$1.7 Billion of our taxes going to the Jan 6 rioters

[TimHauck]

2 minutes ago, Fnord said:

He didn't say he would. He's just ending the conversation respectfully. Chill out.

lol yes I know he wasn’t actually saying he would.  Just wanted to remind him of his hypocrisy.  Thanks for quoting me so he’d see it.

[cyclone24]

32 minutes ago, Fnord said:

So no response, just TDS. Exactly like I said. I get it, it's easier to ignore it than admit you were wrong or misled. But you just completely proved my point.

ETA: I voted for Walz, and as information came out about the fraud, I admitted it was a disaster and that I wouldn't vote for him again. I was mistaken. I don't understand why it's so difficult for folks to admit they were wrong.

I asked you which leader we kidnapped to prove its just TDS gibberish….feel free to answer knowing i know who you are referring to 

[Caine Mutiny]

26 minutes ago, Fnord said:

Respectfully

Given that you’re responding to @Meglamaniac you lost me right here. 

[JuneJuly]

2 hours ago, Fnord said:

Now let's talk about:

weaponizing the DOJ, paying his friends back with no bid contracts, slush funds, immunizing himself and family from future audits, gerrymandering midterms, a cabinet of billionaires, insider trading, extrajudicial executions, kidnapping foreign presidents, crypto policy literally designed to enrich himself, and oh yeah, a war he got duped into fighting because he's an idiot. I mean, I could go on, but feel free to address any of those things and compare them to Obama and Biden. Or Bush Jr, Clinton, Bush Sr, Reagan, Carter, Ford, even focking Nixon looks like a choir boy compared to cockwomble.

LOL

 

 

[Fnord]

10 minutes ago, cyclone24 said:

I asked you which leader we kidnapped to prove its just TDS gibberish….feel free to answer knowing i know who you are referring to 

Maduro, obviously. Someone else answered it too. What's your point?

[Meglamaniac]

4 minutes ago, Caine Mutiny said:

Given that you’re responding to @Meglamaniac you lost me right here. 

LOL

[TimHauck]

7 minutes ago, Fnord said:

Maduro, obviously. Someone else answered it too. What's your point?

He thinks he wasn’t kidnapped, I guess 

[Fnord]

6 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

He thinks he wasn’t kidnapped, I guess 

That's my assumption.

[Sean Mooney]

3 hours ago, cyclone24 said:

“In plain view”.  

 

Yes- you think your sources are the only ones. People on the left think theirs are the only ones......2 headed coin

[cyclone24]

2 hours ago, Fnord said:

Maduro, obviously. Someone else answered it too. What's your point?

Yeah, so you cant really kidnap anyone that multiple administrations including Biden had a bounty on. You’re aware of what a bounty is correct?

So that’s one that’s just pure gibberish. Would you like me to go on?
 

 

[Fnord]

1 hour ago, cyclone24 said:

Yeah, so you cant really kidnap anyone that multiple administrations including Biden had a bounty on. You’re aware of what a bounty is correct?

So that’s one that’s just pure gibberish. Would you like me to go on?
 

 

I would. Let's pretend this is a W for you. Move to the next subject.

[thegeneral]

Slush fund is kaput. Trump def wants to keep that IRS immunity for him and his spawn of grifters. We’ll see what happens there.

[cyclone24]

23 minutes ago, Fnord said:

I would. Let's pretend this is a W for you. Move to the next subject.

Well, luckily, we don’t have to pretend. That is a W for me. 
 

Well, I mean all of it is gibberish. He didn’t get duped into a war. Iran has been an issue for almost 50 years. Unless you’re one of those goofballs that think they weren’t trying to build a nuclear weapon which they were. So that needed to happen at some point.
 

I don’t even own cryptocurrency and I’m glad he did that. That’s the future not the past. This is kind of par for the course with you guys. You take an issue, you tie it to Trump and then you manufacture ways to fill in the blanks anywhere you can when you dont know something to make him look as bad as possible. 
 

 

[Fnord]

1 minute ago, cyclone24 said:

Well, luckily, we don’t have to pretend. That is a W for me. 
 

Well, I mean all of it is gibberish. He didn’t get duped into a war. Iran has been an issue for almost 50 years. Unless you’re one of those goofballs that think they weren’t trying to build a nuclear weapon which they were. So that needed to happen at some point.
 

I don’t even own cryptocurrency and I’m glad he did that. That’s the future not the past. This is kind of par for the course with you guys. You take an issue, you tie it to Trump and then you manufacture ways to fill in the blanks anywhere you can when you dont know something to make him look as bad as possible. 
 

