HorrorMovieFans.com

And it's not us spewing it. It's every news outlet in the world and an FBI investigation lmao. Again, what reality are you living in?

Jason wrote:

Headhunter wrote: Another bad comparison in a thread chalk full of them.

*Chock full.

Congrats? Weirdo.

Headhunter wrote:And it's not us spewing it. It's every news outlet in the world and an FBI investigation lmao. Again, what reality are you living in?

The same kind of fake news outlets that blackmailed a random person on the internet and threatened to air his personal information because he created a goofy meme about them. Yeah, let's take them seriously.

Foo wrote:

Jmac Attack wrote:

Headhunter wrote:

Jason wrote:

Headhunter wrote:

Jason wrote:

Jmac Attack wrote:

Jason wrote:Liberal spin: Trump Jr. met with an enemy government official in attempt to collude with their government and bring down a political opponent.
Actual: Some Russian broad with no government ties pretended to have information damaging to Hillary's campaign, but didn't.

Did you read it, or did you read that on Breitbart too? Lol

I simply go by what is known.

What was known by Trump Jr. is someone claiming to be part of the Russian government offered dirt and he was all for it.

Headhunter wrote: What was known by Trump Jr. is someone claiming to have dirt and he was all for it.

Correct.

Really? Read the e-mails. She's described as a Russian GOVERNMENT attorney and the "Crown Prosecutor of Russia". That is actually in the e-mails Trump Jr. released, not made up.

Holy shit . . .

Even the conservatives over at the Bengals board accept it. It's like me denying the Clinton emails. Which I never did and called her piece of shit when it came out. But, if you don't believe YouTube conspiracy theories about having people murdered, then I must love her.

Which, BTW, the last thread Jason made about it, Fox even retracted the story. Lulz up in here!

Can you imagine if we could somehow harness the collective brainpower of all the members of a Cincinnati Bengals politics forum?

No, just pointing out how much you are "special". You're as snarky as cat glasses wearing vegan poet who listens to alternative music. I can dig it though. Lol

Jason wrote:

Headhunter wrote:And it's not us spewing it. It's every news outlet in the world and an FBI investigation lmao. Again, what reality are you living in?

The same kind of fake news outlets that blackmailed a random person on the internet and threatened to air his personal information because he created a goofy meme about them. Yeah, let's take them seriously.

Yeah, let's take your YouTube investigative reporters and birther bigots seriously instead. You've almost certainly posted more fake news on HMF than any poster in the history of this section, your judgment here is a joke.

Headhunter wrote:

Jason wrote:

Headhunter wrote:And it's not us spewing it. It's every news outlet in the world and an FBI investigation lmao. Again, what reality are you living in?

The same kind of fake news outlets that blackmailed a random person on the internet and threatened to air his personal information because he created a goofy meme about them. Yeah, let's take them seriously.

Yeah, let's take your YouTube investigstive reporters and birther bigots seriously instead. You've almost certainly posted more fake news on HMF than any poster in the history of this section, your judgment here is a joke.

Show me one thing I posted that was fake.

Foo wrote:

Jmac Attack wrote:

Foo wrote:

Jmac Attack wrote:

Foo wrote:

Jmac Attack wrote:

Jason wrote:

Jmac Attack wrote:

Headhunter wrote:

Foo wrote:Yeah, because nothing has changed with technology and information since the 1970s.

Why are you so adamant about this investigation catering to you? Jesus, when they're done they're done. They're not working on Foo o'clock, there's nothing for you to legitimately bitch about. Pretty weird.

I remember when every second of the day all we heard about was Clinton being investigated for lying about a blowjob.....this went on for a loooooong time. Funny, that something serious should just be dropped and let Trump do his job. Lol

What is this serious investigation? I'm still waiting for someone to explain what's so serious, and why all the fake outrage...

If you think Jr's emails are no big deal, then I don't know what else to say. Remember the show To Catch a Predator? Dudes were setting up meeting with 14 year old girls.....but hey, no sex happened, right?

http://codes.findlaw.com/ca/penal-code/ ... 261-5.html

That is the California state law against statutory rape. Notice the specificity and how it is clear having sex with a minor is illegal except under certain circumstances. Again, the specificity.

Ok, now show me the specific law you are alleging was going to be broken. Again, specific. Don't give me some vague bullshit that you liberally interpreted.

Lol.....I have already said nothing illegal so far. Go back a few pages. Question, would you let the guy setting up a casual encounter with a 12 year old boy watch your kids because he didn't do anything technically wrong?

Do you honestly think this is how the law works? You allege something with no evidence and then continually poke around hunting for some sort of crime. Really?

When did you go from a liberal who believes in laws to a banana republic dictator who uses the police to go after enemies?

You are making a mountain out of a molehill regarding my point. Hell, I was just having a laugh with Jason about it. Said it isn't the best analogy, lol

Just asking. Do you think some evidence of a crime should be presented in order to launch an investigation? Should the investigation be limited to the alleged crime?

