Comey, What an Asshat
-
There’s no moving goalposts dimwit. The issue is your refusal to come to terms with the fact that the left is far more prone to violence.
Did I not already recognize the fact you came upon a Republican using the term 86?
I believe I did.
Sure, I’ll agree to condemn the right for doing the same thing in the past.
Now will you finally agree that the left has a greater propensity for violence as demonstrated by the examples I listed?No more deflecting.
It’s an easy enough concept to prove. All you need are all the names of violent crime offenders and their respective political affiliations. It’ll take some sorting.
Aside from that, all there really is are opinion pieces and anecdotal instances to prove that the left has a greater propensity for violence than the right. You could be correct, but l don’t think anyone here has the time or gumption to unequivocally prove that.
This is akin to the “all righties are racists” argument because some republican made a questionable comment. Maybe righties do have a greater propensity to be racists? But how the heck to you unequivocally prove that? You really can’t without an unreasonable amount of research.
It’s an easy enough concept to prove. All you need are all the names of violent crime offenders and their respective political affiliations. It’ll take some sorting.
Aside from that, all there really is are opinion pieces and anecdotal instances to prove that the left has a greater propensity for violence than the right. You could be correct, but l don’t think anyone here has the time or gumption to unequivocally prove that.
This is akin to the “all righties are racists” argument because some republican made a questionable comment. Maybe righties do have a greater propensity to be racists? But how the heck to you unequivocally prove that? You really can’t without an unreasonable amount of research.
You also get into the area where we don't agree on who is left or right, and we don't agree on what is considered violence
Again, a large portion of this board thinks Jan 6th didn't happen, or it wasn't actually that bad, or it was an inside job / false flag, etc.
If we can't agree on basic reality anymore then what is the point of trying to debate anything?
Ja.brill Peppers - Cleveland Brown OldBrownsFan, on 02 Jun 2017 - 5:09PM said: "No you are not the work of the devil but you are deceived by the devil." Who's got it better than us? Nooooobody! -
It’s an easy enough concept to prove. All you need are all the names of violent crime offenders and their respective political affiliations. It’ll take some sorting.
Aside from that, all there really is are opinion pieces and anecdotal instances to prove that the left has a greater propensity for violence than the right. You could be correct, but l don’t think anyone here has the time or gumption to unequivocally prove that.
This is akin to the “all righties are racists” argument because some republican made a questionable comment. Maybe righties do have a greater propensity to be racists? But how the heck to you unequivocally prove that? You really can’t without an unreasonable amount of research.
You also get into the area where we don't agree on who is left or right, and we don't agree on what is considered violence
Again, a large portion of this board thinks Jan 6th didn't happen, or it wasn't actually that bad, or it was an inside job / false flag, etc.
If we can't agree on basic reality anymore then what is the point of trying to debate anything?
*FART* PECK PECK PECK
you don't agree about what violence is? You won't say Laken Riley's name, or any other name who has been raped and murdered etc ?
But you think a Grandma in a wheelchair PRAYING outside of an abortion clinic is violence?
The point of debate is to discuss things intelligently, but you nave never done it.
Will it never end?
-
86 is code for getting rid of or removing…its also can mean assassinating or killing.
In the example you gave of Gaetz, 86’d clearly meant mission accomplished over the removal of McConnell and two others.
I looked it up and found 8646 was also used, calling for the impeachment of Biden. There is no debating its intent.
So now we have 8647. By what means do you suppose they take another shot at removing Trump? (pun intended). To impeach yet again???
So when the Reps, multiple Reps, use it, it means remove or impeach
But when Comey, a former Rep, uses it, then it totally definitely means assassinate?
You're gonna strain something pearl clutching
So when the Reps, multiple Reps, use it, it means remove or impeach
But when Comey, a former Rep, uses it, then it totally definitely means assassinate?
You're gonna strain something pearl clutching
Funny he denied knowing what it even meant. That tells me his thoughts.
-
It’s an easy enough concept to prove. All you need are all the names of violent crime offenders and their respective political affiliations. It’ll take some sorting.
Aside from that, all there really is are opinion pieces and anecdotal instances to prove that the left has a greater propensity for violence than the right. You could be correct, but l don’t think anyone here has the time or gumption to unequivocally prove that.
This is akin to the “all righties are racists” argument because some republican made a questionable comment. Maybe righties do have a greater propensity to be racists? But how the heck to you unequivocally prove that? You really can’t without an unreasonable amount of research.
