Acosta has pass revoked

[Faun]

In reality, what I actually said in response to you claiming it didn’t hurt national security was that it ”could” hurt national security but that we’ll likely never know since such matters are clandestine.

But it couldn't and didn't. Thats how stupid you are, We have seen the memo and there was nothing that compromised national security there.
You supported (((Schiff))) in his claims that it would hurt national security. He lost...the memo was released..and national security is fine. This is the danger of having you subhuman types involved in anything. And you will still follow (((Schiff)))...even though he humiliated you. It wasnt so much your lie. You were just a dupe. Its that you dont mind attacking the good people who exposed (((schiffs))) lie.

So Faun...are we OK? No "constitutional crisis" like you and (((schiff))) promised?" No collapse of national security?

Quote me saying that would lead to a constitutional crisis. Quote me saying it would lead to a collapse of national security.

You can’t because I never said those things. You’ve lost this argument so badly that now you’ve reduced your argument to lying and fighting against positions I never took.

 

[Faun]

******* moron ....... they weren’t in Wisconsin.

Battery/Assault is the same all over the US.

The claim the ******* moron made was that the intern had the legal right to physically wrestle that mic from him using any means necessary.

I didn't say "by any means necessary," you lying douche bag. However, she is allowed to use the amount of force required. If Trump wanted to, he could have had Whitehouse security wrestle him to the ground, cuff him, and the physically drag him off the premises. They could have even used pepper spray and batons on the bastard if he refused to comply.

”I didn't say "by any means necessary," you lying douche bag.”

You can’t lie your way out of this one, ya ******* moron...

She sure as hell is. She's entitled to use whatever physical force is required to retrieve White house property from someone who at this point is properly deemed a thief.

 

[bripat9643]

I know you were going to say that. What a ******* dolt. Every state has a similar law. However, DC may be different since it's populated with ignorant savages.

LOLOL

And I knew you couldn’t post the law.

Spare me, idiot. Everyone can see I posted the law.

LOLOLOL

No, ******* moron, everyone saw you post a law from another state which has absolutely zero jurisdiction in D.C..

You actually demonstrate there is no such law in D.C. since you would have posted one had it actually existed.

All you prove is that my assessment that you’re a ******* moron is 100% spot on accurate.

I knew you were going to hang your hat on that idiocy. Every state in the union has the same kind of law. You're trying to tell us that DC doesn't allow people to defend their property. You're claiming that thugs can mug people with impunity in DC. It takes a special kind of stupid to defend such an idiocy.

LOLOLOL

Oh, ******* moron? You knew I would call you out for posting a Wisconsin law while we were talking about an event occurring in D.C.? How satient of you.

No, I knew you would behave like an anal-retentive asshole and harp on details that aren't relevant. DC law is no different than the law in any other state. In fact, in DC, stand your ground is legal, which means you don't have to run away when thugs accost you. You can legally blow them away.

 

[bripat9643]

******* moron ....... they weren’t in Wisconsin.

Battery/Assault is the same all over the US.

The claim the ******* moron made was that the intern had the legal right to physically wrestle that mic from him using any means necessary.

I didn't say "by any means necessary," you lying douche bag. However, she is allowed to use the amount of force required. If Trump wanted to, he could have had Whitehouse security wrestle him to the ground, cuff him, and the physically drag him off the premises. They could have even used pepper spray and batons on the bastard if he refused to comply.

”I didn't say "by any means necessary," you lying douche bag.”

You can’t lie your way out of this one, ya ******* moron...

She sure as hell is. She's entitled to use whatever physical force is required to retrieve White house property from someone who at this point is properly deemed a thief.

Lying is your stock in trade, asshole. Notice that you failed to include the words "is required," which changes the meaning of the words you quoted, you ******* douchebag piece of shit.

Note that you accused me of saying "by any means necessary." Then you quoted me saying "whatever physical force is required." It takes a special kind stupid not to notice the two statements are different when you have quoted both of them in your post.

That level of stupid is difficult to fathom.

 

[bripat9643]

******* moron ....... they weren’t in Wisconsin.

Battery/Assault is the same all over the US.

The claim the ******* moron made was that the intern had the legal right to physically wrestle that mic from him using any means necessary.

I didn't say "by any means necessary," you lying douche bag. However, she is allowed to use the amount of force required. If Trump wanted to, he could have had Whitehouse security wrestle him to the ground, cuff him, and the physically drag him off the premises. They could have even used pepper spray and batons on the bastard if he refused to comply.

I wish he had done that. Would have accelerated the whole process.

