The Government Investigations.

I've tried to follow this twice now but it goes too quickly for me to get the drift.
I have been told that it is meant to be funny but I really had to switch off before it finished because my eyeballs started to roll about uncontrollably.

Did I miss a serious argument? If so, can I have a summary?
 
I followed it. It makes no sense to you because... well because all of what is going on makes no sense. If you were paying attention you would have known that without having it pointed out so eloquently. LOL, the democrats are mad as a stirred up hornets nest because they lost an election they felt they were entitled to and are perfectly willing to destroy the USA or maybe even the whole world over that.
 

I get it. The link that I looked at on another forum must have been speeded up.
By not watching the distracting side bits I was able to concentrate on his words and I see now that it is the political equivalent of "There was an old lady who swallowed a fly".
 
dpwspringer said:
I followed it. It makes no sense to you because... well because all of what is going on makes no sense. If you were paying attention you would have known that without having it pointed out so eloquently. LOL, the democrats are mad as a stirred up hornets nest because they lost an election they felt they were entitled to and are perfectly willing to destroy the USA or maybe even the whole world over that.
Click to expand...

Quoted for truth.
 
I love the opening sentence:

"Democrats who called for the firing of FBI director James Comey are shocked and appalled by the firing of FBI director James Comey."

:highly_amused:
 
Trade said:
I love the opening sentence:

"Democrats who called for the firing of FBI director James Comey are shocked and appalled by the firing of FBI director James Comey."

:highly_amused:
Click to expand...
For obvious reasons, I am not a Democrat voter, but I did consider James Comey's letter to Congress within days of the presidential ballot to be rather poor judgement but upon hearing his recent testimony to Congress concerning his thinking behind his decision, I have given him the benefit of the doubt. Given the difficult choice between reveal or conceal he chose reveal. Given his commitment to Congress after telling them that the matter was closed that he would keep them informed, I can see why he would make such a choice. What would I have done? I have no idea but I am prepared to acknowledge that he is a man following some sort of moral compass, even when it becomes very uncomfortable.

He is gone now but we may yet hear more from him. That is now up to Congress. While they were happy to hear from him before the ballot, they may now be more reluctant to call him to testify. It all depends on the moral compasses of the people appointed to the various investigations already set in train. Will they do the right thing, even though the result may be very uncomfortable?
 
Warrigal said:
I get it. The link that I looked at on another forum must have been speeded up.
By not watching the distracting side bits I was able to concentrate on his words and I see now that it is the political equivalent of "There was an old lady who swallowed a fly".
Click to expand...

I had never heard of that, so I looked it up on the internet. HA! It does come close to what it happening, doesn't it?
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top