Jacksonville Jaguars Fan Forums

(08-29-2023, 11:02 AM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]

(08-29-2023, 10:45 AM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ]LOL

post 1 : people need to stop being sore losers
post 2 : proceeds to be a sore loser

The only person who attempted to cheat in that election is being prosecuted for it

Lol.

You're the one believing blatant lies from a cheap con man with a mile long list of ripping people off in his wake

So, advise yourself

(08-29-2023, 10:45 AM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ]

(08-29-2023, 06:07 AM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]It's not good to permit cheating either.

LOL

post 1 : people need to stop being sore losers
post 2 : proceeds to be a sore loser

The only person who attempted to cheat in that election is being prosecuted for it

There's an irony that many Trump voters (including some on here) before the election said that they'd accept the outcome. I assume they thought Trump would win in spite of the fact that he'd already lost one popular vote to Hillary Clinton 4 years earlier and was behind Biden in polling. The loss brought on a cognitive dissonance that's contributed to the various voter fraud conspiracy theories that are still bouncing around today.

(08-29-2023, 11:16 AM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ]

(08-29-2023, 11:02 AM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]Lol.

You're the one believing blatant lies from a cheap con man with a mile long list of ripping people off in his wake

So, advise yourself

Irrespective of Trump, who I didn't vote for btw, I see the blatant election corruption as the real threat to our Republic. And I was saying this in October of 2020 too, not just during the election when we saw all those irregularities that you guys hand wave away happening in real time or even after Trump started protesting and we had the J6 fiasco. It was clear what the democrats were up to leading into the General and they played it perfectly. Now they have Trump in court where they will likely win and Trump will be the Republican nominee anyway. Meanwhile Captain Potato Head is going to campaign from his basement and refuse to debate, mostly because he's dementia-ridden and unable to function at the level of 4 year old while we suffer international humiliation, continuing inflation, over-taxation coupled with Trillion dollar deficits, and a de facto world war under way. And so, as intended, the fall of the Nation continues apace. But hey, Drumpf bad!

(08-29-2023, 11:52 AM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]

(08-29-2023, 11:16 AM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ]You're the one believing blatant lies from a cheap con man with a mile long list of ripping people off in his wake

So, advise yourself

Irrespective of Trump, who I didn't vote for btw, I see the blatant election corruption as the real threat to our Republic. And I was saying this in October of 2020 too, not just during the election when we saw all those irregularities that you guys hand wave away happening in real time or even after Trump started protesting and we had the J6 fiasco. It was clear what the democrats were up to leading into the General and they played it perfectly. Now they have Trump in court where they will likely win and Trump will be the Republican nominee anyway. Meanwhile Captain Potato Head is going to campaign from his basement and refuse to debate, mostly because he's dementia-ridden and unable to function at the level of 4 year old while we suffer international humiliation, continuing inflation, over-taxation coupled with Trillion dollar deficits, and a de facto world war under way. And so, as intended, the fall of the Nation continues apace. But hey, Drumpf bad!

Accuse someone of hand waving away something of import to our nation and then proceed to hand wave away the greatest detriment to our nation we may have ever seen in modern times. 

Perfect.

There is literally zero evidence of any corruption in the 2020 election beyond the small scale seen in every election.
Of course - excepting the felonious attempt of the loser to overturn the result. 

Why you want to continue believing in a conspiracy with no merit is something you'll need to reconcile with yourself.

(08-29-2023, 12:36 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DaRmYmH7w8Q

Comparing politicians doing politically motivated things is fine. 

Not understanding the gravity of Trump's indictments compared to those being compared above is another issue altogether.

An issue that that makes that cute little edit completely moot.

Sure... that sounds great until you remove your bias.

(08-29-2023, 12:57 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]Sure... that sounds great until you remove your bias.

LOL

cop out post of the year

You guys always want us to put in the work. Your whole schtick is a cop out.

You don't have proof of [BLEEP]. You have a phone call of a guy who believed there was election interference, in spite of what he was advised, and wanted the Republican governor to do an investigation and find the fraud. You have to prove intent. You can't. You know the guy is inarticulate. You know the guy is a narcissist. Instead of recognizing it for what it is, you pretend you have "proof." You don't. That doesn't stop you from saying things like, I have proof, or these charges are much more serious. It's garbage. Every single angle with the exception of POSSIBLY the protected documents is just boogeyman posturing created by his political opponents or their lackeys.

