Trump/Russia Dossier

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Wed Jan 10, 2018 11:42 am

Thing is boys, and please don't take this the wrong way but IT knows what he is talking about in regards to this.

Just like you do when you talk about car stuff Sidney, and I'm sure Andy knows his stuff equally well.

Trump might well hang on, but he has to make sure that he hangs on for the right reasons. If he's got nothing to hide, then he needs to let the investigation into the election continue and lessons to be learnt from it so that foreign govts cannot interfere in the democratic process.

Just because IT can come across as a bit of a dick, does not change the fact that he knows his stuff.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Wed Jan 10, 2018 11:43 am

Sidney1st wrote:Due to this forum I was convinced he would be gone during the last year.

Maybe they've extended the deadline for a bit?

Turtle is the expert.

Maybe you should have spent a bit more time informing yourself then.

Even if I was an expert we all know how little regard you people have for expert opinion so there's no reason to think your attitude would change.

Sidney1st · Post by **Sidney1st** » Wed Jan 10, 2018 11:46 am

I'm well aware IT research's the US in great detail and froths at the mouth about it.

Trump wasn't going to see out the first year of his presidency we were told though and he's just about done it.
He's also putting in place things that are keeping his voters happy and could actually work in regards to his tax stuff.

I know people don't like the bloke and what he's allegedly done, but he's still there and getting on with it.

Personally I think some of the things he says are quite refreshing compared to the usual political drivel we usually see.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Wed Jan 10, 2018 11:47 am

Really?

He's a demagogue. Check out all the demagogues from history. See how they worked out.

Sidney1st · Post by **Sidney1st** » Wed Jan 10, 2018 11:48 am

Imploding Turtle wrote:Maybe you should have spent a bit more time informing yourself then.

Even if I was an expert we all know how little regard you people have for expert opinion so there's no reason to think your attitude would change.

Calm yourself down.

Several people on here were adamant he'd be gone by now, it was a forgone conclusion apparently.
Well he's still there and getting on with it despite everyone else's efforts to get him out.

When you say 'you people' what are you meaning?
Do you mean people who don't spend spare time researching what the US president is up too?

Sidney1st · Post by **Sidney1st** » Wed Jan 10, 2018 11:50 am

What he did worked though and he's president until either the next election or he gets impeached.
Right now I wouldn't be sure which will happen first.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Wed Jan 10, 2018 11:50 am

Lancasterclaret wrote:Thing is boys, and please don't take this the wrong way but IT knows what he is talking about in regards to this.

Just like you do when you talk about car stuff Sidney, and I'm sure Andy knows his stuff equally well.

Trump might well hang on, but he has to make sure that he hangs on for the right reasons. If he's got nothing to hide, then he needs to let the investigation into the election continue and lessons to be learnt from it so that foreign govts cannot interfere in the democratic process.

Just because IT can come across as a bit of a dick, does not change the fact that he knows his stuff.

This is because for some people we live in a time where the importance of facts is entirely dependent on who is telling you them. CNN is fake news but Breitbart and Fox are trustworthy to these people.

Sidney1st · Post by **Sidney1st** » Wed Jan 10, 2018 11:52 am

You keep referring to 'these people' and you've made an assumption that they follow news reports from particular sources.

It's entirely possible those people don't follow the news from specific sources.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Wed Jan 10, 2018 12:16 pm

I'm referring to many types of people i suppose, but in your instance i'm talking about the kind of people who will avoid finding out anything for themselves and then think they're making a good point by saying nothing has been proven beyond "reasonable doubt", as if the fact that Russia helping Trump and undermining a western democracy should only be considered a problem if it meets the same standard of proof required to convict someone in court.

You have consistently and repeatedly deflected criticism of Trump in this kind of way, not just on Russia but also on his ****** up and dumb policies. If all you're going to do is sit on the fence and use your own deliberate ignorance as justification for your fence-sitting then get the **** out of the conversation because you are completely worthless when it comes to trying to discuss it. All you're doing is wasting everyone's time when there's literally nothing that can convince you of not just truth but basic facts.

This post perfectly illustrates just how little you know

Sidney1st wrote:Calm yourself down.