​

Which process is that, CNN utterly disgracing itself?

 

[Faun]

LOLOL

And I knew you couldn’t post the law.

Spare me, idiot. Everyone can see I posted the law.

LOLOLOL

No, ******* moron, everyone saw you post a law from another state which has absolutely zero jurisdiction in D.C..

You actually demonstrate there is no such law in D.C. since you would have posted one had it actually existed.

All you prove is that my assessment that you’re a ******* moron is 100% spot on accurate.

I knew you were going to hang your hat on that idiocy. Every state in the union has the same kind of law. You're trying to tell us that DC doesn't allow people to defend their property. You're claiming that thugs can mug people with impunity in DC. It takes a special kind of stupid to defend such an idiocy.

LOLOLOL

Oh, ******* moron? You knew I would call you out for posting a Wisconsin law while we were talking about an event occurring in D.C.? How satient of you.

No, I knew you would behave like an anal-retentive asshole and harp on details that aren't relevant. DC law is no different than the law in any other state. In fact, in DC, stand your ground is legal, which means you don't have to run away when thugs accost you. You can legally blow them away.

”DC law is no different than the law in any other state.”

LOLOL

And yet, you can’t actually find any such D.C. law. So you rely on false equivalencies and bluffing; as though that compensates for your complete and utter failure to prove your bullshit.

 

[Faun]

******* moron ....... they weren’t in Wisconsin.

Battery/Assault is the same all over the US.

The claim the ******* moron made was that the intern had the legal right to physically wrestle that mic from him using any means necessary.

I didn't say "by any means necessary," you lying douche bag. However, she is allowed to use the amount of force required. If Trump wanted to, he could have had Whitehouse security wrestle him to the ground, cuff him, and the physically drag him off the premises. They could have even used pepper spray and batons on the bastard if he refused to comply.

”I didn't say "by any means necessary," you lying douche bag.”

You can’t lie your way out of this one, ya ******* moron...

She sure as hell is. She's entitled to use whatever physical force is required to retrieve White house property from someone who at this point is properly deemed a thief.

Lying is your stock in trade, asshole. Notice that you failed to include the words "is required," which changes the meaning of the words you quoted, you ******* douchebag piece of shit.

Note that you accused me of saying "by any means necessary." Then you quoted me saying "whatever physical force is required." It takes a special kind stupid not to notice the two statements are different when you have quoted both of them in your post.

That level of stupid is difficult to fathom.

No law, not even the Wisconsin law you ridiculously posted, allows for “whatever force is required.” There are limitations. You cannot beat someone to within an inch of their life, as you insanely insinuated, to prevent a theft.

Shit, you can’t even prove he didn’t give the mic back until actually told to. You can’t prove there’s any such law in D,C.. You can’t prove whose mic it is. You can’t prove it was theft. All you can prove is that you’re a ******* moron. Which is all you ever prove.

 

[bripat9643]

Battery/Assault is the same all over the US.

The claim the ******* moron made was that the intern had the legal right to physically wrestle that mic from him using any means necessary.

I didn't say "by any means necessary," you lying douche bag. However, she is allowed to use the amount of force required. If Trump wanted to, he could have had Whitehouse security wrestle him to the ground, cuff him, and the physically drag him off the premises. They could have even used pepper spray and batons on the bastard if he refused to comply.

”I didn't say "by any means necessary," you lying douche bag.”

You can’t lie your way out of this one, ya ******* moron...

She sure as hell is. She's entitled to use whatever physical force is required to retrieve White house property from someone who at this point is properly deemed a thief.

Lying is your stock in trade, asshole. Notice that you failed to include the words "is required," which changes the meaning of the words you quoted, you ******* douchebag piece of shit.

Note that you accused me of saying "by any means necessary." Then you quoted me saying "whatever physical force is required." It takes a special kind stupid not to notice the two statements are different when you have quoted both of them in your post.

That level of stupid is difficult to fathom.

No law, not even the Wisconsin law you ridiculously posted, allows for “whatever force is required.” There are limitations. You cannot beat someone to within an inch of their life, as you insanely insinuated, to prevent a theft.

Shit, you can’t even prove he didn’t give the mic back until actually told to. You can’t prove there’s any such law in D,C.. You can’t prove whose mic it is. You can’t prove it was theft. All you can prove is that you’re a ******* moron. Which is all you ever prove.

You can beat them pretty badly, because the cops don't have much sympathy for thieves. "whatever force is required" means "whatever force is necessary and appropriate." Beating them to within an inch of their lives, obviously isn't necessary

When the intern extended her hand, that was a request to return the mic. Only a lying moron would refuse to admit that.

