Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Trump is Unfit?


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Supporting the church by ejecting the clergy and surveying the scene by not surveying any of the damage or hardly even looking at the church.

I just named the five items again, without googling.  Since its been nearly 15 hours, I got an additional 10 points. My doctor crapped his pants on the spot and a dozen nurses genuflected, offering th

President Trump tells Brian Kilmeade it was a false report that he was taken to the underground bunker amid protests, though he confirms he did go to the bunker. He says he went in the day and it was

6 minutes ago, Don't Noonan said:

Where I disagree with the folks in here is that he visited the church solely for a photo op.  Of course him posing for a picture was for a photo but that is why he went there.  He went to support the church and survey the scene on the ground like all good Presidents do.  

Good, progress.  It was a photo op. Yes absolutely there can be a difference of opinion in his motivations for going there. You don’t believe he went there for the photo op, I believe he did. Neither one of us will ever know who’s right because none of us are in his head.  But if it was or wasn’t a photo op is not in question.  
 

*And I’ll ignore your Freudian slip in the bolded. 😉

Edited by dkp993
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Don't Noonan said:

Where I disagree with the folks in here is that he visited the church solely for a photo op.  Of course him posing for a picture was for a photo but that is why he went there.  He went to support the church and survey the scene on the ground like all good Presidents do.  

I was with you right up until the third sentence.  He never went inside and never met with a single member of the church.

He walked across.

He posed for the pictures.

He walked back.

/scene

  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, dkp993 said:

Sure and she could be absolutely telling the truth but just didn’t hear it. That doesn’t mean the warnings didn’t come. So her statement while being truthful could also be incorrect. We just don’t know.  So I error on the side of what I seen in the past, and that is the police giving warnings about the impending gas bombs being dropped on people. It’s pretty standard protocol.  

I'm also going to assume that warnings were given, but it's abundantly apparent that they weren't obvious enough.

Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, [scooter] said:
54 minutes ago, Don't Noonan said:

Why would President Biden be going to an NRA rally?

Good point. It's kind of like saying "Why would President Trump be going to a church?"

:lmao: 

Perfect.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 2
  • Laughing 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Don't Noonan said:

Where I disagree with the folks in here is that he visited the church solely for a photo op.  Of course him posing for a picture was for a photo but that is why he went there.  He went to support the church and survey the scene on the ground like all good Presidents do.  

:lmao:  Supporting the church by ejecting the clergy and surveying the scene by not surveying any of the damage or hardly even looking at the church.

  • Like 6
  • Thanks 2
  • Laughing 4
  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, dkp993 said:

Good, progress.  It was a photo op. Yes absolutely there can be a difference of opinion in his motivations for going there. You don’t believe he went there for the photo op, I believe he did. Neither one of us will ever know who’s right because none of us are in his head.  But if it was or wasn’t a photo op is not in question.  
 

*And I’ll ignore your Freudian slip in the bolded. 😉

Crap, typo ruins my argument.  Good catch.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, -jb- said:

I was with you right up until the third sentence.  He never went inside and never met with a single member of the church.

He walked across.

He posed for the pictures.

He walked back.

/scene

Let's not forget the tear gas and force used to clear a path to the church, including on a priest of said church.

  • Like 3
  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Smoke cannisters and pepper balls, apparently. Considerable and easily discernible difference to the people on the receiving end, I'm sure.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Todd Andrews said:

Kings 2:23-24: From there, Elisha went up to Bethel, and as he was walking up the road, a group of young men came out of the city and jeered at him, chanting, “Go up, you baldhead! Go up, you baldhead!” 24 Then he turned around, looked at them, and called down a curse on them in the name of the LORD. Suddenly two female bears came out of the woods and mauled forty-two of the boys.

That's some good old fashioned smitin' right there.

Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Don't Noonan said:

Once again I was proven correct.

Listen to Noonan

Protesters were not peaceful and no tear gas was used.  

Like I said, common sense.

Protestors were peaceful by accounts of those on the ground...including those on the property of the church who heard saw and smelled and dealt with what was happening.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, sho nuff said:

Protestors were peaceful by accounts of those on the ground...including those on the property of the church who heard saw and smelled and dealt with what was happening.

 

There were people on buildings throwing stuff at police.  They were not all peaceful.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Don't Noonan said:

There were people on buildings throwing stuff at police.  They were not all peaceful.

After they started firing what they did...yes thats in the videos i believe.  Not from the church...by any account.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Don't Noonan said:

There were people on buildings throwing stuff at police.  They were not all peaceful.

I saw one guy throwing a few things, and he was told to, and I believe this is a direct quote from a woman in the crowd, "Stop throwing ####!" So aside from one idiot, and unverified reports of stuff getting thrown at police from buildings, that still leaves the problem of chemical agents being used on peaceful protesters, which is a thing that happened whether you want to believe it or not.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Kal El said:

I saw one guy throwing a few things, and he was told to, and I believe this is a direct quote from a woman in the crowd, "Stop throwing ####!" So aside from one idiot, and unverified reports of stuff getting thrown at police from buildings, that still leaves the problem of chemical agents being used on peaceful protesters, which is a thing that happened whether you want to believe it or not.

