ChrisWeigant.com

Moscow Mitch Caves!

[ Posted Thursday, September 19th, 2019 – 16:50 UTC ]

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell reversed course today and allowed a bill with $250 million in new election security spending to advance. It looks like the "#MoscowMitch" campaign worked, in other words. We got to him, and he finally caved!

It's important to put this issue into some context. While $250 million may sound like a lot of money, in Washington it is absolute peanuts. In terms of the whole federal budget, this is the equivalent of some loose change found in the couch cushions. And not even that much loose change, at that. As the old saying about federal spending goes (a saying so old it was mythically first uttered by a senator who died in 1969): "A billion here and a billion there, and pretty soon you're talking real money." Given that bar -- again, set in the 1960s when Dr. Evil thought "one mil-li-on dollars" was a lot of dough -- $250 million only adds up to one-eighth of what was considered "real money" over a half-century ago. Like I said, peanuts. This is what Mitch McConnell was fighting so hard to avoid ponying up.

Democrats, of course, would spend more on securing America's election infrastructure to protect it against foreign attacks from Russia, China, and anyone else, because Democrats actually care about protecting our election system. They already passed a bill in the House with $600 million in additional spending, earlier this year. The House version would require states to upgrade their voting machinery to avoid all sorts of problems, but McConnell considers this "socialism" and "a federal takeover" of state election processes, even though in reality it is neither of those things. McConnell's bill has no such requirements. Even so, it represents a huge turnaround, since for months he had been blocking any new money for the states to improve election security.

This led to a Democratic outcry, and it led the Washington Post to run a column calling Mitch a "Russian asset." Joe Scarborough went one step further and dubbed McConnell "Moscow Mitch," which he absolutely hated (even though it was an apt label). McConnell called it "modern-day McCarthyism," which it wasn't. But he was quite obviously incensed about the new nickname (and #MoscowMitch hashtag), which only led Democrats to push it even harder.

Today, Moscow Mitch defied his marching orders from Vladimir Putin (delivered by proxy through President Donald Trump) and decided to allow additional elections security money to move forward. He didn't actually say it in his Senate floor speech, but you could hear it anyway if you listened hard: "So can everyone please stop calling me Moscow Mitch now?!?"

OK, admittedly that may be a little snarky, but the main point is that Trump is indeed in the middle of this whole political equation. Trump has repeatedly stated -- even while standing right next to Vladimir Putin -- that he simply does not believe the overwhelming consensus from the U.S. intelligence community that Russia did indeed attack our election in 2016. To admit to any such thing would be to cast doubt on his own victory, which (in his mind) was one for the ages (even though it really wasn't, of course). Such doubts are not allowed in Trumplandia, therefore no additional money should be necessary to counter a threat that Trump doesn't believe exists. Republicans, from McConnell on down, are a quaking mass of spinelessness, as the Republican Party has become so co-opted by Trump that it's a wonder they don't rename it the Trumpublican Party. These days, McConnell doesn't even sneeze without begging Trump's permission first, so it is indeed notable not only that McConnell allowed the elections security money to go forward, but that he actually stood up on the Senate floor and announced it to the world. By doing so, he risks the wrath of Trump and (even more importantly) the wrath of Trump's followers.

The only conclusion is that the whole "Moscow Mitch" thing just got under his skin to the degree that he was forced to act, even in defiance of Donald Trump. That is indeed notable. Mitch McConnell can still be shamed into doing the right thing. He'll resist, and he won't go down without a petulant fight, but in the end if he faces relentless embarrassment from the opposition, he can indeed be forced to put country ahead of party (and, more importantly, ahead of hurting Donald Trump's precious feelings). From where I sit, that is good news indeed.

-- Chris Weigant

 

Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant

 

170 Comments on “Moscow Mitch Caves!”

  1. [1] 
    C. R. Stucki wrote:

    If you define hacking Democratics' e-mails, and thereby revealing to all the world that the Democratic party is anything but democratic, as "interfering in our elections", then yeah, the Russians interfered, but that leaves the question unresolved about what effect(s) if any that interference may have had.

    But if you believe that spending spare change out of the petty cash fund, or for that matter even SERIOUS MONEY, on trying to stop that sort of "interference" will accomplish the desired result, you are more naive than even I ever realized.

  2. [2] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    who was it again who mentioned that china was planning to intervene in the next election on behalf of the democrats?

  3. [3] 
    TheStig wrote:

    Can 1/4 billion insure that every voting machine has a paper audit trail? I would doubt it, and that is just one of many election security weaknesses that needs fixing. Old McConnell needs to put some teeth into the election security funding,- and do it fast -before I'll consider him de-bitched.

  4. [4] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    So the big money Republicans and big money Democrats are passing legislation to make our elections more secure.

    The only thing that makes me feel more secure aboot that is that they are only spending peanuts as the legislation will most likely only make our elections more secure for the big money interests from interference by ordinary Americans.

    When are you going to stop peddling the bullshit aboot the Dems wanting to protect our elections from "anyone" when they are getting funding from the big money interests which is more of a danger to our democracy than any interference from foreign governments?

    Well, since Moscow Mitch worked it's time to give a tried and true approach a chance to wake you from your intellectual slumber as what is good for the goose is good for the gander:

    #SeeBubbleYouLiegant

    Get Real.

  5. [5] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    Or maybe it should be #CWWhycant as in why can't you stop peddling the bullshit and actually cover reality?

  6. [6] 
    SF Bear wrote:

    Michael, you are the only gun “expert” I know of, so this question is directed at you. Why can’t we ban all semi auto weapons? This would remove the problems you raise in identifying distinctions between them. I am no expert but I have been around guns my whole life (72 years) and own a few myself. I hunted since I was a small boy and I have never owned a semi auto of any sort and have never felt the need for one. My bolt action deer rifle has put venison on my table since before you were born, I never wished for anything else. And as for self defense, defending my home, my double barrel shotgun is far, far, superior to any sort of a rifle. All the authorities I have read agree; a shotgun that you simply point is much more effective than a rifle that you must aim. I know many guys in Vietnam asked their parents and friends to send them a shotgun to use when clearing out tunnels and hootches for that very reason. The semi auto weapon, all semi auto weapons, were developed for killing people out in the open. They are optimal for that purpose and really are not necessary for anything else. So when does a citizen have a legitimate need to kill lots of people out in the open? What sort of self defense situation can you imagine where I would need to attack a group of people on the other side of the street? I do not see any need for these weapons, and without a compelling need there is no constitutional problem in banning them. Also they are real easy to define.

  7. [7] 
    C. R. Stucki wrote:

    Bear

    Of the 26 firearms I owned in a lifetime of hunting every huntable creature in the Rocky Mtns, three were semi-auto. The first was the famous Browning Auto-Five 12 ga shotgun, the other two were .22 rimfire guns, a Weatherby rifle and a Browning handgun.

    Back in the last half of the 1900's, at least thru 1980, I would have been seriously 'out of sorts' had somebody tried to convince me I shouldn't have been allowed to own and use those three guns, although I freely admit it's no longer the same world anymore, half as much game and twice as many people, and that my kids and grandkids which now have them find very little use for them.

  8. [8] 
    Michale wrote:

    Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell reversed course today and allowed a bill with $250 million in new election security spending to advance. It looks like the "#MoscowMitch" campaign worked, in other words. We got to him, and he finally caved!

    Yea.. THAT must be it.. :eyeroll:

    OR.. MORE likely..

    McConnell found a way to make it work to his advantage..

    But hay.. Whatever ya have to tell yerself to make it thru your day.. :D

    The only conclusion is that the whole "Moscow Mitch" thing just got under his skin to the degree that he was forced to act, even in defiance of Donald Trump.

    The only conclusion that fits our TRUMP/AMERICA hate Agenda and allows us to maintain our delusions is that the whole "Moscow Mitch" thing just got under his skin to the degree that he was forced to act, even in defiance of Donald Trump.

    There.. Fixed it for ya.. Yer welcome. :D

  9. [9] 
    Michale wrote:

    Michael, you are the only gun “expert” I know of, so this question is directed at you.

    Thank you.. I'll do my best.. :D

    Why can’t we ban all semi auto weapons?

    Simple.. The 2nd Amendment will not allow it..

    We can ban grenade launchers because grenade launchers aren't really prevalent in today's society.. They TRULY are a military battlefield weapon and have no place in civilian society..

    Semi-automatics are approx 80% of the guns in America..

    The Constitution simply will not allow such a wide spread ban...

    To put it in a different context, it would be as the government wanted to ban free speech in every place except the written word.. You can write out whatever you feel, but you can't exercise free speech on the Internet or in any speaking form..

    When contemplating banning firearms, a good rule of thumb to follow is apply your "ban" to Free Speech or Freedom of assembly or any other Constitutional right..

    If it won't work for any of those, it won't work for guns..

    Because owning a gun is as much of a Constitutional as Freedom of speech or any other Constitutional freedom..

    I hunted since I was a small boy and I have never owned a semi auto of any sort and have never felt the need for one.

    That's all well and good and, if it works for you, awesome..

    Again, let's put it in the context of Freedom of Speech...

    "I don't need that dat gol durn Enternet thingy, so I don't see why anyone would be pissed off if they didn't have free speech there.."
    -Joe Bob Hillbilly

    Joe Bob might not care about lack of free speech on the Internet, as he has never seen the need for it..

    But YOU feel quite differently, I am sure..

    The great thing about this country (well, ONE of them anyways) is that one group does not get to impose their beliefs on another group without due process..

    In this case, "due process" means you have to get rid of the 2nd Amendment..

    If ya'all can manage that feat, ya'all DESERVE your gun ban...

    All the authorities I have read agree; a shotgun that you simply point is much more effective than a rifle that you must aim.

    For certain tasks... But, I would think that you would WANT a ban on shotguns.. Something that is so easy to use to kill a large group of people???

    I know many guys in Vietnam asked their parents and friends to send them a shotgun to use when clearing out tunnels and hootches for that very reason.

    Yes, in a small enclosed tunnel is ideal. A real crowd pleaser... A shotgun is a perfect weapon..

    But when you are in a CQB situation (Close Quarters Combat) a long gun (long gun in the literal sense) is unweildy and will likely get you killed.. A handgun is the weapon of choice then...

    The semi auto weapon, all semi auto weapons, were developed for killing people out in the open.

    Yes... And so???

    I can postulate many a scenario where killing people out in the open is a good thing..

    I do not see any need for these weapons, and without a compelling need there is no constitutional problem in banning them.

    The compelling reason is they make up 80% of the firearms available to civilians...

    As such, the 2nd Amendment will not allow a ban on semi-automatic firearms..

  10. [10] 
    Michale wrote:

    Russ,

    We prove you wrong all the time. Heck, you prove yourself wrong on a daily basis! Expanded background checks to cover all sells has not been tried.

    Every mass shooter that did not steal their weapons passed a background check..

    How is expanding background checks to family members and gifts (.5% of all firearm transactions) going to prevent or help prevent Crowd Based Mass Shootings when the background checks without that .5% didn't do dick??

    Expanded background checks haven't been tried because it's nothing but a ridiculous WOULDN'T IT BE NICE law and will have NO EFFECT..

    But hay.. OK..

    You get your 100% background checks...

    BUT... You have to agree to a 10 year moratorium on ANY new gun law...

    If you are so certain that 100% background checks will "solve" the problem, then you should have no problem agreeing to the moratorium..

    Furious backpedaling in 5.... 4.... 3.... 2.....

    As long as you agree that gun makers can no longer produce or sale assault rifles,

    First you will have to define what an {sic} "assault" rifle is..

    NONE of ya'all have been able to do that in ALL the gun discussions we have..

    There is a reason for that.. You CAN'T define it..

    BIG DIFFERENCE- I was actually an EMT...you have never been a police officer!

    And THAT is why you always lose these discussions..

    Because you live in a fantasy world.. You can't handle that I am the acknowledged authority (Even SF Bear, who probably dislikes me immensely, acknowledges my expertise.. Of course, now that I point it out, he might claim he was being sarcastic, but.. the point is there) in this and any other LEO issue so you simply deny it. Without a SHRED of fact to support your delusion..

    AS per yer usual..

    and he just laughs when I read him your comments.

    And yet, he never posts here.. So, all we have is your word.. And, as I have proven beyond ANY doubt, your so far into yer delusions, your word is useless..

    Devon wants to know why he has to wear a Kevlar vest if his gun ensures his safety?

    Tell Devon that if he has to ask that question he should immediately turn in his badge and take up quiche farming.. :eyeroll:

  11. [11] 
    Michale wrote:

    Tell Devon that if he has to ask that question he should immediately turn in his badge and take up quiche farming.. :eyeroll:

    Because he has NO BUSINESS being on the streets in a LEO capacity...

    Or tell him to take a desk job.. His community would be a lot safer then.. :eyeroll:

  12. [12] 
    Michale wrote:

    Back in the last half of the 1900's, at least thru 1980, I would have been seriously 'out of sorts' had somebody tried to convince me I shouldn't have been allowed to own and use those three guns, although I freely admit it's no longer the same world anymore, half as much game and twice as many people, and that my kids and grandkids which now have them find very little use for them.

    The problem for the rest of the Weigantians is they think that THEIR beliefs should rule..

    *I* don't see a need for an AR-15, therefore they should be banned..
    -Weigantian Peanut Gallery

    That's the same thing as ME saying "*I* don't see a need for a disowned welfare crack whore should pollute this society so she should be banned from civilized life"

    Fortunately for society the Weigantian Peanut Gallery is not in charge...

