Tlaib uses expletive while calling for impeachment

[Use of Time]

Use of Time exposed on Page 1:

Tlaib uses expletive while calling for impeachment

Tlaib uses expletive while calling for impeachment

Yet, on Page 2 alone Use of Time continues on his fallacy to bring Trump into it 4 Times:









His pattern of drawing to Trump continues throughout the thread...

Seems Use of Time has a problem with the truth...

Calm down Use of Time, no rage on my part here, just the facts...

Yeah, we all know. You brought Trump into this. He’s fair game. We are all still here in this thread. You brought up Trump and I gave you my opinion on that. We all know what has been said In this thread. We’ve been talking about it for a week inspector dingus. What do you think you are exposing here? I was naturally following the conversation and responses of others and you know this. You are now bringing up Pelosi on your own so i guess that’s my argument now in your head. So now if I respond to that I’m creating that fallacy too I guess?

Show me the part where I use it to defend her? This is a reach man and you know it.

Better yet show me wherever I say AOC is right.

You can’t. And won’t.

 

[Benjamin]

Yeah, we all know. You brought Trump into this. He’s fair game. We are all still here in this thread. You brought up Trump and I gave you my opinion on that. We all know what has been said In this thread. We’ve been talking about it for a week inspector dingus. What do you think you are exposing here? I was naturally following the conversation and responses of others and you know this. You are now bringing up Pelosi on your own so i guess that’s my argument now in your head. So now if I respond to that I’m creating that fallacy too I guess?

Show me the part where I use it to defend her? This is a reach man and you know it.

Better yet show me wherever I say AOC is right.

You can’t. And won’t.

Yes, I’m sure it is only a coincidence that the flow of your “naturally following the conversation” just happens to coincide with your “favorite argument” as pointed out (exposed) on page 1 when you considered my calling out the fallacy (of 2 Wrongs makes a Right) was a "nice spin" which demonstrated your objection to my calling it out. Got it.

Hey, I understand you have trouble holding on to more than one premise at a time to reach a conclusion, but I don't think it a good Use of Time to keep spelling this out for you, so you can just disagree if you like.

 

[Use of Time]

Yes, I’m sure it is only a coincidence that the flow of your “naturally following the conversation” just happens to coincide with your “favorite argument” as pointed out (exposed) on page 1 when you considered my calling out the fallacy (of 2 Wrongs makes a Right) was a "nice spin" which demonstrated your objection to my calling it out. Got it.

Hey, I understand you have trouble holding on to more than one premise at a time to reach a conclusion, but I don't think it a good Use of Time to keep spelling this out for you, so you can just disagree if you like.

So I can’t comment in any way on something you brought into the conversation? That’s nice.

I want you to show me in any post where I a actually defend or portray AOC in a positive light. I dare you.

You understand this isn’t some symbiotic scenario where one incident has anything to do with the other right. They can both simply be wrong.

Last chance for you to post where I indicate how any of this equates to a “right” from either side. If you can’t do it then you are a liar. And I know you are going to try to mind read me here but that is also a lie.

My “nice spin” comment was easily vindicated for your public vs private defense which got torpedoed easily.

RT already ducked out of the thread like a coward when I pressed him to back up his statement on who I voted for. I’m guessing I’ll get another duck and dodge from you as well. Shows both of your character.

 

[RighteousnessTemperance&]

Yeah, we all know. You brought Trump into this. He’s fair game. We are all still here in this thread. You brought up Trump and I gave you my opinion on that. We all know what has been said In this thread. We’ve been talking about it for a week inspector dingus. What do you think you are exposing here? I was naturally following the conversation and responses of others and you know this. You are now bringing up Pelosi on your own so i guess that’s my argument now in your head. So now if I respond to that I’m creating that fallacy too I guess?

Show me the part where I use it to defend her? This is a reach man and you know it.

Better yet show me wherever I say AOC is right.

