viz.
I did not say that it did, and you missed the point entire.
It's the point I laid out here, so perhaps you need to furnish a counterpoint with a bit more substance to it than "".
It is all you can muster my partisanshithead friend. Feel free to carry on the rest of the day if you must, I see no discussion to be had here, cheers.
viz.
It's the point I laid out here, so perhaps you need to furnish a counterpoint with a bit more substance to it than "".
It's all the response your post deserves.
It is all you can muster my partisanshithead friend. Feel free to carry on the rest of the day if you must, I see no discussion to be had here, cheers.
viz.
It's the point I laid out here, so perhaps you need to furnish a counterpoint with a bit more substance to it than "".
It's all the response your post deserves.
Typical Democrat ignorance of the Second Amendment
viz.
It's the point I laid out here, so perhaps you need to furnish a counterpoint with a bit more substance to it than "".
It's all the response your post deserves.
It is all you can muster my partisanshithead friend. Feel free to carry on the rest of the day if you must, I see no discussion to be had here, cheers.
viz.
It's the point I laid out here, so perhaps you need to furnish a counterpoint with a bit more substance to it than "".
It's all the response your post deserves.
There is nothing to discuss. Trump has the party endorsement. There is no reason to caucus.
It is all you can muster my partisanshithead friend. Feel free to carry on the rest of the day if you must, I see no discussion to be had here, cheers.
It's all the response your post deserves.
There is nothing to discuss. Trump has the party endorsement. There is no reason to caucus.
You're a typical partisanshithead. Corruption on your side is ok, you'll howl and banshee wail if you spot it on "the other" side. Wouldn't surprise anyone if Don punks out on debates as well, is he not already president?
Your entire political system is a charade designed to thwart the will of the unsubstantial people and while insuring that one-hominid-one-vote is never realized.
Since you liked it so much the first time:
Let's examine the folly of that from both pathological perspectives.
Nevada Democratic Party asks caucus volunteers to sign confidentiality agreements
The news comes just one day before the Nevada Democratic caucuses. The caucus process here in Nevada has come under intense scrutiny after a similar process melted down in Iowa. Nevada Democrats, led by operatives with ties to former Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, have worked for weeks to ensure the caucus goes smoothly, worried that a poor showing could imperil the state's first in the west status and further undermine the entire nomination process.
A Nevada State Democratic Party official told CNN that it's standard practice to request staff and volunteers to sign an NDA because they are privy to strategic information and said the party also required NDAs in 2018.
Nevada Democratic Party asks caucus volunteers to sign confidentiality agreements
Democratic Party corruption, yet again, out in the open for all to see. Their excuse to the people? Oh we did this last year as well. Bear in mind this is the party that in the aftermath of 2016 stated in court that it had no legal responsibility to honor the wishes of its own primary voters in the general. Super delegates only exist to override and "manage" any one-hominid-one-voteism that may arise and threaten concentrated capital.
It is all you can muster my partisanshithead friend. Feel free to carry on the rest of the day if you must, I see no discussion to be had here, cheers.viz.
It's all the response your post deserves.
There is nothing to discuss. Trump has the party endorsement. There is no reason to caucus.
You're a typical partisanshithead. Corruption on your side is ok, you'll howl and banshee wail if you spot it on "the other" side. Wouldn't surprise anyone if Don punks out on debates as well, is he not already president?
Your entire political system is a charade designed to thwart the will of the unsubstantial people and while insuring that one-hominid-one-vote is never realized.
Since you liked it so much the first time:
Let's examine the folly of that from both pathological perspectives.
Nevada Democratic Party asks caucus volunteers to sign confidentiality agreements
The news comes just one day before the Nevada Democratic caucuses. The caucus process here in Nevada has come under intense scrutiny after a similar process melted down in Iowa. Nevada Democrats, led by operatives with ties to former Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, have worked for weeks to ensure the caucus goes smoothly, worried that a poor showing could imperil the state's first in the west status and further undermine the entire nomination process.
A Nevada State Democratic Party official told CNN that it's standard practice to request staff and volunteers to sign an NDA because they are privy to strategic information and said the party also required NDAs in 2018.
Nevada Democratic Party asks caucus volunteers to sign confidentiality agreements
Democratic Party corruption, yet again, out in the open for all to see. Their excuse to the people? Oh we did this last year as well. Bear in mind this is the party that in the aftermath of 2016 stated in court that it had no legal responsibility to honor the wishes of its own primary voters in the general. Super delegates only exist to override and "manage" any one-hominid-one-voteism that may arise and threaten concentrated capital.
