Printable View
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJ_Chaps
Lies about random stupid shit, or lies about cheating on the first lady literally in the White house......if the latter wasn't impeachable then how is the first?Quote:
Originally Posted by ToasterOven
I hope you're just really, really baked, cause if not, this is just sheer stupidity.Quote:
Originally Posted by DJ_ChapsQuote:
Originally Posted by El Gallo
do you know what acquitted means, moron? odd for you guys to go so literal on this one.
Chaps getting destroyed
Chaps probably knows he was mistaken, but at this point it's too embarrassing to concede the point.
It doesn't have to be, though. Look at the sort of people who always stubbornly cling to their arguments and never admit they're wrong. They're complete morons. You don't want to be that guy.
There are many fine examples in this very thread.
Like who?Quote:
Originally Posted by SrslySirius
TIME has been putting out very non-specific and intentionally misleading denials of Trump's claims.Quote:
Originally Posted by vegas1369Exactly what did they lie about? This pretty much corroborates what they're saying.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
They never said a call didn't take place. They're saying they wouldn't have told him that he was probably person of the year. What more than likely happened was they told him he was being considered, which isn't good enough for old puffy orange face, and he declined their interview... because he's a giant bitch.
Keep on defending him though.
You think that's just an accident?
Why won't they just specify EXACTLY what was and wasn't said on that call?
Now that Trump has called them out, why can't they simply respond and definitively state what occurred on that phone call?
So now you're hanging your hat on the word "probably"? LOL
Actually, I believe they either used that word or said something to heavily imply it. Remember, the person from TIME calling Trump was attempting to kiss his ass and get his cooperation for the cover of their shitty magazine. So they likely knew he was already selected as person of the year (barring a highly unlikely scenario of someone doing something incredibly impactful in the next few weeks, like curing cancer), and they wanted to give him assurance that this phone call wasn't wasting his time based upon what MIGHT happen.
So, yes, it's far more plausible that they called Trump and said something like, "President Trump, I'm calling from TIME Magazine. We are pleased to inform you that we are probably going to feature you as our person of the year, and would love a few moments of your time for a photo shoot once that selection is confirmed."
Then Trump told them to stuff it, and tried to humiliate them on Twitter.
Then, instead of just owning up to this harmless phone call, TIME tried to fight back with him by implying he was lying, without specifying what he was lying about or where he was incorrect.
Look, I get that a lot of you hate Trump.
I don't love him, either. I didn't support him in the primary, and I hated the fact that America's choice was between him and Hillary.
However, too many of you want to cast him as the wrong party in EVERY situation, and the world simply doesn't work like that.
I will even concede that Trump shouldn't have been posturing about his rejection of TIME, but their response should have been to point out how he was wasting his important time with this nonsense (as he frequently does), not to try to make it look like his account of the situation was wrong.
I couldn't think of anything less important than this topic.
Once again Trump wins having us debate this nonsense instead of real stuff, like the fraudulent tax cut for the super rich bill going through.
Man.... Druff really hates being wrong...lol
Druff, this is a very simple argument. Trump is saying they called him and said he's probably going to be Person of the Year. Time simply disputes that they told him that as their policy is they don't announce who won until a later date. Given Trumps history, it makes a whole lot more sense for them to have called to request the interview, and he wouldnt grant it because they wouldn't commit to him being the winner. He then made a typical "beat them to the punch" tweet, just like he did when all if the CEO's decided to quit the Business Advisory Committee. I really don't get the defense of Trump here other than to make a mountain out of a molehill and just to defend for the sake of defending.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SrslySirius
oh sure i got carried away with my simple view on impeachment. these guys say impeach trump, wanting him out. i just look at that and zero in on the hypocricy since clinton didn't get shitcanned.
but, as is typical with the new left, instead of saying hey chappy its more complicated than that, impeachment is just the process. they go lol trumptard, because muh labels and muh inner anger are common among a lot of these types.
and yes vegas, i was obv baked to the gills, still am. just got done 13 overnighters in a row and enjoying a few nights off.
Quote:
Originally Posted by vegas1369
Read the bolded part you wrote again.