You can’t. And won’t.

OK, enough of the nonsense about who "brought Trump into this." Trump was the obvious target of the extreme expletive. Trump was the target of AOC's defense cited in post #8. The Dems are at fault here; the Dems are the bad guys in this one, hands down. But calling them bad guys is just far too mild. Evil personified maybe.

The private vs. public argument still stands firm, but is mere shadow regarding the phrases used. The other points made concerning what this perverse woman is really all about are far more germane. She is much more dangerous than these few public remarks reveal. The idea of a Muslim Progressive (can I use oxymoron here, KY?) is just too grotesque for words, certainly any polite ones, the reality of one in office so politically blasphemous there really ought to be a law. Those enabling "this woman" deserve the destruction sure to come should they succeed, but we will all certainly suffer, if they do.

 

[Use of Time]

OK, enough of the nonsense about who "brought Trump into this." Trump was the obvious target of the extreme expletive. Trump was the target of AOC's defense cited in post #8. The Dems are at fault here; the Dems are the bad guys in this one, hands down. But calling them bad guys is just far too mild. Evil personified maybe.

The private vs. public argument still stands firm, but is mere shadow regarding the phrases used. The other points made concerning what this perverse woman is really all about are far more germane. She is much more dangerous than these few public remarks reveal. The idea of a Muslim Progressive (can I use oxymoron here, KY?) is just too grotesque for words, certainly any polite ones, the reality of one in office so politically blasphemous there really ought to be a law. Those enabling "this woman" deserve the destruction sure to come should they succeed, but we will all certainly suffer, if they do.

Explain how the private vs public stands firm when it’s already been easily refuted? I predict the goal posts are about to move again folks! Hold on tight!

Still dodging my challenge I see. What a surprise.

 

[777]

Ran off from the thread, seeing as I don't even get the point of contention here, it could be this?:

I . Okay. The “Trump said it in private” is a fine argument to make but it has a fatal flaw. It means Trump is a phony who shows his true character in private while pretending to be otherwise in the media. At least she is owning who she is. A woman who said a cuss word. Wow.

Explain how Trump is any better in that regard. This ought to be good. I love being told to man up by internet people. I don’t think you would have been able to walk a mile in my shoes tough guy.

No, it was known that Trump was a womanizer, brash and rude long before 2006 but the fact that he never used such harsh language in public since then does not mean he is a phony - he is just someone who at least some degree of knowing what language is socially acceptable and what is not. You would have a case with someone like Mike Pence but not with a loose cannon like Trump.

You shouldn't admire Tlaib's honesty, frankness, whatever you call her filthy language, She's not merely a woman who used a bad word, her election to Congress itself was symbolic to me of the balkanization of America, in particular the area she is from.

She outspent and barely beat Brenda Jones (should have won) in the D primary in a crowded field, Soros backed her through some of his many front groups, she was sworn in on a Koran (not TJ's), wrapped herself up with a Palestinian flag, took Israel off the map in her office, and now this. She's the phony here.

You did leave it blank, didn't you?

 

[Use of Time]

Ran off from the thread, seeing as I don't even get the point of contention here, it could be this?:



No, it was known that Trump was a womanizer, brash and rude long before 2006 but the fact that he never used such harsh language in public since then does not mean he is a phony - he is just someone who at least some degree of knowing what language is socially acceptable and what is not. You would have a case with someone like Mike Pence but not with a loose cannon like Trump.

You shouldn't admire Tlaib's honesty, frankness, whatever you call her filthy language, She's not merely a woman who used a bad word, her election to Congress itself was symbolic to me of the balkanization of America, in particular the area she is from.

She outspent and barely beat Brenda Jones (should have won) in the D primary in a crowded field, Soros backed her through some of his many front groups, she was sworn in on a Koran (not TJ's), wrapped herself up with a Palestinian flag, took Israel off the map in her office, and now this. She's the phony here.

You did leave it blank, didn't you?

