Jump to content

sheeeit

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    702
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by sheeeit

  1. I realize that this is just fun speculation, but you guys need to differentiate between who you want as potus and who has an actual chance of beating trump. If the economy is still humming then he is going to be very hard to beat, especially by the same old tired people that have been around forever. If the economy is humming, the only way a dem beats trump is if that dem is has good economic credentials and will essentially espouse many of the same economic policies as trump. Then they can make moves away from trump's idiocy on other things. But if the dems run a fairly liberal candidate and their approach to the economy is tax the rich, higher min wage, bad ceos and tax companies then they are going to get bludgeoned.
  2. I have thought about the solution to the mexican drug problem a bunch. Like all things, there are no easy answers. But I think there are only 2 choices. 1) The easiest and least violent way is to legalize most drugs that come in from mexico. Weed, cocaine, meth, heroin etc. I realize that this is highly unlikely to happen, but we have made progress on weed. I have no idea what it would look like but I envision stores similar to liquor stores that sell narcotics. Let US companies manufacture the narcotics and let the FFA regulate the quality and then let them sell to retailers that are also well regulated. Heck, I would even let mexico supply much of the drugs if they can compete. have them sell to licensed dealers here in the us. Likely a pipe dream but it would eliminate a ton of the profits for the cartels. 2) Negotiate with mexico (tell them basically) that the us military is coming in. The drug trade is just too lucrative and the state and local police are in a horrible spot. Take money from the cartels or get killed and have your family killed. That scenario is never, ever, going to eliminate the problem. The cartels make so much money that they have arsenals of weapons, more than the local police. So, imo, an outside group has to intervene. It would be unbelievably brutal in the short term. The policy would have to be scorched earth. Assaults on cartel locations. Total burning of fields and plants and equipment. An eradication of the trade. Then, help mexico to police the areas so that it never grows so big and out of hand again. In a large scale operation, you essentially eliminate all of the known bad guys and wipe out all of their supply. Make it very, very difficult for someone to come in and start from scratch. Obviously, solution 1 is the best avenue. Maybe some combination of both. But I can not blame the local police in many of these mexican communities for not stopping the problem.
  3. I would vote for Bloomberg over anyone that has run in the last 20 years except for maybe Romney. He may just be too old. It is going to be hard for the people mentioned to beat trump just from an oversized personality standpoint. Bloomberg is certainly smarter and much more polished (not exactly a high bar) than Trump. He is also not an ideologue. I hope he runs.
  4. You are truly a weird little man. You are also so full of shit it is amazing. I have little hope that anyone will call you out for calling me a liar and then using total bullshit lies to justify it. This just seems par for the course for this place and people like you. The daily estimate of people crossing legally everyday is about 1,000,000. http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2016/07/19/opinion-million-people-cross-border-legally-every-day-and-that-good-thing.html Seems a little higher than 50,000. But I will link several articles from left news agencies that all agree that the monthly number arrested/apprehended is 50,000. https://www.cnbc.com/2018/04/05/crossing-attempts-at-us-southwest-border-triple-in-march-from-year-ago.html http://time.com/5303831/trump-illegal-immigration-border-arrests-may/ https://www.npr.org/2018/06/06/617750865/may-marks-another-increase-in-border-arrests-despite-trump-crackdown I wonder if anyone will call you out.
  5. Maybe. It still doesn't make much sense to me. If the generals were ready to pounce pre-summit and then Un gets some perceived respect from the US then what does that buy him? 6 months? A year? I think it is much, much more likely that Un has risked way more on the summit than the us. If he doesn't deliver change now, then the people will be much more inclined to revolt. Un played his trump card (no pun). I think a coup of the generals is much more likely as a result of them not wanting to get executed by unruly mobs than trying to take out Un to get power.
  6. Jesus. You guys are high strung. I made a mistake when typing. Meant to say month not day. I based it on this: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/border-arrests-exceed-50000-for-third-month-in-a-row/2018/06/06/db6f15a6-680b-11e8-bea7-c8eb28bc52b1_story.html?utm_term=.9893499e8685 My point still stands. If 50,000-75,000 poor, unskilled, non-english speaking people were crossing the Canadian border every MONTH then I absolutely think the same people calling for a wall with Mexico would be calling for a wall with Canada.