If there is smoke, then there should be an investigation. If nothing is wrong, then who cares? (Using conservative logic on this one).

Foo wrote:

Headhunter wrote:

Jason wrote:Sweet! If true, guess how much more I give a shit. Zilch.

Lmao, literally right as I post it.

Luckily, what you care about and what amounts to attempted collusion do not correlate much if at all.

Please explain the difference between "collusion" and an ally sharing information with another.

LMAO! Surely not even you can buy that bullshit.

Jason wrote:

Headhunter wrote:

Jason wrote:

Headhunter wrote:And it's not us spewing it. It's every news outlet in the world and an FBI investigation lmao. Again, what reality are you living in?

The same kind of fake news outlets that blackmailed a random person on the internet and threatened to air his personal information because he created a goofy meme about them. Yeah, let's take them seriously.

Yeah, let's take your YouTube investigstive reporters and birther bigots seriously instead. You've almost certainly posted more fake news on HMF than any poster in the history of this section, your judgment here is a joke.

Show me one thing I posted that was fake.

"Rigging the Election Video Series: Irrefutable Proof!'

A shame we can't access HMF for more gold.

showa58taro wrote:

Foo wrote:

Headhunter wrote:

Jason wrote:Sweet! If true, guess how much more I give a shit. Zilch.

Lmao, literally right as I post it.

Luckily, what you care about and what amounts to attempted collusion do not correlate much if at all.

Please explain the difference between "collusion" and an ally sharing information with another.

LMAO! Surely not even you can buy that bullshit.

That's the problem. He is willing to fill in the blanks with bullshit wherever he can.

That was a great thread. Nothing fake about it at all.

let me give you an example of what is so scary about what you guys think is ok:

- your ex is pissed and alleges you steal from work and calls the employer with no evidence
- the employer never suspected you of stealing, but has experienced theft in the past
- the police are contacting and they start investigating
- over the course of the investigation, the police discover that you drink and hang out with people who were previous felons, but no evidence of theft
- one day you come home with a new car they don't think you can afford, so they start digging into your finances, audit your taxes, etc.
- during the audit they discover you have a home office you claim is 20% of the home. They get a warrant to check.
- After executing the warrant and measuring your home office and finding it is 20%, they notice a strange smell and expand the search to include marijuana
- while searching for the marijuana they discover your porn collection, including vintage Traci Lords movies
- you are arrested for kiddie porn

There is a reason why evidence of a specific crime should be presented in this process. It protects us all.

showa58taro wrote:

Foo wrote:

Headhunter wrote:

Jason wrote:Sweet! If true, guess how much more I give a shit. Zilch.

Lmao, literally right as I post it.

Luckily, what you care about and what amounts to attempted collusion do not correlate much if at all.

Please explain the difference between "collusion" and an ally sharing information with another.

LMAO! Surely not even you can buy that bullshit.

My former occupation required a lot of training and education on the subject.

The classic example:

- Company A has 60% market share and charges 6% commissions and Company B has 30% market share and charges 6% commissions. This is perfectly legal.

- Company A and Company B make an agreement to never charge less than 6%. This is is illegal collusion.

- Company B charges 6% because that is what company A charges. This is not collusion and legal.

- Company A and Company B meet to discuss market conditions and share data. This is legal.

He must be a Hillary supporter! OMG! https://www.yahoo.com/news/trey-gowdy-b ... 39010.html

Jmac Attack wrote:He must be a Hillary supporter! OMG! https://www.yahoo.com/news/trey-gowdy-b ... 39010.html

I deeply admire the professionalism of Trey Gowdy.

Jmac Attack wrote:He must be a Hillary supporter! OMG! https://www.yahoo.com/news/trey-gowdy-b ... 39010.html

OMG!

Foo wrote:

Jmac Attack wrote:He must be a Hillary supporter! OMG! https://www.yahoo.com/news/trey-gowdy-b ... 39010.html

OMG!

Right?! Like....totally!

“If you get a call to go to a certain place in the middle of the night to pick up stolen goods and it turns out the stolen goods don’t show up but the cops show up,” he added, “I think you’re going to have a very weak story saying, ‘Well, I got swindled here.’”

Exactly.

Jmac Attack wrote:“If you get a call to go to a certain place in the middle of the night to pick up stolen goods and it turns out the stolen goods don’t show up but the cops show up,” he added, “I think you’re going to have a very weak story saying, ‘Well, I got swindled here.’”

Exactly.

Not exactly, because you are comparing a crime (receiving stolen goods) with a non-crime.

It is more like you went to meet a craigslist chick for sex and she just wanted to cuddle.

Foo wrote:

Jmac Attack wrote:“If you get a call to go to a certain place in the middle of the night to pick up stolen goods and it turns out the stolen goods don’t show up but the cops show up,” he added, “I think you’re going to have a very weak story saying, ‘Well, I got swindled here.’”

Exactly.

Not exactly, because you are comparing a crime (receiving stolen goods) with a non-crime.

It is more like you went to meet a craigslist chick for sex and she just wanted to cuddle.

Which is rude, lol!