I don’t think you kept up with the thread. There have been some other examples brought in while in office.

Who in this thread at any point has said she should be admired? Nobody. Why do you guys always have to make up these imaginary things.

Pretty sure it’s been proven Trump has used language since election. You have just ignored it.

 

[kyredneck]

I don't even get the point of contention here, it could be this?

Zactly. Yet he claims he's always voted Republican, never Democrat.

 

[Use of Time]

Zactly. Yet he claims he's always voted Republican, never Democrat.

Nah 777 has a bag of excuses for Trump. This is like his third attempt to move the goal posts. Apparently Trump is just now at the age of 72 learning what is socially acceptable in public even though he’s been in the public sphere most of his adult life. 777 then goes to on to ignore the multiple times where Trump has failed this since his Presidency.

 

[kyredneck]

he claims he's always voted Republican, never Democrat

Nah 777

I'm referring to YOU, troll.

 

[Use of Time]

Nah 777 has a bag of excuses for Trump. Apparently Trump is just now at the age of 72 learning what is socially acceptable in public even though he’s been in the public sphere most of his adult life. 777 the goes to on to ignore the multiple times where Trump has failed this.

I'm referring to YOU, troll.

I know.

 

[church mouse guy]

Trump is no angel but he has done a lot of nice things in his life, also, such as fixing the Central Park ice skating rink when no one else could or would. I am sure that he would rather be at one of his resorts playing golf but he recognized that neither party was doing what was right for the USA. Things are better than they were two years ago and we don't need anymore illegals because we can't afford them at $150,000,000,000 a year. Illegals take our jobs and lower our wages and then eat up our taxes in welfare. Everyone except liberals can see that plain as day.

 

[kyredneck]

Everyone except liberals can see that plain as day.

Oh, make no mistake, they see it, it's actually become their plan to hold on to power by having a whole underclass of people that are dependent on the government.

 

[Benjamin]

...I dare you.
...If you can’t do it then you are a liar.
...RT already ducked out of the thread like a coward when I pressed him
...I’m guessing I’ll get another duck and dodge from you as well.
...Shows both of your character.

They can both simply be wrong.

Everyone can see that you believe bringing Trump into this is of some value as I've said repeatedly. I can't help that you're not honest enough to admit that value of yours is based on fallacy.

You got caught so quit yer whining, you come in this debate trying to wrestle with the Big Dogs you're gonna to get bit. SO my advice to you is to just tuck your tail between your legs and leave this argument before making a bigger fool of yourself by trying to make it personal.

 

[Use of Time]

Everyone can see that you believe bringing Trump into this is of some value as I've said repeatedly. I can't help that you're not honest enough to admit that value of yours is based on fallacy.

You got caught so quit yer whining, you come in this debate trying to wrestle with the Big Dogs you're gonna to get bit. SO my advice to you is to just tuck your tail between your legs and leave this argument before making a bigger fool of yourself by trying to make it personal.

So you can’t post it. It can’t be done. Another lie. Now you are calling yourself a big dog.

To recap. You’ve consistently wined about the topic not being about Trump. You bring Trump into it with the personal vs private argument. That argument is easily shot down. Now all of a sudden It’s not important who brought Trump into this. Amazing. You are all over the place big dog.

You can’t even show me the “defense” that “everybody” can clearly see apparently. I’d ask you to show me where I got “caught” but I know I’m just going to get more misdirection and scrambling so I’m not going to hold my breath. One lie after another.

 

[777]

I don’t think you kept up with the thread. There have been some other examples brought in while in office.

Who in this thread at any point has said she should be admired? Nobody. Why do you guys always have to make up these imaginary things.

Pretty sure it’s been proven Trump has used language since election. You have just ignored it..

I'm going to need my super-secret neverTrumoer decoder ring to sort this one out:

"move the goal posts" = not bash Trump enough to suit you.

