Former Acting Attorney General Testifies About Trump’s Efforts to Subvert Election

Dutch Uncle said:
More likely a retirement facility for dementia patients. Most of the wackadoodles on JPP are Euro-American, elderly with age-related mental issues.

Text Drive, Bulletbob, Truth Detector, Grokmaster, etc. all show signs of advance age and a loss of mental acuity. They each only have a narrow range of communication skills; primarily spreading anger and hate.

IMO, this is common among some elderly men as they weaken through age. They feel like they are no longer "men" and must prove themselves by acting like assholes on the Internet. It's their primary window to the outside world.

Notice how they don't chit-chat, they only vent their venom. It's classic displaced aggression. They are scared and the hate allows them to feel better because they have nothing else. Mostly I ignore them (unless I'm feeling ornery) since there is nothing to be done for them and most will be dead in a few years.
Click to expand...

You might have a good point.
 
PoliTalker said:
Hello guno,



Wow. Talk about going over your boss's head:

(from the OP link)

"Mr. Clark had been engaging in unauthorized conversations with Mr. Trump about ways to have the Justice Department publicly cast doubt on President Biden’s victory, particularly in battleground states that Mr. Trump was fixated on, like Georgia. Mr. Clark drafted a letter that he asked Mr. Rosen to send to Georgia state legislators, wrongly asserting that they should void Mr. Biden’s victory because the Justice Department was investigating accusations of voter fraud in the state."

I should think that Mr. Clark is a person of interest for the Select Committee.
Click to expand...
I'm betting that Rosen was informed that he'll be viewed as an accomplice if he continued to obstruct Congress as he did in May. He found religion
 
ThatOwlWoman said:
Classic projection for the loss! :rofl2:

Troll on, trollboy. Makes me laugh every time you post your simplistic, childish nonsense, knowing that you can't call other ppl bitches, cunts, assholes, etc. because it would blow your cover. You do looking darling in drag though. :laugh:
Click to expand...
BAM! His introduction thread fell flat, eh?
 
Althea said:
BAM! His introduction thread fell flat, eh?
Click to expand...

Pretty much. It's Son of Insurrection posing as his "wife." Notice how he doesn't write more than one line of trollish nonsense, afraid that he'll give himself away. Oops! Too late! I love it because 1) he doesn't dare act like his usual vile and potty-fingered self, and 2) all he can do is troll.
 
Trumpet said:
You might have a good point.
Click to expand...
Without personal inspection or knowledge, it's difficult to tell. I'm going by people I personally know and what they are like in reference to the people here.

While I could be wrong, it's not a stretch of the imagination to listen to people IRL and online who speak the same talking points to be similar in other ways too.
 
ThatOwlWoman said:
Pretty much. It's Son of Insurrection posing as his "wife." Notice how he doesn't write more than one line of trollish nonsense, afraid that he'll give himself away. Oops! Too late! I love it because 1) he doesn't dare act like his usual vile and potty-fingered self, and 2) all he can do is troll.
Click to expand...

How long do you think he can keep up the act once his ban is over? A week? Two weeks? Or will the "wife" suddenly disappear only to make occasional appearances because we're all too mean and ugly?

LOL on giving himself away. :thup:
 
Althea said:
Or Twitter
Click to expand...

Another possible college level class in the near future "Trump and Social Media: how to plan an Insurrection on Twitter".

Most laws and practices are because a few idiots pushed the limits which required laws. Curfews for minors after 10PM might be enacted because a few idiots are causing problems for everyone else.

Child sex trafficking laws have to be enacted because of pedos like Trump, Epstein, Clinton, Prince Andrew and others in their circle.
[url]https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/woman-who-says-she-was-groomed-and-abused-by-jeffrey-epstein-sues-britains-prince-andrew/2021/08/09/77805b96-f975-11eb-9c0e-97e29906a970_story.html[/URL]

Now, besides pushing the limits of self-control and common sense, the Qless/Trumpians have pushed the limits of social media forcing more control and less freedom.

Thanks Trump!

QCCGl2E.jpg
 
ThatOwlWoman said:
Pretty much. It's Son of Insurrection posing as his "wife." Notice how he doesn't write more than one line of trollish nonsense, afraid that he'll give himself away. Oops! Too late! I love it because 1) he doesn't dare act like his usual vile and potty-fingered self, and 2) all he can do is troll.
Click to expand...

Or:

It's a girl who desires to be taken seriously by those she aspires to be, (popular girls in school) who plays the part of an impotent male who resorts to violent posts as a way to make himself feel important.


It's a toss up. The posts scream for attention.
 
Dutch Uncle said:
How long do you think he can keep up the act once his ban is over? A week? Two weeks? Or will the "wife" suddenly disappear only to make occasional appearances because we're all too mean and ugly?

LOL on giving himself away. :thup:
Click to expand...
How long is her ban?
 
Dutch Uncle said:
12B. Jesus fucking Christ. Stupid must run in your family. Are you two first cousins?
Click to expand...

hey little uneducated fella... here is the rule.

12(b) - No sexual comments relating to minors. With the exception of news articles or a mature discussion involving stats, how it effects people etc, We DO NOT want ANY mention in ANY context about suggesting encounters with another poster and a child, or with yourself and another poster's child, nor any mention of kids being sexually assaulted, sexually molested, raped, having people being called pedophiles, suggesting posters may have been molested as a kid, having vague references to any of the former, having a "clever" play on words with a wink and a nod that might suggest any of the former, any slight references, WE WANT NOTHING TO DO WITH ANY OF IT. Do not try to approach the line to test us to see what one can get away with, if you approach the line, chances are you will not receive the benefit of the doubt.

Please point out where I broke that rule.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top