Sign up for The Wire Newsletter!

No Collusion?

muttly

Veteran Expediter
Tell me that you said the same thing about Clinton. And no, I don’t think it’s an impeachable offense. Possibly the lying and trying to hide everything might approach it but I don’t want to see him impeached (as much as I dislike him).
Always back to Clinton. Trump may have lied to the NyTimes about it. But I'm not aware that lying to the NYTimes is an impeachable offense.
But since you brought up Clinton. Do you think it's appropriate for a supervisor to have a more than platonic relationship with a direct subordinate in a work environment?
Where I work in my other job, that's not ok.
And do you think it is ok to tamper with witnesses in an investigation by providing job opportunities and financial gains to them as long as they don't cooperate. That's part of what Clinton was accused of.
 

Solar

Expert Expediter
Owner/Operator
Nor am I intentionally pranking anyone into believing something that isn't true.
It doesn’t require explaining the joke so much as simply as, “I’m just joking.”

IMG_4692.JPG

Without that, all you have done is to deceive someone into believing something that isn’t true.

And if you believe that if someone is so stupid that that they don’t get it, then it’s on them, con artists live by that same moniker.

This is why I say, if you allow a person to believe a joke, it’s no longer a joke, it’s a prank. You’re setting them up for a fall.




Sent from my iPhone using EO Forums
 

dalscott

Expert Expediter
Always back to Clinton. Trump may have lied to the NyTimes about it. But I'm not aware that lying to the NYTimes is an impeachable offense.
But since you brought up Clinton. Do you think it's appropriate for a supervisor to have a more than platonic relationship with a direct subordinate in a work environment?
Where I work in my other job, that's not ok.
And do you think it is ok to tamper with witnesses in an investigation by providing job opportunities and financial gains to them as long as they don't cooperate. That's part of what Clinton was accused of.
I never said that Clinton was perfect and there is truth to some of what you said. My point is that I think that having an affair like he did was not so smart but to my knowledge, there are no laws preventing consensual sex in the workplace. But if not for those witch-hunts none of that stuff would have probably never seen the light of day.
Trump has done his share of witness tampering and hasn’t been punished (yet).
Another thing, while Newt Gingrich was first in line pushing for impeachment it was found that he was banging more than one woman in the Capital building while the impeachment process was going on. Dan Burke called Clinton a scumbag. Later it was discovered that he too was having an adulterous affairs. Who knows how many of your other holier than thou folks could have been guilty of that too. What hypocrites!



Sent from my iPhone using EO Forums
 

LDB

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
I have no problem saying what needs to be said about either side. I've rarely, if ever, had anything good to say about Ryan, McCain, McConnell and many others on the right.
 

dalscott

Expert Expediter
I have no problem saying what needs to be said about either side. I've rarely, if ever, had anything good to say about Ryan, McCain, McConnell and many others on the right.
That’s fair. There are likewise people on the right that I like and respect. Funny, McCain is one of them. I also disagreed strongly with Clinton and Obama for their trade policies. That’s one of the few things that I agree with Trump.
Nice to have a civilized conversation without the name calling and insults Isn’t it?


Sent from my iPhone using EO Forums
 

LDB

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
There are likewise people on the right that I like and respect. Funny, McCain is one of them.
Maybe because he was totally a RINO and really a leftist so you weren't really liking a guy on the right, just one who falsely claimed being on the right.
 

dalscott

Expert Expediter
Maybe because he was totally a RINO and really a leftist so you weren't really liking a guy on the right, just one who falsely claimed being on the right.
Right!! Then he fooled millions of people down through the years, not just me. I also liked Dunken Hunter so much that I probably would have voted for him had he been your candidate.
I also liked Bush senior as a person.
I guess McCain was no good because you disagreed with him. Maybe because he couldn’t be led by the nose by Trump.