If the Whitehouse didn't supply the mic, then who did, CNN? Only an anal retentive moron without a clue insists that I have to prove every single thing said about the incident. That's a tactic designed to deflect from the fact that you were proven dead wrong. Some people are smart enough to realize that some things are obvious. Only those caught in their own lies demand such proof.

BTW, asshole, I proved that you're a liar. In fact, you proved it by making a claim about what I said and then posting exactly what I said which differed from what you claimed.

Talk about a stupid lying cockroach.

 

[DOTR]

In reality, what I actually said in response to you claiming it didn’t hurt national security was that it ”could” hurt national security but that we’ll likely never know since such matters are clandestine.

But it couldn't and didn't. Thats how stupid you are, We have seen the memo and there was nothing that compromised national security there.
You supported (((Schiff))) in his claims that it would hurt national security. He lost...the memo was released..and national security is fine. This is the danger of having you subhuman types involved in anything. And you will still follow (((Schiff)))...even though he humiliated you. It wasnt so much your lie. You were just a dupe. Its that you dont mind attacking the good people who exposed (((schiffs))) lie.

So Faun...are we OK? No "constitutional crisis" like you and (((schiff))) promised?" No collapse of national security?

Quote me saying that would lead to a constitutional crisis. Quote me saying it would lead to a collapse of national security.

You can’t because I never said those things. You’ve lost this argument so badly that now you’ve reduced your argument to lying and fighting against positions I never took.

I have already covered this. Always the technicality.."well see technically I never said that exact thing". But Im not claiming you did. You never say anything. You operate by rote. And you supported (((schiff))) when he said the Nunes Memo would (1) wreck national security and (2) cause a constitutional crisis. And you swore he was right.
I know you are dense but my point is you have so little humanity that you didnt even rebel after being humiliated by (((schiff))). You dont mind being treated like a serf because you were born to be one. And you spend your life "technically" wiggling out of taking any stand.

 

[Yarddog]

Maybe he should only allow FOX News in, the only tough question they will ask him is "how does he like his eggs?".

He didnt pull the pass for CNN, just Acost-ya. He's just one man, so really nothing to see here.

 

[bripat9643]

In reality, what I actually said in response to you claiming it didn’t hurt national security was that it ”could” hurt national security but that we’ll likely never know since such matters are clandestine.

But it couldn't and didn't. Thats how stupid you are, We have seen the memo and there was nothing that compromised national security there.
You supported (((Schiff))) in his claims that it would hurt national security. He lost...the memo was released..and national security is fine. This is the danger of having you subhuman types involved in anything. And you will still follow (((Schiff)))...even though he humiliated you. It wasnt so much your lie. You were just a dupe. Its that you dont mind attacking the good people who exposed (((schiffs))) lie.

So Faun...are we OK? No "constitutional crisis" like you and (((schiff))) promised?" No collapse of national security?

Quote me saying that would lead to a constitutional crisis. Quote me saying it would lead to a collapse of national security.

You can’t because I never said those things. You’ve lost this argument so badly that now you’ve reduced your argument to lying and fighting against positions I never took.

I have already covered this. Always the technicality.."well see technically I never said that exact thing". But Im not claiming you did. You never say anything. You operate by rote. And you supported (((schiff))) when he said the Nunes Memo would (1) wreck national security and (2) cause a constitutional crisis. And you swore he was right.
I know you are dense but my point is you have so little humanity that you didnt even rebel after being humiliated by (((schiff))). You dont mind being treated like a serf because you were born to be one. And you spend your life "technically" wiggling out of taking any stand.

Fuax's favorite tactic is to pick out one single insignificant statement in your post and then harp on it relentlessly as if it's the crux of your entire position. He pretends he's disproved your entire argument if he manages to undermine that one irrelevant statement. Of course, his main claim has holes so big in it that you could drive a freight train through it.

Faux has been attempting to claim the D.C. law doesn't allow you to use force to keep someone from taking your property. His entire argument hinges on whether I quote the actual statute that says so.

 

[Yarddog]

Maybe your dumb ass needs to go back and watch the video. He didn't slam her ******* arm, that is the right wing lie that has been debunked. See the problem is simpleton a lot of folks in the room actually recorded what happened.

Yes they did, and those videos show Acosta's hand/wrist on her arm, pushing it down, and knocking her off balance.

That's a crock, he just put his hand up and stopped her from grabbing the mic out of his hand. She had no business trying to take something out of his hand.