You also get into the area where we don't agree on who is left or right, and we don't agree on what is considered violence
Again, a large portion of this board thinks Jan 6th didn't happen, or it wasn't actually that bad, or it was an inside job / false flag, etc.
If we can't agree on basic reality anymore then what is the point of trying to debate anything?
Again, a large portion of this board thinks Jan 6th didn't happen, or it wasn't actually that bad, or it was an inside job / false flag, etc.
What's your reality, they were mostly peaceful protests? That 6 feet of separation and masks saved lives? Biden was fine all up until his last debate with Trump?
That men are women and can have babies? Russia collusion is why Trump won the 1st election? Hunters laptop was compromised or didn't exist? It was a staffers cocaine in the WH?
Funny for someone in your reality to criticize anything.
-
It’s an easy enough concept to prove. All you need are all the names of violent crime offenders and their respective political affiliations. It’ll take some sorting.
Aside from that, all there really is are opinion pieces and anecdotal instances to prove that the left has a greater propensity for violence than the right. You could be correct, but l don’t think anyone here has the time or gumption to unequivocally prove that.
This is akin to the “all righties are racists” argument because some republican made a questionable comment. Maybe righties do have a greater propensity to be racists? But how the heck to you unequivocally prove that? You really can’t without an unreasonable amount of research.
How much more evidence do you need that the left are violent race baiting ,gaslighting commies?...
Wake up lol..
How much more evidence do you need that the left are violent race baiting ,gaslighting commies?...
Wake up lol..
I just told you, it will take statistics. If the hypothesis is “lefties are more prone to violence than righties”, then you do what any reasonable person would do if the goal is to prove that. You use statistics.
Get the names of all violent offenders over a specific period of time in a specific region. Then figure out their political affiliation, and boom, now you have statistics.
It’s basically an impossible task, which means this is an impossible argument.
-
How much more evidence do you need that the left are violent race baiting ,gaslighting commies?...
Wake up lol..
I just told you, it will take statistics. If the hypothesis is “lefties are more prone to violence than righties”, then you do what any reasonable person would do if the goal is to prove that. You use statistics.
Get the names of all violent offenders over a specific period of time in a specific region. Then figure out their political affiliation, and boom, now you have statistics.
It’s basically an impossible task, which means this is an impossible argument.
I just told you, it will take statistics. If the hypothesis is “lefties are more prone to violence than righties”, then you do what any reasonable person would do if the goal is to prove that. You use statistics.
Get the names of all violent offenders over a specific period of time in a specific region. Then figure out their political affiliation, and boom, now you have statistics.
It’s basically an impossible task, which means this is an impossible argument.
This group will also take ten news stories about illegal immigrant violence and extrapolate it over millions of people
Definitely nothing else influencing their decision....
-
I just told you, it will take statistics. If the hypothesis is “lefties are more prone to violence than righties”, then you do what any reasonable person would do if the goal is to prove that. You use statistics.
Get the names of all violent offenders over a specific period of time in a specific region. Then figure out their political affiliation, and boom, now you have statistics.
It’s basically an impossible task, which means this is an impossible argument.
This group will also take ten news stories about illegal immigrant violence and extrapolate it over millions of people
Definitely nothing else influencing their decision....
*LIE* *FART* peck peck
baloney. Say Laken Riley's name. Or continue to be an ostrich woodpecker.
-
*FART* PECK PECK PECK
you don't agree about what violence is? You won't say Laken Riley's name, or any other name who has been raped and murdered etc ?
But you think a Grandma in a wheelchair PRAYING outside of an abortion clinic is violence?
The point of debate is to discuss things intelligently, but you nave never done it.
Will it never end?
But you think a Grandma in a wheelchair PRAYING outside of an abortion clinic is violence?
The point of debate is to discuss things intelligently
You’re spot on there Calf, discuss things intelligently.
I don’t recall anyone claiming a woman in a wheelchair praying was a violent act. Please link that for me so that l can make fun of them as well. That’s a ridiculous thing to say.
-
It’s an easy enough concept to prove. All you need are all the names of violent crime offenders and their respective political affiliations. It’ll take some sorting.
Aside from that, all there really is are opinion pieces and anecdotal instances to prove that the left has a greater propensity for violence than the right. You could be correct, but l don’t think anyone here has the time or gumption to unequivocally prove that.
This is akin to the “all righties are racists” argument because some republican made a questionable comment. Maybe righties do have a greater propensity to be racists? But how the heck to you unequivocally prove that? You really can’t without an unreasonable amount of research.