Sent from my iPhone using EO Forums
 

LDB

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
McCain was no good because for many many years he only gave lip service to common sense, frequently straying too far to the left. It wasn't just the last couple of years while Trump was around. And I didn't always disagree with him, only when he was wrong which sadly was more often than it should have been.
 

dalscott

Expert Expediter
McCain was no good because for many many years he only gave lip service to common sense, frequently straying too far to the left. It wasn't just the last couple of years while Trump was around. And I didn't always disagree with him, only when he was wrong which sadly was more often than it should have been.
I understand. If somebody tries to work at with the left or go off the far right wall even the slightest bit, that’s going too far to the left. I got it!
I guess Eisenhower was too far left. Gee, look at the number of people he put back to work and how the economy picked up for most of the fifties.


Sent from my iPhone using EO Forums
 

LDB

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
No, working with the left is a desirable action when the left is willing to move away from the 1, based on a 1-10 scale. Nothing should drop below 5.5 however, the middle point on the scale. McCain was more than willing to visit 5, 4 or 3 and perhaps even lower on the scale. Pelosi/Schumer and their ilk are apparently incapable of passing 2. That's the problem.
 

dalscott

Expert Expediter
No, working with the left is a desirable action when the left is willing to move away from the 1, based on a 1-10 scale. Nothing should drop below 5.5 however, the middle point on the scale. McCain was more than willing to visit 5, 4 or 3 and perhaps even lower on the scale. Pelosi/Schumer and their ilk are apparently incapable of passing 2. That's the problem.
Agree as long as we remember that that’s a two way street. If you remember, the two parties used to work with each other and got a lot of things done.
It worked well until Obama was elected when top republican leaders and decided to block everything that Obama was for including republican ideas. That led to a lot of filibusters and record obstruction. If you don’t believe me, check out the Caucus Room conspiracy.
 

dalscott

Expert Expediter
Agree as long as we remember that that’s a two way street. If you remember, the two parties used to work with each other and got a lot of things done.
It worked well until Obama was elected when top republican leaders and decided to block everything that Obama was for including republican ideas. That led to a lot of filibusters and record obstruction. If you don’t believe me, check out the Caucus Room conspiracy.


Sent from my iPhone using EO Forums
 

Turtle

Administrator
Staff member
Owner/Operator
Without that, all you have done is to deceive someone into believing something that isn’t true.
Again, nonsense. If I'm telling a joke to a single person and they don't get it, that's one thing, but if 70% of the people in the room get the joke, the other 30% haven't been deceived at all.
 

Solar

Expert Expediter
Owner/Operator
It worked well until Obama was elected when top republican leaders and decided to block everything that Obama was for including republican ideas. That led to a lot of filibusters and record obstruction. If you don’t believe me, check out the Caucus Room conspiracy.
You mean when Senator Kennedy died, and the state of Massachusetts put a Republican in his seat, for no other reason but to obstruct Obamacare?



Sent from my iPhone using EO Forums
 

Solar

Expert Expediter
Owner/Operator
Again, nonsense. If I'm telling a joke to a single person and they don't get it, that's one thing, but if 70% of the people in the room get the joke, the other 30% haven't been deceived at all.
If you are a comedian, up telling jokes, then everyone already knows you’re joking, even if they don’t get a joke.

But, if you are giving a speech to a room of newbie drivers, and say “Putting a pound of sugar into your fuel tank increases your fuel economy.” and only 70% of the room leaves knowing it’s a joke, then you pulled a prank.


Sent from my iPhone using EO Forums
 

Turtle

Administrator
Staff member
Owner/Operator
If you are a comedian, up telling jokes, then everyone already knows you’re joking, even if they don’t get a joke.

But, if you are giving a speech to a room of newbie drivers, and say “Putting a pound of sugar into your fuel tank increases your fuel economy.” and only 70% of the room leaves knowing it’s a joke, then you pulled a prank.


Sent from my iPhone using EO Forums
You got me on that one. Then again I wouldn't say such a falsehood knowing it could cause real damage without qualifying that "I'm kidding."

But if I say "AOC is freaky smart because she has an economics degree from Boston," the 30% who belive that's a serious statement and don't think it's a joke, I haven't pranked anybody. And I'm under no obligation to make it clear that it's a joke.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Solar
Top