NDAs (AKA CYAs) in these cases are certainly the height of transparency. They prevent election officials from discussing any ****-ups or switcheroos with outside parties, such as the press.
Gosh, it seems you missed the part about Epstein and the Democrats. How interesting.
As to Republican caucuses, casting early support to a sitting president so as not to waste time and resources on two thinly supported wackos is hardly corruption. Walsh and Weld are both essentially non-entities within the party. They were going nowhere. No one of any import expressed interest in running against Trump.
Economy of motion.
It is all you can muster my partisanshithead friend. Feel free to carry on the rest of the day if you must, I see no discussion to be had here, cheers.viz.
It's all the response your post deserves.
There is nothing to discuss. Trump has the party endorsement. There is no reason to caucus.
You're a typical partisanshithead. Corruption on your side is ok, you'll howl and banshee wail if you spot it on "the other" side. Wouldn't surprise anyone if Don punks out on debates as well, is he not already president?
Your entire political system is a charade designed to thwart the will of the unsubstantial people and while insuring that one-hominid-one-vote is never realized.
Since you liked it so much the first time:
Let's examine the folly of that from both pathological perspectives.
Nevada Democratic Party asks caucus volunteers to sign confidentiality agreements
The news comes just one day before the Nevada Democratic caucuses. The caucus process here in Nevada has come under intense scrutiny after a similar process melted down in Iowa. Nevada Democrats, led by operatives with ties to former Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, have worked for weeks to ensure the caucus goes smoothly, worried that a poor showing could imperil the state's first in the west status and further undermine the entire nomination process.
A Nevada State Democratic Party official told CNN that it's standard practice to request staff and volunteers to sign an NDA because they are privy to strategic information and said the party also required NDAs in 2018.
Nevada Democratic Party asks caucus volunteers to sign confidentiality agreements
Democratic Party corruption, yet again, out in the open for all to see. Their excuse to the people? Oh we did this last year as well. Bear in mind this is the party that in the aftermath of 2016 stated in court that it had no legal responsibility to honor the wishes of its own primary voters in the general. Super delegates only exist to override and "manage" any one-hominid-one-voteism that may arise and threaten concentrated capital.
NDAs (AKA CYAs) in these cases are certainly the height of transparency. They prevent election officials from discussing any ****-ups or switcheroos with outside parties, such as the press.
Gosh, it seems you missed the part about Epstein and the Democrats. How interesting.
As to Republican caucuses, casting early support to a sitting president so as not to waste time and resources on two thinly supported wackos is hardly corruption. Walsh and Weld are both essentially non-entities within the party. They were going nowhere. No one of any import expressed interest in running against Trump.
Economy of motion.
NDAs (AKA CYAs) in these cases are certainly the height of transparency. They prevent election officials from discussing any ****-ups or switcheroos with outside parties, such as the press.
Gosh, it seems you missed the part about Epstein and the Democrats. How interesting.
As to Republican caucuses, casting early support to a sitting president so as not to waste time and resources on two thinly supported wackos is hardly corruption. Walsh and Weld are both essentially non-entities within the party. They were going nowhere. No one of any import expressed interest in running against Trump.
Economy of motion.
In other words you'll decide for others because you know best huh.
And by the way learn to count. Walsh, Weld and Sanford equals three. And all of them are nationally prominent, whether you'd choose any of them or not. See, the idea of holding a vote is kind of that LOTS OF people get to participate.
NDAs (AKA CYAs) in these cases are certainly the height of transparency. They prevent election officials from discussing any ****-ups or switcheroos with outside parties, such as the press.
Gosh, it seems you missed the part about Epstein and the Democrats. How interesting.
As to Republican caucuses, casting early support to a sitting president so as not to waste time and resources on two thinly supported wackos is hardly corruption. Walsh and Weld are both essentially non-entities within the party. They were going nowhere. No one of any import expressed interest in running against Trump.
Economy of motion.
In other words you'll decide for others because you know best huh.
And by the way learn to count. Walsh, Weld and Sanford equals three. And all of them are nationally prominent, whether you'd choose any of them or not. See, the idea of holding a vote is kind of that LOTS OF people get to participate.
NDAs (AKA CYAs) in these cases are certainly the height of transparency. They prevent election officials from discussing any ****-ups or switcheroos with outside parties, such as the press.
Gosh, it seems you missed the part about Epstein and the Democrats. How interesting.
As to Republican caucuses, casting early support to a sitting president so as not to waste time and resources on two thinly supported wackos is hardly corruption. Walsh and Weld are both essentially non-entities within the party. They were going nowhere. No one of any import expressed interest in running against Trump.
Economy of motion.