You also get into the area where we don't agree on who is left or right, and we don't agree on what is considered violence
Again, a large portion of this board thinks Jan 6th didn't happen, or it wasn't actually that bad, or it was an inside job / false flag, etc.
If we can't agree on basic reality anymore then what is the point of trying to debate anything?
and we don't agree on what is considered violence
woodpecker refuses to say Laken Riley's name.....
-
and we don't agree on what is considered violence
woodpecker refuses to say Laken Riley's name.....
-
@calfoxwc said:
woodpecker refuses to say Laken Riley's name.....
Well ok then, you made that bit up about the praying grandma. No worries, not out of character.
At least you’re actually quoting Woody instead of inserting goofy peck/fart things. Thanks for discussing things intelligently.
-
-
It’s an easy enough concept to prove. All you need are all the names of violent crime offenders and their respective political affiliations. It’ll take some sorting.
Aside from that, all there really is are opinion pieces and anecdotal instances to prove that the left has a greater propensity for violence than the right. You could be correct, but l don’t think anyone here has the time or gumption to unequivocally prove that.
This is akin to the “all righties are racists” argument because some republican made a questionable comment. Maybe righties do have a greater propensity to be racists? But how the heck to you unequivocally prove that? You really can’t without an unreasonable amount of research.
You also get into the area where we don't agree on who is left or right, and we don't agree on what is considered violence
Again, a large portion of this board thinks Jan 6th didn't happen, or it wasn't actually that bad, or it was an inside job / false flag, etc.
If we can't agree on basic reality anymore then what is the point of trying to debate anything?
and we don't agree on what is considered violence
Again, a large portion of this board thinks Jan 6th didn't happen, or it wasn't actually that bad
woodpecker refuses to say Laken Riley's name.....
-
Welcome to the circus @ibleedbrown
-
I buy my underwear at K-Mart
I buy my underwear at K-Mart
You as well, thanks for discussing things intelligently.
-
How much more evidence do you need that the left are violent race baiting ,gaslighting commies?...
Wake up lol..
I just told you, it will take statistics. If the hypothesis is “lefties are more prone to violence than righties”, then you do what any reasonable person would do if the goal is to prove that. You use statistics.
Get the names of all violent offenders over a specific period of time in a specific region. Then figure out their political affiliation, and boom, now you have statistics.
It’s basically an impossible task, which means this is an impossible argument.
I just told you, it will take statistics. If the hypothesis is “lefties are more prone to violence than righties”, then you do what any reasonable person would do if the goal is to prove that. You use statistics.
Get the names of all violent offenders over a specific period of time in a specific region. Then figure out their political affiliation, and boom, now you have statistics.
It’s basically an impossible task, which means this is an impossible argument.
lol Statistics?
We don’t have to show you any stinkin statistics.That’s a cop out. You know it is.
The evidence is glaring.
I’ve presented many examples. It’s your job to prove otherwise. Google is a great place to start.
Violence, wishing or implying death from the left goes way back..
A quote from Demonrat Representative Tim Horrigan…
In a thread relating to the plane crash that killed former Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens this week, Halloran wrote, "Just wish Sarah and Levy were on board." The comment appeared to be in reference to Palin and the father of her grandson, Levi Johnston.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/new-hampshire-lawmaker-resigns-after-dead-palin-comment/
You’re not aware of the recent storming of an ICE office by democrat “lawmakers” (sort of an oxymoron eh?), or perhaps an example of irony …then having the gall to proclaim it was justified ? That is a testament of them being inherently prone to violence.
Like the liberal thug on the street, they believe that they are entitled to it.Now all you have to is provide evidence that a group of Republicans behaved in that manner because of something they didn’t like.
-
I just told you, it will take statistics. If the hypothesis is “lefties are more prone to violence than righties”, then you do what any reasonable person would do if the goal is to prove that. You use statistics.
Get the names of all violent offenders over a specific period of time in a specific region. Then figure out their political affiliation, and boom, now you have statistics.
It’s basically an impossible task, which means this is an impossible argument.
lol Statistics?
We don’t have to show you any stinkin statistics.That’s a cop out. You know it is.
The evidence is glaring.
I’ve presented many examples. It’s your job to prove otherwise. Google is a great place to start.
Violence, wishing or implying death from the left goes way back..
A quote from Demonrat Representative Tim Horrigan…
In a thread relating to the plane crash that killed former Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens this week, Halloran wrote, "Just wish Sarah and Levy were on board." The comment appeared to be in reference to Palin and the father of her grandson, Levi Johnston.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/new-hampshire-lawmaker-resigns-after-dead-palin-comment/
You’re not aware of the recent storming of an ICE office by democrat “lawmakers” (sort of an oxymoron eh?), or perhaps an example of irony …then having the gall to proclaim it was justified ? That is a testament of them being inherently prone to violence.
