WrestlingRasta

Again, when we hear four different locations in 24 hours, logic will not allow me to assume anything. PS-why did you edit an entire post

To start it would depend on where it actually was. As said earlier one of the alleged locations was where they leave personal belongings before things get tight. Was it found there? Ive been to the White House but never on a tour. Do they have dogs to sniff out drugs on a tour? I like to wear gym shorts pretty much anytime I’m not at work. If I were a prankster I could easily slip a Nickel bag tucked in my nutsack and have it accidentally slide out onto the floor unnoticed. Point is, there are so many possibilities that logic would not allow me to assume absolutely anything at this point. But not all are logical, and that’s where the entertainment begins. The wild theories and the opportunity to mention the other side of the aisle as much as possible. It’s gonna be fun.

That’s literally the fourth different place I’ve heard it was found. We’re going to hear a lot of shit through the funny webs. And if we’re smart, we’re not going to give a single ounce of weight to any of it. But then there are those who aren’t smart, and that’s where the entertainment is going to be

There have certainly been far more destructive occurrences take place in the White House!

This is going to be a fun one to follow. We are never going to hear who it belonged to, it may never actually be found out. But my oh my the theories are going to be fun. And man oh man, many will be, or as apparent in this thread, already are absolute certain of who did it. This is gonna be a good one.

Do you ever say anything that makes sense? I’m interested…

Really?

Probably my favorite pics from the day

Happy Birthday ‘Mericans!

I understand that. I’m just saying that’s not what the court ordered. The court ordered they cannot talk about the case, along with anyone listed as a witness. It did not say no contact. Just to clarify…

Didn’t say they couldn’t be together, order said they couldn’t talk about the case. (Not saying they are following that, but he works for trump, they have to be together)

Interested to see some of these cooks come out tomorrow…. I got a dozen or so people coming, big menu: St. Louis Ribs; pulled chicken; pulled brisket, Mac n cheese, variety of melons, variety of veggies, home made cucumber salsa. Added some furniture down at the PitDock, but man it’s going to be a hot mutha…..

This is the thing for me, leaning more the conservative side of things but no way in hell I could ever vote for Trump or any MAGA. Policies are great but as we have seen policies change at the stroke of a pen, and can do so every four years. But as soon as someone takes it over and establishes themselves as the authoritarian ruler of the country.......that's all over. And that can't take place without the help of people in places like congress and judicial benches.

Listening is good. But which is a better indicator of one’s character and values…..something they say on camera, or a lifetime of actions involving lies, deceit, and abusive activity?

Correct, I do not think a man whose life has consistently and throughout revolved around lies, deceit, drug dealing, drug addiction, physical abuse, and psychological abuse, is worthy of a presidential debate. You do. We finally have an agreement on something. (Except I think you need to review who first identified and replied to whom in our chat, and who initiated any kind of talk about debates in our little chat. I thought I told you to review tip #2 before proceeding!!) The funny thing is; you believe that within your defending the man I described above (all facts no opinion) you’re saying something about me. Sweet dreams dum dum.

I mean.... Can't you have a Ribeye, and she have a strip?

So then, by Supreme Court Ruling, an SRO in every school is in fact not the answer.

Debates were an important piece when people's source of information was one TV in the house and the local newspaper on your doorstep. Today people are rarely swayed by debates because their positions and character are already well known. Or at least, discussed heavily. "well known" depends on how much of that discussion is accurate.

You really are not very good at this. There are a lot of tips to be offered here, let me start with tip #1: you should just stop on this subject now. You're not doing yourself any favors. Tip#2: Stick to what I said, not what I didn't say. But for my part it is difficult to take someone serious that refuses to acknowledge that RFK Jr IS a candidate for the Democratic nomination. Here's a tip: When someone does all the paperwork necessary to become a presidential candidate, they are a legit presidential candidate. It doesn't matter if you approve or not. I never said RFK is not an official candidate who didn't turn in his paperwork. In fact my initial statement about him made zero mention of his Presidential candidate, and my points about him have had absolutely nothing to do with whether he did or did not file. You brought in bona fide candidate, and I agreed he is not a bona fide candidate, in fact even mentioning I would not be a bona fide candidate even if I declared to be. The fun part of that is, if you look up bona fide, you will see words like 'sincere', 'without intent to deceive'. Guess what words you won't find.....'official', 'paperwork', 'declared'. Now, maybe you realized that, and that's why you started twisting it in to claiming I was denying he officially had declared himself a candidate. Or-maybe you did actually look into his past, and history, and realize what a POS he is, and had to acknowledge he isnt' to be taken seriously, but are just incapable so you had to do some twisting of words. I don't know. I'm not sure what it is that goes on in that mind of yours, but it is interesting. Tip#3: Remember which side of the argument you are on when you are arguing. (we may have a whole new 'dumbest thing you have ever said here') I knew nothing about Clinton when he was running. Hick from AK is all I knew. Therefore, he was not a legitimate candidate if I go by your philosophy. Listen closely here Sparty so you can follow me: YOU ARE THE ONE SAYING YOU KNOW NOTHING ABOUT RFKjr OTHER THAN HE IS SR'S SON. I am saying I know a lot about him, and that is why I'm saying he's not to be taken seriously. (Again, I never used the word legitimate. Please review tip #2 before proceeding) And finally tip #4: Dude, lose your hard on for Biden. I'm not a fan either, but wow. It's not healthy. I would prefer Biden win the nomination. He's as weak as it gets. I think in the end he won't be the nominee. It will be like Lyndon Johnson, just not enough support. He's running on "Bidenomics" and 34% of the people polled approve of his handling of the economy. There is no there there. And no one even on the left wants Biden for a 2nd term. While yes, there has been discussion in this thread about Biden/RFK, my initial comment, which you responded to, had nothing to do with Biden vs RFK in anything. It was strictly about RFK. I made that clear again, I'm talking about RFK. Yet, you have typed the name Biden 11 times, not including 'Bidenomics', while twisting things I did not say in regard to RFK. Seriously dum dum......let it go limp. I worry about you.

The schools definitely play their part in the scheme. And I’m sorry you paid 10% interest on a car. That’s god awful! Having a sip for you now…

I like that they are not being forgiven, but I wish that with that something would be done with the regulations on interest. It's not the tuition that is burying people in debt but the ridiculous amount of interest. Financing our population's education should not be one of the most profitable rackets in our country. But then again I guess when it's only topped by insurance and pharmaceuticals, what do you expect...

We have an few in the house that like their steak well-well done......and I like to give them options. Chuck eye, or top round??

Just looked again and McKenna is at 70

When you go from ‘Biden saying he’s not going to debate him is Biden saying he couldn’t handle a debate with him’….to trying to claim I’m saying Biden would mop the floor with him, I can’t take you seriously. Particularly when you’re defending this guy. Except for this, Here’s a tip: if all you know about him is he is RFK’s son, then you have zero ground to stand on in claiming whether he is or is not a serious candidate. You literally just admitted you know nothing about him while trying to defend him. (Remember earlier today when I said something you stated was the dumbest thing you’ve ever said on these boards? Well….that was short lived). I strongly suggest you look into his history, then decide whether or not you want to defend this POS. Enjoy the holiday of America!!

Yes I’m sorry, thank you.