    Here is a reality check for Weigantians.. There will NEVER be a ban on firearms that will give them what they want.

    NEVER.. EVER...

    It's really THAT simple..

  13. [13] 
    Michale wrote:

    How about them Jags, eh!!! :D

    It figures.. The one game I miss (spending time with my grandkids), Jags kick ass!! :D

  14. [14] 
    Michale wrote:

    If one looks at the stats of Crowd Based Mass Shootings, a goodly portion of the shootings were done with handguns.. Many were also done with shotguns..

    But yet, it's the RIFLE that must be banned.

    Where is the logic in that??

    Further, when looking at ALL violence resulting in death,
    a VERY SMALL portion had the weapon being a rifle.. Fists and feet killed TWICE as many people as rifles did..

    Given these FACTS, the **ONLY** logical conclusion that explains the Anti-gun fanatics preoccupation with rifles, is that they are pushing a partisan agenda..

    NOTHING else explains this pre-occupation with rifles when other weapons used cause considerably more deaths..

    TWICE as many people killed with fists and feet than with rifles.

    Using the Dumbocrat "logic" every American must have their hands and feet amputated.. :eyeroll:

  15. [15] 
    Michale wrote:

    Further, when looking at ALL violence resulting in death,
    a VERY SMALL portion had the weapon being a rifle.. Fists and feet killed TWICE as many people as rifles did..

    Given these FACTS, the **ONLY** logical conclusion that explains the Anti-gun fanatics preoccupation with rifles, is that they are pushing a partisan agenda..

    NOTHING else explains this pre-occupation with rifles when other weapons used cause considerably more deaths..

    I am open to other possibilities that explains the Democrats' obsession with rifles that do CONSIDERABLY less harm than other weapons..

    "Anyone?? Anyone?? Buehler"

    {{ccchhhhiiiiirrrrrpppppppp ccccchhhhhiiiiirrrrrrppppppp}}

  16. [16] 
    Michale wrote:

    Beto bitch slaps Senate Minority leader.. :D

    Chuck Schumer Claims Democrats Don’t Support Gun Confiscation. Beto Proves Him Wrong.

    After Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) dismissed Democratic presidential candidate former Rep. Beto O'Rourke's (D-TX) demand for a nationwide gun confiscation program as unrepresentative of the Democratic Party, O'Rourke responded with polls showing its support.

    "I don't know of any other Democrat who agrees with Beto O’Rourke," Schumer told reporters during a conference call on Wednesday. "But it is no excuse not to go forward [with gun control legislation]."

    "With respect to the Minority Leader, a recent Monmouth University poll found that nearly 70% of Democrats support Beto’s mandatory buyback plan for assault weapons," O'Rourke's campaign responded in a fundraising email. "A Washington Post poll found 74% of Democrats support it."
    https://www.dailywire.com/news/51973/chuck-schumer-claims-democrats-dont-support-gun-molly-prince

    So... After all of ya'all's claims that Democrats don't support gun confiscation.......

    The FACTS and the POLLS prove you wrong..

    Once again... Ya'all have the bullshit..

    And *I* have the facts..

    The GOP and President Trump campaign ads that show Democrats *ARE* coming for patriotic American's guns is going to DECIMATE Democrat candidates and make the completely and utterly un-electable...

    "These are the facts of the case. And they are undisputed."
    -Captain Smilin Jack Ross, A FEW GOOD MEN

  17. [17] 
    Michale wrote:

    The former Texas congressman was the first major 2020 Democratic candidate to endorse a government-run gun seizure program for so-called "assault weapons," but a host of his primary challengers have since followed suit, including members of Schumer's own Senate caucus.

    "Even several of Schumer's colleagues support Beto’s plan," the email continued. "For example, both Sen. Kamala Harris and Sen. Cory Booker said they back Beto's mandatory assault weapons buyback."

    O'Rourke faced widespread blowback after the Democratic National Committee's (DNC) third primary debate when he stated in no uncertain terms that if he were to be elected president, he would confiscate millions of firearms from law-abiding American citizens.

    "Hell yes, we're going to take away your AR-15, your AK-47," O'Rourke said on the debate stage. "We are not going to allow [them] to be used against our fellow Americans anymore."

    Yep.. Democrats ARE toast.. :D

  18. [18] 
    Michale wrote:

    Democrats sure picked the WRONG time to come clean that they are all about GUN CONFISCATION.. :D

    It's gonna be GOP DOMINATION in Nov of 2020...

    "The sport ends. The massacre begins"
    -Grand Primus T'Cael, THE FINAL FRONTIER

  19. [19] 
    Kick wrote:

    Russ

    We prove you wrong all the time. Heck, you prove yourself wrong on a daily basis! ~ Russ

    Right you are, Russ!

    Every mass shooter that did not steal their weapons passed a background check.. ~ Michale

    Oh, EPIC FAIL and wrong again, Mike. The Midland-Odessa shooter did not steal his gun and also did not pass a background check.

    https://www.texastribune.org/2019/09/03/odessa-texas-shooter-bought-gun-private-sale-without-background-check/

    Russ is correct; your so-called "FACTS" are frequently bullshit, Mike. Own it because it's a real FACT. :)

  20. [20] 
    Michale wrote:

    DSWS,

    Our system of constitutional change is utterly broken.

    I completely disagree..

    Changes are required to be thoughtful and rational.. Not hysterical and laden with emotionalism..

    The creators of the Constitution knew the human psyche all too well.. Which is why they made it so difficult to make changes in the heat of the moment..

    "It was the heat of the moment!! Heat Of The Moment!!"
    -Dean Winchester

    Today, what it takes to change a piece of constitutional law is simply a majority on the Supreme Court. Various restrictions on firearms have been imposed throughout US history. There's plenty we could do, if we really decided to.

    No offense, dood.. Yer a great guy and one of the most rational ones here..

    But everyone claims there is plenty we can do.. Yet no one can come up with a viable option... More background checks?? Obviously the current ones are not up to par, what makes anyone believe that MORE are the answer??

    And then you have the people who make illegal sales and IGNORE background checks all together. Like the Odessa incident..

    I understand the need, the desire to "do something".. But doing something just for the sake of doing something can often cause more harm then good..

    The Bump Stock/Binary Trigger fiasco is a perfect example..

    We could restrict firing rate of semiautomatic weapons.

    How so?? Make the barrel melt after 100 rounds are fired thru it?? How exactly could we do that?

    We could restrict magazine capacity.

    Been done and has had NO effect..

    And, as I have aptly proven, anyone with a modicum of skill can fire off 50 rnds in 10rnd Mag increments twice as fast as a JEEP could fire off 50rnds with a single 50rnd mag...

    Mag capacity is a red herring..

    We could restrict the quantity and type of ammunition a person can own, or can carry.

    Since ammunition can easily be made, the ONLY way this can work is by search and seizure.. Say goodbye to the 4th Amendment..

    We could restrict weapons based on the velocity, kinetic energy, and/or mass of the bullets they're capable of firing.

    80% of the weapons available share velocity/kinetic energy characteristics.. Many mass shootings have occured using .22 and .22lr ammo. It has the highest velocity, yet very low kinetic energy...

    You see the dilemma?? The FACTS and reality don't support the DO SOMETHING!!! ANYTHING!!! mentality...

    There is only ONE thing that can be done that will obtain the desired results ya'all want..

    Gun Ban/Confiscation..

    And THAT will never happen in the US in our lifetimes..

    And so on. Gun enthusiasts will insist that any proposed measure is unconstitutional and won't do any good. But there are lots of options.

    As I have proven, no, there is not..

    As to guns, ya'all only have ONE option.. Ban/Confiscate..

    Now, if you want to talk Mental Health, which is ACTUALLY the problem here...

    You have OODLES of options.. A PLETHORA of options..

    But first, Democrats must give up on their Personal Privacy Social Stigma platform...

  21. [21] 
    TheStig wrote:

    It appears the News Cycle is about to give McConnell some cover. Goodbye Moscow Mitch, hello Moscow Donald! The President is going to have to do some serious tap dancing. This week's FTP promises to be both interesting and entertaining.

  22. [22] 
    Michale wrote:

    It appears the News Cycle is about to give McConnell some cover. Goodbye Moscow Mitch, hello Moscow Donald! The President is going to have to do some serious tap dancing. This week's FTP promises to be both interesting and entertaining.

    Yea?? Ya have been saying that for over 3 years, Stig!

    Why on god's green earth would you believe you have ANY credibility???

  23. [23] 
    Kick wrote:

    Michale
    20

    But everyone claims there is plenty we can do.. Yet no one can come up with a viable option... More background checks?? Obviously the current ones are not up to par, what makes anyone believe that MORE are the answer??

    And then you have the people who make illegal sales and IGNORE background checks all together. Like the Odessa incident..

    Wrong again, Mike. It wasn't an "illegal sale" in any way, shape, or fashion in the "Odessa incident" because private sellers in Texas (as well as other states) aren't required to do background checks, including those made by private sellers at gun shows. Although federal law gives Texas/other states the option to regulate these private sales, the majority of states have opted not to do so.

    That's why they call it a "loophole" and the majority of the country wants the "loophole" closed, you know, something they could easily do. Those are the FACTS.

  24. [24] 
    Michale wrote:

    As I have mentioned I support Red Flag laws.. But ONLY if the due process is concrete and written in stone within the law AND there are VERY punitive measures in place to punish those who frivolously use the Red Flag laws to further an agenda..

    I will add to that that these VERY punitive measures be enforced if the Respondent wins the case and is able to retain his guns.. These VERY punitive measures should include FINES to the Court for wasting the Court's time, COMPENSATION to the Respondent for time and trouble and, in most egregious cases, jail time for the petitioners violation to the Respondent's Constitutional rights.. In the instances where Respondent suffered physical harm or death that COULD have been prevented if Respondent had had their guns, the Petitioner should get life in prison..

    THAT is what a Red Flag law should look like..

    Let's look at what the Dumbocrats want..

    This Awful House Bill Would Promote Gun Confiscation Without Due Process

    The bill would make the criteria for federal grants loose enough to accommodate even the worst "red flag" laws.
    https://reason.com/2019/09/12/this-awful-house-bill-would-promote-gun-confiscation-without-due-process/

    How completely and utterly sad..

  25. [25] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    If the comments here are true it seems the Dems are also working for the Russians.

    Trump and the Republicans are working directly for the Russians and the Dems are trying to take away our guns so we won't be able to fight back when the Russians eliminate the middleman and come here to rule in person. :D

  26. [26] 
    Kick wrote:

    TS
    21

    It appears the News Cycle is about to give McConnell some cover. Goodbye Moscow Mitch, hello Moscow Donald! The President is going to have to do some serious tap dancing. This week's FTP promises to be both interesting and entertaining.

    I actually think Moscow Mitch "caved" to the $250 million in new election security because of the continued saga of Benedict Donald Treasonous Trump. Did you notice how Trump let Rudy out of his cage again to blow smoke on CNN? Positively nuts.

    https://theweek.com/articles/866525/brief-timeline-trump-whistleblower-saga

    So Trump finally releases the $250 million aid to Ukraine... interesting timeline of events involving Rudy and a whistle blower... Dan Coats resigning, getting his #2 to resign, and then Moscow Mitch releases the $250 million for election security shortly thereafter.

    Dot. Dot. Dot. Dot. Dot. <---- Connect

  27. [27] 
    Michale wrote:

    If the comments here are true it seems the Dems are also working for the Russians.

    Trump and the Republicans are working directly for the Russians and the Dems are trying to take away our guns so we won't be able to fight back when the Russians eliminate the middleman and come here to rule in person. :D

    Hehehehehehe Yep..

    "That's the way it is, truly truly truly is..
    So what are you going to do today??
    I think I'll share."

    -IT'S NICE TO SHARE
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a3HeyqXESOg

    :D

  28. [28] 
    Michale wrote:

    It wasn't an "illegal sale" in any way, shape, or fashion in the "Odessa incident"

    Some moron posted this and it was just BEGGING to be bitch-slapped to hell.. :D

    Authorities have put together the timeline of the Odessa shooting, beginning with the sale of the .22 rifle used by the Odessa shooter. Although the seller that sold Seth Ator, 36 the rifle has not been publicly identified, it has been determined that the sale was an illegal gun sale. Authorities say that the .22 rifle sold to Ator was made from parts purchased over the internet and the seller assembled the weapon to sell to Ator. It is illegal in Texas for a non-dealer to do this.

    As you can see, the moronic idiot who claimed "It wasn't an "illegal sale" in any way, shape, or fashion in the "Odessa incident".." is completely, utterly and unequivocally full of shit..

    AND THE CROWD GOES WILD!!!!

    BBBWWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

  29. [29] 
    Michale wrote:

    Finally: Beto Reveals How He’ll Enforce His Gun Confiscation Plan. Mass Murderers, Listen Up
    https://www.redstate.com/alexparker/2019/09/18/finally-beto-reveals-how-hell-enforce-his-gun-confiscation-plan-mass-murderers-listen-up/

    THIS oughta be worth a few laughs.. :D

  30. [30] 
    Michale wrote:

    Beto's "plan" for enforcing his gun confiscation..

    “I begin by saying that we expect our fellow Americans to follow the law.”
    -Beto O'Rourke

    BBBBWWHAHAHAHAHAHAAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

    OK, let me see if I understand that..

    Beto believes that people who want to shoot upwards of dozens and dozens of people will "follow the law" and turn in their guns??

    BBBBWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHA

    Hay, Beto... How are you going to enforce your "mandatory" gun buy back??