 

Sure, sure. Look man, this convo is going nowhere. We've had similar before. I can shoot off a few dozen links from different sources all saying the same bad things about this admin and you will inevitably shut it down, like you have done today, without even considering merit. You are not interested in the crimes or behavior of this admin, which is your right. Unfortunately for you, that just diminishes your credibility to discuss the issues in my eyes.

But it's all good. We're just here killing time pretending that what we say isn't meaningless. Enjoy the rest of your day.

 

[JuneJuly]

12 minutes ago, cyclone24 said:

Well, luckily, we don’t have to pretend. That is a W for me. 
 

Well, I mean all of it is gibberish. He didn’t get duped into a war. Iran has been an issue for almost 50 years. Unless you’re one of those goofballs that think they weren’t trying to build a nuclear weapon which they were. So that needed to happen at some point.
 

I don’t even own cryptocurrency and I’m glad he did that. That’s the future not the past. This is kind of par for the course with you guys. You take an issue, you tie it to Trump and then you manufacture ways to fill in the blanks anywhere you can when you dont know something to make him look as bad as possible. 
 

 

[TimHauck]

14 minutes ago, cyclone24 said:

Well, luckily, we don’t have to pretend. That is a W for me. 
 

Well, I mean all of it is gibberish. He didn’t get duped into a war. Iran has been an issue for almost 50 years. Unless you’re one of those goofballs that think they weren’t trying to build a nuclear weapon which they were. So that needed to happen at some point.
 

I don’t even own cryptocurrency and I’m glad he did that. That’s the future not the past. This is kind of par for the course with you guys. You take an issue, you tie it to Trump and then you manufacture ways to fill in the blanks anywhere you can when you dont know something to make him look as bad as possible. 
 

 

You’re glad Trump launched coins that are down ~95% ($TRUMP) and ~99% ($MELANIA) from their peak?  Lol.

[JuneJuly]

6 minutes ago, Fnord said:

Sure, sure. Look man, this convo is going nowhere. We've had similar before. I can shoot off a few dozen links from different sources all saying the same bad things about this admin and you will inevitably shut it down, like you have done today, without even considering merit. You are not interested in the crimes or behavior of this admin, which is your right. Unfortunately for you, that just diminishes your credibility to discuss the issues in my eyes.

But it's all good. We're just here killing time pretending that what we say isn't meaningless. Enjoy the rest of your day.

 

Claiming moral superiority and then runs away.  Weak.  

[cyclone24]

3 minutes ago, Fnord said:

Sure, sure. Look man, this convo is going nowhere. We've had similar before. I can shoot off a few dozen links from different sources all saying the same bad things about this admin and you will inevitably shut it down, like you have done today, without even considering merit. You are not interested in the crimes or behavior of this admin, which is your right. Unfortunately for you, that just diminishes your credibility to discuss the issues in my eyes.

But it's all good. We're just here killing time pretending that what we say isn't meaningless. Enjoy the rest of your day.

 

Yeah, I’m not bashing you. I’m just saying you laid out about 15 different things that for the most part nonsensical. I mean I’ve taken two or three and basically not even with a dumb ass lawyer angle could dissect those allegations. 
 

I’m interested if you lay out something factual but no, you’re simply wrong on the threat Iran, was and has been. You’re wrong and how you’ve portrayed what happened to Maduro, which was not a kidnapping. 
 

I don’t mind debating factual things, but like I said, you make it up or you fill in the blanks with negativity every single time. There is no instance where if you don’t know something you fill it in with anything positive about him. And you know you don’t. That’s my whole point.

[cyclone24]

1 minute ago, JuneJuly said:

Claiming moral superiority and then runs away.  Weak.  

It’s like calling trump a Nazi. They like to yell and yell, but then when you actually try to pin them down to prove something, they don’t really have anything past ad hominem attacks
 

I really don’t know what their goal is. He’s going to be there for four years, you’re not getting him out of there. Maybe start worrying about their dog shiiit policies.

[TimHauck]

5 minutes ago, cyclone24 said:

It’s like calling trump a Nazi. They like to yell and yell, but then when you actually try to pin them down to prove something, they don’t really have anything past ad hominem attacks
 

Yeah, kinda like when you put posters on ignore for proving you wrong so often

[seafoam1]

1 hour ago, TimHauck said:

Yeah, kinda like when you put posters on ignore for proving you wrong so often

You have never proven anyone wrong. Ever. 

[thegeneral]

Will the cuckold GOP deny Trump and company IRS audit immunity?

If they grow a pair and deny that it’s curtains for Todd Blanche. Next man up!

