually going to effect the final outcome.

BobTheCoward · 22nd January 2020, 06:43 AM

Originally Posted by Fast Eddie B

Regarding “Being Bobbed”...

I appreciate a well-rounded and appropriate “Argumentum ad Adsurdum.” They have their time and place to show the possible implications of a flawed position. I’ve used them myself when appropriate.

But they should be used as a scalpel, not a bludgeon. Absurdity for the sake of absurdity accomplishes little, which is what I think we see in Bob’s case.

Umm,I'm not making argumentum as absurdum. I'm staring my positions. But my conclusions are normally the ends themselves, and not means to an end. So,y positions result in what you would regard as absurd outcomes that I'm indifferent to.

Fast Eddie B · 22nd January 2020, 06:56 AM

Originally Posted by TofuFighter

It's off-topic, but i've never liked the accusation being made about a thread being 'bobbed'. it's personal by definition. my view is that BTC's arguments are sometimes confusing because we make assumptions about his base logic that are wrong. He is always civil and that counts for far more, in my view, than anything else. I've felt frustrated in arguments with him, only to realise that it was my own misunderstanding that caused it. [/o-t]

You are right, of course, and thank you for pointing that out.

However, we have to pull back and ask if his input actually moves a discussion forward or tends to drag it off on a tangent. I don’t think it’s necessarily intentional or inspired by suspect motives, but the end result is the same.

JoeMorgue · 22nd January 2020, 07:07 AM

Bob wouldn't be problem if he would just start threads for all the basic human things he doesn't understand instead of demanding everyone explain to him that water is wet in the middle of every discussion about showering.

But I notice when people like Bob can't use their amazing ability to not understand things to ruin discussion, they suddenly don't have nearly as much problem understanding things. As if they only can't understand things when they don't want a discussion to happen. Funny that.

And I will continue to use "Bobbing" until such a time as the term is no longer necessary.

kmortis · 22nd January 2020, 07:09 AM

Get it back on topic, and not about other posters.

Posted By:kmortis

TragicMonkey · 22nd January 2020, 07:09 AM

Deleted

Squeegee Beckenheim · 22nd January 2020, 08:21 AM

https://twitter.com/justinhendrix/st...120644103?s=20

Quote:

In an incredible exchange at Davos,
@realdonaldtrump
admits he is comfortable with the status of the impeachment trial because the White House is withholding evidence. "Honestly, we have all the material. They don't have the material." As always, he says the quiet part out loud.

Video embedded in tweet.

I do have to grudgingly give Trump one thing, though - "Shifty Shiff" is a good nickname. Trips off the tongue. I wonder if he came up with it himself?

carlitos · 22nd January 2020, 08:24 AM

An intriguing theory I heard on Michael Smerconish's show - If Republicans "trade" witnesses, like allowing Bolton in trade for allowing Hunter Biden, it could be a net win for Democrats, because Hunter Biden could be a great witness.

I'm skeptical about this affecting the general public because of the crap TV quality, but could it sway 4 senate votes? You never know.

JoeMorgue · 22nd January 2020, 08:24 AM

Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim

I do have to grudgingly give Trump one thing, though - "Shifty Shiff" is a good nickname. Trips off the tongue. I wonder if he came up with it himself?

Too obvious, the nickname writes itself.

JoeMorgue · 22nd January 2020, 08:27 AM

Originally Posted by carlitos

An intriguing theory I heard on Michael Smerconish's show - If Republicans "trade" witnesses, like allowing Bolton in trade for allowing Hunter Biden, it could be a net win for Democrats, because Hunter Biden could be a great witness.

I'm skeptical about this affecting the general public because of the crap TV quality, but could it sway 4 senate votes? You never know.

No bad idea. The Republicans already want to turn this into the Hunter Biden Impeachment. Officially involving him in it in basically does just that. It's buying into their "Well what Trump did was okay because he thought Biden was dirty" argument which they could probably do.

Don't put them into a scenario where they can sell the narrative that Trump didn't do anything wrong if they can get Hunter Biden on the stand and get a soundbite that can sound a little guilty of something if you stand on your head, close one eye, and squint at it.

Even if Hunter Biden was building an army of cloned mecha-Hitlers in the Ukraine to march on the United States, Trump was not in the right for what he did.

Squeegee Beckenheim · 22nd January 2020, 08:30 AM

Documents may show Schiff mischaracterised a text exchange in the Parnas documents

Squeegee Beckenheim · 22nd January 2020, 08:37 AM

https://twitter.com/spdustin/status/1219879255624114177

Quote:

GOP voted down:

• Evidence from the White House, State Dept., OMB, and DoD
• Testimony from Mulvaney, Duffey, and Bolton
• Anti-cherry-picking evidence rule
• Guaranteed votes on witnesses
• 24 (rather than 2) hours to respond to motions
• CJ Roberts witness approval power

plague311 · 22nd January 2020, 08:48 AM

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

No bad idea. The Republicans already want to turn this into the Hunter Biden Impeachment. Officially involving him in it in basically does just that. It's buying into their "Well what Trump did was okay because he thought Biden was dirty" argument which they could probably do.

Don't put them into a scenario where they can sell the narrative that Trump didn't do anything wrong if they can get Hunter Biden on the stand and get a soundbite that can sound a little guilty of something if you stand on your head, close one eye, and squint at it.

Even if Hunter Biden was building an army of cloned mecha-Hitlers in the Ukraine to march on the United States, Trump was not in the right for what he did.

The questioning process is different in the Senate than in the House, isn't it? Legit question, I'm not sure. In the House they just got to scream at the witness repeatedly, I don't think they get to do that in the Senate, do they?

Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim

Documents may show Schiff mischaracterised a text exchange in the Parnas documents

The part that sucks is people will actually look at that as if it's a big deal instead of a fairly minuscule oversight that doesn't actually make any difference in the grand scheme.