Time says that it's not their policy to ANNOUNCE who won until a later date. That is correct. They have not ANNOUNCED anything. They also did not ANNOUNCE anything to Trump.
Telling someone, "You're probably going to be Person of the Year, and we are requesting your cooperation if that happens" is not ANNOUNCING anything.
It is giving the likely winner a heads-up, without committing to anything.
Do you really think TIME hadn't already selected Trump at that point, barring a last-minute miracle of some sort (again, like a guy curing cancer)?
Obviously they were trying to give him the heads up because he was indeed PROBABLY person of the year, in order to get him to agree to a photo shoot when it likely happens.
Then it all blew up, and instead of just owning up to what really happened, they are engaging in lame double-speak to try to make him look like a liar.
What do you think happened?
trump's mistake in this is thinking that being named time's man of the year is meant as an honor, when it's not. it just means you were the most significant
hitler (seriously) was time's man of the year
"Mr President, Time Magazine is requesting an interview and photo op with you. You are a finalist for Person of the Year"
"Did I win? I mean, trust me, if anyone should win it should be me.. biggest inauguration in history... jobs, lots of jobs, stock market, highest it's ever been... believe me, everybody thinks I should win, it's not even a question. I have to win, bigly, trust me... So, did I win?"
"They won't say Mr. President "
"I have to win... who could beat me?... trust me... there's no one... they're all losers... just tell them to let us know it's me... we'll throw a big party, it will be great, believe me. Biggest party, nest party ever, they'll get big ratings. BIG! Just tell them that..."
"They say they can't disclose the winner yet Mr. President"
"Ok... Fuck them... tell them we're not doing it. Let them have their stupid competition... No body cares about their stupid magazine anymore anyway... terrible ratings. Terrible!! They're dead... Where's my phone? I need to Tweet about this"
Something like that.
whether trump is right or wrong here is not really the issue.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan DruffTIME has been putting out very non-specific and intentionally misleading denials of Trump's claims.Quote:
Originally Posted by vegas1369
You think that's just an accident?
Why won't they just specify EXACTLY what was and wasn't said on that call?
Now that Trump has called them out, why can't they simply respond and definitively state what occurred on that phone call?
So now you're hanging your hat on the word "probably"? LOL
Actually, I believe they either used that word or said something to heavily imply it. Remember, the person from TIME calling Trump was attempting to kiss his ass and get his cooperation for the cover of their shitty magazine. So they likely knew he was already selected as person of the year (barring a highly unlikely scenario of someone doing something incredibly impactful in the next few weeks, like curing cancer), and they wanted to give him assurance that this phone call wasn't wasting his time based upon what MIGHT happen.
So, yes, it's far more plausible that they called Trump and said something like, "President Trump, I'm calling from TIME Magazine. We are pleased to inform you that we are probably going to feature you as our person of the year, and would love a few moments of your time for a photo shoot once that selection is confirmed."
Then Trump told them to stuff it, and tried to humiliate them on Twitter.
Then, instead of just owning up to this harmless phone call, TIME tried to fight back with him by implying he was lying, without specifying what he was lying about or where he was incorrect.
Look, I get that a lot of you hate Trump.
I don't love him, either. I didn't support him in the primary, and I hated the fact that America's choice was between him and Hillary.
However, too many of you want to cast him as the wrong party in EVERY situation, and the world simply doesn't work like that.
I will even concede that Trump shouldn't have been posturing about his rejection of TIME, but their response should have been to point out how he was wasting his important time with this nonsense (as he frequently does), not to try to make it look like his account of the situation was wrong.
what's more important is that trump's tweets on this subject (like those against the NFL and, lol, lavar ball) are signs of legit insanity
Shame on you guys for making chaps cry.
Decided to look at TIME person of the year history just now. Extremely biased towards Americans and nearly every USA president gets it, often more than once. Interestingly the only person to ever get it twice in a row from what I can see is Richard Nixon... Interesting company for Trump if he gets it again which I would expect. I think there is also outside chance "internet trolls" win.