In other words you'll decide for others because you know best huh.
And by the way learn to count. Walsh, Weld and Sanford equals three. And all of them are nationally prominent, whether you'd choose any of them or not. See, the idea of holding a vote is kind of that LOTS OF people get to participate.
Sanford is most forgettable.
Nationally prominent? Perhaps to wishful thinking Democrats.
NDAs (AKA CYAs) in these cases are certainly the height of transparency. They prevent election officials from discussing any ****-ups or switcheroos with outside parties, such as the press.
Gosh, it seems you missed the part about Epstein and the Democrats. How interesting.
As to Republican caucuses, casting early support to a sitting president so as not to waste time and resources on two thinly supported wackos is hardly corruption. Walsh and Weld are both essentially non-entities within the party. They were going nowhere. No one of any import expressed interest in running against Trump.
Economy of motion.
In other words you'll decide for others because you know best huh.
And by the way learn to count. Walsh, Weld and Sanford equals three. And all of them are nationally prominent, whether you'd choose any of them or not. See, the idea of holding a vote is kind of that LOTS OF people get to participate.
One hominid one vote has never been real in America, and and was never intended to be so. This is what the power structure fears most; the voice and will of the people.
NDAs (AKA CYAs) in these cases are certainly the height of transparency. They prevent election officials from discussing any ****-ups or switcheroos with outside parties, such as the press.
Gosh, it seems you missed the part about Epstein and the Democrats. How interesting.
As to Republican caucuses, casting early support to a sitting president so as not to waste time and resources on two thinly supported wackos is hardly corruption. Walsh and Weld are both essentially non-entities within the party. They were going nowhere. No one of any import expressed interest in running against Trump.
Economy of motion.
In other words you'll decide for others because you know best huh.
And by the way learn to count. Walsh, Weld and Sanford equals three. And all of them are nationally prominent, whether you'd choose any of them or not. See, the idea of holding a vote is kind of that LOTS OF people get to participate.
Sanford is most forgettable.
Nationally prominent? Perhaps to wishful thinking Democrats.
It looks to be a couple hundred miles away.
It's not that far, but it's certainly not IN the BWCA like the moonbat OP said it was.
They would use any wilderness area within 1000 miles as an excuse not to build the mine.
"In other words you'll decide for others because you know best huh."
NDAs (AKA CYAs) in these cases are certainly the height of transparency. They prevent election officials from discussing any ****-ups or switcheroos with outside parties, such as the press.
Gosh, it seems you missed the part about Epstein and the Democrats. How interesting.
As to Republican caucuses, casting early support to a sitting president so as not to waste time and resources on two thinly supported wackos is hardly corruption. Walsh and Weld are both essentially non-entities within the party. They were going nowhere. No one of any import expressed interest in running against Trump.
Economy of motion.
In other words you'll decide for others because you know best huh.
And by the way learn to count. Walsh, Weld and Sanford equals three. And all of them are nationally prominent, whether you'd choose any of them or not. See, the idea of holding a vote is kind of that LOTS OF people get to participate.
Name some of his Republican clientele. Don't say Trump because he was a registered Democrat when he was still on speaking terms with Epstein.
NDAs (AKA CYAs) in these cases are certainly the height of transparency. They prevent election officials from discussing any ****-ups or switcheroos with outside parties, such as the press.
Gosh, it seems you missed the part about Epstein and the Democrats. How interesting.
As to Republican caucuses, casting early support to a sitting president so as not to waste time and resources on two thinly supported wackos is hardly corruption. Walsh and Weld are both essentially non-entities within the party. They were going nowhere. No one of any import expressed interest in running against Trump.
Economy of motion.
As I've said repeatedly Shirley, Epstein's clientele was of course utterly bipartisan. That is the central point.
So yes, if the clientele was bipartisan, then democrats were involved. Does that escape you?
Let's review for the intellectually challenged:
And all the while, the bickering factions of the aristocracy you folks in "both" camps support in rabid frothy-mouthed partisanshitheadism and admitted hatred, engage bipartisanly in scenarios like the patronage of Jeffrey Epstein's/ Ghislaine Maxwell's child sex trafficking. Epstein is conveniently disappeared, Maxwell is allowed to sashay back off into the shadows so as not to embarrass our pedophile aristocracy. And an ostensibly free people do nothing but observe.
Fweedumb.
But you know what you're fecklessly attempting to avoid here.
The mine has been in the works for over a decade...Oboingo's eco-Stalinists kept it in an eight-year limbo... Every time they think that they're good to go, some other city-dwelling dirt worshiper throws another lawsuit at them.