JoeMorgue · 22nd January 2020, 08:52 AM

Originally Posted by plague311

The questioning process is different in the Senate than in the House, isn't it? Legit question, I'm not sure. In the House they just got to scream at the witness repeatedly, I don't think they get to do that in the Senate, do they?

I think the Senate Republicans will be given enough leeway (or just take it and dare someone to stop them which amounts to the same thing) to, if Hunter Biden is called to testify, throw enough "When did you stop beating your wife" style questions at him to get a soundbite they can use to drive home their "See? See? Trump was in the right to investigate Biden, therefore this whole thing is a sham/nothingburger" narrative better then... whatever the Democratic narrative would be.

Again nothing Hunter Biden did matters, so putting him on the stand can't possibly make the narrative clearer.

BobTheCoward · 22nd January 2020, 09:01 AM

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

I think the Senate Republicans will be given enough leeway (or just take it and dare someone to stop them which amounts to the same thing) to, if Hunter Biden is called to testify, throw enough "When did you stop beating your wife" style questions at him to get a soundbite they can use to drive home their "See? See? Trump was in the right to investigate Biden, therefore this whole thing is a sham/nothingburger" narrative better then... whatever the Democratic narrative would be.

Again nothing Hunter Biden did matters, so putting him on the stand can't possibly make the narrative clearer.

If nothing hunter did matters, then the democrats should put him up and demonstrate that.

plague311 · 22nd January 2020, 09:05 AM

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

I think the Senate Republicans will be given enough leeway (or just take it and dare someone to stop them which amounts to the same thing) to, if Hunter Biden is called to testify, throw enough "When did you stop beating your wife" style questions at him to get a soundbite they can use to drive home their "See? See? Trump was in the right to investigate Biden, therefore this whole thing is a sham/nothingburger" narrative better then... whatever the Democratic narrative would be.

Again nothing Hunter Biden did matters, so putting him on the stand can't possibly make the narrative clearer.

The Democrats would get Bolton (according to rumor). Do you think Bolton has something that would be more damaging to Trump than whatever the GOP can distort Biden into saying to be used against the Dems?

I have no doubts that the GOP and the conservative media will find a way to spin Biden saying, "Good Morning" into a threat against God fearing, blue collar men and women. That's standard. What I don't doubt is that Bolton has something up his sleeve that he is dying to say. I want to know what it is.

plague311 · 22nd January 2020, 09:06 AM

Originally Posted by BobTheCoward

If nothing hunter did matters, then the democrats should put him up and demonstrate that.

Pay attention Bob. He said that they'll spin what he says, not that Biden did anything wrong. Try to keep it straight.

BobTheCoward · 22nd January 2020, 09:08 AM

Originally Posted by plague311

Pay attention Bob. He said that they'll spin what he says, not that Biden did anything wrong. Try to keep it straight.

If you don't believe in your ability convince the jury that your position is correct, then you shouldn't be pursuing impeachment.

plague311 · 22nd January 2020, 09:11 AM

Originally Posted by BobTheCoward

If you don't believe in your ability convince the jury that your position is correct, then you shouldn't be pursuing impeachment.

It has nothing to do with a jury as the American public isn't the jury. The GOP has already made up their minds, there's no convincing anyone in the Senate. What isn't wanted is a bunch of lies thrown on social media, and the TV stations that are twisting what Biden said, did, or does.

They aren't pursuing impeachment, he's been impeached. They're pursuing removal from office. If you're going to play semantic, absurdly nonsensical games at least get the facts straight. Enough now, I'm done with this conversation with you. I refuse to chase the rabbit.

JoeMorgue · 22nd January 2020, 09:14 AM

Originally Posted by plague311

The Democrats would get Bolton (according to rumor). Do you think Bolton has something that would be more damaging to Trump than whatever the GOP can distort Biden into saying to be used against the Dems?

I think since the outcome of this is already obvious giving Republicans more rope in the hope that this is the time they'll finally trip up and hang themselves is insane.

Long story short I have a lot more faith in the Republican's ability to pull some dirt on Biden out of whatever thin air they can they I do in the Democrat's ability to get Bolton on the stand and play out the "Did you order the Code Red?" scene in a few good men.

Even without Biden involved at all I don't want the Democrats to get Bolton on the stand. They'll find a way to mess that up.

Not to be my grumpy self again, but the Democrats haven't wowed me yet with their ability to take advantage of opportunities, they always backfire. So I'm not giving them anymore. I'm not buying any of their "Just give us a chance and we'll swoop in and save the day" requests anymore.

Run out the clock until the Republicans decided they've played with the Democrats enough and declare Trump innocent, the victim of a witch hunt, and dashingly handsome and get back to trying to win in 2020.

BobTheCoward · 22nd January 2020, 09:14 AM

Originally Posted by plague311

It has nothing to do with a jury as the American public isn't the jury. The GOP has already made up their minds, there's no convincing anyone in the Senate. What isn't wanted is a bunch of lies thrown on social media, and the TV stations that are twisting what Biden said, did, or does.

They aren't pursuing impeachment, he's been impeached. They're pursuing removal from office. If you're going to play semantic, absurdly nonsensical games at least get the facts straight. Enough now, I'm done with this conversation with you. I refuse to chase the rabbit.

If they don't trust in their ability to make an argument persuasive enough to change people's minds, then they shouldn't be doing this.

plague311 · 22nd January 2020, 09:31 AM

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

I think since the outcome of this is already obvious giving Republicans more rope in the hope that this is the time they'll finally trip up and hang themselves is insane.

To be honest, we could have stopped here.

If you don't believe they can possibly handle this then why in the **** would we want them in power? I'm serious here. If that's how you feel, that the Dems are complete and total morons, then why would anyone want them to win? What possible ******* reason is there to put them in charge of anything more than a buffet? This is why your position has constantly baffled me.

