American war dead are "Losers and Suckers," per Trump

  • Like
Reactions: golfballs
Uh huh. Carry on.

Same to you. You can make up things I didn't say to support your argument as long as you want. I'll stand by the statement that if youre going to talk bad about the president to a reporter, you're probably going to remain anonymous whether you're telling the truth or not.
 
I wonder what's going through the mind of Mike Huckabee right now. Yesterday his own daughter said Trump tried to pimp her our to the Communist dictator of North Korea. Today it's revealed Trump thinks anyone who was a POW or died while serving our country is a loser and a sucker. Maybe tomorrow we'll find out Trump paid for a hooker he got pregnant to have an abortion. Trump is a walking contradiction to everything someone like Huckabee stands for. When is enough enough?
 
I wonder what's going through the mind of Mike Huckabee right now. Yesterday his own daughter said Trump tried to pimp her our to the Communist dictator of North Korea. Today it's revealed Trump thinks anyone who was a POW or died while serving our country is a loser and a sucker. Maybe tomorrow we'll find out Trump paid for a hooker he got pregnant to have an abortion. Trump is a walking contradiction to everything someone like Huckabee stands for. When is enough enough?

You can't be serious - you know she included that story as a joke right?
 
I wonder what's going through the mind of Mike Huckabee right now. Yesterday his own daughter said Trump tried to pimp her our to the Communist dictator of North Korea. Today it's revealed Trump thinks anyone who was a POW or died while serving our country is a loser and a sucker. Maybe tomorrow we'll find out Trump paid for a hooker he got pregnant to have an abortion. Trump is a walking contradiction to everything someone like Huckabee stands for. When is enough enough?
1599191133834.jpeg
 
I wonder what's going through the mind of Mike Huckabee right now. Yesterday his own daughter said Trump tried to pimp her our to the Communist dictator of North Korea. Today it's revealed Trump thinks anyone who was a POW or died while serving our country is a loser and a sucker. Maybe tomorrow we'll find out Trump paid for a hooker he got pregnant to have an abortion. Trump is a walking contradiction to everything someone like Huckabee stands for. When is enough enough?
I’m actually shocked there hasn’t been a Trump-funded or Trump Foundation-funded abortion story. Seems like a pretty slim chance it hasn’t happened,
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tyler Durden
Same to you. You can make up things I didn't say to support your argument as long as you want. I'll stand by the statement that if youre going to talk bad about the president to a reporter, you're probably going to remain anonymous whether you're telling the truth or not.

The story says there are anonymous sources making claims. You apparently claim not to believe the story while also claiming to believe that there are anonymous sources making the claims.

You believe the story, Einstein.

You're squirming to claim not to believe the story, but when your previous post was quoted, you have to affirm believing the story. But that puts you in the cross-hairs of your "hypocrite" logic, so you somehow need to affirm that you believe the story while claiming not to.

Take the L, Einstein. You didn't look this dumb when you were having the imaginary future projection debate.
 
Soon you must give in to William of Ockham.

some parts I really confirm; super duper confirm - yeah that makes sense

if you read the story from your tweet you'll see the source is primarily focused on comments about McCain and the Kelly incident which has to be interpreted by Kelly's "friend" (you know, what Trump "really meant when he said that").
 
The story says there are anonymous sources making claims. You apparently claim not to believe the story while also claiming to believe that there are anonymous sources making the claims.

You believe the story, Einstein.

You're squirming to claim not to believe the story, but when your previous post was quoted, you have to affirm believing the story. But that puts you in the cross-hairs of your "hypocrite" logic, so you somehow need to affirm that you believe the story while claiming not to.

Take the L, Einstein. You didn't look this dumb when you were having the imaginary future projection debate.
Explain to me how believing that anonymous sources told the Atlantic something and fear retribution for telling that to the Atlantic, is the same thing as saying that this article is verifiable on its face.
I don't know if its true or not but I haven't thrown out any kind of blanket, "this article cannot be trusted because of anonymous sources" or "this article has to be trusted in spite of anonymous starements" argument.

Edit: you can have the last word.
 
If we're getting stories like this two months in advance of the election, there are going to be some humdingers come October.
 
So in other words, you got nothing other than rank speculation.
Why would they be using Nance as a source when he's nowhere near Trump?
I'm so sorry another one of your threads crashed and burned...isn't it time for you to bump the Omar thread and tell us for the 40th time why the Anti Semite of the Year loves Jews?
 
some parts I really confirm; super duper confirm - yeah that makes sense

if you read the story from your tweet you'll see the source is primarily focused on comments about McCain and the Kelly incident which has to be interpreted by Kelly's "friend" (you know, what Trump "really meant when he said that").

Really, you should answer the door and let William of Ockham in. He'd like to speak to you.
 
I'm so sorry another one of your threads crashed and burned...isn't it time for you to bump the Omar thread and tell us for the 40th time why the Anti Semite of the Year loves Jews?
You. Got. Nothing.
The fact that you're starting with cernovich (wasn't he the pizza parlor originator?) tells me a lot about where you get your news.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tvolsfan
Explain to me how believing that anonymous sources told the Atlantic something and fear retribution for telling that to the Atlantic, is the same thing as saying that this article is verifiable on its face.
I don't know if its true or not but I haven't thrown out any kind of blanket, "this article cannot be trusted because of anonymous sources" or "this article has to be trusted in spite of anonymous starements" argument.

Edit: you can have the last word.
OK. But I don't need it. All my previous words did well enough.
 
You. Got. Nothing.
The fact that you're starting with cernovich (wasn't he the pizza parlor originator?) tells me a lot about where you get your news.
Here's two first hand witnesses that deny it Scarvino and Sanders..now your turn name the source
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rickyvol77
Advertisement

Back
Top