Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
THEY CAN’T CLAIM IT IS UNTRUE, idiot. THEY DON’T KNOW.there's more than 1 flow to logic as it is also derived from our own experiences. to pin it to 1 way or you're wrong seems rather convenient.Because they personally didn’t write it and they don’t know if someone else did or not.If it is not true and they know it is not true, then why bother to claim you did not write it? Seems the more logical thing to do is say it is not true.
You apparently don’t understand what logic is.
But they know if the basic content is accurate or not. If the piece was total BS and did not match reality, then the logical thing to do is say so, not claim you did not write it.
your devotion to Trump keeps you from using logic
If you claim you did not write it, then that does not address the content at all.
If you claim it is untrue, that addresses both the content and the fact that you did not write it.
Which is the more logical way to go if the content is untrue?
For the last fucking time.
Dude just shut up.Because they personally don’t agree with the content....
You can’t get any more basic than that.
.
How can you know that since they have not addressed the content?
Denying your wrote it does not make the content untrue.
That's not the question you asked, nor the answer I gave you.
You asked why the Administration didn't say it was bullshit, and I pointed out where what they did say, would be the same as them saying it was bullshit. That doesn't necessarily make it bullshit or true. It just means they aren't going to jump through your or the New York Time's hoops and say what you want them to say.
Dude just shut up.Because they personally don’t agree with the content....
You can’t get any more basic than that.
.
How can you know that since they have not addressed the content?
None of that is important.THEY CAN’T CLAIM IT IS UNTRUE, idiot. THEY DON’T KNOW.there's more than 1 flow to logic as it is also derived from our own experiences. to pin it to 1 way or you're wrong seems rather convenient.Because they personally didn’t write it and they don’t know if someone else did or not.
You apparently don’t understand what logic is.
But they know if the basic content is accurate or not. If the piece was total BS and did not match reality, then the logical thing to do is say so, not claim you did not write it.
your devotion to Trump keeps you from using logic
If you claim you did not write it, then that does not address the content at all.
If you claim it is untrue, that addresses both the content and the fact that you did not write it.
Which is the more logical way to go if the content is untrue?
For the last fucking time.
They are part of the day to day operations of the White House, they would know if the basic content of the piece was accurate or not. How could they not know?
They would know if meetings with Trump veer off topic and off the rails, and if he engages in repetitive rants or not.
if i ask you if you wrote something, are you going to say "yes/no" or give me war and peace about the content?there's more than 1 flow to logic as it is also derived from our own experiences. to pin it to 1 way or you're wrong seems rather convenient.Because they personally didn’t write it and they don’t know if someone else did or not.i think "none of them calling it BS" is a reach. most people will do the same thing about of human nature. now was anyone who said NOT ME *asked* if any of it were true?
If it is not true and they know it is not true, then why bother to claim you did not write it? Seems the more logical thing to do is say it is not true.
You apparently don’t understand what logic is.
But they know if the basic content is accurate or not. If the piece was total BS and did not match reality, then the logical thing to do is say so, not claim you did not write it.
your devotion to Trump keeps you from using logic
If you claim you did not write it, then that does not address the content at all.
If you claim it is untrue, that addresses both the content and the fact that you did not write it.
Which is the more logical way to go if the content is untrue?
how do you know they have not? not like the media is forthcoming in such matters for the right these days.Because they personally don’t agree with the content....
You can’t get any more basic than that.
.
How can you know that since they have not addressed the content?
Unless The NY Times plans to rat this person out after the damage is done, there is no way this person is real.There's something that isn't making sense to me on this.
Let's assume that this whole thing is true, that an important person at the White House wrote this editorial as an account of this group of people who are manipulating as much as possible around Trump to protect the country.
Why would they expose this plot, one which they seem to think is working? Surely the person who wrote this knew they'll ultimately be exposed. Surely they know this will change things at the White House. So why would they let the cat out of the bag at this time?
The only two reasons I can come up with are (a) that they want to influence the November elections for some help in decreasing Trump's overall power, and (b) that they're hoping that we take a serious look at the 25th. What are your guesses?
I was going to start this in the CDZ, but let's see if we can get some serious thought here.
.
if i ask you if you wrote something, are you going to say "yes/no" or give me war and peace about the content?there's more than 1 flow to logic as it is also derived from our own experiences. to pin it to 1 way or you're wrong seems rather convenient.Because they personally didn’t write it and they don’t know if someone else did or not.If it is not true and they know it is not true, then why bother to claim you did not write it? Seems the more logical thing to do is say it is not true.
You apparently don’t understand what logic is.
But they know if the basic content is accurate or not. If the piece was total BS and did not match reality, then the logical thing to do is say so, not claim you did not write it.
your devotion to Trump keeps you from using logic
If you claim you did not write it, then that does not address the content at all.