Democrats are insane to believe they can contradict CLEAR video evidence and get away with it. They get courage by listening to each others lunacies, and then go around mindlessly blabbering the same ridiculous fallacy.

This has nothing to do with Democrat or republican, it is a crying shame that folks would try and push a blatant lie just because you don't like the way a man reports when it comes to your God.

Wrong Bru, reporters, though they have passes, are still guests in the White House. She had every right to reach for the microphone and I bet if the research was done there would be other instances where a staffer reached to remove a microphone. It's her job to give it to the next speaker. Acosta was just being a little girl about it sorry. He shoved her arm down and you could see the look on her face that it wasnt really cool.. but she then backed down as not to make a scene. But hey, just another angry white male putting a woman in her place right? is that good for you?

 

[Yarddog]

Furthermore , it is in the White Houses discretion to determine whether they find someone rude or not. Right or wrong. Accosta got his pass removed but CNN still has access and they can send another qualified reporter. This has absolutely nothing to do with the suppression of the press

 

[bripat9643]

Furthermore , it is in the White Houses discretion to determine whether they find someone rude or not. Right or wrong. Accosta got his pass removed but CNN still has access and they can send another qualified reporter. This has absolutely nothing to do with the suppression of the press

CNN's access should be removed as well. They permitted Acosta to engage in his rude behavior. In fact, they even endorsed it. They should be required to submit a formal apology and implement policies to require respectful behavior towards the president from their reporters.

 

[Pogo]

Furthermore , it is in the White Houses discretion to determine whether they find someone rude or not. Right or wrong. Accosta got his pass removed but CNN still has access and they can send another qualified reporter. This has absolutely nothing to do with the suppression of the press

CNN's access should be removed as well. They permitted that Acosta to engage in his rude behavior. In fact, they even endorsed it. They should be required to submit a formal apology and implement policies to require respectful behavior towards the president from their reporters.

 

[Faun]

The claim the ******* moron made was that the intern had the legal right to physically wrestle that mic from him using any means necessary.

I didn't say "by any means necessary," you lying douche bag. However, she is allowed to use the amount of force required. If Trump wanted to, he could have had Whitehouse security wrestle him to the ground, cuff him, and the physically drag him off the premises. They could have even used pepper spray and batons on the bastard if he refused to comply.

”I didn't say "by any means necessary," you lying douche bag.”

You can’t lie your way out of this one, ya ******* moron...

She sure as hell is. She's entitled to use whatever physical force is required to retrieve White house property from someone who at this point is properly deemed a thief.

Lying is your stock in trade, asshole. Notice that you failed to include the words "is required," which changes the meaning of the words you quoted, you ******* douchebag piece of shit.

Note that you accused me of saying "by any means necessary." Then you quoted me saying "whatever physical force is required." It takes a special kind stupid not to notice the two statements are different when you have quoted both of them in your post.

That level of stupid is difficult to fathom.

No law, not even the Wisconsin law you ridiculously posted, allows for “whatever force is required.” There are limitations. You cannot beat someone to within an inch of their life, as you insanely insinuated, to prevent a theft.

Shit, you can’t even prove he didn’t give the mic back until actually told to. You can’t prove there’s any such law in D,C.. You can’t prove whose mic it is. You can’t prove it was theft. All you can prove is that you’re a ******* moron. Which is all you ever prove.

You can beat them pretty badly, because the cops don't have much sympathy for thieves. "whatever force is required" means "whatever force is necessary and appropriate." Beating them to within an inch of their lives, obviously isn't necessary

When the intern extended her hand, that was a request to return the mic. Only a lying moron would refuse to admit that.

If the Whitehouse didn't supply the mic, then who did, CNN? Only an anal retentive moron without a clue insists that I have to prove every single thing said about the incident. That's a tactic designed to deflect from the fact that you were proven dead wrong. Some people are smart enough to realize that some things are obvious. Only those caught in their own lies demand such proof.

BTW, asshole, I proved that you're a liar. In fact, you proved it by making a claim about what I said and then posting exactly what I said which differed from what you claimed.

Talk about a stupid lying cockroach.

”Beating them to within an inch of their lives, obviously isn't necessary”

Yet that was the example you ridiculously offered.

Even funnier is you opining you don’t have to prove everything you say. Of course. We should just take everything a ******* moron like you says as gospel.

 

[Yarddog]

Furthermore , it is in the White Houses discretion to determine whether they find someone rude or not. Right or wrong. Accosta got his pass removed but CNN still has access and they can send another qualified reporter. This has absolutely nothing to do with the suppression of the press

CNN's access should be removed as well. They permitted that Acosta to engage in his rude behavior. In fact, they even endorsed it. They should be required to submit a formal apology and implement policies to require respectful behavior towards the president from their reporters.