Like the liberal thug on the street, they believe that they are entitled to it.Now all you have to is provide evidence that a group of Republicans behaved in that manner because of something they didn’t like.
lol Statistics?
We don’t have to show you any stinkin statistics.That’s a cop out. You know it is.
The evidence is glaring.
I’ve presented many examples. It’s your job to prove otherwise. Google is a great place to start.
Violence, wishing or implying death from the left goes way back..
A quote from Demonrat Representative Tim Horrigan…
In a thread relating to the plane crash that killed former Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens this week, Halloran wrote, "Just wish Sarah and Levy were on board." The comment appeared to be in reference to Palin and the father of her grandson, Levi Johnston.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/new-hampshire-lawmaker-resigns-after-dead-palin-comment/
You’re not aware of the recent storming of an ICE office by democrat “lawmakers” (sort of an oxymoron eh?), or perhaps an example of irony …then having the gall to proclaim it was justified ? That is a testament of them being inherently prone to violence.
Like the liberal thug on the street, they believe that they are entitled to it.Now all you have to is provide evidence that a group of Republicans behaved in that manner because of something they didn’t like.
You’re free to form your opinion based on whatever does it for you. I like statistics.
I don’t think we have anyone here anymore who enjoys participating in anecdotal offs, at least from the left perspective. I recall that guy cccjwh would participate in such things. Not my cup of tea, but it was wild watching everyone try their best to rub faces in whatever assholery was going on at the time.
Look at what this asshole did!
Oh yeah, well look at what this asshole did!
Oh yeah? Well look at what this asshole said..
It was fun to read to a point. I hope you find your dance partner.
-
86 is code for getting rid of or removing…its also can mean assassinating or killing.
In the example you gave of Gaetz, 86’d clearly meant mission accomplished over the removal of McConnell and two others.
I looked it up and found 8646 was also used, calling for the impeachment of Biden. There is no debating its intent.
So now we have 8647. By what means do you suppose they take another shot at removing Trump? (pun intended). To impeach yet again???
So when the Reps, multiple Reps, use it, it means remove or impeach
But when Comey, a former Rep, uses it, then it totally definitely means assassinate?
You're gonna strain something pearl clutching
So when the Reps, multiple Reps, use it, it means remove or impeach
But when Comey, a former Rep, uses it, then it totally definitely means assassinate?
You're gonna strain something pearl clutching
Face palm.
I’ll try again.
86’ d (note the ‘d) was uttered by Gaetz AFTER THE SAID INDIVIDUALS WERE REMOVED, indicating mission accomplished, therefore it couldn’t have possibly meant to assassinate you simpleton.So yes, Comey’s posting of 8647 could be advocating for Trumps death. Comey wasn’t brought in for questioning for nothing other than that. and by what other means would you get rid of Trump at this stage of the game?
Dont be what you accuse Cal of.
-
I buy my underwear at K-Mart
I buy my underwear at K-Mart
so, you find your women's panties at K-Mart.
too much information. I guess you are joining up with the woodpecker to screw up this forum.
-
So when the Reps, multiple Reps, use it, it means remove or impeach
But when Comey, a former Rep, uses it, then it totally definitely means assassinate?
You're gonna strain something pearl clutching
Face palm.
I’ll try again.
86’ d (note the ‘d) was uttered by Gaetz AFTER THE SAID INDIVIDUALS WERE REMOVED, indicating mission accomplished, therefore it couldn’t have possibly meant to assassinate you simpleton.So yes, Comey’s posting of 8647 could be advocating for Trumps death. Comey wasn’t brought in for questioning for nothing other than that. and by what other means would you get rid of Trump at this stage of the game?
Dont be what you accuse Cal of.
Face palm.
I’ll try again.
86’ d (note the ‘d) was uttered by Gaetz AFTER THE SAID INDIVIDUALS WERE REMOVED, indicating mission accomplished, therefore it couldn’t have possibly meant to assassinate you simpleton.So yes, Comey’s posting of 8647 could be advocating for Trumps death. Comey wasn’t brought in for questioning for nothing other than that. and by what other means would you get rid of Trump at this stage of the game?
Dont be what you accuse Cal of.
More than Gaetz on the right have used the term 86
Trump has directly advocated for violence.
Cal is a moron and a politically brainwashed one at that. That's not an accusation. That's fact.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login