    "“I begin by saying that we expect our fellow Americans to follow the law.”

    BBBWWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

    So, if Beto "expects our fellow Americans to follow the law", ***WHAT NEED IS THERE FOR A MANDATORY GUN BUY BACK!!???***

    Seriously, people... Where DID you find this moron named "Beto"???

    Are you Democrats **TRYING** to lose this election???

  31. [31] 
    Michale wrote:

    Oh wait.. Wait.. HOLD THE PRESSES!!!

    Beto has a PLAN B

    “If Americans do not follow the law and turn in their guns, there would be a fine imposed to compel them to follow the law.”
    -Beto

    BETO HAS DONE IT!!!! BETO HAS SOLVED THE PROBLEM!!!

    Beto will impose FINES on people who don't follow the law..

    OK... SO, if we impose "FINES" on people who commit mass murder, they will be compelled to follow the law!!!

    BBBBWWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

    My gods, people.. I have seen DIRT that is smarter than ya'all's Democrat candidates..

    I have to ask again..

    Are ya'all Democrats **TRYING** to lose the election??

  32. [32] 
    Michale wrote:

    “We’ve seen this implemented successfully in Australia, where you’ve seen a near-50% reduction in gun violence deaths in that country. They estimate that between 16 and 20 mass shootings have been averted so far.”
    -Beto

    Of course, the FACT is, it's IMPOSSIBLE to guess how many mass shootings have been averted..

    But we DO know that Australia have had MORE people killed in Mass murder incidents AFTER the Port Arthur Shooting and subsequent gun ban than were killed in mass murder incidents BEFORE the shooting and gun ban..

    So, OBVIOUSLY banning guns doesn't save any lives.. It actually causes MORE death..

  33. [33] 
    Michale wrote:

    DeBlowHard is out of the race!! :D

    Bill de Blasio finally pulls the plug on his sputtering presidential bid
    https://nypost.com/2019/09/20/bill-de-blasio-pulls-the-plug-on-his-sputtering-presidential-bid/

    I wonder who will get DeBlasio supporters.. All 2 of them.. :eyeroll:

    :D

  34. [34] 
    Kick wrote:

    Michale
    28

    It wasn't an "illegal sale" in any way, shape, or fashion in the "Odessa incident" ~ Kick

    Some moron posted this and it was just BEGGING to be bitch-slapped to hell.. :D

    Do you see the quotes around "illegal sale"? It is not illegal in Texas for a private seller to sell a firearm without doing a background check.

    The sale of firearms in Texas from a private seller to another are legal, but that doesn't mean the guns they are selling are legal.

    Although the seller that sold Seth Ator, 36 the rifle has not been publicly identified, it has been determined that the sale was an illegal gun sale.

    And then you have the people who make illegal sales and IGNORE background checks all together. Like the Odessa incident.. ~ Michale

    Context, Mike. You claimed that it was an "illegal sale" in the context of the seller "ignoring background checks all together [sic]." As I said, it is not illegal for a private seller in Texas to sell a gun without doing a background check.

    Are you claiming that the seller was required to do a background check? He wasn't. Not in Texas and the majority of states. That was my entire point.

    Regardless your spin on my statement, thanks, Mike! You've been hoisted by your own petard since you have now in your own words identified ways in which something could be done when you've spent days insisting there's nothing else that exists that could be done!

    You bitch slapped yourself. Good for you, Mike! :)

  35. [35] 
    Michale wrote:

    Once again.. Hysterical Bullshit

    "It wasn't an "illegal sale" in any way, shape, or fashion in the "Odessa incident".."

    And then there are the FACTS..

    Authorities say that the .22 rifle sold to Ator was made from parts purchased over the internet and the seller assembled the weapon to sell to Ator. It is illegal in Texas for a non-dealer to do this.

    The sale to the Odessa shooter was an ILLEGAL sale. PERIOD

    Anyone who says different is an utter and complete moron...

  36. [36] 
    Michale wrote:

    "It wasn't an "illegal sale" in any way, shape, or fashion in the "Odessa incident".."
    -TOTAL and COMPLETE MORON

    Authorities say that the .22 rifle sold to Ator was made from parts purchased over the internet and the seller assembled the weapon to sell to Ator. It is illegal in Texas for a non-dealer to do this.
    -FACTS AND REALITY

    BBBWWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHHAHAHAHA

  37. [37] 
    Michale wrote:

    Saying the ODESSA sale was not an illegal sale is as STOOPID and MORONIC as Beto saying he trusts Americans to obey the law..

    It shows an complete and utter lunacy that makes one wonder if the people MAKING those claims have the intelligence to BREATH on their own..

    BBBBWWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHA

  38. [38] 
    Michale wrote:

    "It wasn't an "illegal sale" in any way, shape, or fashion in the "Odessa incident".."

    What's so hilarious is how I suckered the Forum Moron into taking an unequivocal stance that I then proceeded to DEMOLISH and DECIMATE with the FACTS..

    Gods, I'm good!!! :D

  39. [39] 
    Michale wrote:

    Do you see the quotes around "illegal sale"? It is not illegal in Texas for a private seller to sell a firearm without doing a background check.

    And the FORUM MORON continues to dig itself DEEPER into it's hole..

    It **IS** illegal for a person in Texas who is NOT a Licensed Gun Dealer to assemble a rifle and then sell it to someone..

    It doesn't matter if a background check is done or not.. It was ALREADY an "ILLEGAL GUN SALE"..

    And, since it was an "ILLEGAL GUN SALE" there is simply NO REASON to believe that the seller would have DONE a background check, even if it WAS the law...

    In short, only a complete and utter MORON would believe that a person who makes an illegal gun sale would OBEY the law in a performance of a mandatory background check..

    BBBWWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

  40. [40] 
    Kick wrote:

    Mike

    Authorities have put together the timeline of the Odessa shooting, beginning with the sale of the .22 rifle used by the Odessa shooter. Although the seller that sold Seth Ator, 36 the rifle has not been publicly identified, it has been determined that the sale was an illegal gun sale. Authorities say that the .22 rifle sold to Ator was made from parts purchased over the internet and the seller assembled the weapon to sell to Ator. It is illegal in Texas for a non-dealer to do this.

    Link to your quote, please. Otherwise, it's just unsubstantiated bullshit.

    Also, it still isn't illegal in Texas and the majority of states to sell a gun without a background check. This is commonly referred to as the "loophole." :)

  41. [41] 
    Michale wrote:

    Seems to be a lot of bitch slapping going around..

    I am bitch slapping the Forum Moron all over the forum..

    Woman confronts Beto on gun confiscation at town hall: 'I'm here to say, hell no you're not'

    A Colorado woman confronted Democratic presidential candidate Beto O'Rourke Thursday on his controversial proposal to go after high-powered weapons through a mandatory buyback program.

    "I am here to say: Hell, no, you’re not," Lauren Boebert told O'Rourke, passionately defending her rights under the Second Amendment.

    "I have four children, I am 5-foot-0, 100 pounds, I cannot really defend myself with a fist. ... I want to know how you're going to legislate that because a criminal breaks the law, so all you're going to do is restrict law-abiding citizens, like myself."
    https://www.foxnews.com/media/woman-confronts-beto-gun-confiscation-hell-no

    And a feisty Colorado woman bitch slaps Beto!! :D

    What a great day it is today!! :D

  42. [42] 
    Michale wrote:

    Also, it still isn't illegal in Texas and the majority of states to sell a gun without a background check. This is commonly referred to as the "loophole." :)

    And there has NEVER been a mass shooting as the result of a no background check sale...

    ALL the mass shootings have been with weapons that have either been stolen, purchased thru ILLEGAL gun sales or purchased in accordance with the LAW..

    Ergo, NO NEW LAW mandating 100% background checks would have prevented ANY MASS SHOOTING in history..

    "These are the facts of the case. And they are UNDISPUTED"
    -Captain Smilin Jack Ross, A FEW GOOD MEN

    "A bitch-slappin' I will go.. A bitch-slappin' I will go..
    Hi Ho the derrie-o.. A bitch-slappin' I will go.."

    BBBWWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHA

  43. [43] 
    Michale wrote:

    Link to your quote, please. Otherwise, it's just unsubstantiated bullshit.

    And now look how the FORUM MORON changes gears.. It can't win on the REALITY so it questions the facts..

    I accept your concession, Forum Moron... :D

    BBBWWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

  44. [44] 
    Michale wrote:

    Now any minute, the Forum Moron is going to come up with a comment that says, in effect, "OK, the fact is it IS illegal for a non-licensed person to assemble a gun and sell it, but I have free rent in your head blaaa blaaa blaaaa blaaa blaaa blaaa"

    You watch.. That is EXACT what it is going to do.. :D

    BBBWWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

    Bitch is SOOOO PWNED!!!

  45. [45] 
    Michale wrote:

    This is commonly referred to as the "loophole." :)

    And it's a mythical "loophole" that has NEVER made a single difference in ANY mass shooting to date..

    In other words, it's a difference that MAKES no difference, ergo it IS no difference..

    So says Commander Spock..

    Once again.. YOU LOSE..

    PWNED!!!!!!!

    BBBWWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

  46. [46] 
    Kick wrote:

    Michale
    39

    And the FORUM MORON continues to dig itself DEEPER into it's hole..

    You actually do this every single day, Mike.

    It **IS** illegal for a person in Texas who is NOT a Licensed Gun Dealer to assemble a rifle and then sell it to someone..

    It doesn't matter if a background check is done or not.. It was ALREADY an "ILLEGAL GUN SALE"..

    And then you have the people who make illegal sales and IGNORE background checks all together. Like the Odessa incident.. ~ Michale

    So why your insistence that it was an "illegal sale" because the seller IGNORED background checks altogether?

    And, since it was an "ILLEGAL GUN SALE" there is simply NO REASON to believe that the seller would have DONE a background check, even if it WAS the law...

    And then you have the people who make illegal sales and IGNORE background checks all together. Like the Odessa incident.. ~ Michale

    So then why did you infer that the sale was illegal because of the altogether IGNORED background check?

    In short, only a complete and utter MORON would believe that a person who makes an illegal gun sale would OBEY the law in a performance of a mandatory background check..

    So you're admitting you're a moron since you are the one who brought up the background check. Again, private sellers in Texas and the majority of states are not required to do background checks... "loophole"! :p

  47. [47] 
    Michale wrote:

    Yunno.. It's been so long..

    Let's relive that glorious moment.. :D

    "It wasn't an "illegal sale" in any way, shape, or fashion in the "Odessa incident".."
    -Forum Moron

    Authorities say that the .22 rifle sold to Ator was made from parts purchased over the internet and the seller assembled the weapon to sell to Ator. It is illegal in Texas for a non-dealer to do this.
    -FACTS AND REALITY

    I know, I know...

    It's just fun to relive the moment that totally and utterly decimated DLC Victoria, the FORUM MORON.. :D

  48. [48] 
    Michale wrote:

    Again, private sellers in Texas and the majority of states are not required to do background checks... "loophole"! :p

    And that has NEVER been a factor in ANY MASS SHOOTING to date...

    It's a mythical loophole that has no factual bearing on ANYTHING...

    Once again..

    FORUM MORON loses..

    Michale kicks it's ass!!!

    BBBWWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

  49. [49] 
    Kick wrote:

    Michale
    43

    And now look how the FORUM MORON changes gears.. It can't win on the REALITY so it questions the facts..

    What facts? You posted a bunch of words with no link and claimed they are facts.

    I concede you are the Forum Moron who posted no link and therefore no facts whatsoever.

    I accept your concession, Forum Moron... :D

    Thank you for your concession. Nice signature you got there. :D

  50. [50] 
    TheStig wrote:

    Kick-26

    Absolute monarchy alert.

  51. [51] 
    Michale wrote:

    Ahhh yes.. The Forum Moron tries the old "I KNOW YOU ARE BUT WHAT AM I!!?" rebuttal..

    3rd grade rebuttals are it's specialty...

    BBBWWAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHHAAHHAHAHAHAHAHA

    "It wasn't an "illegal sale" in any way, shape, or fashion in the "Odessa incident".."
    -Forum Moron

    Authorities say that the .22 rifle sold to Ator was made from parts purchased over the internet and the seller assembled the weapon to sell to Ator. It is illegal in Texas for a non-dealer to do this.
    -FACTS AND REALITY

    Odessa was an illegal gun sale.. The Forum Moron is bitch-slapped to hell.. :D

    Life is good..

  52. [52] 
    Kick wrote:

    Michale

    In point of fact, it wasn't that many comment boxes ago that you claimed:

    Every mass shooter that did not steal their weapons passed a background check.. ~ Michale

    I could do like you're doing and keep spiking the football over and over like I've never seen the end zone before, but then I'm actually used to correcting your incorrect bullshit on a fairly regular basis so therefore have no need of that. Then there's the FACT that I'm not as insecure and as constantly needy of attention as you.

    Facts! :)

  53. [53] 
    Kick wrote:

    Still waiting on your link, Mike.

  54. [54] 
    Michale wrote:

    Let me ignore the bitch-slapped to hell Forum Moron for a moment and turn my attention to ANOTHER moron who can't handle the FACTS..

    "No one gives a shit about his brown face. I don't know anyone who hasn't been pissed at a party and worn a bra for earmuffs."
    -Nuck

    Ahhh, but let us see what Lefties who are NOT trying to bullshit on a political forum

    "Seeing the Prime Minister in brownface/blackface is deeply saddening. The wearing of blackface/brownface is reprehensible and hearkens back to a history of racism which is unacceptable."
    -Mustafa Farooq, Executive Director of the National Council of Canadian Muslims.