They are treating the guy like a mob boss and trying to get his insiders to turn on him using RICO laws. They are charging him for multiple counts of the same thing. They are finding ways and loopholes (like in NY) to charge him for misdemeanors past the statue of limitations. It's political persecution and an abuse of the law. If you LISTENED to what your democratic operatives in the MSM were saying about Trump, it's the EXACT same thing. "Any DA can manufacture indictment charges; you just don't do it." PSYCH! The Democrats can do it. Not only can they use the power of their DAs in blue counties to drum up charges, but they can also roll out the power of the media and pretend that Trump is a special kind of evil, and the coolest part is a bunch of people will just believe them. Lol. Cop out.

(08-29-2023, 02:32 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]You guys always want us to put in the work. Your whole schtick is a cop out.

You don't have proof of [BLEEP]. You have a phone call of a guy who believed there was election interference, in spite of what he was advised, and wanted the Republican governor to do an investigation and find the fraud. You have to prove intent. You can't. You know the guy is inarticulate. You know the guy is a narcissist. Instead of recognizing it for what it is, you pretend you have "proof." You don't. That doesn't stop you from saying things like, I have proof, or these charges are much more serious. It's garbage. Every single angle with the exception of POSSIBLY the protected documents is just boogeyman posturing created by his political opponents or their lackeys.

They are treating the guy like a mob boss and trying to get his insiders to turn on him using RICO laws. They are charging him for multiple counts of the same thing. They are finding ways and loopholes (like in NY) to charge him for misdemeanors past the statue of limitations. It's political persecution and an abuse of the law. If you LISTENED to what your democratic operatives in the MSM were saying about Trump, it's the EXACT same thing. "Any DA can manufacture indictment charges; you just don't do it." PSYCH! The Democrats can do it. Not only can they use the power of their DAs in blue counties to drum up charges, but they can also roll out the power of the media and pretend they never said these things, and the coolest part is a bunch of people will just believe them. Lol. Cop out.

blah, blah, 

same old horse [BLEEP] 

Who [BLEEP] cares what Trump believed !! 

He wasn't advised, he was INFORMED of the actual election results. And he criminally sought to change them via fraud. 

This is one of those perfectly black and white issues and you are bent on spinning it into something else.

It's not something else. 

Criminal did crime. 
Criminal got indicted for doing crime. 

End of story.

For the record, since you keep trying to split hairs, informed and advised can be synonymous. I know English is a tricky language, but constantly changing it back doesn't mean anything. You keep using that word like he HAS to believe these people. If he doesn't think they are credible, what does it matter that they informed him? Geez, dude. It's not proof. Get out of your own bubble for 2 seconds and think.

(08-29-2023, 02:44 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]For the record, since you keep trying to split hairs, informed and advised can be synonymous. I know English is a tricky language, but constantly changing it back doesn't mean anything. You keep using that word like he HAS to believe these people. If he doesn't think they are credible, what does it matter that they informed him? Geez, dude. It's not proof. Get out of your own bubble for 2 seconds and think.

dear lort...


You keep trying to act like what he was informed of was something he could "take under advisement" as he deemed fit. 
That's not the case. 

This is clearly why I keep correcting your piss poor word choice, but please, make yourself appear the fool by insulting my understanding of the English language. LOL 


he was INFORMED of the actual result of the election -  and he lost it. You can't semantics your way out of that. 
Pure and simple. 
Black and white. 
Open and shut. 
He lost. 


 There isn't this room for leeway you keep trying to inject with YOUR semantics. 
[BLEEP] lost.
He was informed he lost by officials of multiple government agencies. 
He was informed he was lying about the results by multiple government agencies. 
Doesn't matter if he thinks they are "credible" LOL - they are credible whether he likes it or not.  

YET - he criminally tried to change the outcome. He [BLEEP] around and he is officially finding out.
Simple. 

(08-29-2023, 12:44 PM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ]

(08-29-2023, 12:36 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DaRmYmH7w8Q

Comparing politicians doing politically motivated things is fine. 

Not understanding the gravity of Trump's indictments compared to those being compared above is another issue altogether.