TEAR GAS was not used.  Own it.  It is okay to be wrong.  My goodness.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Don't Noonan said:

TEAR GAS was not used.  Own it.  It is okay to be wrong.  My goodness.

If you go back and look real close at my post, nowhere in it did I mention tear gas by name. By your own assertion, pepper balls were used, which I took the liberty of seeing what went into them, and lo and behold, they share a similar chemical makeup to tear gas. Never mind the canisters found, I won't even talk about those, but the fact of the matter is that chemical agents were used on peaceful protesters.

It's okay to be wrong.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Kal El said:

If you go back and look real close at my post, nowhere in it did I mention tear gas by name. By your own assertion, pepper balls were used, which I took the liberty of seeing what went into them, and lo and behold, they share a similar chemical makeup to tear gas. Never mind the canisters found, I won't even talk about those, but the fact of the matter is that chemical agents were used on peaceful protesters.

It's okay to be wrong.

Thank you for admitting I was right.  Well done.  :hifive:

  • Laughing 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Don't Noonan said:

Thank you for admitting I was right.  Well done.  :hifive:

If you think disproving your assertion means I proved you were right, I have solemn news for you. But since this is as unproductive as ever, I'll leave you to whatever it is that involves being factually incorrect.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Kal El said:

If you think disproving your assertion means I proved you were right, I have solemn news for you. But since this is as unproductive as ever, I'll leave you to whatever it is that involves being factually incorrect.

My 20 posts or so this afternoon defending myself from the echo chamber have been vindicated.  It feels great thanks.  Have a good night!

Edited by Don't Noonan
  • Like 1
  • Laughing 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Don't Noonan said:

My 20 posts or so this afternoon defending myself from the echo chamber have been vindicated.  It feels great thanks.  Have a good night!

If you had claimed all afternoon (in likely more than 20 posts) that there was no tear gas maybe.  But that wasn't the case.

You are now splitting hairs that other chemical agents were used as well as police physically removing people which was still not justified.  Especially from church property.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Cowboysfan8 said:

The police aren’t trained to kill innocent people 

They're also not trained to fire tear gas at peaceful protesters, but look where we are now.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Cowboysfan8 said:

The police aren’t trained to kill innocent people 

But their tactics often result in it which would indicate retraining is needed.  As well as oversight  so such things dint get covered up.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Cowboysfan8 said:

Often??

Their tactics OFTEN result in the death of innocent people?

bull#### 

Well, "often" is a little subjective, but it is true that 1 in 1000 black men in America can expect to die at the hands of police. So there is a problem. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Cowboysfan8 said:

Too often is a whole hell of a lot different than often

You’d obviously agree with that, right?

I think the intention was similar actually

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Todd Andrews said:

Well, "often" is a little subjective, but it is true that 1 in 1000 black men in America can expect to die at the hands of police. So there is a problem. 

How many of those 1 in 1000 were not justified? As in were they were armed and dangerous?

I ask because i don’t know. Show me

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Cowboysfan8 said:

Move the goalposts some more I guess

have a great night

I'll have you know my goalposts are set in stone, thank you very much. This whole fiasco started because a cop who had prior complaints killed a person, and people are sick of living in fear from people who are supposed to serve and protect. Their training is inadequate, their military style weaponry is unnecessary, and their public relations are an outright tragedy. They need to make sweeping changes, and it needs to happen yesterday.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Cowboysfan8 said:

I didn’t question your numbers.

Lets try again. Are you saying these killings are all the fault of the police?

What percentage is the police’s fault?

I gave you the source of the information and it doesnt break the stat down by fault or percentages, just gives the raw statistic. Which itself is troubling.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Todd Andrews said:

I gave you the source of the information and it doesnt break the stat down by fault or percentages, just gives the raw statistic. Which itself is troubling.

It’s troubling, but I don’t know how anyone can blame the police for the raw statistic without knowing how many are the fault of the police and how many arent

🤷🏻‍♂️

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Todd Andrews said:

I gave you the source of the information and it doesnt break the stat down by fault or percentages, just gives the raw statistic. Which itself is troubling.

:lmao:

look who’s back in town

  • Love 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Kal El said:

I'll have you know my goalposts are set in stone, thank you very much. This whole fiasco started because a cop who had prior complaints killed a person, and people are sick of living in fear from people who are supposed to serve and protect. Their training is inadequate, their military style weaponry is unnecessary, and their public relations are an outright tragedy. They need to make sweeping changes, and it needs to happen yesterday.


“Hold officers accountable who use excessive force. But there’s no evidence of widespread racial bias.”

”a police officer is 18½ times more likely to be killed by a black male than an unarmed black male is to be killed by a police officer”

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wsj.com/amp/articles/the-myth-of-systemic-police-racism-11591119883

Edited by Cowboysfan8
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...