[Caine Mutiny]

1 hour ago, thegeneral said:

Will the cuckold GOP deny Trump and company IRS audit immunity?

 

It’s very difficult to find news on this 

[thegeneral]

12 minutes ago, Caine Mutiny said:

It’s very difficult to find news on this 

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/06/02/us/politics/trump-irs-settlement.html

[seafoam1]

5 hours ago, thegeneral said:

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/06/02/us/politics/trump-irs-settlement.html

This is what libtards call "news".

 The ny slimes. 

Thegenital sitting online late night trying to GET TRUMP!!! 

[shadrap]

14 hours ago, thegeneral said:

Slush fund is kaput. Trump def wants to keep that IRS immunity for him and his spawn of grifters. We’ll see what happens there.

I'm glad no slush fund.

[Voltaire]

20 hours ago, Fnord said:

Link? Proof? Why is the Trump DOJ not all over this?

Now let's talk about:

weaponizing the DOJ, paying his friends back with no bid contracts, slush funds, immunizing himself and family from future audits, gerrymandering midterms, a cabinet of billionaires, insider trading, extrajudicial executions, kidnapping foreign presidents, crypto policy literally designed to enrich himself, and oh yeah, a war he got duped into fighting because he's an idiot. I mean, I could go on, but feel free to address any of those things and compare them to Obama and Biden. Or Bush Jr, Clinton, Bush Sr, Reagan, Carter, Ford, even focking Nixon looks like a choir boy compared to cockwomble.

• weaponizing the DOJ- True enough, but R or D, this is what we get. It's nothing new. The last truly independent attorney generals we had were John Ashcroft and Jeff Sessions and they both eventually got squeezed out. Presidents have determined that that they need a warrior in that position to fight for their agenda. Its not like Eric Holder and Merrick Garland's DOJ weren't weaponizing the DOJ. Their offices were stuffed to the rafters with political activists pushing a partisan agenda as well. Both the incoming and outgoing lawfare has been intense this century, and we've grown accustomed to seeing our attorney generals as partisan actors. After Merrick Garland, nothing seems a bridge too far.  
• paying his friends back with no bid contracts- this sucks but again, its bipartisan by both parties and at all levels of government. I suspect this is a far bigger blue problem than red, but that may be personal bias.
• slush funds - that was always a nothingburger that wasn't going to go anywhere, as was so very easily predicted. Much ado about nothing.
• immunizing himself and family from future audits - This is far less awful than it appears. We've seen him put through the ringer on transparently BS charges both legal and financial, so I don't blame him. The Dems were out to get him every-which-way. That said, the president should be paying taxes and I don't trust him overseeing himself either. Its just less bad than the alternatives. 
• gerrymandering midterms- I would agree. I use to oppose gerrymandering, maybe I still do, ideally, but this is where we are. And Trump has indeed made it worse. Good government referendums that prevent gerrymandering (like the one I voted for in Michigan that still holds because the governor and legislature are of different parties) are being tossed aside. But remind me which Democrat state wasn't already gerrymandered to the hilt. Two. Virginia where the Dems recently took over the governor and legislature. That'll get done for 2028. In California, where the Dems had to overcome a voter referendum to gerrymander. What's new is that redistricting is now being done mid-decade, and the agitation for this does lie with Trump. What's also new is that the GOP can now retaliate in their states. I can't say I like this state of afffairs.
• a cabinet of billionaires- Yes, there are a few
• insider trading- This sucks and is out of control. Another both sides do it thing. We do have good government advocates from both parties proposing legislation and, of course, overwhelming popular support but when actions are taken, then leave massive gaps and spotty enforcement.
• extrajudicial executions- Good. Don't smuggle drugs. Bye 
• kidnapping foreign presidents - Good. Venezuela is so much better off. 
• crypto policy literally designed to enrich himself - He's making tons of cash off this and it does look shady. I liked his previous policy of skepticism towards crypto, but that was long ago and no longer relevant.
• a war he got duped into fighting  - He tries to take on and solve longstanding problems and Iran is a big one. I'm not terribly keen on the never-ending peace talks that appear to be going nowhere, but preventing Iran from funding terrorism and building nuclear weapons are worthwhile goals. 

Adressing three/four points together, you're onto something with the crypto, the insider trading, and the no-bid contracts. It certainly looks shady especially when he prevents himself from getting audited. But even if it is all on the up-and-up, the Democrats have and will come after him personally full bore, What we've seen in the past was BS. They went after his assets for no reason and changed the law to charge him with transparently fake felonies. Even though this looks bad, potentially is bad, after what he's been through, I don't blame him at all. It is understandable.