"These guys are ******* morons. Lets stop doing this and hope that these complete dip ***** find a way to win in 2020!" Like, why? Why not leave Trump in office? He has to be a better choice than the people you've already said can't handle simple tasks. At least the economy is better.

BobTheCoward · 22nd January 2020, 09:34 AM

Originally Posted by plague311

To be honest, we could have stopped here.

If you don't believe they can possibly handle this then why in the **** would we want them in power? I'm serious here. If that's how you feel, that the Dems are complete and total morons, then why would anyone want them to win? What possible ******* reason is there to put them in charge of anything more than a buffet? This is why your position has constantly baffled me.

"These guys are ******* morons. Lets stop doing this and hope that these complete dip ***** find a way to win in 2020!" Like, why? Why not leave Trump in office? He has to be a better choice than the people you've already said can't handle simple tasks. At least the economy is better.

This is how I felt about Dems complaining about Russian advertisement. If you think so many people fell for that, what does it say about those voters and why do you want their votes?

JoeMorgue · 22nd January 2020, 09:37 AM

Originally Posted by plague311

To be honest, we could have stopped here.

If you don't believe they can possibly handle this then why in the **** would we want them in power? I'm serious here. If that's how you feel, that the Dems are complete and total morons, then why would anyone want them to win? What possible ******* reason is there to put them in charge of anything more than a buffet? This is why your position has constantly baffled me.

I don't. I'm not a Democrat, I'm realist. I don't want them in power but I live in the world I live in not an idealistic fantasy world in my own head.

They are the better of the two options by a huge margin but I'm not a fanboy for them.

My options are not "Supporting the BAD ORANGE MAN" or "OMG the Democrats are just the bestest."

I hate Trump and I am infinitely annoyed at how bad the Democrats are at handling him. This isn't a paradox.

This is how vile and toxic modern politics have gotten. I'm only given two options and then I'm treating like I'm either a hypocrite or some impossible to satisfy monster because I'm not totally in love with the... I despise the term "Lesser of Two Evils" because of how it conceptualizes it but something in that ballpark... that I have to settle for.

The Democrats have my vote in 2020. They do not have my slobbering adoration. This is not that hard of a concept.

BobTheCoward · 22nd January 2020, 09:43 AM

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

I don't. I'm not a Democrat, I'm realist. I don't want them in power but I live in the world I live in not an idealistic fantasy world in my own head.

Have you considered being an idealist?

plague311 · 22nd January 2020, 09:47 AM

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

I don't. I'm not a Democrat, I'm realist. I don't want them in power but I live in the world I live in not an idealistic fantasy world in my own head.

They are the better of the two options by a huge margin but I'm not a fanboy for them.

How are they the better of two options? In what ways are they better?

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

My options are not "Supporting the BAD ORANGE MAN" or "OMG the Democrats are just the bestest."

Yes, you say this with almost feverish repetition. No one here has implied you should support him, or that this false dichotomy are your only options. This is completely and entirely of your own construct. I certainly didn't imply it previously.

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

I hate Trump and I am infinitely annoyed at how bad the Democrats are at handling him. This isn't a paradox.

Yet, when you've been asked repeatedly what else they should do, the bulk of your answers are "I don't know, it's not my job to know". So, what should they be doing, in your opinion, that they aren't? Leave everything tied up in the courts? They're still chasing several avenues through the courts (his finances, and illegal donations). Just give a brief list of what the dems should be doing that they aren't.

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

This is how vile and toxic modern politics have gotten. I'm only given two options and then I'm treating like I'm either a hypocrite or some impossible to satisfy monster because I'm not totally in love with the... I despise the term "Lesser of Two Evils" because of how it conceptualizes it but something in that ballpark... that I have to settle for.

No, you're not only given two options. I asked why, if the Democrats are so completely useless in your opinion, you would want them in power? That's not giving you two options, that's asking a question. One you didn't answer. You just reverted back to your "bad man orange" nonsense. You then turn it into a false dichotomy and rail on it ad nauseum.

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

The Democrats have my vote in 2020. They do not have my slobbering adoration. This is not that hard of a concept.

A concept I completely understand, and haven't even argued with. Go on though, say "bad orange man" again. It'll be super effective this time.

ETA: The problem I see here is that the Dems have tried almost everything they can, they've been blocked by the most restrictive, least transparent administration in our brief history, and you seem to blame the Dems for it.

Paul2 · 22nd January 2020, 09:52 AM

Originally Posted by BobTheCoward

This is how I felt about Dems complaining about Russian advertisement. If you think so many people fell for that, what does it say about those voters and why do you want their votes?

Uh, to win an election? Counting up votes does not involve any judgment about the gullibility or lack thereof of the voter.

JoeMorgue · 22nd January 2020, 09:52 AM

I must say I'm rather lost as to what exactly I'm being accused or what exactly need to say to defend myself here.

Trump is not going to be convicted. Is there anyone really not agreeing with this?

Why does me saying it sound so different?

plague311 · 22nd January 2020, 09:59 AM

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

I must say I'm rather lost as to what exactly I'm being accused or what exactly need to say to defend myself here.

Trump is not going to be convicted. Is there anyone really not agreeing with this?

Why does me saying it sound so different?

I apologize, I'll try to be more clear.

I would like you to explain to me just a few things so we're clear.

What have the Democrats screwed up? Just a few examples is fine.
What would you have done differently?
If they Democrats are people that can't handle something like this, why would you want them in power to lead the entire nation? Seems counterproductive

Lets start there.

ETA: Did someone say Trump was going to be convicted? Lets take Trump being convicted out of this completely and entirely.

BobTheCoward · 22nd January 2020, 10:01 AM

Originally Posted by Paul2

Uh, to win an election? Counting up votes does not involve any judgment about the gullibility or lack thereof of the voter.