"just ignoring Trump's use of language" = whataboutism, and it doesn't matter if Benjamin first brought it up. He knew what you'd say and do, use the thread to bash Trump.

"private v. public stands firm" - no, there IS a big difference in what kind of language is acceptable in public v. private

"examples brought while in office" - first off, I don't believe Dick Durbin over the two Senators who never heard that, SOB is not nearly as offensive as what the HAMAS apologist said.

Lastly, you know exactly what I was referring to when you asked "who said in this thread that she should be admired?":

"The “Trump said it in private” is a fine argument to make but it has a fatal flaw. It means Trump is a phony who shows his true character in private while pretending to be otherwise in the media. At least she is owning who she is. A woman who said a cuss word. Wow. Explain how Trump is any better in that regard." = You shouldn't admire Tlaib's honesty, frankness, whatever you call her filthy language

"Why do you guys always have to make up these imaginary things." - why do you make up that you implied that she was "owning who she was", therefore, more honest and just some poor lady that said a naughty word, thereby diminishing it?

I'll take it a little further - I think you agree with what she called Trump, seeing that she's an enemy of an enemy and you can't change the topic back to Trump fast enough,

 

[Use of Time]

I'm going to need my super-secret neverTrumoer decoder ring to sort this one out:

"move the goal posts" = not bash Trump enough to suit you.

"just ignoring Trump's use of language" = whataboutism, and it doesn't matter if Benjamin first brought it up. He knew what you'd say and do, use the thread to bash Trump.

"private v. public stands firm" - no, there IS a big difference in what kind of language is acceptable in public v. private

"examples brought while in office" - first off, I don't believe Dick Durbin over the two Senators who never heard that, SOB is not nearly as offensive as what the HAMAS apologist said.

Lastly, you know exactly what I was referring to when you asked "who said in this thread that she should be admired?":

"The “Trump said it in private” is a fine argument to make but it has a fatal flaw. It means Trump is a phony who shows his true character in private while pretending to be otherwise in the media. At least she is owning who she is. A woman who said a cuss word. Wow. Explain how Trump is any better in that regard." = You shouldn't admire Tlaib's honesty, frankness, whatever you call her filthy language

"Why do you guys always have to make up these imaginary things." - why do you make up that you implied that she was "owning who she was", therefore, more honest and just some poor lady that said a naughty word, thereby diminishing it?

I'll take it a little further - I think you agree with what she called Trump, seeing that she's an enemy of an enemy and you can't change the topic back to Trump fast enough,

Wow that’s a reach. Here’s a pro tip. You took some great liberties with paraphrasing my post there. That’s pretty manipulative and dishonest. If you get “admiration” from that it’s because you have to paraphrase my words to support your argument. That’s some bush league level quibbling there.

Oh so now we have the goal posts down to “f” word is worse than “sob.” Let me know if that’s the final resting place. It moves every time it gets defeated. Wow.

Finally. Believe whatever lies you have to invent about me and what I believe to support yourself. I doubt you’d say it to my face. You appear to believe whatever is convenient for you at the time. I have no respect for that level of insecurity.

 

[kyredneck]

She also has an arrest record. How in the world did this loud mouthed nut ever get elected. I believe we can expect more of her disrespectful foul mouth in the future. Pelosi didn't rein her in and she will remain out of control.

They're following Pelosi's lead, I suppose. That was exactly what she did.

More importantly, Pelosi didn't call Ms. Foul Mouth on the carpet. So this type of behavior will continue to stain the decorum of a House of Representatives with a weak leader, whose only message is to hate Trump. She'll allow any type of behavior that advances that message.

…maybe the Republicans will ultimately benefit from this.

Good takeaway carpro.

 

[church mouse guy]

TDS and NeverTrumpers, you only have until 2024 so relax.

 

[Benjamin]

To recap. You’ve consistently wined...

I haven't wined since New Years Eve and it was only one glass, quit telling your lies!