Several people on here were adamant he'd be gone by now, it was a forgone conclusion apparently.
Well he's still there and getting on with it despite everyone else's efforts to get him out.

When you say 'you people' what are you meaning?
Do you mean people who don't spend spare time researching what the US president is up too?

What has Trump actually achieved in his first year? He said Mexico will be paying for his border wall but he's just asked congress to pay for it. He promised to repeal Obamacare but he failed. His tax cut which you seem to think might be brilliant is actually absolute disaster that will raise taxes on his own ******* voters in order to pay for tax cuts for republican donors AND Trump. He's actually trying to start a war with North Korea and is being held back from it by his own staff including the Secretary of State Rex Tillerson. He's trying to undermine the so-far successful deal with Iran that stops them trying to develop nukes. He's trying to get his justice department to prosecute his political enemies which is so clearly antithetical to seperation fo powers that even you can't be in denial of how ****** up that is. And he's turned the U.S. into a laughing stock on the world stage.

So what exactly is it about Trump that you find "refreshing"? What is it that he's actually done that you think improves the lives of the people who voted for him?

You people? Blind and delusional fools like you who think Trump is just "getting on with it". Getting on with what exactly?

Sidney1st · Post by **Sidney1st** » Wed Jan 10, 2018 12:32 pm

I didn't talk about what he's achieved, I said that you and others were absolutely adamant he'd be gone by now, yet he's still there.

What's refreshing?
He doesn't put out the same political drivel that we get from all the other career politicians.

As for deflecting criticism, you were at it before he'd even been sworn in and you've been it ever since, so why can't some of us bat it away?

What am I sitting on the fence about?
He's in his first year and as you're well aware policies take time to get approved, implement and see the results, so sitting on the fence is really the only option until the outcome can be seen.
Obviously you're the expert and can see something won't work before it's even done, surprised you haven't become an MP

I didn't expect Mexico to pay for that wall, I think most people outside the US knew the yanks would end up paying for it, Mexico won't be arsed about it really, it won't make much difference to people who really want to get into the US illegally.

Where have I said his tax cut was brilliant?
Oh wait, I haven't and the reason for that is because I don't know, BUT it doesn't need to be brilliant for me, I'm not a US taxpayer.
It appeared to be rushed through very quickly and almost via the back door so appears shady, but it needs time to work.

I'm not in denial about what he's done with Iran or how he's dealing with his political adversaries.

Ah so who's the biggest laughing stock, the US or the UK because you seem to think both are for different reasons?

Blind and delusional or not willing to wade into US politics to the point that you do?
He's just getting on with his job, which you're not willing to let him do and preach to all and sundry that he's **** and will be thrown out of office in his first year....
I don't know all the intricate details of being a political leader, so 'getting on with it' should cover it quite well unless you want to be anal as **** and break it all down into minisucle details to bore the pants off everyone else....

Sidney1st · Post by **Sidney1st** » Wed Jan 10, 2018 12:34 pm

All you're doing is wasting everyone's time when there's literally nothing that can convince you of not just truth but basic facts.

Which fustrates you the most, the fact he's still in office or me?

CrosspoolClarets · Post by **CrosspoolClarets** » Wed Jan 10, 2018 12:37 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:Yay, noticing a lot of this recently "Well its bad obviously, but "insert other side" are just as bad."

Murdering journalists and political opponents?

Yeah, we do that all the time.

Afternoon Lancaster.

The quote was about fiddling in overseas elections, as you well know. As were the recent media stories. As far as I know, the accusations are about influence, not murder.

What else Russia get up to aside from external elections, such as internal Russian politics, is a completely different conversation.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Wed Jan 10, 2018 12:54 pm

Sidney1st wrote:Which fustrates you the most, the fact he's still in office or me?

I'm not frustrated by either. But ironically you've demonstrated another fact about the modern right-wing. No matter how bad it is if it pisses off liberals then it's ok with you.

Sidney1st · Post by **Sidney1st** » Wed Jan 10, 2018 12:58 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:I'm not frustrated by either. But ironically you've demonstrated another fact about the modern right-wing. No matter how bad it is if it pisses off liberals then it's ok with you.

So now I'm right wing?

