Jump to content

Kushner and his bride


noonereal

Recommended Posts

neither can get security clearance...the daughter who has her eyes set on running for President....and the guy who was going to fix the problem in the middle east?...it's worse now that it's been in years......and after Halley ripped the Palestinians in her UN speech today?...Jered has a lot of work to do....if he can get away from Muller....who's is looking into his  666 5th Ave property and the billion of dollars he owes on it....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, noonereal said:

Not long ago this pair were the saviors of humanity.

I have not heard a peep in months,

What's up with the Prince in Princess of America? 

I see you have moved on to the greener pastures of starting threads attacking the children of those you have contempt for ......that's a great look on you....

giphy.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, dbcaptiron said:

I see you have moved on to the greener pastures of starting threads attacking the children of those you have contempt for ......that's a great look on you....

giphy.gif

Your premise is straight on.  I do not cotton to attacking the children of any individual holding public office....UNLESS...they happen to be designated...Senior Advisor to the President...and Advisor to the President...as Dr. "J" and the quasi First Lady are.

In this case...I think they're fair game.

Let's all hope that Gen. Kelly and Jared find a way to get along.  Or Ivanka might tell daddy to fire the General.

 

 

Rufus>>

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Rufus69 said:

Your premise is straight on.  I do not cotton to attacking the children of any individual holding public office....UNLESS...they happen to be designated...Senior Advisor to the President...and Advisor to the President...as Dr. "J" and the quasi First Lady are.

In this case...I think they're fair game.

Let's all hope that Gen. Kelly and Jared find a way to get along.  Or Ivanka might tell daddy to fire the General.

 

 

Rufus>>

He's just trolling, it's all he does. We all know children  of the president does apply to peopel actively engaged as these two or Don Jr are. 

He needs to get out and chase down those vicious Fox that have him rattled.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, noonereal said:

He's just trolling, it's all he does. We all know children  of the president does apply to peopel actively engaged as these two or Don Jr are. 

He needs to get out and chase down those vicious Fox that have him rattled.

Speaking of Fox....

Vincente is on a rampage....LOL.

 

 

Rufus>>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, thc6795 said:

Yeah hard to believe nor isn't anti Trump. 

I am anti Trump, now! Honest, I cannot understand how anyone would not be if they truly put America first. 

I am a centrist. I am liberal socially and conservative fiscally. 

I am OK with a few things TRump has done and have said so. 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, noonereal said:

I am anti Trump, now! Honest, I cannot understand how anyone would not be if they truly put America first. 

I am a centrist. I am liberal socially and conservative fiscally. 

I am OK with a few things TRump has done and have said so. 

 

Call yourself what you want...being 'intellectually dishonest' I'm sure you can rationalize it in your own head....

But here's a clue for you....people will recognize your political leanings by the stances you take and the policies you promote....not by the smoke you try to blow past them...  If you think you have to correct people or state where 'you think' you are coming from, then there is obviously a disconnect between the two.

As you repeatedly skate away from actual point and policy, and prefer to start 'rant threads' that do nothing but promote disdain opinion, your actions are clear as day....

'Intellectually dishonest' thru and thru.......

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Rufus69 said:

Your premise is straight on.  I do not cotton to attacking the children of any individual holding public office....UNLESS...they happen to be designated...Senior Advisor to the President...and Advisor to the President...as Dr. "J" and the quasi First Lady are.

In this case...I think they're fair game.

I fully agree with you here... seriously

36 minutes ago, Rufus69 said:

Let's all hope that Gen. Kelly and Jared find a way to get along.  Or Ivanka might tell daddy to fire the General.

Rufus>>

But this is where you fall into the same trap as nooner.  Fair game to critique on point and policy, but rather repugnant to make statements such as these which are pure conjecture laced with disdain. 

Surely you see the difference, as you have always presented as a well reasoned poster...

unlike the 'intellectually dishonest' types...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, noonereal said:

but that is what you do here to fellow posters all day long

you really are a big ball of contradictions

No I simply point to your own contradictions an untruths...

If you are so confident in your posts or your 'stances' (term used extremely loosely), then you should have no issue, and could easily properly defend the position ......

...Instead of skating away, to start another 'bashing thread' that will turn into a 'hit and run' play for you.... if the thread actually turns towards point and policy...... 

but feel free to ....RAGE ON FOOL !!!

giphy.gif

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, dbcaptiron said:

I fully agree with you here... seriously

But this is where you fall into the same trap as nooner.  Fair game to critique on point and policy, but rather repugnant to make statements such as these which are pure conjecture laced with disdain. 

Surely you see the difference, as you have always presented as a well reasoned poster...

unlike the 'intellectually dishonest' types...

 

I don't think you're being honest with yourself.  The issue over Kelly's attempt to revoke and revise security clearances for those that the FBI didn't fully approve (Mr. Kushner being one) and who's clearances are "pending"...have caused a squabble between Dr. "J" and Sir John.  Several media outlets have reported it.

If The General pursues the revocation of Kushner's current pending Security Clearance...do you not think...sparks will fly?

And this is me being a well reasoned poster.

 

 

Rufus>>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Rufus69 said:

  The issue over Kelly's attempt to revoke and revise security clearances for those that the FBI didn't fully approve (Mr. Kushner being one) and who's clearances are "pending"...have caused a squabble between Dr. "J" and Sir John.  Several media outlets have reported it.