I don't know why one would want to win to represent gullible people.

theprestige · 22nd January 2020, 10:02 AM

Originally Posted by plague311

I apologize, I'll try to be more clear.

I would like you to explain to me just a few things so we're clear.

What have the Democrats screwed up? Just a few examples is fine.
What would you have done differently?
If they Democrats are people that can't handle something like this, why would you want them in power to lead the entire nation? Seems counterproductive

Lets start there.

ETA: Did someone say Trump was going to be convicted? Lets take Trump being convicted out of this completely and entirely.

Are you prepared for a lesser of two evils argument? Because you're about to get a lesser of two evils argument.

---

Personally, I think it's the right argument and a properly realistic approach.

Tero · 22nd January 2020, 10:02 AM

well, Trump is not going to be convicted
but even a 50/50 vote would be a great embarrassment
it was for Bill
he got 55/45 and 50/50 on the two charges

theprestige · 22nd January 2020, 10:03 AM

Originally Posted by BobTheCoward

I don't know why one would want to win to represent gullible people.

This is a profound failure of imagination.

plague311 · 22nd January 2020, 10:05 AM

Originally Posted by theprestige

Are you prepared for a lesser of two evils argument? Because you're about to get a lesser of two evils argument.

---

Personally, I think it's the right argument and a properly realistic approach.

Duly noted. Thanks.

So it really does boil down to nothing more than "Orange man bad"?

22nd January 2020, 04:45 AM	#2
ChristianProgressive Master Poster Join Date: Nov 2014 Posts: 2,828	Originally Posted by Norman Alexander No. Quite the opposite. They are TRYING, despite all the opposition from Trump, to give him a fair trial. That includes the opportunity to bring refutations, his evidence, his witnesses and even to step up and attempt to refute the accusations in person should he so wish. Is that not fair? But the people who are attempting to prevent this happening are NOT the Dems or the Senate. It's the GOP and specifically The Turtle, who has already proudly stated he is taking his marching orders from the White House, i.e. Donny himself. So Donny is bitching about a situation that he himself is creating. Nobody else. It's almost like he is trying to get sympathy for "Look what you made me do!" Bingo. GOP 101. Make a mess, then use the mess you made to argue that the system is broken and against you.
	__________________ "As it was in the days of Noah, so will it be at the coming of the Son of Man." - Matthew 24:37 "And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh." - Luke 21:28

22nd January 2020, 04:46 AM	#3
ChristianProgressive Master Poster Join Date: Nov 2014 Posts: 2,828	Originally Posted by alfaniner I get the distinct impression that some of the Republican Senators are hearing the details of this case for the first time. "Holy ***, he did that*? I'm going to have to think about this some more..." But they're still voting to support McConnell's whitewash.
	__________________ "As it was in the days of Noah, so will it be at the coming of the Son of Man." - Matthew 24:37 "And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh." - Luke 21:28

22nd January 2020, 06:11 AM	#4
alfaniner Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Sorth Dakonsin Posts: 24,891	Originally Posted by ChristianProgressive But they're still voting to support McConnell's whitewash. Yes, and I find that terribly disappointing. Not one Democratic Amendment was approved. But I think they're looking better onstage than the Republicans.
	__________________ Science is self-correcting. Woo is self-contradicting.

22nd January 2020, 06:41 AM	#7
JoeMorgue Self Employed Remittance Man Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Florida Posts: 30,693	Originally Posted by Belz... Again, why does Moscow Mitch have so much power if Republicans disagree with him? Or are they just paying lip service to the idea of a fair process? Gut feeling? Because "disagree" is not purely binary. Very few if any Senators are actually going to come down as against McConnell, but I think at least some (no I can't put anything resembling a X percent of Republican Senators kind of number to it) at least recognize that this could still go bad for them so are... softening their blows a little bit? We will get some token resistant from some Republicans, most probably never on any thing that actually matters, never in a way that's actually going to effect the final outcome.
	__________________ Yahtzee: "You're doing that thing again where when asked a question you just discuss the philosophy of the question instead of answering the bloody question." Gabriel: "Well yeah, you see..." Yahtzee: "No. When you are asked a Yes or No question the first word out of your mouth needs to be Yes or No. Only after that have you earned the right to elaborate."

22nd January 2020, 07:07 AM	#10
JoeMorgue Self Employed Remittance Man Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Florida Posts: 30,693	Bob wouldn't be problem if he would just start threads for all the basic human things he doesn't understand instead of demanding everyone explain to him that water is wet in the middle of every discussion about showering. But I notice when people like Bob can't use their amazing ability to not understand things to ruin discussion, they suddenly don't have nearly as much problem understanding things. As if they only can't understand things when they don't want a discussion to happen. Funny that. And I will continue to use "Bobbing" until such a time as the term is no longer necessary.
	__________________ Yahtzee: "You're doing that thing again where when asked a question you just discuss the philosophy of the question instead of answering the bloody question." Gabriel: "Well yeah, you see..." Yahtzee: "No. When you are asked a Yes or No question the first word out of your mouth needs to be Yes or No. Only after that have you earned the right to elaborate." Last edited by JoeMorgue; 22nd January 2020 at 07:08 AM.

22nd January 2020, 06:24 AM	#5
Fast Eddie B Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Lenoir City, TN/Mineral Bluff, GA Posts: 6,746	Regarding “Being Bobbed”... I appreciate a well-rounded and appropriate “Argumentum ad Adsurdum.” They have their time and place to show the possible implications of a flawed position. I’ve used them myself when appropriate. But they should be used as a scalpel, not a bludgeon. Absurdity for the sake of absurdity accomplishes little, which is what I think we see in Bob’s case.

