Douchebag Thread for Politics & Religion Spill Over

[Apathy]

From Dewiz' latest trolling status update. Figured this response was better suited to the Shed and I'd save the Mods the grief of locking that idiocy on my account.

Knapp there won't be any real conversations to be had, the P&R forum has proven that for months now. How am I trolling? These are my views and such views aren't welcomed to numerous people here so they call said poster a troll. Here's a solution for you and others, if you don't like what I say don't respond. One reason why I've avoided the P&R

Attention whore bahahaha.....you got me.

The P&R forum is among the busiest on this site, with excellent conversations among people with very diverse views. The only people that fare poorly there are people who present opinions unsupported by facts, especially opinions that are easily debunked and/or shown to be foolish. You're well known for such opinions, and you've earned the level of respect commensurate with such opinions.
P&R isn't for everyone, and that obviously includes you, because you have the mind of a child. If you can't swim then stay out of the deep end. But don't cry at the people who can. It's not our fault you're bad at discussing politics.

Knapp go f#*k yourself
Please amuse me on which topics I'm wrong about?

There have been half a dozen or more occasions where you drop a tweet by a random far right nut job with ~14 followers, it gets proven to be completely made up bullsh#t or illogical, and then you ignore the whole thing like it never happened. Rinse and repeat. Or you offer up some completely insincere apology and berate the person who responded. Rinse and repeat.

Where are these examples? You're worst than Nancy Pelosi babbling the way you are
How hard is to present evidence these days? I'm still waiting to see any Russian/Trump connections and these so-called Comey memos.

So far both those are completely bullsh#t news that haven't been proved otherwise but yet you guys keep posted that garbage in the P&R forums....rinse and repeat.

 

[ZRod]

Are you really this ignorant? Or are you just extremely obtuse? Investigations don't present findings or evidence until their conclusion unless it's leaked.

 

[ZRod]

Also since you asked. This is just from a quick search... I don't think I need to pull up your last several status updates which are basically the same thing.

https://twitter.com/robschneider/status/847121599564169216

https://twitter.com/jackposobiec/status/847605610539433988

https://twitter.com/cernovich/status/844589845364191232

Is the irony of someone saying this on twitter, and you sharing it without any other insight, lost on you?

You rarely, if ever, jump into the actual conversations here on HB. You come in, take some shots, maybe link a few tweets, add in some "hmm...interesting"'s, then bounce.

Hahahaha

https://twitter.com/bensasse/status/841826697993441281

https://twitter.com/sahouraxo/status/841827374069092353

https://twitter.com/jackposobiec/status/839249816207175685

 

[Redux]

P&R gang back at it...

 

[Apathy]

Also since you asked. This is just from a quick search... I don't think I need to pull up your last several status updates which are basically the same thing.

https://twitter.com/robschneider/status/847121599564169216

https://twitter.com/jackposobiec/status/847605610539433988

https://twitter.com/cernovich/status/844589845364191232

Is the irony of someone saying this on twitter, and you sharing it without any other insight, lost on you?

You rarely, if ever, jump into the actual conversations here on HB. You come in, take some shots, maybe link a few tweets, add in some "hmm...interesting"'s, then bounce.

Hahahaha

https://twitter.com/bensasse/status/841826697993441281

https://twitter.com/sahouraxo/status/841827374069092353

https://twitter.com/jackposobiec/status/839249816207175685

Which said tweets are wrong? Do some of them bring up some good valid points?

How is this sh#t I posted anything different from the garbage posted in the P&R forum that have been proven to be false or lack of evidence? And I'm the ignorant one

 

[knapplc]

I'm the ignorant one

You make this too easy.

 

[Mierin]

Hay you gais. I'm "worst" than *inserts name of first female Democrat I can think of even though I'm not a Democrat*

 

[knapplc]

How is this sh#t I posted anything different from the garbage posted in the P&R forum that have been proven to be false or lack of evidence? And I'm the ignorant one

For the most part, the P&R regulars don't post "garbage." Everyone who regularly posts in P&R knows that if they post bullsh#t, they're going to be called out on it. Happens to me, to zoogs, to TGHusker, BRB, everyone. So when we post stuff there, we don't just grab the first stuff that coincides with our worldview, we check it.

We do that because we're interested in talking. We engage. We debate. We open our opinions up to cross-checking and, if we're blatantly wrong, ridicule. I posted something that was entirely wrong, wrong, wrong once and saunders called me out on it. I had to take my lumps for it.

You don't do that. You post your status updates, you get called on it, and rather than double-checking it, you complain you're being attacked, or you call people names like a five-year-old. You don't have the conviction of facts, you have the security blanket of your opinions.

Smart people let facts form their opinion. You force your opinion on to facts.

 

[Landlord]

How is this sh#t I posted anything different from the garbage posted in the P&R forum

In the P&R forum people actually converse. You just swoop in, drop some sh#t sandwich, and walk away.

And I'm the ignorant one

This is the most spot on thing you've said politics-wise in years.

How hard is to present evidence these days? I'm still waiting to see any Russian/Trump connections and these so-called Comey memos.

You obviously don't understand what evidence actually is. Or how investigations actually work. But regardless,

And then this week, the Washington Post reported — later confirmed by NBC News — that Trump asked two top intelligence officials in March to say publicly that they saw no evidence the Trump campaign had colluded with the Russian effort to interfere in the 2016 election.

Meanwhile, on Capitol Hill yesterday, former Obama CIA chief John Brennan was asked if there was collusion or coordination between Trump’s campaign and the Russian. Here was his answer: “I encountered and am aware of information and intelligence that revealed contacts and interactions between Russian officials and U.S. persons involved in the Trump campaign that I was concerned about because of known Russian efforts to suborn such individuals and it raised questions in my mind, again, whether or not the Russians were able to gain the cooperation of those individuals.”