If The General pursues the revocation of Kushner's current pending Security Clearance...do you not think...sparks will fly?

And this is me being a well reasoned poster.

 

 

Rufus>>

This is an absolutely reasonable post ...and have no problem with it.

It HAS A POINT, some info, and discussionally leading questions......(and mostly absent of dripping contempt and disdain)

A far cry from some others, and why I thought you would 'get it'

As I am not 'that' up to speed on the royal family latest, I 'honestly' cannot answer....

When this occurs, I usually just ask questions...or offer what I do know....

Sparks have been flying between the FBI and the WH since the day T took office hasn't it?

My read on your info seems like more of the same, and fairly mundane in that the FBI is stalling or objecting to WH initiatives....

If this really  does 'blow up' what are the possible outcomes?  If it's just the removal of nepotism for 'UNQUALIFIED' persons then I am all for it....If it's counterproductive harassing of 'otherwise qualified' people for political purposes then I am all against it....

See how that works???  Point and Policy.....

I know you get it.....It's time that others did as well...... 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, dbcaptiron said:

This is an absolutely reasonable post ...and have no problem with it.

It HAS A POINT, some info, and discussionally leading questions......(and mostly absent of dripping contempt and disdain)

A far cry from some others, and why I thought you would 'get it'

As I am not 'that' up to speed on the royal family latest, I 'honestly' cannot answer....

When this occurs, I usually just ask questions...or offer what I do know....

Sparks have been flying between the FBI and the WH since the day T took office hasn't it?

My read on your info seems like more of the same, and fairly mundane in that the FBI is stalling or objecting to WH initiatives....

If this really  does 'blow up' what are the possible outcomes?  If it's just the removal of nepotism for 'UNQUALIFIED' persons then I am all for it....If it's counterproductive harassing of 'otherwise qualified' people for political purposes then I am all against it....

See how that works???  Point and Policy.....

I know you get it.....It's time that others did as well...... 

 

You know...it's just me...but I don't perceive the FBI harassing anyone.  Now for full disclosure...I DO think they are pushing back against a man who has no regard for protocol or procedure (who happens to be occupying the Presidency).  I have very little confidence in a man like Trump who NEVER tells the truth.  He would rather lie or scream Fake News instead of owning up to mistakes, gaffes and/or questionable actions.  And believe me...I'm being extremely "conservative" taking this tact.

I honestly...truly...in my heart....can't believe (1) he was elected...(2)  he hasn't been recalled...(3) he hasn't quit and gone back to Mar A Lago.  I don't know if he's under the influence of Putin or not.  I don't know if he owes "Russian interests" huge sums of money.  And I don't know if he is or is not...genuinely of stable mind.

I do know...he is a total embarrassment as President of the United States.

 

 

Rufus>>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Rufus69 said:

You know...it's just me...but I don't perceive the FBI harassing anyone.  Now for full disclosure...I DO think they are pushing back against a man who has no regard for protocol or procedure (who happens to be occupying the Presidency).  I have very little confidence in a man like Trump who NEVER tells the truth.  He would rather lie or scream Fake News instead of owning up to mistakes, gaffes and/or questionable actions.  And believe me...I'm being extremely "conservative" taking this tact.

I honestly...truly...in my heart....can't believe (1) he was elected...(2)  he hasn't been recalled...(3) he hasn't quit and gone back to Mar A Lago.  I don't know if he's under the influence of Putin or not.  I don't know if he owes "Russian interests" huge sums of money.  And I don't know if he is or is not...genuinely of stable mind.

I do know...he is a total embarrassment as President of the United States.

 

 

Rufus>>

I hear that opinion....and you've certainly got a right to feel that way...

But just one point for clarification

I never said 'harassing', ....'objecting or stalling' has an entirely different meaning 

other than that we're good, even if I have a slightly different assessment...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, dbcaptiron said:

I hear that opinion....and you've certainly got a right to feel that way...

But just one point for clarification

I never said 'harassing', ....'objecting or stalling' has an entirely different meaning 

other than that we're good, even if I have a slightly different assessment...

good

I bullied you into posting as an adult,.

keep it up. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, dbcaptiron said:

I hear that opinion....and you've certainly got a right to feel that way...

But just one point for clarification

I never said 'harassing', ....'objecting or stalling' has an entirely different meaning 

other than that we're good, even if I have a slightly different assessment...

If it's counterproductive harassing of 'otherwise qualified' people for political purposes then I am all against it....

 

This is a direct quote from your post...that I responded to.

 

 

Rufus>>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Rufus69 said:

If it's counterproductive harassing of 'otherwise qualified' people for political purposes then I am all against it....

This is a direct quote from your post...that I responded to.

Rufus>>

There is writing and then there is comprehension (both ways)....

from the post:

'My take..objecting or stalling'  followed by "If it's counterproductive harassing"'...

That is why I made the clarification....I took your reply as thinking I was calling it 'harassing' when I was not.....small words that can be lost Like 'if', which means I never meant or called it that...

As I reread your response and see how you were replying your post makes better sense to me...see it never hurts to clarify:)

 

 

Link to comment
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.   Paste as plain text instead

  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...