    "This kind of racist face-painting is ‘a significant thing that is very hurtful’ to ‘communities and people who live with intersectionalities and face discrimination."
    -Justin Trudeau

    So, once again.. Weigantian peons spew platitudes and BULLSHIT..

    And I respond with the FACTS.. :D

  55. [55] 
    Michale wrote:

    Seeing as the Forum Moron continues to deny the facts and reality...

    "It wasn't an "illegal sale" in any way, shape, or fashion in the "Odessa incident".."
    -DLC Victoria, Forum Moron

    Authorities say that the .22 rifle sold to Ator was made from parts purchased over the internet and the seller assembled the weapon to sell to Ator. It is illegal in Texas for a non-dealer to do this.
    -FACTS AND REALITY

    The fact is, Odessa WAS an illegal sale, just as I stated....

    Since it was already an illegal sale, any legally required background check would have been ignore..

    ONLY LOGICAL CONCLUSION

    A background check requirement would NOT have prevented the Odessa gun sale...

    GAME.... SET..... MATCH.... :D

    BITCH IS PWNED!!!!! :D

  56. [56] 
    Kick wrote:

    TS
    50

    Absolute monarchy alert.

    They're both giving up the $250 million for their respective issues, which are related.

    This is getting real... real fast. They can't obstruct forever, and investigations continue "robustly." Count on it. :)

  57. [57] 
    Michale wrote:

    More About that Odessa Shooting

    Well, it appears that LE now knows where the Odessa mass shooter got his weapon, and how. They’ve also released the reason why the Odessa mass-murderer was unable to pass a background check. (Please note that this second linked article erroneously claims that the Odessa mass-murderer used a “loophole” to obtain his weapon. This is incorrect; no so-called “loophole” was used. The sale of the firearm he used was, to put it plainly, not a routine sale between private individuals; it was a criminal act. See below.)

    I don’t think our pro-gun-control “brethren” are going to be pleased.

    It turns out that the Odessa mass-murderer was unable to purchase a weapon legally because he had significant mental issues. He thus could not pass a routine pre-purchase background check when he’d previously tried to purchase a firearm several years ago. Up to this point, the “system” worked exactly as intended.

    So, how did he get his weapon if he couldn’t pass a background check to buy it legally? Glad you asked.

    Short answer: the sale was prohibited by Federal law, and was thus illegal. More info follows.

    Turns out there apparently was a another guy – reportedly from Lubbock – who “hooked him up”. But this wasn’t exactly a routine sale of a firearm between private individuals.

    It appears that this other fellow allegedly bought parts, assembled those parts into a working firearm – and sold the firearm he’d manufactured to the Odessa mass-murderer. This practice (assembly of a firearm from parts and subsequent sale by a non-FFL dealer) is not legal under current law.

    My guess is that the Odessa shooter heard about the other guy, possibly from a prior customer; contacted him; traveled to Lubbock; made his illegal purchase; and then returned to Odessa. Google maps says the trip would be just over 2 hours each way.
    https://valorguardians.com/blog/?p=90620&cpage=1

    The Odessa sale was an ILLEGAL GUN SALE.. Just as I stated.. NO AMOUNT OF BACKGROUND CHECK LAWS OR REQUIREMENTS would have prevented that sale...

    The system in place WORKED EXACTLY AS IT WAS SUPPOSED TO...

    NO NEW LAWS NEEDED

    Once again..

    Michale RULES

    FORUM MORON DROOLS

    :D

    "It's a beautiful day in the neighborhood..."
    -Mr Rogers

  58. [58] 
    Kick wrote:

    Michale
    55

    Authorities say that the .22 rifle sold to Ator was made from parts purchased over the internet and the seller assembled the weapon to sell to Ator. It is illegal in Texas for a non-dealer to do this.
    -FACTS AND REALITY

    Still waiting on your link.

    The fact is, Odessa WAS an illegal sale, just as I stated....

    And then you have the people who make illegal sales and IGNORE background checks all together. Like the Odessa incident..

    Again, your claim was that the seller in Odessa ignored background checks. The fact is that private sellers in Texas aren't required to perform background checks.

    Still don't have a link to your other plagiarized shit that you're claiming are "facts."

    Link to prove your claim. We'll wait. :D

  59. [59] 
    Michale wrote:

    “And I believe as a supporter of the Second Amendment we should protect that family transfer or family sale, but any stranger to stranger — we don’t know how this person got the gun — but we do know that that’s a real loophole in the law, and I think the NRA [National Rifle Association] needs to get behind the president on that issue and really address that issue,”

    This is NOT factually accurate..

    The Odessa sale did NOT result from a loophole based LEGAL sale..

    The Odessa sale was in illegal sale from start to finish...

    NO LOOPHOLE was utilized...

  60. [60] 
    Michale wrote:

    WOW..

    It's seems I am a bitch-slapping GENIUS today!!!

    Trudeau.. Hysterical and useless gun laws...

    Whatta day!!! :D

  61. [61] 
    Kick wrote:

    Weigantia

    Okay, we finally have a link from Mike!

    Thank you, Mike.

    And Mike's so-called "facts" are from a blog post by "Hondo" on another blog called "Valor Vultures" where he repeatedly uses phrases such as:

    * "My guess is"
    * "It appears that"
    * "allegedly bought parts"

    My guess is that the Odessa shooter heard about the other guy, possibly from a prior customer... ~ Hondo from another blog

    BBBWWAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHHAAHHAHAHAHAHAHA

  62. [62] 
    Michale wrote:

    Seeing as the Forum Moron continues to deny the facts and reality...

    "It wasn't an "illegal sale" in any way, shape, or fashion in the "Odessa incident".."
    -DLC Victoria, Forum Moron

    Authorities say that the .22 rifle sold to Ator was made from parts purchased over the internet and the seller assembled the weapon to sell to Ator. It is illegal in Texas for a non-dealer to do this.
    -FACTS AND REALITY

    Again, NOTHING but the facts...

    Authorities believe the gun used in the drive-by shooting in Midland and Odessa, Texas this past weekend was illegally manufactured and sold by a Lubbock, Texas man.

    The U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives is currently investigating a man who they believe illegally manufactured and sold the AR-15-style rifle that Seth Ator used to kill seven people and injure 22 more on Saturday, before he was shot and killed by police.

    Authorities say that the .22 rifle sold to Ator was made from parts purchased over the internet and the seller assembled the weapon to sell to Ator. It is illegal in Texas for a non-dealer to do this.
    https://www.wsj.com/articles/authorities-suspect-man-of-making-and-selling-gun-used-in-texas-shooting-11567639127

    Of course, none of the Democrat Propaganda wing will report these facts..

    When the seller is arrested, they lame Leftist MSM will have to acknowledge the FACTS...

  63. [63] 
    Michale wrote:

    So... To recap..

    Forum Moron copies my laugh.. Imitation is the SINCEREST form of flattery..

    Forum Moron claims that the Odessa gun sale was completely and unequivocally legal..

    The FACTS prove that this was an illegal sale that NO AMOUNT OF NEW LAWS regarding background checks would have prevented..

    Michale RULES..

    FORUM MORON drools.. :D

  64. [64] 
    Michale wrote:

    DEMOCRAT CIVIL WAR!!! :D

    Beto O’Rourke says Senate’s top Democrat has accomplished ‘absolutely nothing’ on gun control

    White House hopeful Beto O’Rourke escalated his feud with Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer (N.Y.) on Thursday night, asserting that his fellow Democrat has accomplished “absolutely nothing” on gun control.

    O’Rourke’s comments to reporters following a town hall in Aurora, Colo., came in response to Schumer distancing the party earlier this week from the former Texas congressman’s call for a mandatory buyback program for assault-style weapons.

    “Ask Chuck Schumer what he’s been able to get done,” O’Rourke said. “We still don’t have [universal] background checks. Didn’t have them when he was in the majority, either. So, you know, the game that he’s played, the politics that he’s pursued have given us absolutely nothing and have produced a situation where we lose nearly 40,000 of our fellow Americans every year.”
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/beto-orourke-says-senates-top-democrat-has-accomplished-absolutely-nothing-on-gun-control/2019/09/20/ced58c92-db93-11e9-a688-303693fb4b0b_story.html

    Beto whines and cries about universal background checks..

    It's a FACT that 99.5% of gun sales are background checked.

    It's a FACT that there **NEVER** has been a mass shooting that used a weapon from a legal NON-BACKGROUND CHECKED gun sale..

    Once again..

    Dumbocrats have hysterical emotional bullshit..

    And I have the FACTS.... :D

  65. [65] 
    Michale wrote:

    Oops.. My bust...

    DEMOCRAT CIVIL WAR!!! :D

    Beto O’Rourke says Senate’s top Democrat has accomplished ‘absolutely nothing’ on gun control

    White House hopeful Beto O’Rourke escalated his feud with Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer (N.Y.) on Thursday night, asserting that his fellow Democrat has accomplished “absolutely nothing” on gun control.

    O’Rourke’s comments to reporters following a town hall in Aurora, Colo., came in response to Schumer distancing the party earlier this week from the former Texas congressman’s call for a mandatory buyback program for assault-style weapons.

    “Ask Chuck Schumer what he’s been able to get done,” O’Rourke said. “We still don’t have [universal] background checks. Didn’t have them when he was in the majority, either. So, you know, the game that he’s played, the politics that he’s pursued have given us absolutely nothing and have produced a situation where we lose nearly 40,000 of our fellow Americans every year.”
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/beto-orourke-says-senates-top-democrat-has-accomplished-absolutely-nothing-on-gun-control/2019/09/20/ced58c92-db93-11e9-a688-303693fb4b0b_story.html

    Beto whines and cries about universal background checks..

    It's a FACT that 99.5% of gun sales are background checked.

    It's a FACT that there **NEVER** has been a mass shooting that used a weapon from a legal NON-BACKGROUND CHECKED gun sale..

    Once again..

    Dumbocrats have hysterical emotional bullshit..

    And I have the FACTS.... :D

    There.. Much better. :D

  66. [66] 
    Michale wrote:

    Only 65 comments??

    Slow day... :D

  67. [67] 
    Kick wrote:

    Michale
    63

    Forum Moron copies my laugh.. Imitation is the SINCEREST form of flattery..

    Whatever you have to tell yourself to make it through your day, Mike. The fact is, I simply find it easier to copy and paste your bullshit since my voice recognition software doesn't recognize "Moron" speak. *laughs*

    Forum Moron claims that the Odessa gun sale was completely and unequivocally legal..

    This is why no one takes your shit seriously, Mike. You're misrepresenting what I said... same shit as per your usual. You inferred that the seller IGNORED background checks, and my point was that private sellers in Texas and multiple states aren't required to perform background checks. That's still a fact no matter how you spin the speculation of "Hondo" from the Vultures blog that you incorrectly presented without a link and claimed his theory as "facts."

    Enough said.

    The FACTS prove that this was an illegal sale that NO AMOUNT OF NEW LAWS regarding background checks would have prevented..

    You've presented speculation and no "facts."

    Michale RULES..

    I think he meant "Hondo" from the other blog rules.

    FORUM MORON drools.. :D

    Another nice signature, Mike; you definitely DO drool all over this forum. Not content to pass your own speculation off as "facts," you had to introduce the "Hondo" drool from another blog! With drool shit and bullshit like that, you need never wonder why you're not taken seriously. :)

  68. [68] 
    Michale wrote:

    Forum Moron continues to deny the FACTS..

    "It wasn't an "illegal sale" in any way, shape, or fashion in the "Odessa incident".."
    -DLC Victoria, Forum Moron

    Odessa Shooter Illegally Obtained Firearm in Private Sale

    The lone gunman who killed seven and injured 22 in a series of drive-by shootings in Odessa and Midland, Texas on Saturday obtained the firearm he used in the attack through an illegal private sale.
    https://tinyurl.com/y6l4jvvl

    BBBWWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHHAHAHAHA

    Forum Moron drools...

    Michale RULEZ :D

  69. [69] 
    Michale wrote:

    Once again.. Forum Moron DLC Victoria has hysterical and emotional bullshit..

    "Law enforcement officials said they have identified the person who is allegedly guilty of illegally manufacturing and selling the rifle used in Saturday's mass shooting in West Texas. While private gun sales are legal under federal law, it is a crime to be in the business of manufacturing or selling guns without a license. Law-enforcement officials say the man was buying various gun parts to build his own guns and then reselling them."
    https://www.wsj.com/articles/authorities-suspect-man-of-making-and-selling-gun-used-in-texas-shooting-11567639127

    And Michale brings it home with the FACTS!!!

    AND THE CROWD GOES WILD!!!!

    :D

  70. [70] 
    Michale wrote:

    Well, there is one plus here.

    FORUM MORON DLC Victoria always posting my comments totally and completely defeats the purpose of everyone else's spyware script cracks me up to no end!!

    BBBWWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHHAAHHAHHAHA

  71. [71] 
    Kick wrote:

    Michale
    70

    FORUM MORON DLC Victoria always posting my comments totally and completely defeats the purpose of everyone else's spyware script cracks me up to no end!!

    And Trump Cock Holster and admitted criminal Mike's mugshots and those multiple mugshots of his family and the fact that he lives in a doublewide shithole is a laugh riot to me.

    Laugh it up and get your jollies trolling the posters on this forum, Mike. It doesn't change those creepy criminal mugshots of you and your criminal spawn or your doublewide in the swamps of Shithole! :D

    BBBWWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHHAAHHAHHAHA

  72. [72] 
    Michale wrote:

    And, as we see the Forum Moron, DLC Victoria, FORUM MORON flounder and flail in the FACTS department, she resorts to her outright DELUSIONS regarding my private life and the life of my family...

    BBBBWWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

    The question one has to ask DLC Victoria, FORUM MORON is why it is so concerned about my private life and the lives of my children and grandchildren.. Kinda disgusting when ya think about it. STALKER-ish.. Especially a Stalker who likes to give it's own father and brother blowjobs.. eeeeeeewwwwwwwwwwwww

    Can't it just answer the FACTS??

    Of course it can't..

    Because it is full of shit and ALL the facts are against it..

    "It wasn't an "illegal sale" in any way, shape, or fashion in the "Odessa incident".."
    -DLC Victoria, Forum Moron

    Authorities believe the gun used in the drive-by shooting in Midland and Odessa, Texas this past weekend was illegally manufactured and sold by a Lubbock, Texas man.

    The U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives is currently investigating a man who they believe illegally manufactured and sold the AR-15-style rifle that Seth Ator used to kill seven people and injure 22 more on Saturday, before he was shot and killed by police.

    Authorities say that the .22 rifle sold to Ator was made from parts purchased over the internet and the seller assembled the weapon to sell to Ator. It is illegal in Texas for a non-dealer to do this.
    https://www.wsj.com/articles/authorities-suspect-man-of-making-and-selling-gun-used-in-texas-shooting-11567639127
    -FACTS AND REALITY

    BBBWWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAAHHAHAHAHAHAAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

  73. [73] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    While you guys go round and round..

    250 Million? Is that a joke? That's less than 5 million per State, or about what NY fishes out of the river on Saturday afternoons.

    "Moscow Mitch" gets to keep his moniker, at least until some real money comes rolling out.

  74. [74] 
    Kick wrote:

    Mike
    72

    And, as we see the Forum Moron, DLC Victoria, FORUM MORON flounder and flail in the FACTS department, she resorts to her outright DELUSIONS regarding my private life and the life of my family...

    Oh, epic fail yet again, Mike!

    Remember: "Pictures don't lie," and those mugshots of you and your crime family are definitely pictures. Easily searchable too.

    Did your one brain cell forget that you've already admitted to imprisoning your wife and to your own time in prison and part of your criminal past? That same one brain cell that thought it would be a good idea to be your own lawyer when you and your crime family got their asses handed to you and bitchslapped into your Shithole.

    Good times! :D

    While you might be able to fool even your own gullible self with your denials, you ain't fooling me and Russ.

    Troll all the posters on the blog, Mike. It won't change your pathetic life. :)

  75. [75] 
    Kick wrote:

    Balthasar
    73

    250 Million? Is that a joke? That's less than 5 million per State, or about what NY fishes out of the river on Saturday afternoons.

    How is it less than $5 million? How many states do you think there are? *smile* *wink*

    "Moscow Mitch" gets to keep his moniker, at least until some real money comes rolling out.

    You got that right! "Moscow Mitch" is stuck with that moniker forever. :)

  76. [76] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Kick and Michale,

    You guys are talking past each other in a wholly moronic manner that SHOULD have no place in this forum but, sadly, does.

  77. [77] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    If there is a site on the internet(s) on which the comments sections are more intensely below the quality of the commentaries themselves as they are at this forum, I'm sure I don't want to know about them.

  78. [78] 
    Kick wrote:

    EM
    76

    You guys are talking past each other in a wholly moronic manner that SHOULD have no place in this forum but, sadly, does.

    I'm responding to the level of troll that stalks this blog. Any more questions?

  79. [79] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Juvenile.

  80. [80] 
    Michale wrote:

    Balthsar,

    While you guys go round and round..

    I thought you were all about FACTS??

    And the FACT is, there has NEVER been a mass shooting where the weapon was legally purchased w/o a background check.

    Ergo... MORE Background checks won't do a lick of good..

    250 Million? Is that a joke?

    No, what's a joke is how you people complain and whine and cry that McConnell won't do what you want with regards to Election Security..

    Then when he DOES do what ya'all want, you WHINE AND COMPLAIN that it's not enough..

    Do you see the pattern here???

    :D

  81. [81] 
    Michale wrote:

    You guys are talking past each other in a wholly moronic manner that SHOULD have no place in this forum but, sadly, does.

    Hay, don't blame me.. I provide the facts around here.

    And if all that is around here are MORONS like DLC Victoria, well.. I'll put da bitch in her place...

    If you give me something better to do, then I'll do it..

    If all you give me is incest-loving Victoria.. Well, then that's all I gots to work with..

    It's really that simple..

  82. [82] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Why not just work with what Chris provides?

  83. [83] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    All the rest is noise, anyway, right?

  84. [84] 
    Kick wrote:

    EM
    79

    Juvenile.

    Yes, the troll is infinitely juvenile.

    Justin Trudeau and blackface. Discuss!

    Juvenile. :)

  85. [85] 
    Michale wrote:

    Hay, don't blame me.. I provide the facts around here.

    And the FACT is, there has **NEVER** been a mass shooting that resulted from a legal weapon purchase that was NOT background checked..

    Therefore, a law allowing the extra .5% of gun purchases is useless.. Nothing more than a WOULDN'T IT BE NICE law...

    But I am STILL willing to support it.. It makes no difference so why not... I'll support a law that makes ALL gun PURCHASES (sans family transfers) subject to background checks..

    All ya'all have to do is support Nationwide CCW Reciprocity...

    But ya'all (NEN) won't do that.. Because ya'all (NEN) are SOLELY and COMPLETELY about gun banning and gun confiscation...

    As I said, there ARE exceptions.. They know who they are.. :D

  86. [86] 
    Michale wrote:

    Why not just work with what Chris provides?

    Because what Chris provides is limited to solely Pro Democrat Anti Trump stuff...

    Gimme something I can work with and I will work with it..

    But I won't become a Party slavery drone like many here..

    All the rest is noise, anyway, right?

    One's person's "noise" is reality's FACTS... :D

  87. [87] 
    Michale wrote:

    I'm responding to the level of troll that stalks this blog. Any more questions?

    [79] Elizabeth Miller wrote:
    Juvenile.>

    Yes.. The I KNOW YOU ARE BUT WHAT AM I rebuttals are ALWAYS juvenile...

    But that, coupled with DLC Victoria's incessant bullshit about having private information on my children and my grandchildren, is all that she can do...

    I mean.. Ask yourself what kind of sick and pathetic person collects 'private' information on a person's children and grandchildren, SOLELY because she gets her ass kicked in a political forum...

    What kind of sick person does that???

    Victoria. 'nuff said..

  88. [88] 
    Michale wrote:

    Liz,

    But hay.. If you want to have a COMPLETELY logical and rational discussion, let's have it..

    Explain to me, in complete calm and rational discourse, the justification that someone could use to attack a man's family.. To attack a man's children and grandchildren in the most disgusting ways SOLELY because of political disagreements..

    Let's have that rational and objective discussion, shall we??

    Because until you can rationally and objectively address that.. Nothing will change in here..

  89. [89] 
    Michale wrote:

    Until then, I press on...

  90. [90] 
    Michale wrote:

    Police advocates to politicians: It's time to stop the 'demagoguery' and back America's men, women in blue
    https://www.foxnews.com/us/police-advocates-speak-out

  91. [91] 
    Michale wrote:

    As far as Trudeau's blackface incidents..

    Tucker Carlson mocks CNN’s Don Lemon for blackface hypocrisy over coverage of Megyn Kelly, Justin Trudeau
    https://www.foxnews.com/media/tucker-carlson-mocks-cnns-don-lemon-for-blackface-hypocrisy-over-coverage-of-megyn-kelly-justin-trudeau

    Funny how, when Lefties do blackface, it's acceptable and condoned.. Virgina Governor STILL has his job after HIS blackface incidents came to light..

    Compare that to a Right winger who even MENTIONS blackface and she is demonized and vilified to hell and back..

    Oh the hypocrisy...

    Justine Trudeau should have at least a DISHONORABLE MENTION (AT LEAST) in the MDDOTW segment tonight..

    If not, there is no hope left... :D

  92. [92] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    trudeau not only isn't a democrat, he isn't even an american. i think that disqualifies him from either CW award.

  93. [93] 
    Michale wrote:

    trudeau not only isn't a democrat, he isn't even an american. i think that disqualifies him from either CW award.

    Ample precedent exists to award a person who is important to the Left Wing cause and/or who is not an American citizen.. CW can back me up on this..

    The only reason to disqualify Trudeau is the embarrassment of having been so vocal of a supporter, especially when Trudeau went up against President Trump...

  94. [94] 
    Kick wrote:

    Mike
    81

    Hay, don't blame me.. I provide the facts around here.

    No, moron; you provide the repetitive effing trolling of near every poster on the forum. Same simpleminded bullshit over and over like a poon with one brain cell.

    And if all that is around here are MORONS like DLC Victoria, well.. I'll put da bitch in her place...

    You're a troll who hasn't realized that trolling the posters on this forum won't change your pathetic life.

    Again, liar, no one on this forum has attacked your grandchildren, not a single person, but don't let that fact prevent you from making up a load of bullshit where you claim otherwise. You just wouldn't be the troll you are if you weren't making up shit that didn't happen and posting lies. If you'd like to whine and moan incessantly about the stupid moron that doxed your entire family, well you need look no further than the mirror in the shithole you got bitchslapped into.

    Lawsuits don't lie. Mugshots don't lie.

    If you give me something better to do, then I'll do it..

    Go troll your buddy "Hondo" on the ammosexual blowhard forum. Go suck on your guns with the same fervor you suck the Fat Bastard. You want to discuss politics, do it. You want to troll posters? Eff off.

    If all you give me is incest-loving Victoria.. Well, then that's all I gots to work with..

    There's nothing you can troll me with that will change your pathetic life, and there's no name you can call me that I haven't called the dipshits like you whom I busted down and trained to be soldiers. You're an effing troll and a pretty effing lousy one at that.

  95. [95] 
    Michale wrote:

    CW's MIDOTW just a couple weeks ago..

    It's not exactly impressive, but it certainly is a relief to hear that Howard Schultz, head Starbucks honcho, has decided not to launch an independent bid for the presidency. This could have thrown a real monkey wrench in the general election, so it is indeed a relief to hear he's decided not to do so.

    They're not Democrats (well, not officially...), but CNN certainly deserves some kudos for putting on a monster of a town hall on climate change this week.

    Schulz is not a Democrat.. CW explicitly states that the CNN people "They're not Democrats"..

    Precedent exists for awards to non-Democrats..

    I am sure if I dug further, I can find references to non-Americans.

    Or you can just concede the point and save me some time.. :D

  96. [96] 
    TheStig wrote:

    Kick-71

    A mugshot of a smug individual is termed a "smugshot."

    Family smugshots can be combined to make a charming Christmas card - Martha Stewart started that trend. "May Your Holiday Joy Be Unconfined"

  97. [97] 
    Michale wrote:

    Hell, BERNIE is not a Democrat and I am CERTAIN that CW has awarded him a DOTW award for something or a rather..

  98. [98] 
    C. R. Stucki wrote:

    Michale

    You need to have more patience with Kicktoria. The girl has a terminal case of PTSD syndrome over the Mueller Report's failure to bring down the Orange Moron.

  99. [99] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Michale,

    Explain to me, in complete calm and rational discourse, the justification that someone could use to attack a man's family.. To attack a man's children and grandchildren in the most disgusting ways SOLELY because of political disagreements..

    There is no justification for that. PERIOD.

    I don't understand why Chris allows such attacks. Have you written him about it?

  100. [100] 
    Michale wrote:

    You need to have more patience with Kicktoria. The girl has a terminal case of PTSD syndrome over the Mueller Report's failure to bring down the Orange Moron.

    Yea, and if she would confine her attacks to me, it would be easy to ignore her as the mewling, sniveling and useless forum moron that she is..

    But when she shows what a low life scumbag she really is and attacks my children and my grandchildren??

    Well, bitch-slapping is an instinct in those cases..

  101. [101] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Actually, I don't understand a lot about what is allowed in the comments sections … :(

  102. [102] 
    Michale wrote:

    There is no justification for that. PERIOD.

    Agreed..

    I don't understand why Chris allows such attacks. Have you written him about it?

    On many occasions.. Just my opinion mind you, but CW appears to want to be hands off in forum Flame Wars and doesn't want to even give the appearance of taking sides. He takes this approach to a 'T' which is what allows disgusting and perverse attacks like that to happen..

    I don't fault him for it.. It takes a specially designed thick and fire proof skin to wade into such flame wars. And the fact that I GIVE much more decimating, devastating and dominating responses than I get probably is not helping him much.. In that I am really very sorry.. But I won't let such perversion and disgusting terroristic attacks go un-answered..

    Until such time as they are addressed in some form or another, I am left with no choice but to address them in my own estimable and some-what embarrassingly fashion..

    And so it goes and so it goes...

  103. [103] 
    Michale wrote:

    Actually, I don't understand a lot about what is allowed in the comments sections … :(

    It's actually easy to understand..

    It's a no-holds-barred free-for-all.. As long as no laws are being broken, CW appears to just let the children fight it out and tire themselves out... :D

    Again, I base this on no personal knowledge other than my gut and 12 years (13 years?? 14?? WOW) of knowing CW..

  104. [104] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    If Chris sticks to that, then one of two things will eventually happen ... the comments sections here will increasingly devolve into a kind of anti-Enlightenment cesspool that he will surely not want to be associated with and hence no more chrisweigant.com or, the site will be forever known as am unmoderated juvenile free-for-all that will attract only the worst of humankind.