The United Arab Emirates arranged a secret meeting in January between Blackwater founder Erik Prince and a Russian close to President Vladi­mir Putin as part of an apparent effort to establish a back-channel line of communication between Moscow and President-elect Donald Trump, according to U.S., European and Arab officials.

The meeting took place around Jan. 11 — nine days before Trump’s inauguration — in the Seychelles islands in the Indian Ocean, officials said. Though the full agenda remains unclear, the UAE agreed to broker the meeting in part to explore whether Russia could be persuaded to curtail its relationship with Iran, including in Syria, a Trump administration objective that would be likely to require major concessions to Moscow on U.S. sanctions.

WASHINGTON — The C.I.A. told senior lawmakers in classified briefings last summer that it had information indicating that Russia was working to help elect Donald J. Trump president, a finding that did not emerge publicly until after Mr. Trump’s victory months later, former government officials say.

The briefings indicate that intelligence officials had evidence of Russia’s intentions to help Mr. Trump much earlier in the presidential campaign than previously thought. The briefings also reveal a critical split last summer between the C.I.A. and counterparts at the F.B.I., where a number of senior officials continued to believe through last fall that Russia’s cyberattacks were aimed primarily at disrupting America’s political system, and not at getting Mr. Trump elected, according to interviews.

Evan McMullin, who in his role as policy director to the House Republican Conference participated in the June 15 conversation, said: “It’s true that Majority Leader McCarthy said that he thought candidate Trump was on the Kremlin’s payroll. Speaker Ryan was concerned about that leaking.”

McMullin ran for president last year as an independent and has been a vocal critic of Trump.

When initially asked to comment on the exchange, Brendan Buck, a spokesman for Ryan, said: “That never happened,” and Matt Sparks, a spokesman for McCarthy, said: “The idea that McCarthy would assert this is absurd and false.”

After being told that The Post would cite a recording of the exchange, Buck, speaking for the GOP House leadership, said: “This entire year-old exchange was clearly an attempt at humor. No one believed the majority leader was seriously asserting that Donald Trump or any of our members were being paid by the Russians. What’s more, the speaker and leadership team have repeatedly spoken out against Russia’s interference in our election, and the House continues to investigate that activity.”

Just a few very quick examples of what rational people capable of thinking for themselves would call 'evidence'

 

[knapplc]

I never saw any of that on Fox & Friends.

- Dewiz

 

[ZRod]

P&R gang back at it...

The man asked. I'm simply obliging him.

 

[Apathy]

How is this sh#t I posted anything different from the garbage posted in the P&R forum that have been proven to be false or lack of evidence? And I'm the ignorant one

For the most part, the P&R regulars don't post "garbage." Everyone who regularly posts in P&R knows that if they post bullsh#t, they're going to be called out on it. Happens to me, to zoogs, to TGHusker, BRB, everyone. So when we post stuff there, we don't just grab the first stuff that coincides with our worldview, we check it.
We do that because we're interested in talking. We engage. We debate. We open our opinions up to cross-checking and, if we're blatantly wrong, ridicule. I posted something that was entirely wrong, wrong, wrong once and saunders called me out on it. I had to take my lumps for it.

You don't do that. You post your status updates, you get called on it, and rather than double-checking it, you complain you're being attacked, or you call people names like a five-year-old. You don't have the conviction of facts, you have the security blanket of your opinions.

Smart people let facts form their opinion. You force your opinion on to facts.

My first status update: Another Terrorist attack nothing to see here
Why did I post that? Because the f'ing mayor of London was the one telling his fellow citizens to get used to it because they live in a big city hence why I posted that status. Not forcing my opinion on there just repeating what the Mayor said

Second Status update was the twitter video. Another CNN employee says it's false but the guy recording the video says that the video is true. You believe in CNN which is fine but I don't because they've been caught more than once lying and fabricating stories before.

And Knapp go back and read those status updates again and see who called who names first. I was called a troll, snowflake and an attention whore before I said anything back.

But please let your big ego get in the way of facts

 

[Thanks_Tom RR]

Dewiz, I found the original quote from London Mayor Sadiq Khan that Trump was responding to:

"My message to Londoners and visitors to our great city is to be calm and vigilant today. You will see an increased police presence today, including armed officers and uniformed officers. There is no reason to be alarmed by this. We are the safest global city in the world. You saw last night as a consequence of our planning, our preparation, the rehearsals that take place, the swift response from the emergency services tackling the terrorists and also helping the injured.

Fox News did not report that full quotation rather reporting that the London mayor only said "no reason to be alarmed".

Trump then tweeted (maybe after seeing the misleading Fox report, though I, of course, do not know that):

https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/871328428963901440

So, you can see, Trump mistakenly interpreted Khan's comment to mean there is no need to be concerned about terrorist attacks, when Khan was referring to the visible increase in police activity on the streets of London. Trump got it wrong and may or may not admit that, but you and I know his error.

Trump, of course, has since sent out another tweet doubling down on his position. However, you and I can see reason and the reality of the situation and of his error in logic. We don't have to support his false narrative, am I right!?

 

[Saunders]

We do that because we're interested in talking. We engage. We debate. We open our opinions up to cross-checking and, if we're blatantly wrong, ridicule. I posted something that was entirely wrong, wrong, wrong once and saunders called me out on it. I had to take my lumps for it.

Lol, what was it? I don't even remember!

 

[knapplc]

I'd have to go back and dig to find it, but I recall it was something I posted in haste without checking the facts and you're like, "Errr.... here's the real story....?" and I had to admit I was wrong. RedDenver caught me in something as well.

People keep you on your toes in P&R. Some guys can handle being told they're wrong. Some guys can't. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