Interesting conclusion, is that something you've decided all by yourself'?
Although I've been called a Fascist on here before and a Nazi, so feel free to apply whatever label makes you feel comfortable.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Wed Jan 10, 2018 3:04 pm

Sidney1st wrote:So now I'm right wing?

Interesting conclusion, is that something you've decided all by yourself'?
Although I've been called a Fascist on here before and a Nazi, so feel free to apply whatever label makes you feel comfortable.

More deflection.

LongsideFacingUp · Post by **LongsideFacingUp** » Wed Jan 10, 2018 3:30 pm

IT always has the BEST gibberish for a good chuckle.

I cannot wait to read his stuff the day Trump is re-elected, provided his head doesn't explode of course.

Sidney1st · Post by **Sidney1st** » Wed Jan 10, 2018 3:36 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:More deflection.

Not really, you're the one who labelled me as right wing, I just asked if you came up with that by yourself.

Can I accuse you of deflection for calling me right wing?
I did answer your other post.

Sidney1st · Post by **Sidney1st** » Wed Jan 10, 2018 3:37 pm

LongsideFacingUp wrote:IT always has the BEST gibberish for a good chuckle.

I cannot wait to read his stuff the day Trump is re-elected, provided his head doesn't explode of course.

IF Trump gets that far I might actually have to take time off work just to see what this forum is like.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Wed Jan 10, 2018 4:10 pm

Sidney1st wrote:I didn't talk about what he's achieved, I said that you and others were absolutely adamant he'd be gone by now, yet he's still there.

...

Was I?

I'm not even going to bother with the rest of your post until you can support this accusation. Or correct it.

Sidney1st · Post by **Sidney1st** » Wed Jan 10, 2018 4:37 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:Was I?

I'm not even going to bother with the rest of your post until you can support this accusation. Or correct it.

Deflection

PS you haven't proven where I said his tax thing was brilliant....

claretandy · Post by **claretandy** » Wed Jan 10, 2018 4:43 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:I'm not frustrated by either. But ironically you've demonstrated another fact about the modern right-wing. No matter how bad it is if it pisses off liberals then it's ok with you.

The fact he triggers liberals is the only reason i like Trump

Sidney1st · Post by **Sidney1st** » Wed Jan 10, 2018 4:55 pm

I just find Trump amusing because he's not one of the usual career politicians who drone on and on about the same old crap etc.

I think that's what upsets so many people, is the fact he isn't a career politician and STILL made it to the top job, despite all the efforts to prove he's crooked or in cahoots with Russia etc.
Until someone rocks up with a picture that puts Trump at the scene of the crime he will get away with it.

grapidianclaret · Post by **grapidianclaret** » Wed Jan 10, 2018 5:23 pm

I don't think most Trumpers actually get it. The man will happily sell out Europe to the Russians to aid his grovelling,to his Moscow boss. He went after NATO. NATO FFS!. Thats you lot, over there! If The US was to pull out of NATO how would that improve your situation? Same with the United Nations?

grapidianclaret · Post by **grapidianclaret** » Wed Jan 10, 2018 5:25 pm

You can criticize the USA( correctly in many cases for the issues it created) however, as far as Europe is concerned, the USA and its politicians from both sides of the isle were very instrumental in preventing war in Europe between the Soviets and Europe.

grapidianclaret · Post by **grapidianclaret** » Wed Jan 10, 2018 5:26 pm

At least Putin has not shown any interest in invading Europe..................

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Wed Jan 10, 2018 6:04 pm

Sidney1st wrote:Deflection

PS you haven't proven where I said his tax thing was brilliant....

I'm addressing literally the very first thing you said. I'm not sure you know what 'deflection' means.

And why do i have to prove that? Are you under the impression that someone has said you said that? Or are you just at Trump's level of literacy and didn't understand what you were reading?

Sidney1st · Post by **Sidney1st** » Wed Jan 10, 2018 6:07 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:I'm addressing literally the very first thing you said. I'm not sure you know what 'deflection' means.

And why do i have to prove that? Are you under the impression that someone has said you said that? Or are you just at Trump's level of literacy and didn't understand what you were reading?

You stated that I've said his tax plan is brilliant, I haven't said anything of the sort and asked you to prove it like you've asked me to prove that you stated he'd be out in his first year.