Also, you're not going to get better results on insider trading and no-bid contracts by voting Democrat.

I don't want a weaponized DOJ nor gerrymandering, but we're kind of dragged into these positions. You're not going to get a non-weaponized DOJ with either either party. In Trump's defense, his weaponized DOJ picks far better and more appropriate battles. Trump did not start this. What Trump did indeed start, he's been the primary agitator for mid-decade gerrymandering. Now, Democrats are joining him by retaliating. That's another genie we may not get back into the bottle.

A third thing you fail to mention is the Senate filibuster. The Dems almost scrapped it. The two Dems that held firm to prevent it from going away are now out of office. Trump now wants to scrap it too and John Cornyn paid the price for keeping it. Eventually, one party or the other seems likely to kill the filibuster. Maybe once Trump leaves office the fever pitch will die down, we focking hate each other now.

[thegeneral]

7 minutes ago, Voltaire said:

• weaponizing the DOJ- True enough, but R or D, this is what we get. It's nothing new. The last truly independent attorney generals we had were John Ashcroft and Jeff Sessions and they both eventually got squeezed out. Presidents have determined that that they need a warrior in that position to fight for their agenda. Its not like Eric Holder and Merrick Garland's DOJ weren't weaponizing the DOJ. Their offices were stuffed to the rafters with political activists pushing a partisan agenda as well. Both the incoming and outgoing lawfare has been intense this century, and we've grown accustomed to seeing our attorney generals as partisan actors. After Merrick Garland, nothing seems a bridge too far.  
• paying his friends back with no bid contracts- this sucks but again, its bipartisan by both parties and at all levels of government. I suspect this is a far bigger blue problem than red, but that may be personal bias.
• slush funds - that was always a nothingburger that wasn't going to go anywhere, as was so very easily predicted. Much ado about nothing.
• immunizing himself and family from future audits - This is far less awful than it appears. We've seen him put through the ringer on transparently BS charges both legal and financial, so I don't blame him. The Dems were out to get him every-which-way. That said, the president should be paying taxes and I don't trust him overseeing himself either. Its just less bad than the alternatives. 
• gerrymandering midterms- I would agree. I use to oppose gerrymandering, maybe I still do, ideally, but this is where we are. And Trump has indeed made it worse. Good government referendums that prevent gerrymandering (like the one I voted for in Michigan that still holds because the governor and legislature are of different parties) are being tossed aside. But remind me which Democrat state wasn't already gerrymandered to the hilt. Two. Virginia where the Dems recently took over the governor and legislature. That'll get done for 2028. In California, where the Dems had to overcome a voter referendum to gerrymander. What's new is that redistricting is now being done mid-decade, and the agitation for this does lie with Trump. What's also new is that the GOP can now retaliate in their states. I can't say I like this state of afffairs.
• a cabinet of billionaires- Yes, there are a few
• insider trading- This sucks and is out of control. Another both sides do it thing. We do have good government advocates from both parties proposing legislation and, of course, overwhelming popular support but when actions are taken, then leave massive gaps and spotty enforcement.
• extrajudicial executions- Good. Don't smuggle drugs. Bye 
• kidnapping foreign presidents - Good. Venezuela is so much better off. 
• crypto policy literally designed to enrich himself - He's making tons of cash off this and it does look shady. I liked his previous policy of skepticism towards crypto, but that was long ago and no longer relevant.
• a war he got duped into fighting  - He tries to take on and solve longstanding problems and Iran is a big one. I'm not terribly keen on the never-ending peace talks that appear to be going nowhere, but preventing Iran from funding terrorism and building nuclear weapons are worthwhile goals. 

Adressing three/four points together, you're onto something with the crypto, the insider trading, and the no-bid contracts. It certainly looks shady especially when he prevents himself from getting audited. But even if it is all on the up-and-up, the Democrats have and will come after him personally full bore, What we've seen in the past was BS. They went after his assets for no reason and changed the law to charge him with transparently fake felonies. Even though this looks bad, potentially is bad, after what he's been through, I don't blame him at all. It is understandable.

Also, you're not going to get better results on insider trading and no-bid contracts by voting Democrat.

I don't want a weaponized DOJ nor gerrymandering, but we're kind of dragged into these positions. You're not going to get a non-weaponized DOJ with either either party. In Trump's defense, his weaponized DOJ picks far better and more appropriate battles. Trump did not start this. What Trump did indeed start, he's been the primary agitator for mid-decade gerrymandering. Now, Democrats are joining him by retaliating. That's another genie we may not get back into the bottle.

