Guest views are now limited to 12 pages. If you get an "Error" message, just sign in! If you need to create an account, click here.

Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by bostonangler

  1. Wow all you patriots' are bashing a decorated American soldier in the name of a draft dodging, lying, cheating, stumble bum who praises dictators and hides the very information that could end all of this. Your allegiance to America is dead. Traded for a cheap con man. B/A
  2. He's not hiding it from the left he's hiding it from you... LOL B/A
  3. Pizza Gate. Soros. Obama's Birth certificate. Clinton's Emails. The Deep State. Everyone must be lying. The world is wrong. Only believe one person over all others. B/A
  4. Dude, it was Trumps people who edited the transcript because they know the full transcript would sink him. Why do you think they didn't release it In full? Now his people are testifying and the republican's reaction is to bash career veterans… If it wasn't bad they would have released it. The dumbed down version is for his followers because they believe everything he says without proof, facts or evidence. How anyone would not demand the full transcript and thus the truth is beyond reason. He's your guy, don't you want to see the full transcript or are you afraid it might burst your orange bubble? B/A
  5. See Caz, there you go again spewing your anger... Do you understand how people are put in the Electoral College? They are appointed to it by the politicians in their states. So as democrats continue to win districts like they did in 2016 and add to their ability to appoint people the Electoral College, it is going to change. Then how much will you like it when a Democrat led Electoral College appoints their guy to president. Will you still love it? I will mark you reply, so in 2024 when they just put in the White House they want I will come back and see how your answer compares to the new reality. B/A
  6. You know Caz, writing that last post made me think of something. Trump was appointed in 2016. Obama won in 2008 and 2012. "W" Bush won in 2004 and was appointed in 2000 after losing the popular vote to Gore. And George HW Bush was a shoe-in after Reagan... So really Since the 80's the republican president's haven't won many popular votes contests... What does that tell you about America and her people? B/A
  7. Now that's not nice. Umbertino and I bring news articles. Just because you don't like or seek truth, that shouldn't be a reason for anger and attack posts. And truth is I'm not a Clinton voter, however she did win the majority. Majority, that means more people voted for her than her opponent. A novel concept that means nothing. So truth be known, he was appointed. The electoral college is made up of chosen folks by party members. So the republicans had more politicians living off the government than the democrats in 2016. But now that number is changing and democrats will be picking electoral college members and then they will get to appoint someone. Let's see what you think about the electoral college when that happens. B/A
  8. Or simply release the actual transcript of the phone call and not the dumbed down version and this could be over in one day. B/A
  9. Republican Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming has been an ardent defender of President Donald Trump during the impeachment inquiry, but she may have reached her breaking point on Tuesday. Cheney said the attempts by members of her party to slur the patriotism of Army Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman are “shameful” and that “we need to show that we are better than that as a nation.” Vindman, the top Ukraine expert on the National Security Council, is set to testify on Tuesday that he heard Trump pressure Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky into digging up dirt on former Vice President Joe Biden and son Hunter Biden. At a press conference ahead of Vindman’s testimony, Cheney said, “I also want to address something that’s been going on for the last several hours, and last night, which I think is also shameful, and that is questioning the patriotism and questioning the dedication to country of people like Mr. Vindman, Lt. Col. Vindman, who will be coming today, and others who have testified.” “I think that we need to show that we are better than that as a nation,” she added. “Their patriotism, their love of country, we’re talking about decorated veterans who have served this nation, who have put their lives on the line, and it is shameful to question their patriotism, their love of this nation, and we should not be involved in that process.” On Monday, Fox News’ Laura Ingraham accused Vindman of being “apparently against the president’s interests” while inside the White House and tried to paint him as a double agent. On Tuesday, former GOP Rep. Sean Duffy (R-Wisc.) told a CNN panel that Vindman’s loyalty might be suspect because he was born in Ukraine before his family moved to the United States. RawStory noted that Cheney’s father, former Vice President **** Cheney, trashed the military service of Democratic nominee and Purple Heart recipient John Kerry while campaigning for reelection in 2004. I have never been a big fan of the Cheney clan, but I have to agree with her. It is pretty low to question this man's honor and patriotism. The republican party is showing a dark side for trying to shame a guy who has dedicated his life to defending America for a guy with bone spurs and refused to serve his country. B/A
  10. Are you comparing The United States of America to Venezuela? You really should come off the conspiracy sites. Venezuela is a banana republic and currently probably allow humor like we have in America. They don't have SNL, or late night talks shows where people can express their opinions or make fun of the government. Although after reading of the comments on this site, there does seem to be a faction of Americans who would like a dictatorship. A country without media, freedom of speech, basic human rights and many of the things we enjoy in our country. This thread is about humor and if you would like to post satirical pieces on democrats running for office, I don't think the people on the left here at DV would whine and cry about it. Unlike the self labeled tough guys who back Trump seem to do every time they see something don't like. Stop and laugh even if it makes fun of Trump. Everyone laughed at Clinton and Obama, heck even Bush laughed at Bush jokes. Why are jokes about Trump sacrilege for his supporters? B/A
  11. Well, I guess some people believe anything... Personally I don't believe our country will suddenly become a new government because one person is elected. I think the Congress and Senate might have something to say about. B/A
  12. Again just because the say it doesn't mean it will happen. Let me give you an example.... Mexico will pay for the wall. That sure sounded good and people believed it. It doesn't mean it will happen, so please don't fall the fear mongering being used for someone's agenda... B/A