How do you know I'm not using the same terminology as you were earlier when I said you?
Do I need to put people like you or people like them to help you out?

As for having to prove it, you ask people to quote or prove what you're alleged to have said so can't we do the same?

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Wed Jan 10, 2018 6:08 pm

claretandy wrote:The fact he triggers liberals is the only reason i like Trump

See what i mean? The guy can do anything, even become the leader of purely to serve his own personal interests and the interests of an enemy country and people like this will be OK with it because it "triggers liberals". That's where the western right-wing is now. This is what their patriotism would look like if Trump was Farage and America was the UK.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Wed Jan 10, 2018 6:09 pm

Sidney1st wrote:You stated that I've said his tax plan is brilliant,...

This is where you try to quote me saying that and then come to the realisation that that's not actually what i said. Go on. Quote me.

Sidney1st · Post by **Sidney1st** » Wed Jan 10, 2018 6:13 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:I'm referring to many types of people i suppose, but in your instance i'm talking about the kind of people who will avoid finding out anything for themselves and then think they're making a good point by saying nothing has been proven beyond "reasonable doubt", as if the fact that Russia helping Trump and undermining a western democracy should only be considered a problem if it meets the same standard of proof required to convict someone in court.

You have consistently and repeatedly deflected criticism of Trump in this kind of way, not just on Russia but also on his ****** up and dumb policies. If all you're going to do is sit on the fence and use your own deliberate ignorance as justification for your fence-sitting then get the **** out of the conversation because you are completely worthless when it comes to trying to discuss it. All you're doing is wasting everyone's time when there's literally nothing that can convince you of not just truth but basic facts.

This post perfectly illustrates just how little you know

What has Trump actually achieved in his first year? He said Mexico will be paying for his border wall but he's just asked congress to pay for it. He promised to repeal Obamacare but he failed. His tax cut which you seem to think might be brilliant is actually absolute disaster that will raise taxes on his own ******* voters in order to pay for tax cuts for republican donors AND Trump. He's actually trying to start a war with North Korea and is being held back from it by his own staff including the Secretary of State Rex Tillerson. He's trying to undermine the so-far successful deal with Iran that stops them trying to develop nukes. He's trying to get his justice department to prosecute his political enemies which is so clearly antithetical to seperation fo powers that even you can't be in denial of how ****** up that is. And he's turned the U.S. into a laughing stock on the world stage.

So what exactly is it about Trump that you find "refreshing"? What is it that he's actually done that you think improves the lives of the people who voted for him?

You people? Blind and delusional fools like you who think Trump is just "getting on with it". Getting on with what exactly?

Ok so you've said I think it might be brilliant, close enough .

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Wed Jan 10, 2018 6:17 pm

Sidney1st wrote:I just find Trump amusing because he's not one of the usual career politicians who drone on and on about the same old crap etc.

I think that's what upsets so many people, is the fact he isn't a career politician and STILL made it to the top job, despite all the efforts to prove he's crooked or in cahoots with Russia etc.
Until someone rocks up with a picture that puts Trump at the scene of the crime he will get away with it.

Defends a child molester and says people should vote for one instead of a civil rights hero. Sexually abuses and harrasses women. Walks into the dressing rooms fo his beauty pageant contestents and brags that he can. Vilified the parents of an American war hero because they were brown and dared to speak out against him. Has advocated for the targetting of innocent families of terrorists in military strikes. He said he would pay the legal fees of people who turned violent against protestors at his rallies.

These are just some of the facts about this guy who "amuses" you, and you think the reason the rest of us are "upset" is because people voted for him? No, you dumb ****, it's because people like you who aren't absolute ****bags look past all this **** just because he isn't a career politician.

How is this better than being a career politician?

Sidney1st · Post by **Sidney1st** » Wed Jan 10, 2018 6:21 pm

Career politician he was up against in the election helped hide her husband's sexual misdemanors on his was to the presidency, was that your preferred option in the election you massive bell end?

I'm assuming you'd prefer someone who didn't do the crime but helped suppress it for her own gains?
I suppose it's better isn't it??

This is what amuses me about the whole thing with you whinging about what Trump is but the other alternative wasn't really much better was it?