  105. [105] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    … and, all of that despite the excellent columns Chris has become famous for!

  106. [106] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Just had a thought, the comments sections could just be eliminated.

    There are other forms of responsive communication, after all. :)

  107. [107] 
    James T Canuck wrote:

    'The problem for the rest of the Weigantians is they think that THEIR beliefs should rule..'

    Fucking juvenile.

    Michale, you can't have it both ways. You insist littering this blog with steaming piles of Drudge-sludge, to cling to some hope you and hero's might come off as mildly sane on the gun issue.

    You're idiots, plain and simple, apple pie eating morons. "let's clean up the gun issue by arming every man, woman and child to the tits because an antiquated law, written by an oligarchic crew of slave owners and religious fanatics, prevents us from emerging from our national infancy.

    Cowards.

    Laws and constitutions evolve and keep astride of changing societal needs and nots.

    You hegemonic freaks moan on and on about 'Radical Islamic Terror', and the Woes of Sharia law, yet you cling pedantically to a centuries old set of laws just as antiquated and stale as any part of the dictates of Sharia law.

    So, just stfu about guns and constitutions, it's embarrassing to skim past the same asinine right-wing gobshitery day after day.

    I see Trump is up to his old tricks again...The Clam is now colluding with the Ukraine to subvert yet another election in his favour. Can this guy not get enough Americans to help him knobble an other election? Why is it Trump always seems to be cheek to jowl with these slippery crooks around election time/ And why the fuck are 40% of Americans so dense as not to wonder why Trump prefers Russians over Americans in matters of Democracy, a subject they know little of nothing about?

    LL&P...Comrades.

  108. [108] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Again, I base this on no personal knowledge other than my gut and 12 years (13 years?? 14?? WOW) of knowing CW..

    Hey, Michale!

    What did we do for our tenth anniversaries, anyways!?

  109. [109] 
    Michale wrote:

    'Nuck

    You are welcome to your opinions.. I won't even target your family or your children or grandchildren for having them.

    But what you DON'T get to do is impose your opinions on others.

    We have a 2nd Amendment here in the US.. There is no getting around it..

    You can opine until you are blue in the face..

    But facts are facts and reality is reality.

    And your opinions have none of ether..

    I already slapped you down on your Trudeau bullshit.. Your lack of response is your concession.

    I graciously accept your concession..

  110. [110] 
    Michale wrote:

    Liz

    Hey, Michale!

    What did we do for our tenth anniversaries, anyways!?

    PRESIDENT TRUMP!!! :D

  111. [111] 
    Michale wrote:

    So, just stfu about guns and constitutions, it's embarrassing to skim past the same asinine right-wing gobshitery day after day.

    Ahh I see.. Only YOUR opinions and those who think like you matter..

    Fine.. You are certainly welcome to your own opinions...

    But you are not welcome to your own FACTS..

    And, as I have proven beyond ANY doubt.. I have the facts.. And you have...... Nuttin'... :D

  112. [112] 
    Michale wrote:

    Why They’ll Never Stop Targeting Kavanaugh

    The continuing assault reflects both a fixation and an effort to deprive the court of its legitimacy.

    Here are the reasons, in no certain order, that the accusations against Justice Brett Kavanaugh will never stop and his foes on the progressive left never let up.

    Because progressives have to prove they were right to advance the sexual-assault accusations of Christine Blasey Ford. They lost that battle; Justice Kavanaugh sits on the court. They won’t stop the assault until they can prove they were right to launch it.

    Because people become fixated on their targets. Because #MeToo continues as a potent cultural force. Because as the court assumes an ever more powerful role in American life, confirmation hearings and their aftermath will become more brutal and never-ending.

    Because the authority and legitimacy of future rulings that are not pleasing to progressives (most prominently, perhaps, on Roe v. Wade) can be undermined through footnotes that say “the 5-4 decision was joined by a justice credibly accused of sexual assault.”

    Because the steady drum of allegations diminishes not only Justice Kavanaugh’s stature but that of the court itself, which will be helpful when Democrats attempt to pack it.

    Because the crazier parts of the progressive left increasingly see politics as public theater, with heroes and villains, cheers and hisses from the audience, and costumes, such as outfits from “The Handmaid’s Tale.” Because modern politics is, for the lonely and strange on all sides, entertainment and diversion. And one’s people must be entertained.

    Because many progressives believe deep in their hearts that conservative men are both sexually obsessed and repressed, that conservatism is a way of looking at the world in which women are lesser, mere prey. They think this is behind everything, including conservative reservations about or opposition to abortion. In this view, conservative jurists who say things like “60% of my clerks were women” and “I coach the girls’ soccer and debate teams” are engaged in an elaborate cover. They hate the modern world. Behind closed doors they’re always swinging caveman’s clubs.

    Because where there’s smoke there must be fire. There was Ms. Ford, then the Yale rumors. There’s no way there isn’t something to it.

    So it will never end.
    https://peggynoonan.com/

    Anyone disagree???

  113. [113] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    [110]

    Sheeeeeeee-it.

  114. [114] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    For the record, this comments section is way past its 'best before date'..

  115. [115] 
    Michale wrote:

    For Democrats, it is not “good politics,” and most of them know it. What was done to Justice Kavanaugh had a positive impact on 2018 Senate outcomes—for Republicans. There was a backlash. Women worried their sons and husbands would be targeted in a prosecutorial atmosphere that had abandoned due process.

    People are complicated. Jill Abramson, who covered the 1991 Clarence Thomas hearings as a reporter for The Wall Street Journal, told a story years later. Anita Hill had just testified. During a break, Ms. Abramson went for lunch in the Supreme Court cafeteria. As she stood waiting to pay for her food she chatted with another reporter about how Ms. Hill’s testimony had been lethal for Judge Thomas. The cashier, a middle-aged black woman, overheard, gave Ms. Abramson a baleful look, and said: “They’ll do anything to bring down a black man.” It was clear she supported him. In Ms. Abramson’s view it was an early sign of broader public opinion.

    Democrats suffered a HUGE blacklash over their Kavanaugh debacle..

    One has to wonder what the NY SLIMES was thinking when they BEGGED for a rematch... :^/

  116. [116] 
    Michale wrote:

    Liz,

    Sheeeeeeee-it.

    Yea.. Probably not the award ya were hoping for, eh? :D

    For the record, this comments section is way past its 'best before date'..

    Barring a shooting civil war or alien abduction, I plan on being here at least thru Jan 2021...

    Can't miss my chance to gloat furiously after Trump's re-election.. :D

  117. [117] 
    Michale wrote:

    What is kind of horrifying is the extent to which all this stems from the charges brought last year by Ms. Ford. Mr. Kavanaugh, she said, had drunkenly attempted to force himself on her at a high-school party.

    I watched her testimony, as I’ve written before, with a bias. In my experience women in such matters are telling the truth. I assumed her charges would be substantiated.

    And yet they were not, not at all, not even after a year. Not a single witness emerged to corroborate her account. The woman Ms. Ford described as a close, lifelong friend who could back up her account said she remembered no such party or gathering and had in fact never met Brett Kavanaugh. Now she admits she does not herself believe Ms. Ford’s story.

    Throughout the drama those who believed Judge Kavanaugh’s denials operated at a disadvantage: Any criticism of Ms. Ford would be treated as a smear, so there was almost none.

    I’m reminded of this by the riveting book “Justice On Trial,” by Mollie Hemingway and Carrie Severino. Most such investigations are written by liberal journalists for a liberal audience; Ms. Hemingway and Ms. Severino are conservatives who went forward with journalistic seriousness and paid attention to information others might ignore. They suggest “where there’s smoke there’s fire” can’t be applied to the Kavanaugh case because from the moment he was nominated to the court he was targeted by pyromaniacs.

    Even those who supported Ford and were all ready to believe her concede that there was not a SINGLE SOLITARY FACT to support her claims. Even her own witnesses denied her story.

    Now, on what PLANET would such an accusation be credible??

  118. [118] 
    Michale wrote:

    A leftist feminist group linked him to allegations of sexual harassment against another judge, for whom he’d clerked a quarter-century before. An activist group accused him of supporting the “problematic trope that the Constitution should be ‘colorblind.’ ” Another group said his judicial philosophy amounted to supporting the “white supremacist patriarchy.”

    This was par for the course for a Republican nominee, but soon after Ms. Ford’s charges came the New Yorker story in which a Yale classmate of Judge Kavanaugh said that during her freshman year he exposed himself at a drunken dorm party and caused her to touch his genitals. But the story didn’t hold—the reporters were unable to find a witness to corroborate it, the accuser had “significant gaps” in her memories, and it took six days of “carefully assessing her memories” and consulting with an attorney provided by Democrats, to name Judge Kavanaugh.

    The since-disgraced lawyer Michael Avenatti then brought forward a woman who claimed she was gang raped at a high-school party by Mr. Kavanaugh and his friends, as were other young women. Her story fell apart too.

    Then a charge came in through Democratic Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse. A constituent had called his office to say a man believed to be Mr. Kavanaugh had sexually assaulted a woman on a boat in Newport, R.I., in 1985. Now there was a fourth accuser! Eventually the Judiciary Committee tracked down the constituent, an anti-Trump activist who’d called for a military coup. He later recanted his accusations on Twitter and apologized.

    A letter to Sen. Kamala Harris’s office claimed Judge Kavanaugh had sexually assaulted a woman while driving home from a party. The accuser was a political activist who later admitted her charge was “just a ploy” made because she was angry. Asked if she’d ever met Judge Kavanaugh she said, “Oh Lord, no.”

    In both cases the accusers seemed shocked you couldn’t just . . . lie.

    Accusers were SHOCKED you couldn't just.. LIE...

    That is what the Democrat Party has given us...

    People who are SHOCKED that they can't make up lies against political opponents..

    Weird... {/sarcasm}

  119. [119] 
    Kick wrote:

    TS
    96

    A mugshot of a smug individual is termed a "smugshot."

    Heh! :)

    Family smugshots can be combined to make a charming Christmas card - Martha Stewart started that trend. "May Your Holiday Joy Be Unconfined"

    Hey, that's not a bad idea, TS! The Fat Bastard could do the White House Christmas cards with mugshots of his entire Trump crime family. I think Mikey Flynn will finally be getting his sentence just in time for Christmas too, and Roger Stone won't be too far behind either!

    So Manafort, Papadop, Cohen, Flynn, Stone, etc. on the front... because mugshots don't lie! :)

  120. [120] 
    Michale wrote:

    “Normally the burden of proof is on the accuser,” write Ms. Hemingway and Ms. Severino, “but the media were not even paying lip service to that principle.”

    They weren’t.

    The charges will probably never stop, but at this point many of us, having seen what Justice Kavanaugh was put through because of ideology and politics, will never find them believable.

    AMEN to THAT!!

    Accusations against Justice Kavanaugh will "NEVER BE BELIEVABLE"....

    And who do we have to thank for that?? The Democrat Party and the NY GRIME...

  121. [121] 
    Kick wrote:

    C. R. Stucki
    98

    You need to have more patience with Kicktoria. The girl has a terminal case of PTSD syndrome over the Mueller Report's failure to bring down the Orange Moron.

    Another effing troll who believes his own pathetic bullshit and is basically just here to troll posters rather than discussing political issues.

    It won't change your last few years, Stucki, and it sure as hell won't change mine. :)

  122. [122] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Barring a shooting civil war or alien abduction, I plan on being here at least thru Jan 2021...

    No, no, no Michale … I meant THIS particular 100+ comments section.

  123. [123] 
    Michale wrote:

    No, no, no Michale … I meant THIS particular 100+ comments section.

    Ahhhh my mistake.

    In other words, there is hope for the future, eh??

    THAT's why I keep coming back..

    Hoping that we can, while moving to the future, bring this forum back to the time when it was FUN.. We can laugh at and with each other and we could fight like cats and dogs yet still want to do BBQs and picnics and beer bashes...

    Before the advent of the haters...

    THAT is a time worth waiting for.. :D

  124. [124] 
    Michale wrote:

    Canada's Trudeau pledges assault rifle ban, pivots campaign amid blackface scandal
    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-canada-election/canadas-trudeau-pledges-assault-rifle-ban-pivots-campaign-amid-blackface-scandal-idUSKBN1W51KJ

    Looks like Trudeau has tried a Harvey Weinstein.. :D

    Yea... THAT should work for him.. :eyeroll: :D

  125. [125] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    You can't handle that I am the acknowledged authority (Even SF Bear, who probably dislikes me immensely, acknowledges my expertise.. Of course, now that I point it out, he might claim he was being sarcastic, but.. the point is there) in this and any other LEO issue so you simply deny it. Without a SHRED of fact to support your delusion..

    Oh, this is gonna be fun!

    You were the self-“acknowledged authority” of LEO issues when I first came to this site, but that was only out of the respect people thought you had earned from your years of service as a commissioned police officer! You had everyone believing you had served for years as a police officer in your community — and it made it tough for people to disagree with your assessments of issues involving LEO.

    But after watching you post misinformation countless times about how the legal process works in this country, especially when it came to departments investigating officers for officer-involved-shootings - I couldn’t figure out how someone with supposedly years and years of service could be so wrong on legal concepts that every police academy in this country would require their students having a firm grasp of before ever allowing them to be released to active duty.