22nd January 2020, 06:36 AM	#6
TofuFighter Master Poster Join Date: Aug 2012 Posts: 2,566	It's off-topic, but i've never liked the accusation being made about a thread being 'bobbed'. it's personal by definition. my view is that BTC's arguments are sometimes confusing because we make assumptions about his base logic that are wrong. He is always civil and that counts for far more, in my view, than anything else. I've felt frustrated in arguments with him, only to realise that it was my own misunderstanding that caused it. [/o-t]

22nd January 2020, 06:43 AM	#8
BobTheCoward Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 20,256	Originally Posted by Fast Eddie B Regarding “Being Bobbed”... I appreciate a well-rounded and appropriate “Argumentum ad Adsurdum.” They have their time and place to show the possible implications of a flawed position. I’ve used them myself when appropriate. But they should be used as a scalpel, not a bludgeon. Absurdity for the sake of absurdity accomplishes little, which is what I think we see in Bob’s case. Umm,I'm not making argumentum as absurdum. I'm staring my positions. But my conclusions are normally the ends themselves, and not means to an end. So,y positions result in what you would regard as absurd outcomes that I'm indifferent to.

22nd January 2020, 06:56 AM	#9
Fast Eddie B Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Lenoir City, TN/Mineral Bluff, GA Posts: 6,746	Originally Posted by TofuFighter It's off-topic, but i've never liked the accusation being made about a thread being 'bobbed'. it's personal by definition. my view is that BTC's arguments are sometimes confusing because we make assumptions about his base logic that are wrong. He is always civil and that counts for far more, in my view, than anything else. I've felt frustrated in arguments with him, only to realise that it was my own misunderstanding that caused it. [/o-t] You are right, of course, and thank you for pointing that out. However, we have to pull back and ask if his input actually moves a discussion forward or tends to drag it off on a tangent. I don’t think it’s necessarily intentional or inspired by suspect motives, but the end result is the same.

22nd January 2020, 07:09 AM	#12
TragicMonkey Poisoned Waffles Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Monkey Posts: 59,514	Deleted
	__________________ You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara.

22nd January 2020, 08:21 AM	#13
Squeegee Beckenheim Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Dec 2010 Posts: 31,254	https://twitter.com/justinhendrix/st...120644103?s=20 Quote: In an incredible exchange at Davos, @realdonaldtrump admits he is comfortable with the status of the impeachment trial because the White House is withholding evidence. "Honestly, we have all the material. They don't have the material." As always, he says the quiet part out loud. Video embedded in tweet. I do have to grudgingly give Trump one thing, though - "Shifty Shiff" is a good nickname. Trips off the tongue. I wonder if he came up with it himself?
	__________________ I don't trust atoms. They make up everything.

22nd January 2020, 08:24 AM	#14
carlitos "más divertido" Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: USA! USA! Posts: 22,786	An intriguing theory I heard on Michael Smerconish's show - If Republicans "trade" witnesses, like allowing Bolton in trade for allowing Hunter Biden, it could be a net win for Democrats, because Hunter Biden could be a great witness. I'm skeptical about this affecting the general public because of the crap TV quality, but could it sway 4 senate votes? You never know.

22nd January 2020, 08:27 AM	#16
JoeMorgue Self Employed Remittance Man Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Florida Posts: 30,693	Originally Posted by carlitos An intriguing theory I heard on Michael Smerconish's show - If Republicans "trade" witnesses, like allowing Bolton in trade for allowing Hunter Biden, it could be a net win for Democrats, because Hunter Biden could be a great witness. I'm skeptical about this affecting the general public because of the crap TV quality, but could it sway 4 senate votes? You never know. No bad idea. The Republicans already want to turn this into the Hunter Biden Impeachment. Officially involving him in it in basically does just that. It's buying into their "Well what Trump did was okay because he thought Biden was dirty" argument which they could probably do. Don't put them into a scenario where they can sell the narrative that Trump didn't do anything wrong if they can get Hunter Biden on the stand and get a soundbite that can sound a little guilty of something if you stand on your head, close one eye, and squint at it. Even if Hunter Biden was building an army of cloned mecha-Hitlers in the Ukraine to march on the United States, Trump was not in the right for what he did.
	__________________ Yahtzee: "You're doing that thing again where when asked a question you just discuss the philosophy of the question instead of answering the bloody question." Gabriel: "Well yeah, you see..." Yahtzee: "No. When you are asked a Yes or No question the first word out of your mouth needs to be Yes or No. Only after that have you earned the right to elaborate." Last edited by JoeMorgue; 22nd January 2020 at 08:29 AM.

22nd January 2020, 08:30 AM	#17
Squeegee Beckenheim Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Dec 2010 Posts: 31,254	Documents may show Schiff mischaracterised a text exchange in the Parnas documents
	__________________ I don't trust atoms. They make up everything.

22nd January 2020, 08:37 AM	#18
Squeegee Beckenheim Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Dec 2010 Posts: 31,254	https://twitter.com/spdustin/status/1219879255624114177 Quote: GOP voted down: • Evidence from the White House, State Dept., OMB, and DoD • Testimony from Mulvaney, Duffey, and Bolton • Anti-cherry-picking evidence rule • Guaranteed votes on witnesses • 24 (rather than 2) hours to respond to motions • CJ Roberts witness approval power
	__________________ I don't trust atoms. They make up everything.