An issue that that makes that cute little edit completely moot.

In other words, “It’s okay when we do it!”

(08-29-2023, 03:20 PM)copycat Wrote: [ -> ]

(08-29-2023, 12:44 PM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ]Comparing politicians doing politically motivated things is fine. 

Not understanding the gravity of Trump's indictments compared to those being compared above is another issue altogether.

An issue that that makes that cute little edit completely moot.

In other words, “It’s okay when we do it!”

It's OK to prosecute criminal action by politicians. 

If the investigations into Biden and his son find evidence of criminal action, they should be prosecuted too. 
100%

You are attempting to inject a bias into my statements that I have in no way stated or expressed. 

Do you believe in our legal system? 

Is there a reason you don't trust a jury of normal American citizens to give Trump a fair trial?

(08-29-2023, 03:03 PM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ]

(08-29-2023, 02:44 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]For the record, since you keep trying to split hairs, informed and advised can be synonymous. I know English is a tricky language, but constantly changing it back doesn't mean anything. You keep using that word like he HAS to believe these people. If he doesn't think they are credible, what does it matter that they informed him? Geez, dude. It's not proof. Get out of your own bubble for 2 seconds and think.

dear lort...


You keep trying to act like what he was informed of was something he could "take under advisement" as he deemed fit. 
That's not the case. 

This is clearly why I keep correcting your piss poor word choice, but please, make yourself appear the fool by insulting my understanding of the English language. LOL 


he was INFORMED of the actual result of the election -  and he lost it. You can't semantics your way out of that. 
Pure and simple. 
Black and white. 
Open and shut. 
He lost. 


 There isn't this room for leeway you keep trying to inject with YOUR semantics. 
[BLEEP] lost.
He was informed he lost by officials of multiple government agencies. 
He was informed he was lying about the results by multiple government agencies. 
Doesn't matter if he thinks they are "credible" LOL - they are credible whether he likes it or not.  

YET - he criminally tried to change the outcome. He [BLEEP] around and he is officially finding out.
Simple. 

Lol. No. Only in your head is that simple. If you're the president of the US, you are not required to believe your cabinet members. That's an asinine starting position for this debate.

---

Quote:advise
verb
ad·vise əd-ˈvīz
advised; advising
Synonyms of advise
transitive verb

1
a
: to give (someone) a recommendation about what should be done : to give advice to
Her doctor advised her to try a drier climate.
b
: CAUTION, WARN
advise them of the consequences
c
: RECOMMEND
advise prudence
2
: to give information or notice to : INFORM
advise them of their rights

Bolded the important part. Wouldn't hurt you to learn something in this thread.

(08-29-2023, 03:31 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]

(08-29-2023, 03:03 PM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ]dear lort...


You keep trying to act like what he was informed of was something he could "take under advisement" as he deemed fit. 
That's not the case. 

This is clearly why I keep correcting your piss poor word choice, but please, make yourself appear the fool by insulting my understanding of the English language. LOL 


he was INFORMED of the actual result of the election -  and he lost it. You can't semantics your way out of that. 
Pure and simple. 
Black and white. 
Open and shut. 
He lost. 


 There isn't this room for leeway you keep trying to inject with YOUR semantics. 
[BLEEP] lost.
He was informed he lost by officials of multiple government agencies. 
He was informed he was lying about the results by multiple government agencies. 
Doesn't matter if he thinks they are "credible" LOL - they are credible whether he likes it or not.  

YET - he criminally tried to change the outcome. He [BLEEP] around and he is officially finding out.
Simple. 

Lol. No. Only in your head is that simple. If you're the president of the US, you are not required to believe your cabinet members. That's an asinine starting position for this debate.

---

Quote:advise
verb
ad·vise əd-ˈvīz
advised; advising
Synonyms of advise
transitive verb

1
a
: to give (someone) a recommendation about what should be done : to give advice to
Her doctor advised her to try a drier climate.
b
: CAUTION, WARN
advise them of the consequences
c
: RECOMMEND
advise prudence
2
: to give information or notice to : INFORM
advise them of their rights

Bolded the important part. Wouldn't hurt you to learn something in this thread.

Jeebus, you have a thick skull.

The prez does not have to believe his cabinet but that isn't what I said. READ IT AGAIN
Holy hell. 