    A few of your comments were so wrong that I told you that it is a damn good thing that you were no longer a police officer as you would only dishonor the profession. The longer I was here, the more I came to question how you could have ever been a commissioned officer in any state! And when I questioned you about where you had been commissioned, that was when you admitted that while you’d been an MP in the military, you had never actually been a commissioned officer — which did not surprise me at all!

    You have lied to yourself, and you have lied to everyone here about your LEO background and experience — so anyone here who thinks of you as the authority on any issues related to law enforcement has been duped!

    Part of what made your claims of being a former LEO seem so odd is that you never posted any stories from your time on the force to support your arguments. I have never met a retired police officer who didn’t have stories to share. And as much as you post random crap on here, that is a telling omission!

    When I describe experiences from my years as an EMT and working at a 911 PSAT, those are real experiences. The knowledge you have about law enforcement can be gained by anyone willing to binge-watch Law&Order reruns!

  126. [126] 
    Kick wrote:

    Elizabeth Miller
    99

    There is no justification for that. PERIOD.

    Not a single poster has attacked his grandchildren, Elizabeth; he's lying about that as per usual. Basically all that's ever been said about his family is the fact that they have mugshots that are easily searchable, and that's a fact. The other so-called "attacks" on his family is where he attacks me with his playground names, and then I respond that I thought we had agreed to stop discussing his family.

    I don't understand why Chris allows such attacks. Have you written him about it?

    The attacks are primarily his, Elizabeth. He's a fraud. I would love to discuss this with CW with links to litigation and mugshots that expose the fraud that is Mike; it would be my absolute pleasure to discuss the forum fraud and troll with CW. Bring it on! :)

  127. [127] 
    Michale wrote:

    Russ,

    When I describe experiences from my years as an EMT and working at a 911 PSAT, those are real experiences. The knowledge you have about law enforcement can be gained by anyone willing to binge-watch Law&Order reruns!

    Facts to support??

    Of course you don't..

    Just your own hate and bigotry shinning thru..

    But, hay.. I am flattered that you devote so much time to me, personally..

    I guess that's yer only option since you never can refute my facts..

    Always attack the person.. That's yer motto...

  128. [128] 
    Kick wrote:

    Michale
    100

    But when she shows what a low life scumbag she really is and attacks my children and my grandchildren??

    No one on this forum has attacked your grandchildren. Not a single person. You're a liar and a fraud, and not even a good troll.

    Well, bitch-slapping is an instinct in those cases..

    Your basic instinct is to gaslight with your lies and troll the other posters rather than discussing political issues. You're a lying troll. :)

  129. [129] 
    Michale wrote:

    Not a single poster has attacked his grandchildren,

    While not factually accurate, she concedes and admits that she has attacked my children..

    What kind of disgusting and pathetic excuse for a human being would do that?? Victoria... That's who...

  130. [130] 
    Michale wrote:

    Part of what made your claims of being a former LEO seem so odd is that you never posted any stories from your time on the force to support your arguments.

    BBBWWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

    THAT's your "proof"???

    The fact is, I *HAVE* posted extensively regarding my LEO & military experiences and background as CW, JL and Liz can attest to.. They were around for all of it.. CW even asked for my military expertise to assist in a commentary he was writing...

    But since you haters showed up???

    I don't waste my time..

    You have never mentioned any experiences you have had for an EMT until yesterday..

    OBVIOUSLY you are lying and never were an EMT..

    See how utterly ridiculous you sound?? :eyeroll: moron..

  131. [131] 
    Michale wrote:

    Trump nominates wave of California judges, in fresh bid to reshape courts
    https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-nominates-wave-of-california-judges-in-fresh-bid-to-reshape-courts

    Way ta go, Mr President!!!! :D

    Democrats whine and cry and stamp their feet..

    And President Trump just presses on, doing good for this country...

  132. [132] 
    Kick wrote:

    Michale
    102

    On many occasions.. Just my opinion mind you, but CW appears to want to be hands off in forum Flame Wars and doesn't want to even give the appearance of taking sides. He takes this approach to a 'T' which is what allows disgusting and perverse attacks like that to happen..

    Please don't stop trying, Mike. We'll all get together and compare your lies against my facts and links.

    In that I am really very sorry.. But I won't let such perversion and disgusting terroristic attacks go un-answered..

    Terroristic attacks? *laughs* The attacks are primarily yours, Mike. Me telling you to stop discussing your family could hardly be classified as a "terrorism," and this bullshit of yours is exactly why no one need take your gaslighting and fraud seriously. :)

    Until such time as they are addressed in some form or another, I am left with no choice but to address them in my own estimable and some-what embarrassingly fashion..

    You are definitely an embarrassment to yourself, but you're pissing in the wind if you think you're left with no choice. You definitely have a choice. :)

  133. [133] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    Accusers were SHOCKED you couldn't just.. LIE...

    Coming from such a decorated law enforcement officer as yourself, this IS shocking!

  134. [134] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    THAT is a time worth waiting for.. :D

    Indeed ...

  135. [135] 
    Kick wrote:

    Michale
    109

    You are welcome to your opinions.. I won't even target your family or your children or grandchildren for having them.

    No one is "targeting" your grandchildren, you lying piece of troll stench. No one! Likewise, no one is "targeting" your children unless you think stating the fact that you and your spawn are criminals is the equivalent of bullets. Duck, Mike! Incoming! *laughs*

    But what you DON'T get to do is impose your opinions on others.

    Wrong again, Mike because he just did, and he's obviously a poster who's been paying attention to your repetitive bullshit and seems quite capable of imposing his opinion... witness his excellent post! :)

  136. [136] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    CW even asked for my military expertise to assist in a commentary he was writing...

    Notice how you shifted the conversation’s focus off of being a commissioned police officer and onto you being in the military... as if they have any relation to one another!

    Despite all of your lies on here, I have never questioned your claims of your military service — mainly because I believed even you aren’t so pathetic as to lie about having served...but I am not above admitting that I could be wrong for giving you that much credit!

    YOU told me that you were never commissioned by any state to work as police officer! Are you now denying that is the truth?

    Simple question — only requires a “Yes” or “No” response.

  137. [137] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    Kick,

    The fool cannot handle one of us on his best day — why he believes he’ll be able to take us both on at once is just mind-boggling!

  138. [138] 
    Kick wrote:

    Michale
    129

    While not factually accurate, she concedes and admits that she has attacked my children..

    I have basically just posted that they have multiple mugshots and turned your own curse words toward me into you describing your family. If that's an attack on your family, then you are their primary attacker. I said it before, and I'll say it again, you and your bullying words have been turned back on your own, and that makes you their primary attacker.

    What kind of disgusting and pathetic excuse for a human being would do that??

    You... troll!

    Victoria... That's who...

    I love my pseudonym. She is the equivalent of Nike, you know. It's comical to watch the forum trolls prattle on and on like morons about a pseudonym! Meanwhile, what kind of totally moronic fool who claims to be a law enforcement officer would post the names of himself, his wife, his children and their children on an archived forum? You're a fraud and an idiot; no law enforcement officer worth a shit would do that! None! :)

  139. [139] 
    Michale wrote:

    Russ,

    Part of what made your claims of being a former LEO seem so odd is that you never posted any stories from your time on the force to support your arguments. I have never met a retired police officer who didn’t have stories to share. And as much as you post random crap on here, that is a telling omission!

    And how the FRAK do you know what experiences I have told..

    You have been here MAYBE all of 3 years.. 4 at the most... I have been here more than TEN YEARS longer than you have, you idiot!!

    How the hell would YOU know what I have and haven't told..

    Yer a noob.. A JEEP... An ignorant moron who only spews BULLSHIT because he doesn't have any facts..

    Notice how you shifted the conversation’s focus off of being a commissioned police officer and onto you being in the military... as if they have any relation to one another!

    NOW I KNOW you are completely and utterly ignorant...

  140. [140] 
    Michale wrote:

    Liz,

    THAT is a time worth waiting for.. :D

    Indeed ...

    In spades...

  141. [141] 
    Michale wrote:

    The fool cannot handle one of us on his best day — why he believes he’ll be able to take us both on at once is just mind-boggling!

    Uh MORON???

    It wasn't an "illegal sale" in any way, shape, or fashion in the "Odessa incident"
    -DLC Victoria

    Kicked VICTORIA'S ass with the FACTS...

    Part of what made your claims of being a former LEO seem so odd is that you never posted any stories from your time on the force to support your arguments. I have never met a retired police officer who didn’t have stories to share. And as much as you post random crap on here, that is a telling omission!
    -Russ The Moron

    Kicked YOUR ass with the FACT that you have been here a PIDDLY ass short time.. and I have been here at LEAST 3 times as long.. So you wouldn't KNOW jack shit about the stories and experiences I have told.

    So, looks like I can handle BOTH of you idiots without even breaking a sweat..

    BBBWWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

    I am so good, that your DLC Victoria butt buddy copies my laugh!! :D

    BBBWWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

  142. [142] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    Michale,

    Devon wants to know why he has to wear a Kevlar vest if his gun ensures his safety?

    Tell Devon that if he has to ask that question he should immediately turn in his badge and take up quiche farming..

    Devon asks a legitimate question of someone who claims to be a fellow law enforcement officer and this is how you respond?!?! You implied that guns guarantee your safety, so he wanted to hear your reasoning for wearing a Kevlar vest while on duty. So why would you attacked his record as a police officer in response to such a simple question?

    Captain Michael Whorely....if you are going to lie about being law enforcement, you might as well lie about your rank! From now on, I promise to show you the respect that your years of service have earned you by referring to you simply as Capt. Whorely ...

  143. [143] 
    Kick wrote:

    Russ
    136

    CW even asked for my military expertise to assist in a commentary he was writing... ~ Michale

    Which has exactly what to do with being a commissioned officer, Russ? Nothing!

    Notice how you shifted the conversation’s focus off of being a commissioned police officer and onto you being in the military... as if they have any relation to one another!

    This... EXACTLY this!

    FUN FACT: It is a felony in multiple jurisdictions to claim you are a police officer when you're not.

    Hey, Russ. Remember that time when Mike went through the roof because I called Zimmerman a "wannabe cop"? He sure got his knickers in a twist. He took it awfully personally, and why wouldn't he? Anyone paying attention would know exactly why. :)

  144. [144] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    Capt. Whorely,

    Strange that you stopped sharing your law enforcement stories when someone who actually has worked in law enforcement and is married to a LEO showed up...

    YOU told me that you were never commissioned by any state to work as police officer! Are you now denying that is the truth?

    Simple question — only requires a “Yes” or “No” response.

  145. [145] 
    Michale wrote:

    Devon asks a legitimate question of someone who claims to be a fellow law enforcement officer and this is how you respond?!?!

    It is NOT a legitimate question from someone who was REALLY a cop or who knew ANYTHING about Law Enforcement.

    The fact you pretend it is legitimate is proof positive that you are full of shit when you claim to be married to a cop..

    Being a cop groupie and a cop SLUT is NOT any real connection with Law Enforcement, Russ.. :D

  146. [146] 
    Michale wrote:

    .if you are going to lie about being law enforcement, you might as well lie about your rank!

    Says the cop slut who has NO FACTS to support his claims..

    Per usual for Russ..

    BBBWWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

  147. [147] 
    Michale wrote:

    Cop Slut and Daddys Little Cockholster...

    PWN'ED!!!!

    BBBWWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

  148. [148] 
    Kick wrote:

    Russ
    137

    The fool cannot handle one of us on his best day — why he believes he’ll be able to take us both on at once is just mind-boggling!

    I know, right!? And anyone who is paying attention versus having their head shoved firmly up their ass like the board troll we're discussing should take note that said board troll has not answered your simple "yes" or "no" question.

    Point to Russ. :)

  149. [149] 
    Michale wrote:

    Devon asks a legitimate question

    You have never even provided any fact that "Devon" is a real person..

    "Devon" is probably your pet name for what ever cop you drag home to bang...

    The only "Devon" is in your head... or ON it...

    BBBWWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHA

  150. [150] 
    Michale wrote:

    Whatsamatter, NOOB???

    Can't type because yer hands are busy???

    BBBWWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

    JEEP to scared to respond???

    BBBWWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

  151. [151] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    Kick,

    Hey, Russ. Remember that time when Mike went through the roof because I called Zimmerman a "wannabe cop"? He sure got his knickers in a twist. He took it awfully personally, and why wouldn't he? Anyone paying attention would know exactly why. :)

    Capt. Whorely keeps digging himself in deeper and deeper with his idiotic attempts to avoid the truth! He wants me to prove he was never an officer when he has never offered any proof that he was. Oh, and then there was that little fact...oh what was it??? Oh yeah...

    THE FACT THAT HE ADMITTED TO ME THAT HE HAD NEVER BEEN A COMMISSIONED POLICE OFFICER!!!

    Something that he has avoided addressing for some reason....

    FUN FACT: It is a felony in multiple jurisdictions to claim you are a police officer when you're not.

    Capt. Whorely might want to re-familiarize himself with Florida’s RCW’s regarding falsely claiming to be a LEO. I’d hate for that to happen, but I’d love to make the call!

  152. [152] 
    Michale wrote:

    has not answered your simple "yes" or "no" question.

    I don't have to answer a white trash cop slut who NEVER has ANY facts to back up their claims.

    Just like I find it so EASY to bitch-slap the Daddy's Little Cockholster Victoria who made the BULLSHIT claim that there was NOTHING illegal about the Odessa rifle sale..

    BBBWWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

    Question, Daddy's Little Cockholster Victoria... Does your mom know that you are giving your father blowjobs???

    BBWWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

  153. [153] 
    Michale wrote:

    Well, as much fun as it's been bitch-slapping the cop slut and Daddy's Little Cockholster around the forum..