A third thing you fail to mention is the Senate filibuster. The Dems almost scrapped it. The two Dems that held firm to prevent it from going away are now out of office. Trump now wants to scrap it too and John Cornyn paid the price for keeping it. Eventually, one party or the other seems likely to kill the filibuster. Maybe once Trump leaves office the fever pitch will die down, we focking hate each other now.

The reason that the slush fund didn’t happen is because it was talked about and anyone, not you of course, who bothered to look into it saw how much of a joke it was.

Next up his IRS immunity. 

[Fnord]

4 hours ago, Voltaire said:

• weaponizing the DOJ- True enough, but R or D, this is what we get. It's nothing new. The last truly independent attorney generals we had were John Ashcroft and Jeff Sessions and they both eventually got squeezed out. Presidents have determined that that they need a warrior in that position to fight for their agenda. Its not like Eric Holder and Merrick Garland's DOJ weren't weaponizing the DOJ. Their offices were stuffed to the rafters with political activists pushing a partisan agenda as well. Both the incoming and outgoing lawfare has been intense this century, and we've grown accustomed to seeing our attorney generals as partisan actors. After Merrick Garland, nothing seems a bridge too far.  
• paying his friends back with no bid contracts- this sucks but again, its bipartisan by both parties and at all levels of government. I suspect this is a far bigger blue problem than red, but that may be personal bias.
• slush funds - that was always a nothingburger that wasn't going to go anywhere, as was so very easily predicted. Much ado about nothing.
• immunizing himself and family from future audits - This is far less awful than it appears. We've seen him put through the ringer on transparently BS charges both legal and financial, so I don't blame him. The Dems were out to get him every-which-way. That said, the president should be paying taxes and I don't trust him overseeing himself either. Its just less bad than the alternatives. 
• gerrymandering midterms- I would agree. I use to oppose gerrymandering, maybe I still do, ideally, but this is where we are. And Trump has indeed made it worse. Good government referendums that prevent gerrymandering (like the one I voted for in Michigan that still holds because the governor and legislature are of different parties) are being tossed aside. But remind me which Democrat state wasn't already gerrymandered to the hilt. Two. Virginia where the Dems recently took over the governor and legislature. That'll get done for 2028. In California, where the Dems had to overcome a voter referendum to gerrymander. What's new is that redistricting is now being done mid-decade, and the agitation for this does lie with Trump. What's also new is that the GOP can now retaliate in their states. I can't say I like this state of afffairs.
• a cabinet of billionaires- Yes, there are a few
• insider trading- This sucks and is out of control. Another both sides do it thing. We do have good government advocates from both parties proposing legislation and, of course, overwhelming popular support but when actions are taken, then leave massive gaps and spotty enforcement.
• extrajudicial executions- Good. Don't smuggle drugs. Bye 
• kidnapping foreign presidents - Good. Venezuela is so much better off. 
• crypto policy literally designed to enrich himself - He's making tons of cash off this and it does look shady. I liked his previous policy of skepticism towards crypto, but that was long ago and no longer relevant.
• a war he got duped into fighting  - He tries to take on and solve longstanding problems and Iran is a big one. I'm not terribly keen on the never-ending peace talks that appear to be going nowhere, but preventing Iran from funding terrorism and building nuclear weapons are worthwhile goals. 

Adressing three/four points together, you're onto something with the crypto, the insider trading, and the no-bid contracts. It certainly looks shady especially when he prevents himself from getting audited. But even if it is all on the up-and-up, the Democrats have and will come after him personally full bore, What we've seen in the past was BS. They went after his assets for no reason and changed the law to charge him with transparently fake felonies. Even though this looks bad, potentially is bad, after what he's been through, I don't blame him at all. It is understandable.

Also, you're not going to get better results on insider trading and no-bid contracts by voting Democrat.

I don't want a weaponized DOJ nor gerrymandering, but we're kind of dragged into these positions. You're not going to get a non-weaponized DOJ with either either party. In Trump's defense, his weaponized DOJ picks far better and more appropriate battles. Trump did not start this. What Trump did indeed start, he's been the primary agitator for mid-decade gerrymandering. Now, Democrats are joining him by retaliating. That's another genie we may not get back into the bottle.

A third thing you fail to mention is the Senate filibuster. The Dems almost scrapped it. The two Dems that held firm to prevent it from going away are now out of office. Trump now wants to scrap it too and John Cornyn paid the price for keeping it. Eventually, one party or the other seems likely to kill the filibuster. Maybe once Trump leaves office the fever pitch will die down, we focking hate each other now.

Appreciate the thoughtful response. Don't have the time to rebut right now, but will when I can.