If you want to know which government agencies INFORMED the loser of the election that he lost and which agencies INFORMED him that he was lying about the results, go read the indictment.
 It's all clearly cited there. 
I've already posted that info here multiple times and I'm not going to continue spoon feeding you basic information like that over and over again while you act like a 7th grade grammar student quoting definitions.

He doesn't get to decide if this INFORMATION - not advice - is credible form these agencies. 
 
It wasn't his cabinet
It wasn't "advice"

He was given credible information - ignored it - lied about it - then acted criminally to change the election result.

(08-29-2023, 03:27 PM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ]

(08-29-2023, 03:20 PM)copycat Wrote: [ -> ]In other words, “It’s okay when we do it!”

It's OK to prosecute criminal action by politicians. 

If the investigations into Biden and his son find evidence of criminal action, they should be prosecuted too. 
100%. Given how “investigations” against establishment politicians in general and democrats in particular have gone in the past nothing will come of it.  He is guilty as are most career politicians but there will be no real investigation and you know it.

You are attempting to inject a bias into my statements that I have in no way stated or expressed. You are biased.

Do you believe in our legal system?  Nope.  I used to but there is a multiple tier system of justice and it turns a blind eye against those in the inner circle.

Is there a reason you don't trust a jury of normal American citizens to give Trump a fair trial?  See above.

My statement wasn’t about Trump at all.

IGNORANTIA JURIS NON EXCUSAT.

The law doesn't care what you believed. It cares about your conduct based on what you should have known.

(08-29-2023, 03:49 PM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ]

(08-29-2023, 03:31 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]Lol. No. Only in your head is that simple. If you're the president of the US, you are not required to believe your cabinet members. That's an asinine starting position for this debate.

---

Bolded the important part. Wouldn't hurt you to learn something in this thread.

Jeebus, you have a thick skull.

The prez does not have to believe his cabinet but that isn't what I said. READ IT AGAIN
Holy hell. 

If you want to know which government agencies INFORMED the loser of the election that he lost and which agencies INFORMED him that he was lying about the results, go read the indictment.
 It's all clearly cited there. 
I've already posted that info here multiple times and I'm not going to continue spoon feeding you basic information like that over and over again while you act like a 7th grade grammar student quoting definitions.

He doesn't get to decide if this INFORMATION - not advice - is credible form these agencies. 
 
It wasn't his cabinet
It wasn't "advice"

He was given credible information - ignored it - lied about it - then acted criminally to change the election result.

He doesn't have to believe it. That's the point. It's not a crime to disbelieve an authority. I used cabinet member as a stand in, mistakenly believing you would understand that he doesn't have to take any person or institution at their word. He is not required to believe any information put in front of him.

You have no PROOF he knew he was lying to the American people about what he believed. Sub in any other situation and your tiny little lizard brain might start working again. Let's see.... I was informed there was no proof of aliens by the federal government all through the 80s and 90s. I have also been informed there is unidentified craft that is beyond human capability that's also been recognized by the government. Neither position requires that I believe the other. The opposite is also true. I don't need to believe it, regardless of who informs me. If I take a contrary position, it's not evidence that I set out to deceive people.

---

(08-29-2023, 03:59 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]IGNORANTIA JURIS NON EXCUSAT.

The law doesn't care what you believed.  It cares about your conduct based on what you should have known.

Not even it pertains to free speech. You have to prove intent of a criminal action. There is zero proof of intent so far.

(08-29-2023, 03:58 PM)copycat Wrote: [ -> ]

(08-29-2023, 03:27 PM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ]It's OK to prosecute criminal action by politicians. 

If the investigations into Biden and his son find evidence of criminal action, they should be prosecuted too. 
100%. Given how “investigations” against establishment politicians in general and democrats in particular have gone in the past nothing will come of it.  He is guilty as are most career politicians but there will be no real investigation and you know it.

You are attempting to inject a bias into my statements that I have in no way stated or expressed. You are biased.

Do you believe in our legal system?  Nope.  I used to but there is a multiple tier system of justice and it turns a blind eye against those in the inner circle.

Is there a reason you don't trust a jury of normal American citizens to give Trump a fair trial?  See above.

My statement wasn’t about Trump at all.

Have you noticed the title of the thread at all? LOL