    My time now belongs to my lovely wife of almost 40 years.. :D

    I'll be back to kick some more ass of the NOOBs and JEEPs in the morning.. :D

  154. [154] 
    Kick wrote:

    Russ
    142

    Devon wants to know why he has to wear a Kevlar vest if his gun ensures his safety?

    I have your answer, Russ. You tell Devon that the "teflon" has to be "left on" because of all the "wannabe" dipshits like Mike. :)

    Devon asks a legitimate question of someone who claims to be a fellow law enforcement officer and this is how you respond?!?! You implied that guns guarantee your safety, so he wanted to hear your reasoning for wearing a Kevlar vest while on duty. So why would you attack his record as a police officer in response to such a simple question?

    Point to Russ.

    Captain Michael Whorely....if you are going to lie about being law enforcement, you might as well lie about your rank! From now on, I promise to show you the respect that your years of service have earned you by referring to you simply as Capt. Whorely ...

    Point to Russ.

    And how the FRAK do you know what experiences I have told..

    You have been here MAYBE all of 3 years.. 4 at the most... I have been here more than TEN YEARS longer than you have, you idiot!!

    How the hell would YOU know what I have and haven't told.. ~ Captain Whorely

    Oh, and Russ, apparently "Captain Whorely" has been on this board longer than the author and is completely unaware that every word is archived as witnessed by the links that have been here the whole effing time. Go figure! :)

    So point yet again to Russ! :)

  155. [155] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    Capt. Whorely,

    Are you attacking my spouse? Funny, I vaguely remember you spouting off about how you would never stoop so low... but then again, when do you ever tell the truth?

  156. [156] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    Kick,

    About the only true thing Capt. Whorely has said is that he is married... and I only know that is true from the lawsuits he’s been the subject of!

    OK, I need to get back to trimming some trees on our property. Big hugs to ya!

    Russ

  157. [157] 
    Kick wrote:

    Michale
    152

    I don't have to answer a white trash cop slut who NEVER has ANY facts to back up their claims.

    Narrator: And the trailer trash fake cop plays the "race card." Instant multiple point deduction. What a fraud this troll has turned out to be.

    Just like I find it so EASY to bitch-slap the Daddy's Little Cockholster Victoria who made the BULLSHIT claim that there was NOTHING illegal about the Odessa rifle sale..

    Narrator: And deflection back to the same shit from multiple hours ago rather than answering the very simple "yes" or "no" question posed by Russ. Automatic multiple point deduction to the trolling fraud who is an admitted criminal.

    Forum Note: This board is archived, remember, so no dumbfuckery will be tolerated with this ignorant deflection bullshit.

    Point again to Russ!

    Question, Daddy's Little Cockholster Victoria... Does your mom know that you are giving your father blowjobs???

    My father is deceased. If he were alive, he would get a quite a kick out of the fact that there is a fake cop who spends quite a lot of time whining and moaning daily and fantasizing incessantly about his cock! I can't know for sure, but I believe he would advise you to get over your sick obsession with his prick and focus all that energy on being the human cock holster of Your Orange Worship!

    Suck it, Captain Whorely!

    Point to Russ! :)

  158. [158] 
    Kick wrote:

    Russ
    156

    About the only true thing Capt. Whorely has said is that he is married... and I only know that is true from the lawsuits he’s been the subject of!

    I know, right!? I would wager that people think we are kidding about the lawsuits, but this is easily searchable stuff. Meanwhile, he pretends to be the moral authority of the board and whines and moans about his family being "attacked" when he's the one who made them who they all are: Criminals!

    OK, I need to get back to trimming some trees on our property. Big hugs to ya!

    Hugs back! Stay safe. :)

  159. [159] 
    Michale wrote:

    Capt. Whorely,

    Seriously?? Making fun of a person's name??

    What are you?? 7yrs old?? :eyeroll:

    Are you attacking my spouse?

    Not at all.. If he even exists at all, which the "facts" clearly support that he doesn't...

    You dragged him into this discussion.. By Daddy's Little Cockholster's "logic", that means it's OK to "attack" him..

    If I was attacking him.. If he even exists..

    Someone who really HAD a spouse would be a lot more pissed off.. Apparently, you either DON'T have a spouse or your relationship with him really sucks...

    Which is it, Russ??

    Yer just a cop slut with no spouse?

    Or yer in a loveless marriage with a guy who can't stand you??

    Answer the question, NOOB...

    BBBWWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

  160. [160] 
    Michale wrote:

    Not a single poster has attacked his grandchildren,

    Of course, a scumbag who attacks a man's children and threatens to DOX them SOLELY because of political differences with the man (as Daddy's Little Cockholster has conceded she has done) simply cannot be believed no matter what their denials are..

    DLC Victoria is low-life scum.. That is the ONLY conclusion possible..

  161. [161] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    Capt. Whorely,

    Seriously?? Making fun of a person's name??

    I thought about using your actual last name, but two things made me decide it was best to just stick with mocking you...

    1. I figured that down the road, my posting your actual last name and referring to you as Captain might be used by you as “proof” to others that you were former law enforcement...you know, one of your FACTS!

    2. You dishonor law enforcement with your lies, and you don’t deserve the honor of being identified as one...even when it is done mockingly!

    If I was attacking him.. If he even exists..

    Someone who really HAD a spouse would be a lot more pissed off.. Apparently, you either DON'T have a spouse or your relationship with him really sucks...

    Do you actually believe that your words mean anything to me....or that what you think of me or Devon matters to us? Why would it? You are an old troll who chooses to lie so that the people that you deceive might respect you for your service-that-never-was! You refuse to admit that you weren’t being honest about being a LEO, choosing to double down and attempting to shift the conversation away from focusing on your lies. I’d say that I pity you...but you just do not matter enough for me to feel even that for you.

    But if you think you need to apologize for lying about serving as a police officer when you never have and attacking someone who for the last 18+ years has put his life on the line for the community he has sworn to protect and serve... I will pass that on to Devon.

  162. [162] 
    Kick wrote:

    Mike
    160

    Of course, a scumbag who attacks a man's children and threatens to DOX them SOLELY because of political differences with the man (as Daddy's Little Cockholster has conceded she has done) simply cannot be believed no matter what their denials are..

    Fuck you, you fabricating dipshit. I don't even think you have any children. The facts clearly show that you don't since you can't stop obsessing about my father's cock, and now your fantasizing about Russ! You couldn't have possibly spawned any nose-ringed tattooed up spawn! How does anyone on here even know they exist!?

    Oh, right! You doxed every single one of them all by yourself because that's naturally what a so-called "law enforcement officer" with so much training and expertise would obviously advise everyone to do on this forum that is archived! All that time you spent on here you spent doxing your family... every single one of them... for anyone with an Internet connection and a keyboard to see! That's good thinking, occifer Captain Whorely!

    Russ and I agree that you're a lying scumbag. After all, you're the ignoramus and dumbfuck son of a bitch who was dense enough to dox every single one of your own family members. Meanwhile, neither Russ nor I have EVER posted a single one of their names on this forum.

    If you'd like to take issue with the knuckle-dragging ground pounding moron that doxed your kids, kindly direct your misplaced anger to that low-life piece of shit you see in the mirror, you pig-ignorant trailer trash poon.

    Have a nice day, Captain Moron Dipshit Whorely! :)

  163. [163] 
    Kick wrote:

    Russ
    161

    1. I figured that down the road, my posting your actual last name and referring to you as Captain might be used by you as “proof” to others that you were former law enforcement...you know, one of your FACTS!

    Great point, Russ!

    2. You dishonor law enforcement with your lies, and you don’t deserve the honor of being identified as one...even when it is done mockingly!

    Another great point, Russ!

    Do you actually believe that your words mean anything to me....or that what you think of me or Devon matters to us?

    I would wager: NOT! After all, how much gravity does one give to a dumbfucking swamp poon who'd dox himself and family multiple times on an archived forum and claims to have "law enforcement bona fides"? It's positively disdainful.

  164. [164] 
    TheStig wrote:

    Kick-162

    Said doxing wouldn't have anything to do with "M" hyperlinking his post header with his business website would it?:) I always thought that was a damn fool thing to do. Something a law enforcement officer should probably know NOT TO DO....if they wanted to retain their personal and family privacy. Maybe he thought the additional foot traffic into the shop was worth it?

    In the end, M is just another F'in' troll. His entire debate strategy is based on pimping rhetorical fallacies and recirculating right wing editorials.....plus endless string of scifi and action movie quotes with a dash of bwahahaha...ha's thrown in as a kind of secret sauce.

    In short, a jerk, a loser. Not worth responding to. Nothing frustrates a troll so much as being ignored. It's all about attention.

  165. [165] 
    Kick wrote:

    TS
    164

    Said doxing wouldn't have anything to do with "M" hyperlinking his post header with his business website would it? :) I always thought that was a damn fool thing to do. Something a law enforcement officer should probably know NOT TO DO....if they wanted to retain their personal and family privacy. Maybe he thought the additional foot traffic into the shop was worth it?

    Good question, TS. While anyone who wished to have their personal privacy maintained would be wise not to hyperlink to their personal business, it's not at all a factor in the instant situation. No, sir. Michael just outright supplies his own name, his wife's name, and the names of his children and their children all throughout the forum to be archived for all posterity.

    http://www.chrisweigant.com/2012/08/14/midsummer-u-s-geography-trivia-game/#comment-25180

    Now I ask you: What kind of so-called "law enforcement officer" would supply his own name and multiple personal details of himself and multiple of his family members over and over ad nauseam and repeatedly posted by his own free choice throughout a forum that he knows is archived and then whine incessantly like a nescient and incognizant little bitch that someone doxed his family when he did that all by himself persistently for over a decade? :)

  166. [166] 
    Kick wrote:

    TS
    164

    In the end, M is just another F'in' troll.

    Yes, sir. He admitted as much to Russ.

    In short, a jerk, a loser. Not worth responding to. Nothing frustrates a troll so much as being ignored. It's all about attention.

    Yep. He literally became unhinged and went ape-shit when "neilm" wrote an awesome and very helpful script for the entire group to block the board troll's increasingly more intense spamming of the forum that had been occurring... the one that a whole bunch of posters thanked him for and that you rightly referred to as a "trash compactor":

    Ohh Another spy ware program..

    This is like Neil's "christmas present" Neil sends me every year.. He sends me an online $30 "gift card" every christmas so he can track how and where I spend it..

    I caught on to his scam years ago so just ignore it whenever it comes..

    His spyware script is just another scam... ~ Michael

    http://www.chrisweigant.com/2019/08/02/ftp536/#comment-141465

    Yes, siree, the inveterate moron who's posted the information of himself, his wife, his children and their children all over this forum multiple times inferred that a poster sending him a gift card was doing so in order to "track" him. Does it get any bone-deep ignorant than that? <--- rhetorical

    So as Russ and I have repeatedly discussed over time, Michael has continually revealed himself to be completely ignorant regarding basic issues which even the least educated, least knowledgeable "local yokel"/"occifer" would have. No one who wanted to track your whereabouts would do so in such a manner as he's described; it's asinine and ridiculous on its face.

    That ignorant unhinged conspiracy bullshit of his right there reveals everything anyone needs to know about this inveterate lying poon. The entire incident is illustrative of your statement about the fact that "nothing frustrates a troll so much as being ignored." Exactly right, TS... witness the troll's handiwork that very day.

    The troll got his knickers in such a twist and became so frustrated and incensed that he concocted a ridiculous conspiracy theory that day about another poster on this forum, spammed away furiously, and then he doxed "neilm" in the same exact way that he's doxed himself, his wife, his children and their children repeatedly over the course of a decade plus... all while blaming others.

  167. [167] 
    TheStig wrote:

    Kick-165

    Oh my, that was pretty much like putting his "spare" key under his doormat.

    Now the the cat is well and truly out of the bag and clawing its way up the drapes which in turn are about to collapse with the curtain rods!

    A couple clicks on any number of websites plus a credit card and you've got a ton of public records associated with him! That includes arrest records,mug shots and legal judgements! Street View gives you the house pix!

    Michael is not claiming that any of this info is false. In fact, he's admitting it's true. Bye bye defamation.

  168. [168] 
    Kick wrote:

    TS
    167

    Oh my, that was pretty much like putting his "spare" key under his doormat.

    Except for the fact that his "spare key" had already been handed out -- with no help whatsoever from anybody else -- to anyone with an Internet connection and a keyboard over a decade ago:

    http://www.chrisweigant.com/2008/12/24/mr-claus-goes-to-washington/#comment-4291

    A couple clicks on any number of websites plus a credit card and you've got a ton of public records associated with him! That includes arrest records,mug shots and legal judgements! Street View gives you the house pix!

    Except for the "credit card" and the fact that there are multiple other instances where he chooses to freely post much more personal information. Who'd need a credit card? He freely volunteers his personal information and that of his family over and over ad nauseam.

    Michael is not claiming that any of this info is false. In fact, he's admitting it's true. Bye bye defamation.

    You can neither dox nor defame someone who has already done the job via the demonstrable and inveterate ignorance contained in their freely posted comments.

  169. [169] 
    TheStig wrote:

    Kick-168

    All the way back to 2008! That's not quite The Big Bang of CW.com, but close. I may have been an occasional reader of CW on HuffPo back in that era. Sampling the old clay tablets suggests M was more like Anakin Skywalker, as opposed to his current Darth Vader persona.

  170. [170] 
    Kick wrote:

    Heh.

Comments for this article are closed.