If you claim it is untrue, that addresses both the content and the fact that you did not write it.
Which is the more logical way to go if the content is untrue?
What they said is not the same as saying it was bullshit. Saying "I did not write it" does not equate to "it is not true"
How do you know they are real?Unless The NY Times plans to rat this person out after the damage is done, there is no way this person is real.There's something that isn't making sense to me on this.
Let's assume that this whole thing is true, that an important person at the White House wrote this editorial as an account of this group of people who are manipulating as much as possible around Trump to protect the country.
Why would they expose this plot, one which they seem to think is working? Surely the person who wrote this knew they'll ultimately be exposed. Surely they know this will change things at the White House. So why would they let the cat out of the bag at this time?
The only two reasons I can come up with are (a) that they want to influence the November elections for some help in decreasing Trump's overall power, and (b) that they're hoping that we take a serious look at the 25th. What are your guesses?
I was going to start this in the CDZ, but let's see if we can get some serious thought here.
.
the writer is, of course, REAL----but not likely some
"high official"--------a fame hog-----so---NEW YORK TIMES-----MAKE HIM FAMOUS
how do you know they have not? not like the media is forthcoming in such matters for the right these days.Because they personally don’t agree with the content....
You can’t get any more basic than that.
.
How can you know that since they have not addressed the content?
How do you know they are real?Unless The NY Times plans to rat this person out after the damage is done, there is no way this person is real.There's something that isn't making sense to me on this.
Let's assume that this whole thing is true, that an important person at the White House wrote this editorial as an account of this group of people who are manipulating as much as possible around Trump to protect the country.
Why would they expose this plot, one which they seem to think is working? Surely the person who wrote this knew they'll ultimately be exposed. Surely they know this will change things at the White House. So why would they let the cat out of the bag at this time?
The only two reasons I can come up with are (a) that they want to influence the November elections for some help in decreasing Trump's overall power, and (b) that they're hoping that we take a serious look at the 25th. What are your guesses?
I was going to start this in the CDZ, but let's see if we can get some serious thought here.
.
the writer is, of course, REAL----but not likely some
"high official"--------a fame hog-----so---NEW YORK TIMES-----MAKE HIM FAMOUS
What they said is not the same as saying it was bullshit. Saying "I did not write it" does not equate to "it is not true"
What you are suggesting is the age old gag joke of, "Have you stopped beating your wife yet".
That routine is old as heck, and doesn't get any better no matter how you try and make it. The Administration's response would be the same as the person answering the other question with, "I never beat my wife to start with". Sorry if you aren't satisfied they aren't falling for your crap.
Of course someone wrote the article, but the official who supposedly wrote it could easily be made up.How do you know they are real?Unless The NY Times plans to rat this person out after the damage is done, there is no way this person is real.There's something that isn't making sense to me on this.
Let's assume that this whole thing is true, that an important person at the White House wrote this editorial as an account of this group of people who are manipulating as much as possible around Trump to protect the country.
Why would they expose this plot, one which they seem to think is working? Surely the person who wrote this knew they'll ultimately be exposed. Surely they know this will change things at the White House. So why would they let the cat out of the bag at this time?
The only two reasons I can come up with are (a) that they want to influence the November elections for some help in decreasing Trump's overall power, and (b) that they're hoping that we take a serious look at the 25th. What are your guesses?
I was going to start this in the CDZ, but let's see if we can get some serious thought here.
.
the writer is, of course, REAL----but not likely some
"high official"--------a fame hog-----so---NEW YORK TIMES-----MAKE HIM FAMOUS
monkeys are unable to write
Which means they didn’t....What they said is not the same as saying it was bullshit. Saying "I did not write it" does not equate to "it is not true"
What you are suggesting is the age old gag joke of, "Have you stopped beating your wife yet".
That routine is old as heck, and doesn't get any better no matter how you try and make it. The Administration's response would be the same as the person answering the other question with, "I never beat my wife to start with". Sorry if you aren't satisfied they aren't falling for your crap.
Not even close to the same. Pence and Pompeo were not asked shit, they went out of their way to make public statements that they did not write the piece.
Which means they didn’t....What they said is not the same as saying it was bullshit. Saying "I did not write it" does not equate to "it is not true"
What you are suggesting is the age old gag joke of, "Have you stopped beating your wife yet".
That routine is old as heck, and doesn't get any better no matter how you try and make it. The Administration's response would be the same as the person answering the other question with, "I never beat my wife to start with". Sorry if you aren't satisfied they aren't falling for your crap.
Not even close to the same. Pence and Pompeo were not asked shit, they went out of their way to make public statements that they did not write the piece.
Not even close to the same. Pence and Pompeo were not asked shit, they went out of their way to make public statements that they did not write the piece.