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Wed Jan 10, 2018 6:32 pm

Sidney1st wrote:Career politician he was up against in the election helped hide her husband's sexual misdemanors on his was to the presidency, was that your preferred option in the election you massive bell end?

I'm assuming you'd prefer someone who didn't do the crime but helped suppress it for her own gains?
I suppose it's better isn't it??

This is what amuses me about the whole thing with you whinging about what Trump is but the other alternative wasn't really much better was it?

This is the ****** up false equivalence that the right have embraced in recent years. Hillary Clinton wrongly defending her husband being just as bad as Donald Trump who actually commited the acts.

Yes. I'd prefer the person who worked crisis management for a sexual predator than the actual sexual predator himself. What's wrong with that? If those are the only two choices how the **** is that the wrong choice?

Sidney1st · Post by **Sidney1st** » Wed Jan 10, 2018 6:39 pm

There isn't much else to say is there?

You hate trump that much you would rather have someone who helped hide the acts of a sexual predator in his place instead....

bluelabrador16 · Post by **bluelabrador16** » Wed Jan 10, 2018 6:56 pm

Hillary’s War Crime: The Murder of Muammar Gaddafi. “We Came, we Saw, he Died.”.......Dr. Paul Craig Roberts

"....All sorts of lies were told about Gaddafi and Libya, just as lies were told about Saddam Hussein and are told today about Syria and Russia. A British Parliamentary Report concluded unambigiously that the Western peoples were fed lies by their governments in order to gain acceptance for the destruction of Libya, and that Libya was destroyed because Gaddafi was regarded as an obstacle to Western hegemony.

Note that none of the presstitutes have asked the killer bitch about her guilt under the Nuremburg laws for this war crime prepared on her watch. Note that the oligarchs who own the killer bitch and their press prostitutes intend to make this war criminal the next president of the United States...."

https://www.globalresearch.ca/hillarys- ... ed/5552094" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Wed Jan 10, 2018 7:16 pm

Sidney1st wrote:There isn't much else to say is there?

You hate trump that much you would rather have someone who helped hide the acts of a sexual predator in his place instead....

And you would rather have the sexual predator. How do you think you can possibly be in the right here?

Sidney1st · Post by **Sidney1st** » Wed Jan 10, 2018 7:21 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:And you would rather have the sexual predator. How do you think you can possibly be in the right here?

Where did I say I'd rather have Trump over Hilary?

You don't need to quote me, I'll save you the bother because I didn't.

Neither are desirable and even during the election I stated they were crappy options as President.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Wed Jan 10, 2018 7:38 pm

Sidney1st wrote:Where did I say I'd rather have Trump over Hilary?

You don't need to quote me, I'll save you the bother because I didn't.

Neither are desirable and even during the election I stated they were crappy options as President.

Are you genuinely stupid? You're criticising me for prefering Hillary over Trump because Hillary essentially worked crisis management for a sexual predator. You're literally criticising me for choosing her over an actual sexual predator. And you don't think it's fair to infer from that that you preferred Trump?

**** off. You're trolling. No one can be that stupid.

Sidney1st · Post by **Sidney1st** » Wed Jan 10, 2018 7:43 pm

No I'm not stupid.

I've never inferred or hinted I'd prefer to keep Trump in office over another more viable option.

Clinton isn't a viable option in my opinion, not just due to her hiding what her husband has allegedly been up to with women.

So just to clarify, I'm not stupid or trolling, just impressed how you'd rather have someone who protects a potential sexual offender because it was her husband and he was lining up the presidency over Trump.

Do I need to clear it up some more for you or have you grasped it all now?

Greenmile · Post by **Greenmile** » Wed Jan 10, 2018 8:05 pm

This...

Sidney1st wrote:I'm assuming you'd prefer someone who didn't do the crime but helped suppress it for her own gains?

I suppose it's better isn't it??

and this....

Sidney1st wrote:... I'm not stupid or trolling, just impressed how you'd rather have someone who protects a potential sexual offender because it was her husband and he was lining up the presidency over Trump...

...strongly imply that you’d prefer an actual sexual predator over someone who covered up the sexual predation of her husband.

That’s pretty ****ed up, Sidney.