  7. I am curious, what do you think would be the reason that the well-fed generals would stage a coup?
  8. If there were 50,000-75,000 poor, unskilled, non-english speaking people crossing the Canadian border everyday then I absolutely think the same people calling for a wall with Mexico would be calling for a wall with Canada. Personally, I am against the wall but I can certainly realize that it is a complex situation with no easy fixes.
  9. Obviously it is way too early to know much of anything, but I do take some issue with the above. The people of NK that are eating bark and pulling tape worms out of their stomachs could care less if Un stared down the US. The economy of NK is just as bad today as it was before the Summit. If conditions do not change on the ground in NK then the exact same situation will exist for a coup. Saying the US lost leverage or gave Un some modicum of acceptance is fun to talk about and bash trump about but it has exactly zero practical affect.
  10. violating the 5 year rule but films like old school and wedding crashers were funny from start to finish and carried the theme well. I think it is just hard to make/write good comedies for a full 2 hours. Comedy is also very subjective. I loathe slapstick type comedy where the jokes are so obvious and so predictable. Finding clever and original comedy is hard. Also, I went to a larry the cable guy stand up show and thought it was really funny. I wouldnt go to one of his movies for free.
  11. You seem to have plenty of time on your hands. Maybe you can find the post where I said I know for a fact that there was no collusion. Of course, I have never said that. All I have done is offer my opinion. But, apparently, my opinion is full of shit because we don’t know all of the evidence yet but all of the other opinions are perfectly valid because…
  12. Wow. Did you just claim that my opinion on collusion is invalid because we have not seen all of the evidence relevant to the issue, on a board where literally 1000s of opinions have been given on collusion by other people that also have not seen all of the evidence. I must have missed the posts where you pointed that out to them.
  13. LULZ. What gibberish. I have no idea if trump colluded or not. From what I have scene, my opinion is that he did not. Virtually every act of collusion talked about in the media does not stand up to close inspection. It is all based on anonymous sources and innuendo. Just be honest. What you guys dont like is when you go off on a new tangent (and there have been tons of them and they continue to come) about collusion and how this is the one that will bring trump down and then someone like me actually takes a little closer look at the allegations and applies a little logic and common sense and determines that the allegations are flimsy you guys freak out. I just give my opinion. My opinion could very well be wrong. I doubt it, but it could. Example, just recently one of the usual suspects said that there has been foreign intel for years now that shows collusion. When I read this i think it "smells bad". Then I apply just a tiny bit of logic and critical thinking. I note that the DNI (coats) has every single piece of intelligence that exists in the US at his disposal. I note that he has testified to the house and senate investigations into russsia/collusion. I note that these intel committees have interviewed dozens of intelligence officials including virtually all of the higher ranking ones. I note that, by law, these intelligence folks must reveal what intelligence they have. I then read quotes by 7 or 8 different members of the intel committees who have seen all of this information and none of them say hey have seen any collusion yet. So based on that, my opinion is that there is not any foreign intel that shows collusion. The evidence that the intel exists is based on anonymous sources through media, twitter and blogs. I feel pretty confident betting on the testimony of the Director of National Intelligence over anonymous sources and twitterers. So, as I always do, I outline my position and offer my reasons for why I believe it. And the best rebuttal to my opinion is not a well thought out counter argument or even an attempt at a counter argument. It is met with "Go fuck your face with smokey's dick you dissembling, disingenuous bag of cat shit.". That is reality in this place today.
  14. Just for fun, how about you post something from me that supports some action of trump. FYI, me arguing that trump did not collude with russia is not support of trump as potus. It is my opinion that there was not collusion. You be best too!
  15. College days in Cali. Long ago. I had no experience in sports betting. Roommate has a bookie (bookie is a loose term as it was just another college guy that took bets for someone else) and convinces me to bet with him. Usual story, we start at like $50 a game and start losing early saturday and try to double up. By monday we are down about $5K (which included a $1K bet my roomate did not tell me about) and I had about $150 to my name. We want to double it on monday night but bookie says we have to pay first. My roommate goes to his apartment and gives him his car keys as collateral . My college was in northern cali and roommate was huge 49er fan. We went to the game, Niners vs Redskins. This was montana, rice days. Niners won easily. We were drunk. I did not bet on a sporting event again for nearly 15 years.