22nd January 2020, 08:48 AM	#19
plague311 Great minds think... Join Date: Dec 2011 Location: North Dakota Posts: 8,478	Originally Posted by JoeMorgue No bad idea. The Republicans already want to turn this into the Hunter Biden Impeachment. Officially involving him in it in basically does just that. It's buying into their "Well what Trump did was okay because he thought Biden was dirty" argument which they could probably do. Don't put them into a scenario where they can sell the narrative that Trump didn't do anything wrong if they can get Hunter Biden on the stand and get a soundbite that can sound a little guilty of something if you stand on your head, close one eye, and squint at it. Even if Hunter Biden was building an army of cloned mecha-Hitlers in the Ukraine to march on the United States, Trump was not in the right for what he did. The questioning process is different in the Senate than in the House, isn't it? Legit question, I'm not sure. In the House they just got to scream at the witness repeatedly, I don't think they get to do that in the Senate, do they? Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim Documents may show Schiff mischaracterised a text exchange in the Parnas documents The part that sucks is people will actually look at that as if it's a big deal instead of a fairly minuscule oversight that doesn't actually make any difference in the grand scheme.
	__________________ "Circumcision and death threats go together like milk and cookies." - William Parcher “There are times when the mind is dealt such a blow it hides itself in insanity. While this may not seem beneficial, it is. There are times when reality is nothing but pain, and to escape that pain the mind must leave reality behind.” - Patrick Rothfuss

22nd January 2020, 08:52 AM	#20
JoeMorgue Self Employed Remittance Man Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Florida Posts: 30,693	Originally Posted by plague311 The questioning process is different in the Senate than in the House, isn't it? Legit question, I'm not sure. In the House they just got to scream at the witness repeatedly, I don't think they get to do that in the Senate, do they? I think the Senate Republicans will be given enough leeway (or just take it and dare someone to stop them which amounts to the same thing) to, if Hunter Biden is called to testify, throw enough "When did you stop beating your wife" style questions at him to get a soundbite they can use to drive home their "See? See? Trump was in the right to investigate Biden, therefore this whole thing is a sham/nothingburger" narrative better then... whatever the Democratic narrative would be. Again nothing Hunter Biden did matters, so putting him on the stand can't possibly make the narrative clearer.
	__________________ Yahtzee: "You're doing that thing again where when asked a question you just discuss the philosophy of the question instead of answering the bloody question." Gabriel: "Well yeah, you see..." Yahtzee: "No. When you are asked a Yes or No question the first word out of your mouth needs to be Yes or No. Only after that have you earned the right to elaborate."

22nd January 2020, 09:01 AM	#21
BobTheCoward Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 20,256	Originally Posted by JoeMorgue I think the Senate Republicans will be given enough leeway (or just take it and dare someone to stop them which amounts to the same thing) to, if Hunter Biden is called to testify, throw enough "When did you stop beating your wife" style questions at him to get a soundbite they can use to drive home their "See? See? Trump was in the right to investigate Biden, therefore this whole thing is a sham/nothingburger" narrative better then... whatever the Democratic narrative would be. Again nothing Hunter Biden did matters, so putting him on the stand can't possibly make the narrative clearer. If nothing hunter did matters, then the democrats should put him up and demonstrate that.

22nd January 2020, 09:05 AM	#22
plague311 Great minds think... Join Date: Dec 2011 Location: North Dakota Posts: 8,478	Originally Posted by JoeMorgue I think the Senate Republicans will be given enough leeway (or just take it and dare someone to stop them which amounts to the same thing) to, if Hunter Biden is called to testify, throw enough "When did you stop beating your wife" style questions at him to get a soundbite they can use to drive home their "See? See? Trump was in the right to investigate Biden, therefore this whole thing is a sham/nothingburger" narrative better then... whatever the Democratic narrative would be. Again nothing Hunter Biden did matters, so putting him on the stand can't possibly make the narrative clearer. The Democrats would get Bolton (according to rumor). Do you think Bolton has something that would be more damaging to Trump than whatever the GOP can distort Biden into saying to be used against the Dems? I have no doubts that the GOP and the conservative media will find a way to spin Biden saying, "Good Morning" into a threat against God fearing, blue collar men and women. That's standard. What I don't doubt is that Bolton has something up his sleeve that he is dying to say. I want to know what it is.
	__________________ "Circumcision and death threats go together like milk and cookies." - William Parcher “There are times when the mind is dealt such a blow it hides itself in insanity. While this may not seem beneficial, it is. There are times when reality is nothing but pain, and to escape that pain the mind must leave reality behind.” - Patrick Rothfuss

22nd January 2020, 09:06 AM	#23
plague311 Great minds think... Join Date: Dec 2011 Location: North Dakota Posts: 8,478	Originally Posted by BobTheCoward If nothing hunter did matters, then the democrats should put him up and demonstrate that. Pay attention Bob. He said that they'll spin what he says, not that Biden did anything wrong. Try to keep it straight.
	__________________ "Circumcision and death threats go together like milk and cookies." - William Parcher “There are times when the mind is dealt such a blow it hides itself in insanity. While this may not seem beneficial, it is. There are times when reality is nothing but pain, and to escape that pain the mind must leave reality behind.” - Patrick Rothfuss

22nd January 2020, 09:08 AM	#24
BobTheCoward Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 20,256	Originally Posted by plague311 Pay attention Bob. He said that they'll spin what he says, not that Biden did anything wrong. Try to keep it straight. If you don't believe in your ability convince the jury that your position is correct, then you shouldn't be pursuing impeachment.

22nd January 2020, 09:11 AM	#25
plague311 Great minds think... Join Date: Dec 2011 Location: North Dakota Posts: 8,478	Originally Posted by BobTheCoward If you don't believe in your ability convince the jury that your position is correct, then you shouldn't be pursuing impeachment. It has nothing to do with a jury as the American public isn't the jury. The GOP has already made up their minds, there's no convincing anyone in the Senate. What isn't wanted is a bunch of lies thrown on social media, and the TV stations that are twisting what Biden said, did, or does. They aren't pursuing impeachment, he's been impeached. They're pursuing removal from office. If you're going to play semantic, absurdly nonsensical games at least get the facts straight. Enough now, I'm done with this conversation with you. I refuse to chase the rabbit.
	__________________ "Circumcision and death threats go together like milk and cookies." - William Parcher “There are times when the mind is dealt such a blow it hides itself in insanity. While this may not seem beneficial, it is. There are times when reality is nothing but pain, and to escape that pain the mind must leave reality behind.” - Patrick Rothfuss

