WrestlingRasta

Congratulations. I know that is moving out of your comfort zone. I told you I would hold out hope and pray for you. In the name of the father, Amen. (although you still don’t know the difference between ‘never’ and ‘usually’. But…baby steps. And you’ve taken a big one this evening)

Well there’s a difference between never and usually. But it never stays with a country’s president. Because all politicians are trash

Okay, ‘Newsum’

Love the guy. He is very monotone I’ll give you that, his audio advertisements can put you to sleep. But love his show and love listening to him on other podcasts. Very much conservative but open to talk to and listen to anyone.

. Okay

Oh so now you’re shifting. So it’s no longer “every single one of them”??? Surprise surprise.

“I watched a few minutes of that”….nuff said. And you know you meant to say Newscum, otherwise you would have spelled the name correctly. And it was still a swing and a miss PS- yes I watched the conversation with Tucker. More than a few minutes. And it’s well known I’m no Tucker fan, but I do watch his show. Listening and trying to understand someone I may not agree with does not bother me

Your talk of “all politicians are trash, every single one of them”. But yet your practice is far far different. As evidenced by you will jump on anything or anyone that may go against what you’ve been told to think. Even when, by your own admission, you don’t have a clue what you’re talking about. And your extreme focus on defending other politicians who are favored by those telling you what to think, even when you don’t know what you’re talking about. Part of the problem is refusing to hear anything that might make you uncomfortable. As you’ve displayed, once again, in this thread. But I will hold on to hope and pray for you.

Only you can answer that question. And I guess I shouldn’t say you’re not fooling anyone, your sham is working on some. So I apologize I didn’t give you enough credit.

I saw excerpts too before just running the whole thing through (which I still have a little more to go, four hours isn’t going to happen in one sitting, or even two for that matter). But the excerpts don’t get it. Not trying to convince anyone how they should feel about the guy. It’s just a good conversation between two people who aren’t exactly on the same side of everything. Might I add a conversation that includes a lot more data, statistics, and factual information from both people, than pack messaging. Like I said at the beginning, it’s not going to be comfortable for someone of the pack mentality who goes with what they’re told to think, but for open individuals who enjoy hearing out opposing view points it is very worthwhile.

I believe you were trying to say Newscum

That line again . You’re not fooling anyone.

Thank you for your well rounded advice. And for being the first to jump at being an example of what I said at the beginning of the post. Anyway, if you’re interested in sitting and listening to two people have a good conversation and share information with open minds, it’s a really good listen.

I know it’s going to be automatically dismissed on here by some because of who the guest is and what they’ve been told to think, but for anyone who enjoys just sitting back open minded and listen to two people talk and share information, this is a really good listen. Gavin Newsome on Shawn Ryan show.

This is awesome

https://www.facebook.com/share/v/16px9Tvf88/?mibextid=wwXIfr

Fair enough. If our President’s behavior and thoughts on the matter are of interest to you, those statements are very easy to find. Thanks for the response.

What are your thoughts on his shift into this is a boring subject that no one should be concerned with, and then is a hoax developed by the democrats. I know you don't believe it is a hoax, but is this new line of messaging concerning?

Since when has that been a prerequisite around here?

Yes, and I knew that would come up, and I saved the following question for that. She has been his daughter for a very long time. Our President has had a feud with James Comey for 8 years, well before she was prosecutor on the Epstein case. She has continued in her position all this time. Why is she being fired now, without presented cause, right in the middle of the heat of the Epstein situation, at the same time he started calling it a hoax built by the democrats even though the only two people charged in the case were charged by his DOJ? Do you find that.......spicy?

Recent developments. Out president has begun a campaign of calling this whole thing a hoax put together by democrats, even though the only two people arrested and charged in this case were done so under his previous administration by his department of justice. And just yesterday the key prosecutor in what was to be the case against Epstein was fired, without being given cause. Is anyone concerned by this behavior?

But, according to you, he’s a sleazeball liar who doesn’t give a damn about you or me, correct? PS- before you try to deflect to something else, it’s a simple yes/no question.

But this will be an interesting story to hear at trial...... Vance Boelter told Kash Patel in letter that Gov. Tim Walz told him to kill Democratic lawmakers: report

When you realize you’ve been rendered clueless