I don't think that's really necessary. I'd just stick with the moderate move for now, you wouldnt want to send the wrong message. Acosta shouldnt have pushed her arm down. That's on him. I wonder if he has made an apology yet to the intern?

 

[Yarddog]

I checked to see if Acosta had apologized to her but the search only turned up this item
CNN’s Jim Acosta apologizes for sending obscene message to former Trump staffer

At least he is known to apologize when he makes a mistake

 

[Faun]

In reality, what I actually said in response to you claiming it didn’t hurt national security was that it ”could” hurt national security but that we’ll likely never know since such matters are clandestine.

But it couldn't and didn't. Thats how stupid you are, We have seen the memo and there was nothing that compromised national security there.
You supported (((Schiff))) in his claims that it would hurt national security. He lost...the memo was released..and national security is fine. This is the danger of having you subhuman types involved in anything. And you will still follow (((Schiff)))...even though he humiliated you. It wasnt so much your lie. You were just a dupe. Its that you dont mind attacking the good people who exposed (((schiffs))) lie.

So Faun...are we OK? No "constitutional crisis" like you and (((schiff))) promised?" No collapse of national security?

Quote me saying that would lead to a constitutional crisis. Quote me saying it would lead to a collapse of national security.

You can’t because I never said those things. You’ve lost this argument so badly that now you’ve reduced your argument to lying and fighting against positions I never took.

I have already covered this. Always the technicality.."well see technically I never said that exact thing". But Im not claiming you did. You never say anything. You operate by rote. And you supported (((schiff))) when he said the Nunes Memo would (1) wreck national security and (2) cause a constitutional crisis. And you swore he was right.
I know you are dense but my point is you have so little humanity that you didnt even rebel after being humiliated by (((schiff))). You dont mind being treated like a serf because you were born to be one. And you spend your life "technically" wiggling out of taking any stand.

Well, no, I don’t rebel over rightard ramblings. I’ve come to learn never to take anything from conservatives at face value.

 

[bripat9643]

I didn't say "by any means necessary," you lying douche bag. However, she is allowed to use the amount of force required. If Trump wanted to, he could have had Whitehouse security wrestle him to the ground, cuff him, and the physically drag him off the premises. They could have even used pepper spray and batons on the bastard if he refused to comply.

”I didn't say "by any means necessary," you lying douche bag.”

You can’t lie your way out of this one, ya ******* moron...

She sure as hell is. She's entitled to use whatever physical force is required to retrieve White house property from someone who at this point is properly deemed a thief.

Lying is your stock in trade, asshole. Notice that you failed to include the words "is required," which changes the meaning of the words you quoted, you ******* douchebag piece of shit.

Note that you accused me of saying "by any means necessary." Then you quoted me saying "whatever physical force is required." It takes a special kind stupid not to notice the two statements are different when you have quoted both of them in your post.

That level of stupid is difficult to fathom.

No law, not even the Wisconsin law you ridiculously posted, allows for “whatever force is required.” There are limitations. You cannot beat someone to within an inch of their life, as you insanely insinuated, to prevent a theft.

Shit, you can’t even prove he didn’t give the mic back until actually told to. You can’t prove there’s any such law in D,C.. You can’t prove whose mic it is. You can’t prove it was theft. All you can prove is that you’re a ******* moron. Which is all you ever prove.

You can beat them pretty badly, because the cops don't have much sympathy for thieves. "whatever force is required" means "whatever force is necessary and appropriate." Beating them to within an inch of their lives, obviously isn't necessary

When the intern extended her hand, that was a request to return the mic. Only a lying moron would refuse to admit that.

If the Whitehouse didn't supply the mic, then who did, CNN? Only an anal retentive moron without a clue insists that I have to prove every single thing said about the incident. That's a tactic designed to deflect from the fact that you were proven dead wrong. Some people are smart enough to realize that some things are obvious. Only those caught in their own lies demand such proof.

BTW, asshole, I proved that you're a liar. In fact, you proved it by making a claim about what I said and then posting exactly what I said which differed from what you claimed.

Talk about a stupid lying cockroach.

”Beating them to within an inch of their lives, obviously isn't necessary”

Yet that was the example you ridiculously offered.

Even funnier is you opining you don’t have to prove everything you say. Of course. We should just take everything a ******* moron like you says as gospel.

My example proves that using force to protect your property is not against the law.

Right, so I have to prove the sky is blue and water is wet?

You're an idiot.