22nd January 2020, 09:14 AM	#26
JoeMorgue Self Employed Remittance Man Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Florida Posts: 30,693	Originally Posted by plague311 The Democrats would get Bolton (according to rumor). Do you think Bolton has something that would be more damaging to Trump than whatever the GOP can distort Biden into saying to be used against the Dems? I think since the outcome of this is already obvious giving Republicans more rope in the hope that this is the time they'll finally trip up and hang themselves is insane. Long story short I have a lot more faith in the Republican's ability to pull some dirt on Biden out of whatever thin air they can they I do in the Democrat's ability to get Bolton on the stand and play out the "Did you order the Code Red?" scene in a few good men. Even without Biden involved at all I don't want the Democrats to get Bolton on the stand. They'll find a way to mess that up. Not to be my grumpy self again, but the Democrats haven't wowed me yet with their ability to take advantage of opportunities, they always backfire. So I'm not giving them anymore. I'm not buying any of their "Just give us a chance and we'll swoop in and save the day" requests anymore. Run out the clock until the Republicans decided they've played with the Democrats enough and declare Trump innocent, the victim of a witch hunt, and dashingly handsome and get back to trying to win in 2020.
	__________________ Yahtzee: "You're doing that thing again where when asked a question you just discuss the philosophy of the question instead of answering the bloody question." Gabriel: "Well yeah, you see..." Yahtzee: "No. When you are asked a Yes or No question the first word out of your mouth needs to be Yes or No. Only after that have you earned the right to elaborate." Last edited by JoeMorgue; 22nd January 2020 at 09:18 AM.

22nd January 2020, 09:14 AM	#27
BobTheCoward Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 20,256	Originally Posted by plague311 It has nothing to do with a jury as the American public isn't the jury. The GOP has already made up their minds, there's no convincing anyone in the Senate. What isn't wanted is a bunch of lies thrown on social media, and the TV stations that are twisting what Biden said, did, or does. They aren't pursuing impeachment, he's been impeached. They're pursuing removal from office. If you're going to play semantic, absurdly nonsensical games at least get the facts straight. Enough now, I'm done with this conversation with you. I refuse to chase the rabbit. If they don't trust in their ability to make an argument persuasive enough to change people's minds, then they shouldn't be doing this.

22nd January 2020, 09:31 AM	#28
plague311 Great minds think... Join Date: Dec 2011 Location: North Dakota Posts: 8,478	Originally Posted by JoeMorgue I think since the outcome of this is already obvious giving Republicans more rope in the hope that this is the time they'll finally trip up and hang themselves is insane. To be honest, we could have stopped here. If you don't believe they can possibly handle this then why in the ** would we want them in power? I'm serious here. If that's how you feel, that the Dems are complete and total morons, then why would anyone want them to win? What possible *** reason is there to put them in charge of anything more than a buffet? This is why your position has constantly baffled me. "These guys are *** morons. Lets stop doing this and hope that these complete dip *** find a way to win in 2020!" Like, why? Why not leave Trump in office? He has to be a better choice than the people you've already said can't handle simple tasks. At least the economy is better.
	__________________ "Circumcision and death threats go together like milk and cookies." - William Parcher “There are times when the mind is dealt such a blow it hides itself in insanity. While this may not seem beneficial, it is. There are times when reality is nothing but pain, and to escape that pain the mind must leave reality behind.” - Patrick Rothfuss

22nd January 2020, 09:34 AM	#29
BobTheCoward Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 20,256	Originally Posted by plague311 To be honest, we could have stopped here. If you don't believe they can possibly handle this then why in the ** would we want them in power? I'm serious here. If that's how you feel, that the Dems are complete and total morons, then why would anyone want them to win? What possible *** reason is there to put them in charge of anything more than a buffet? This is why your position has constantly baffled me. "These guys are *** morons. Lets stop doing this and hope that these complete dip *** find a way to win in 2020!" Like, why? Why not leave Trump in office? He has to be a better choice than the people you've already said can't handle simple tasks. At least the economy is better. This is how I felt about Dems complaining about Russian advertisement. If you think so many people fell for that, what does it say about those voters and why do you want their votes?

22nd January 2020, 09:37 AM	#30
JoeMorgue Self Employed Remittance Man Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Florida Posts: 30,693	Originally Posted by plague311 To be honest, we could have stopped here. If you don't believe they can possibly handle this then why in the ** would we want them in power? I'm serious here. If that's how you feel, that the Dems are complete and total morons, then why would anyone want them to win? What possible ***** reason is there to put them in charge of anything more than a buffet? This is why your position has constantly baffled me. I don't. I'm not a Democrat, I'm realist. I don't want them in power but I live in the world I live in not an idealistic fantasy world in my own head. They are the better of the two options by a huge margin but I'm not a fanboy for them. My options are not "Supporting the BAD ORANGE MAN" or "OMG the Democrats are just the bestest." I hate Trump and I am infinitely annoyed at how bad the Democrats are at handling him. This isn't a paradox. This is how vile and toxic modern politics have gotten. I'm only given two options and then I'm treating like I'm either a hypocrite or some impossible to satisfy monster because I'm not totally in love with the... I despise the term "Lesser of Two Evils" because of how it conceptualizes it but something in that ballpark... that I have to settle for. The Democrats have my vote in 2020. They do not have my slobbering adoration. This is not that hard of a concept.
	__________________ Yahtzee: "You're doing that thing again where when asked a question you just discuss the philosophy of the question instead of answering the bloody question." Gabriel: "Well yeah, you see..." Yahtzee: "No. When you are asked a Yes or No question the first word out of your mouth needs to be Yes or No. Only after that have you earned the right to elaborate."

22nd January 2020, 09:43 AM	#31
BobTheCoward Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 20,256	Originally Posted by JoeMorgue I don't. I'm not a Democrat, I'm realist. I don't want them in power but I live in the world I live in not an idealistic fantasy world in my own head. Have you considered being an idealist?