Putin would sell more copies and beats trump as usual.Quote:
Originally Posted by BetCheckBet
purging the clinton faction from the dnc would be the best thing to happen for the democrats and would not lead to 20 years of republican ruleQuote:
Originally Posted by Mintjewlips
He won it a few years ago and very rarely if at all does a non american win it twice. I was serious about internet trolls btw. I'd say there is 5-10% chance TIME labels them as person of the year.Quote:
Originally Posted by limitlesPutin would sell more copies and beats trump as usual.Quote:
Originally Posted by BetCheckBet
https://www.oddschecker.com/novelty/...he-year/winner
Macron betting favourite with Trump and #metoo close behind.
Trump will lose his shit if he loses to either of those two.
Quite possible Trump self sabotaging so he has excuse if he loses. Will simple say TIME is pissed off at him.
Youre basically jewdonk without the cussing right now. I get that this threads about LOLpolitics and everything but sometimes the topic has nothing to do with politics. Sometimes its just douchebags engaging in douchebag behavior.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan DruffQuote:
Originally Posted by vegas1369
Read the bolded part you wrote again.
Time says that it's not their policy to ANNOUNCE who won until a later date. That is correct. They have not ANNOUNCED anything. They also did not ANNOUNCE anything to Trump.
Telling someone, "You're probably going to be Person of the Year, and we are requesting your cooperation if that happens" is not ANNOUNCING anything.
It is giving the likely winner a heads-up, without committing to anything.
Do you really think TIME hadn't already selected Trump at that point, barring a last-minute miracle of some sort (again, like a guy curing cancer)?
Obviously they were trying to give him the heads up because he was indeed PROBABLY person of the year, in order to get him to agree to a photo shoot when it likely happens.
Then it all blew up, and instead of just owning up to what really happened, they are engaging in lame double-speak to try to make him look like a liar.
What do you think happened?
Chaps coming back with ohhhh and what about clinton broz? Hey dumbfuck some of us were in gradeschool when that happened. Why the fuck would we care unless we were 12 year old druff?
But you druff... youre supposed to be smart, all due respect to chaps. Oh youll concede a couple of points? How nice. Get off the rights nuts. Not a good look for you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by varysYoure basically jewdonkQuote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
todge blake is basically jewdonk except he has a discover card
Quote:
Originally Posted by lol wow
and now its real people
except one is black on a boat in asia and one is asian with a bloated black wifeQuote:
Originally Posted by lol wow
are we good here cuz i feel like jim fin'd it
This would make a great SNL sketch, but isn't likely to have been the way the conversation went.Quote:
Originally Posted by vegas1369
TIME won't even disclose what was said on the call! Why do you think that is?
You are giving TIME waaaaaaaaay too much credit regarding their integrity regarding not tipping off the winner.
If TIME feels that a custom photo shoot will sell more magazines, of course they are going to tip the winner off in advance that he either won or is very likely to win.
Why is it so hard to believe that TIME called Trump, told him he was probably going to be person of the year, and wanted to set up a photo shoot?
Some form of that is the most likely scenario regarding what happened.
They are just trying to save face now that Trump publicly rejected them.
Is this an important issue? Certainly not.
Should Trump be wasting his time with this nonsense? Of course not.
But LOL at trying to spin this into Trump simply being angry that TIME wouldn't tell him if he was likely to win. The fact that he was likely to win is the exact reason they called him.
Another question: Did TIME call anyone else -- any other possible winner? I doubt it. (And if they did, I bet it was AFTER Trump's tweet.)
They already had their minds made up.
It's clear as day.
Quote:
Originally Posted by varysYoure basically jewdonk without the cussing right now. I get that this threads about LOLpolitics and everything but sometimes the topic has nothing to do with politics. Sometimes its just douchebags engaging in douchebag behavior.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
Chaps coming back with ohhhh and what about clinton broz? Hey dumbfuck some of us were in gradeschool when that happened. Why the fuck would we care unless we were 12 year old druff?
But you druff... youre supposed to be smart, all due respect to chaps. Oh youll concede a couple of points? How nice. Get off the rights nuts. Not a good look for you.
What are you going on about?
What does my post quoted above have to do with Chaps -- or Clinton for that matter?