Damo · Post by **Damo** » Wed Jan 10, 2018 8:13 pm

To summarise, the people who picked a side in an election thousands of miles away, prefer someone who covered up sexual offences over someone who touched someone's arse, while the majority of people didn't really care who became President?
Great Morales on show here I must say

Sidney1st · Post by **Sidney1st** » Wed Jan 10, 2018 8:14 pm

Nope I've never implied or suggested I'd rather keep a serial molester over someone who hid their partners crimes.

I wouldn't do that either, just a little surprised that Turtle would happily have her in there.

You can carry on trying to suggest I've implied things though if it makes you happy.

Sidney1st · Post by **Sidney1st** » Wed Jan 10, 2018 8:15 pm

Damo wrote:To summarise, the people who picked a side in an election thousands of miles away, prefer someone who covered up sexual offences over someone who touched someone's arse, while the majority of people didn't really care who became President?
Great Morales on show here I must say

Not that we didn't care who won the election, we just weren't able to influence it like Russia did.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Wed Jan 10, 2018 8:18 pm

Sidney1st wrote:Nope I've never implied or suggested I'd rather keep a serial molester over someone who hid their partners crimes.

I wouldn't do that either, just a little surprised that Turtle would happily have her in there.

You can carry on trying to suggest I've implied things though if it makes you happy.

So let me get this straight. You're criticising me for choosing Clinton over Trump, yet you think that it would be unfair to interpret that as you preferring Trump over Clinton. Is that right? Because that seems to be right.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Wed Jan 10, 2018 8:22 pm

Sidney1st wrote:No I'm not stupid.

I've never inferred or hinted I'd prefer to keep Trump in office over another more viable option.

Clinton isn't a viable option in my opinion, not just due to her hiding what her husband has allegedly been up to with women.

So just to clarify, I'm not stupid or trolling, just impressed how you'd rather have someone who protects a potential sexual offender because it was her husband and he was lining up the presidency over Trump.

Do I need to clear it up some more for you or have you grasped it all now?

Now you're moving the goalposts. In 2016 it was a choice between Trump and Clinton. You're criticising me for choosing Clinton over Trump. But when it comes to YOU making a choice suddenly the options are between Trump, Clinton and other viable options.

Why wasn't I allowed that wide a field from which to choose?

No, **** you. The choice was Clinton or Trump. You've criticised me for choosing Clinton. So explain to me why you would choose Trump, since that's the logical conclusion to your criticism.

Sidney1st · Post by **Sidney1st** » Wed Jan 10, 2018 8:23 pm

We can start from the beginning if it's easier?

People like you have spent the last year whinging, whining and stropping about Trump being president when his rival wasn't going to be much of a better option.

I've never said I preferred either over the other, just amused how you'd be fine with her in place if it meant he wasn't.

I said during the election campaign it was a shitty choice to have to make, him or her because neither option appeared massively desirable.

Personally I would've stayed at home on election day like I usually do in the UK if I don't find either option worth voting for.

Anything I've missed?

Sidney1st · Post by **Sidney1st** » Wed Jan 10, 2018 8:24 pm

This is why I think you're a dick head, you keep saying **** you to me and it's hilarious when you do it, but I also think you're a dick head for doing it.

Sidney1st · Post by **Sidney1st** » Wed Jan 10, 2018 8:26 pm

I wouldn't choose trump, I wouldn't vote for either of them as I've just said.
I'd stay at home on voting day because neither are suitable for the presidency in my opinion.
I'm assuming not voting is legal in the USA, you're the expert so you can correct me if I can't.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Wed Jan 10, 2018 8:30 pm

Sidney1st wrote:This is why I think you're a dick head, you keep saying **** you to me and it's hilarious when you do it, but I also think you're a dick head for doing it.

If i had more respect for you then i'd be more articulate than to just use those two words, but whatever respect remained was lost when i saw your post from a few weeks ago misrepresenting my opinion in a way that can only have been intentional.

Greenmile · Post by **Greenmile** » Wed Jan 10, 2018 8:31 pm

Sidney1st wrote:Nope I've never implied or suggested I'd rather keep a serial molester over someone who hid their partners crimes.

I wouldn't do that either, just a little surprised that Turtle would happily have her in there.

You can carry on trying to suggest I've implied things though if it makes you happy.

So you’re just surprised that IT would prefer the same candidate you yourself would?