  16. I also love how statistics work sometimes. There are a myriad of studies on child poverty that rank the USA either even with or worse off than Mexico. Yet, there are literally hundreds of thousands of mexicans willing to risk their lives and their kids lives to get into the USA and there are virtually zero americans risking anything to get into mexico.
  17. LULZ I am out of this one. I just found it funny that you and Hugo are openly wishing that our country was more like a country that has 40% of its children living in poverty.
  18. https://www.euractiv.com/section/economy-jobs/news/40-of-spanish-children-live-in-poverty/ But they apparently do get great vacation days.
  19. Clearly you guys missed the point completely. I can only say that I think Trump is an awful person so many times. I think he is awful, narcissistic, has no morals, cheated on his wives, etc. I think he is a bad human being. I have said, hundreds of times, that if Mueller finds any collusion, or obstruction or financial fraud that I would support impeachment proceedings immediately. I have said that if Trump fires mueller i would support immediate impeachment proceedings. I have said this stuff numerous times. The only thing I have ever done that is interpreted as supporting trump is that I do not think he colluded with the russians. Thats it. My post above is merely pointing out exactly what you guys are saying. So many of the very things that cause you to hate trump are identical to Avenatti. Yet Avenatti gets white knighted and trump is the worst person in the history of the world. One guy above stated "i Like him". Why? There is absolutely nothing likable about him at all. The hypocrisy is glorious. He has been on CNN hundreds of times. Been on many of the late night talk shows. Why? He shits on trump so everyone gives him a platform even though he is a total piece of shit individual. It has been somewhat shocking to me that this guy has become such a media darling when he, if we truly believe them, represents everything the media says they deplore. I will bet I can find at least 15 people on this site who have posted praise for Avenatti. Praise. Again, for what? For defrauding his former partners? For, allegedly, abusing his ex wives? For not paying his taxes? For withholding money from employees and not sending it to the IRS? For admittedly lying to the court to try and squeeze money out of his clients after he had already been paid in full? You don't think it is a little funny?
  20. JFC. You have no clue what you are talking about. The intel community must, by law, give the various intel committees any evidence they have. Nunes and others are questioning the SOURCE of certain intel and wanting access to the investigative files that show means and procedures for the investigation and the DOJ does not want to provide that info. I can see both sides of that argument. But, there is zero argument that when the heads of the various intel agencies and agents who work in those agencies are made to testify to members of the intel committees in hearings that they can not withhold ANY intelligence they have found. They can claim they do not want to name where the evidence came from or how they got it, butt hey have to disclose the evidence. Just go back yourself and read the questioning the house and senate investigators asked the members of the intel community under oath. You seem to actually think they could be asked direct questions about collusion evidence and just lie.
  21. You serious? You can start with the post I was responding too and search for any one of hundreds of posts on here that claim there is foreign intel that will bring everyone down. But you asserted yourself into this argument by mis-representing my point, which I have now made clear. So how about you answer. Do you believe that there is intel, foreign or otherwise, that the intel community has not shared with the various political committees that are investigating collusion? That there is supposedly explosive intel that proves collusion on the part of trumpco? Either it doesn't exist, or it does exist and either Gowdy read it and ignored it (which is impossible) or the intel community has broken the law by not sharing it.
  22. No. My issue is that the House (completed) and Senate did their own investigations of the collusion angle. The members of those intel committees are privy to ALL of the intelligence that is available from the intel community. That means that Adam Schiff has seen all of the intel compiled from our intel agencies to date. And yes this would include any intel from the British. All of it. So have Nunes (even though retard pods thinks he doesn't have a security clearance) and Gowdy. They have closed their investigation and have found that there was, essentially, no collusion. Now I fully realize that these side investigations are pretty worthless in the grand scheme of things. But the people that conduct them have seen all of the intelligence related to the issue. But people on here are arguing that there is direct, smoking gun type evidence of collusion provided by foreign govts from as early as 2016. The only thing that is "absurd and utterly clownish" is that people believe this. You think it is possible that a guy like Trey Gowdy has been shown foreign intel that shows irrefutable collusion between trump co and the russians and that he just disregarded it and co-authored the House memo with Nunes? That is absurd and utterly clownish.
×
×
  • Create New...