My argument regarding TIME isn't even political. It's one of common sense.
If you are going to criticize Trump, there's lots of legitimate things to pick to do so.
Trying to claim that he lied about TIME's phone call to him -- when TIME's cagey reaction to his tweet seems to indicate otherwise -- is just nonsensical partisan bashing.
oh you were just a toddler when clinton was in office, varys? cool.
Wow, that guy simply has no filter lol. That was hilarious and sad all at the same time.Quote:
Originally Posted by simpdog
Quote:
Originally Posted by simpdog
he did so standing in front of a poster of andrew jackson.
you know, the guy who was literally responsible for the 'trail of tears'.
sonatine sitting in his luxurious apartment, scalp intact, complaining on the internet that our forefathers made tough decisions to protect our people from wild savagesQuote:
Originally Posted by sonatine
fuck Indians. We need to get rid of reservations. the "Indians" who live on them live in modern housing, use money, cars, electricity, speak English... fuck outta here Tonto you live in America, deal with it
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zap_the_Fractions_Giraffesonatine sitting in his luxurious apartment, scalp intact, complaining on the internet that our forefathers made tough decisions to protect our people from wild savagesQuote:
Originally Posted by sonatine
My parents support many different Native American foundations. We are very offended by the comments made today.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Krypt
Fucked up story in The Washington Post today.
Sting operation targeting the paper, which turned out to be a lame attempt to discredit the MSM and muddy the waters on the nonce allegations against Roy Moore.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/inves...=.50db13508f4aQuote:
A woman who falsely claimed to The Washington Post that Roy Moore, the Republican U.S. Senate candidate in Alabama, impregnated her as a teenager appears to work with an organization that uses deceptive tactics to secretly record conversations in an effort to embarrass its targets.
In a series of interviews over two weeks, the woman shared a dramatic story about an alleged sexual relationship with Moore in 1992 that led to an abortion when she was 15. During the interviews, she repeatedly pressed Post reporters to give their opinions on the effects that her claims could have on Moore’s candidacy if she went public.
The Post did not publish an article based on her unsubstantiated account. When Post reporters confronted her with inconsistencies in her story and an Internet posting that raised doubts about her motivations, she insisted that she was not working with any organization that targets journalists.
But on Monday morning, Post reporters saw her walking into the New York offices of Project Veritas, an organization that targets the mainstream news media and left-leaning groups. The organization sets up undercover “stings” that involve using false cover stories and covert video recordings meant to expose what the group says is media bias.
James O’Keefe, the founder of Project Veritas who was convicted of a misdemeanor in 2010 for using a fake identity to enter a federal building during a previous sting, declined to answer questions about the woman outside the Project Veritas office, a storefront in Mamaroneck, N.Y., on Monday morning shortly after the woman walked inside.
“I am not doing an interview right now, so I’m not going to say a word,” O’Keefe said.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sonatineQuote:
Originally Posted by simpdog
he did so standing in front of a poster of andrew jackson.
you know, the guy who was literally responsible for the 'trail of tears'.
out of green, but here is this.
At this point I'm starting to think that anyone who stands next to Trump to accept an award deserves to have their culture and people insulted.
Chief Navarro should have taken a knee.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord of the Fraud
After this story broke in the WaPo, everybody asked the same question: "Who the fuck is funding O'Keefe?"
In response to that, O'Keefe made an appeal asking the public for money. But everybody just laughed and called it a scam.
But to me, it's a clear diversion from the fact that's he's already being heavily funded by those trying to quash the Moore allegations. And it seems to have worked.
The fuck is happening to America? Even alleged haters like myself are not laughing anymore.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DPrdXgSV4AE8KFb.jpg
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord of the Fraud
it will be all over soon. the grim truth is that once a nation's abject stupidity reaches a certain tipping point, it gets taken into the food chain.
we had an interesting run for about 250 years but thats all over now. china will continue to quietly acquire resources and corporate influence here, and then they will leverage that influence to manipulate our national policies via the well established corporate lobbyist dynamics.
and honestly im all for it. a post-america earth could thrive.