22nd January 2020, 09:47 AM	#32
plague311 Great minds think... Join Date: Dec 2011 Location: North Dakota Posts: 8,478	Originally Posted by JoeMorgue I don't. I'm not a Democrat, I'm realist. I don't want them in power but I live in the world I live in not an idealistic fantasy world in my own head. They are the better of the two options by a huge margin but I'm not a fanboy for them. How are they the better of two options? In what ways are they better? Originally Posted by JoeMorgue My options are not "Supporting the BAD ORANGE MAN" or "OMG the Democrats are just the bestest." Yes, you say this with almost feverish repetition. No one here has implied you should support him, or that this false dichotomy are your only options. This is completely and entirely of your own construct. I certainly didn't imply it previously. Originally Posted by JoeMorgue I hate Trump and I am infinitely annoyed at how bad the Democrats are at handling him. This isn't a paradox. Yet, when you've been asked repeatedly what else they should do, the bulk of your answers are "I don't know, it's not my job to know". So, what should they be doing, in your opinion, that they aren't? Leave everything tied up in the courts? They're still chasing several avenues through the courts (his finances, and illegal donations). Just give a brief list of what the dems should be doing that they aren't. Originally Posted by JoeMorgue This is how vile and toxic modern politics have gotten. I'm only given two options and then I'm treating like I'm either a hypocrite or some impossible to satisfy monster because I'm not totally in love with the... I despise the term "Lesser of Two Evils" because of how it conceptualizes it but something in that ballpark... that I have to settle for. No, you're not only given two options. I asked why, if the Democrats are so completely useless in your opinion, you would want them in power? That's not giving you two options, that's asking a question. One you didn't answer. You just reverted back to your "bad man orange" nonsense. You then turn it into a false dichotomy and rail on it ad nauseum. Originally Posted by JoeMorgue The Democrats have my vote in 2020. They do not have my slobbering adoration. This is not that hard of a concept. A concept I completely understand, and haven't even argued with. Go on though, say "bad orange man" again. It'll be super effective this time. ETA: The problem I see here is that the Dems have tried almost everything they can, they've been blocked by the most restrictive, least transparent administration in our brief history, and you seem to blame the Dems for it.
	__________________ "Circumcision and death threats go together like milk and cookies." - William Parcher “There are times when the mind is dealt such a blow it hides itself in insanity. While this may not seem beneficial, it is. There are times when reality is nothing but pain, and to escape that pain the mind must leave reality behind.” - Patrick Rothfuss Last edited by plague311; 22nd January 2020 at 09:50 AM.

22nd January 2020, 09:52 AM	#33
Paul2 Philosopher Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 6,592	Originally Posted by BobTheCoward This is how I felt about Dems complaining about Russian advertisement. If you think so many people fell for that, what does it say about those voters and why do you want their votes? Uh, to win an election? Counting up votes does not involve any judgment about the gullibility or lack thereof of the voter.
Paul2 Philosopher Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 6,592	__________________ It's nice to be nice to the nice. Aristotle, so far as I know, was the first man to proclaim explicitly that man is a rational animal. His reason for this view was one which does not now seem very impressive: it was, that some people can do sums. - Bertrand Russell

22nd January 2020, 09:59 AM	#35
plague311 Great minds think... Join Date: Dec 2011 Location: North Dakota Posts: 8,478	Originally Posted by JoeMorgue I must say I'm rather lost as to what exactly I'm being accused or what exactly need to say to defend myself here. Trump is not going to be convicted. Is there anyone really not agreeing with this? Why does me saying it sound so different? I apologize, I'll try to be more clear. I would like you to explain to me just a few things so we're clear. What have the Democrats screwed up? Just a few examples is fine. What would you have done differently? If they Democrats are people that can't handle something like this, why would you want them in power to lead the entire nation? Seems counterproductive Lets start there. ETA: Did someone say Trump was going to be convicted? Lets take Trump being convicted out of this completely and entirely.
	__________________ "Circumcision and death threats go together like milk and cookies." - William Parcher “There are times when the mind is dealt such a blow it hides itself in insanity. While this may not seem beneficial, it is. There are times when reality is nothing but pain, and to escape that pain the mind must leave reality behind.” - Patrick Rothfuss Last edited by plague311; 22nd January 2020 at 10:00 AM.

22nd January 2020, 10:01 AM	#36
BobTheCoward Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 20,256	Originally Posted by Paul2 Uh, to win an election? Counting up votes does not involve any judgment about the gullibility or lack thereof of the voter. I don't know why one would want to win to represent gullible people.

22nd January 2020, 10:02 AM	#37
theprestige Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Hong Kong Posts: 49,675	Originally Posted by plague311 I apologize, I'll try to be more clear. I would like you to explain to me just a few things so we're clear. What have the Democrats screwed up? Just a few examples is fine. What would you have done differently? If they Democrats are people that can't handle something like this, why would you want them in power to lead the entire nation? Seems counterproductive Lets start there. ETA: Did someone say Trump was going to be convicted? Lets take Trump being convicted out of this completely and entirely. Are you prepared for a lesser of two evils argument? Because you're about to get a lesser of two evils argument. --- Personally, I think it's the right argument and a properly realistic approach.

22nd January 2020, 10:02 AM	#38
Tero Master Poster Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: North American prairie Posts: 2,202	well, Trump is not going to be convicted but even a 50/50 vote would be a great embarrassment it was for Bill he got 55/45 and 50/50 on the two charges
	__________________ I've deleted the one blog link. You can find the humor blog by searching "the kari report blogspot." Politics blog: https://esapolitics.blogspot.com/

22nd January 2020, 10:03 AM	#39
theprestige Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Hong Kong Posts: 49,675	Originally Posted by BobTheCoward I don't know why one would want to win to represent gullible people. This is a profound failure of imagination.