James Comey being investigated by the Secret Service

Ramrouser said:
86 a guy is Mob speak - take him 8 miles out of town and bury him 6 feet under. Comey, as former head of the FBI of course, is well aware of this. Doesn't the guy have better things to do than make posts at the beach on social media about a boss that fired him eight years ago? TDS much?
Click to expand...
And once again you need a lesson in logic, which I will provide.

Just because a person can use "86" to refer to whacking a guy doesn't mean that every use of 86 refers to that. Logic. It's fundamental. I have my 10 year old son sitting right next to me, and he laughed at your logic. Just FYI.
 
Ramrouser said:
Hello politics 2025! Everything everyday is blown out of proportion and beat to death by BOSIDES on social media and on cable TV. Isn't this about the 5th day we've been talking about "the plane"?
Click to expand...
You think concern that our president is eager to accept a 400 million gift in exchange for favors to the gifting country is silly ?
 
Ramrouser said:
He typically doesn't go after people unless they go after him.
Click to expand...
LOL. He goes after judges all the time. Remember Gonzalo Curiel? Hell, he's even going after the Supreme Court now AFTER they gave him the greatest gift a court has ever bestowed on a president.
 
superrific said:
And once again you need a lesson in logic, which I will provide.

Just because a person can use "86" to refer to whacking a guy doesn't mean that every use of 86 refers to that. Logic. It's fundamental. I have my 10 year old son sitting right next to me, and he laughed at your logic. Just FYI.
Click to expand...
When I worked in food service in college, 86 from the kitchen meant we were out of something. I don't think they meant to murder the french fries...
 
superrific said:
And once again you need a lesson in logic, which I will provide.

Just because a person can use "86" to refer to whacking a guy doesn't mean that every use of 86 refers to that. Logic. It's fundamental. I have my 10 year old son sitting right next to me, and he laughed at your logic. Just FYI.
Click to expand...
I don't deny "86 47" can have multiple interpretations but certainly ONE of them is for the guy to be wacked. So it's your positions its reasonable and wise for the ex head of the Federal Bureau of Investigation to publish "86 47"? If it's so innocent why on earth did he immediately remove it and sorta apologize? It's not like there haven't been two assassination attempts against Trump in the last 10 months with the loony left out on the streets in frothy anger waiting for a signal to act.
 
SnoopRob said:
Man, it's still a while until dinner...I could murder some french fries right about now.

"That's ketchup, your honor, I swear!"
Click to expand...
I'm having a salmon cake sandwich and tater tots for dinner tonight. You are making me think twice about dunking my tater tots in ketchup.

However, I'm also having a salad with Russian dressing on the side so I should be safe, right ?
 
Ramrouser said:
I don't deny "86 47" can have multiple interpretations but certainly ONE of them is for the guy to be wacked. So it's your positions its reasonable and wise for the ex head of the Federal Bureau of Investigation to publish "86 47"? If it's so innocent why on earth did he immediately remove it and sorta apologize? It's not like there haven't been two assassination attempts against Trump in the last 10 months with the loony left out on the streets in frothy anger waiting for a signal to act.
Click to expand...
That second assassination attempt is as overblown as the idea that this is an actionable threat against Trump. Pretty sure that you need to make it to within eyesight for there to be any danger when you have a gun. Might be different if you had a remote for a bomb and it was anywhere close.

You people are the biggest wimps on earth.
 
I think 86 has something to do with Chumley or Chumlee, maybe from "Pawn Stars." If it means someone who is grossly obese and needs to lose weight, that would definitely apply to St. Donald of Mar-a-Lago.
 
Ramrouser said:
I don't deny "86 47" can have multiple interpretations but certainly ONE of them is for the guy to be wacked. So it's your positions its reasonable and wise for the ex head of the Federal Bureau of Investigation to publish "86 47"? If it's so innocent why on earth did he immediately remove it and sorta apologize? It's not like there haven't been two assassination attempts against Trump in the last 10 months with the loony left out on the streets in frothy anger waiting for a signal to act.
Click to expand...
It was innocent and without harmful intent for him, but he saw your tribe jump on it like a duck on a June bug which freaked him out and he took it down.

Those two attempts on Trump's life had nothing to do with the "loony left ", and the "frothy anger " to which you refer is motivated by Trump's threat to our Constitution and democratic republic and will be expressed and acted upon within the rule of law.

But if the "loony left" storms the Capitol building in an attempt to overthrow the government at any time over the next four years, I welcome you to come here and chastise me.
 
We don't really know what was behind the two attempts because (interestingly) very little information has been released but both are strange to say the least.

What about when the "loony left" burn down cities, take over inner cities during a "summer of love," destroy public and private property, storm college buildings, intimidate and threaten Jewish students, etc. Do I get to mention those? Or, is it always January SIX on the left's calendar?
 
Ramrouser said:
I don't deny "86 47" can have multiple interpretations but certainly ONE of them is for the guy to be wacked. So it's your positions its reasonable and wise for the ex head of the Federal Bureau of Investigation to publish "86 47"? If it's so innocent why on earth did he immediately remove it and sorta apologize? It's not like there haven't been two assassination attempts against Trump in the last 10 months with the loony left out on the streets in frothy anger waiting for a signal to act.
Click to expand...
Here we go again. Why don't you understand very basic legal principles? Did you sleep through every criminal law class?

In order to commit a criminal offense, you need to do something (actus reus) and you have to have a certain intent (mens rea). If you do something that's punishable but for the right reason (or less wrong reason), then there's no liability. For instance, coming out of a bathroom I open the door which hits a person in the face causing them to tumble down the stairs, I'm not liable. I did in fact cripple them (let's say) but it was a complete accident.

So, the mens rea requirement for making a threat is intent. It isn't negligence, which is what you are describing there (an FBI director ought to know that the word might mean that). Thus, there's no possibility of criminal liability, and thus there is no basis for any investigation other than harassment.

Again, I really shouldn't have to explain this to you.
 
Ramrouser said:
If it's so innocent why on earth did he immediately remove it and sorta apologize?
Click to expand...
Are you seriously asking this? Do you need the concept of an apology explained to you as well? You're underperforming my 10 year old, who also knows why a person might apologize after offending someone even inadvertently.
 
heelinhell said:
I'm having a salmon cake sandwich and tater tots for dinner tonight. You are making me think twice about dunking my tater tots in ketchup.

However, I'm also having a salad with Russian dressing on the side so I should be safe, right ?
Click to expand...
On the side? Hmmm, kinda sketchy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top