  13. I hear this all the time as if some elected can simply flip a switch. I'm not a Biden, Warren or Sanders guy, but if one of them should happen to win do you honestly believe our country will suddenly change? That is fantasy and fear mongering. Our country will not instantly become a different type of republic. One person cannot change our country or it's basic vision. Again, don't fall for the fear mongering put out by highly paid marketing professionals. Throughout our history there have been many examples of fear mongering and how someone or a group of people would take down America... It is propaganda and it has been tried before. Here is an example.... One example of fearmongering in American politics is the Daisy television commercial, an oft-referenced advertisement used during Lyndon B. Johnson's 1964 presidential run. It begins with a little girl standing in a meadow with chirping birds, picking the petals of a daisy while counting each petal slowly. When she reaches "9", an ominous-sounding male voice is then heard counting down a missile launch, and as the girl's eyes turn toward something she sees in the sky, the camera zooms in until her pupil fills the screen, blacking it out. When the countdown reaches zero, the blackness is replaced by the flash and mushroom cloud of a nuclear explosion. As the firestorm rages, a voice-over from president Johnson states, "These are the stakes! To make a world in which all of God's children can live, or to go into the dark. We must either love each other, or we must die". Another voice-over then says, "Vote for President Johnson on November 3. The stakes are too high for you to stay home". And another example. You had, for instance, the candidate of the Know-Nothings, 1856, Millard Fillmore, a former president, who said if you allow people of Irish origin and others to run rampant in American society — he was also anti-Catholic — this will be a danger to America. One more for you. Just to see how this works... Wendell Willkie in 1940, he certainly was — never said anything remotely like what we are talking about in terms of defaming minority groups, but he did in the full campaign say essentially, if you elect Franklin Roosevelt, even though he is promising you that he will not involve the United States in a foreign war, you can be sure that, if he's elected, we are going to be at war probably within a few months. He didn't believe that was true. It went way beyond the facts, but it caused Willkie to soar ahead in the polls to the point that, by November, he was almost within striking distance of winning the presidency. B/A
  14. I don't think you'll get beat up for that. It isn't unreasonable and perhaps the 47 republicans who are allowed to be in the interviews might actually attend instead of acting like spoiled brats and storming the house and putting on a show, when they were already supposed to attend. This is like a high school drama. B/A
  15. Thanks, I didn't think you were much of a ruby type guy.. 😎 B/A
  16. Whatever... You post crazy stupid humor about the left all the time... I never neg that... I can laugh at jokes, too bad some people are so wound up they simply can't let go for a minute... No wonder that type of person is never really happy. They are always stuck looking for negatives and cannot enjoy basic human nature and laughing because it's funny regardless of politics... That is really an unfortunate way to go through life. B/A
  17. True Dat... Last week it was all about how Congress needed a vote to move forward and now they announce a vote and guess what??? The crybaby snowflakes come out whining about how it is unfair... The right has got it all wrong n this issue. They introduced the process, they voted on the process, a republican president signed off on the process, and now they don't like it... That's lesson the left should learn. When you create dumbass policies, eventually they will come back to haunt you, just like we are seeing today with the republican's dumbass policy they put into place... Do we really elect these inept people year after year? B/A
  18. You guys really should try to enjoy life... It's okay to laugh at humor.. If this was exactly the same video but said Obama you would love it. I don't understand that mentality. B/A
  19. WASHINGTON — House Speaker Nancy Pelosi sought Monday to deprive President Trump of a legal and political argument against the Democrats’ impeachment inquiry, announcing she would hold a vote in the full House this Thursday that “affirms the ongoing, existing investigation.” “We are taking this step to eliminate any doubt as to whether the Trump Administration may withhold documents, prevent witness testimony, disregard duly authorized subpoenas, or continue obstructing the House of Representatives,” Pelosi said in a written statement. “Nobody is above the law.” Pelosi said the Trump White House has made a “baseless claim that the House of Representatives’ impeachment inquiry ‘lacks the necessary authorization for a valid impeachment proceeding.’” That was a quote from a letter that Trump’s White House counsel, Pat Cipollone, sent to Congress on Oct. 8 rejecting cooperation with the impeachment inquiry. “They argue that, because the House has not taken a vote, they may simply pretend the impeachment inquiry does not exist,” Pelosi said. “Of course, this argument has no merit.” House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi during Pelosi's weekly news conference at the Capitol on Oct. 2. (Photo: Jonathan Ernst/Reuters) Much of the reason that the House held votes in 1974 and 1998 to begin impeachment proceedings against President Richard Nixon and President Bill Clinton was because such a vote was needed to do the investigative work of issuing subpoenas and holding depositions. Over the last decade or two, the rules of Congress have changed so that a full House vote is no longer necessary. Nonetheless, Pelosi’s announcement is both a strategic tactic and perhaps also a concession that Democrats were seeing the legitimacy of their inquiry weakened somewhat by Republican arguments that they should keep with precedent and hold a vote in the House to get every member of the chamber on record, even though another vote to approve articles of impeachment is likely to come to the House floor in the next several weeks. Pelosi’s office said it will announce more details on Tuesday about the next phase of the impeachment inquiry, including when public House committee hearings will be held and the process for the release of deposition transcripts Ask and you shall receive??? B/A
  20. This is funny... I don't care who you are. B/A
  21. Thanks MD.... It has been both a test of patience and very rewarding... I'm not sure I would recommend it!!! LOL B/A
  22. I missed that one... But I do agree with you on the first part. As for the worlds, not so much. B/A
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.