All Things QAnon Thread

GopherJake

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 21, 2009
Messages
18,075
Reaction score
1,961
Points
113
Q Anon is silly. A lot of wacky conspiracy theories that have been proven false. Also silly to get worked up by it. But you have people like Howie who need to be in a constant state of rage.
The FBI is silly. They don't know what they are doing. Plus they are all in the bag for Hillary Clinton. It's not concerning at all. Anyone who is concerned is flying off the handle with rage.
 

howeda7

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
53,951
Reaction score
11,181
Points
113
The FBI is silly. They don't know what they are doing. Plus they are all in the bag for Hillary Clinton. It's not concerning at all. Anyone who is concerned is flying off the handle with rage.

The Fellas appear to have lost the meaning of "rage" and "hate" as they apply it everything remotely critical of them or their Dear Leader. I'm concerned for the mental health of anyone who's lapping up Q-anon garbage as Beeg is.
 

Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
48,046
Reaction score
3,252
Points
113
The FBI is silly. They don't know what they are doing. Plus they are all in the bag for Hillary Clinton. It's not concerning at all. Anyone who is concerned is flying off the handle with rage.

Well, there's obviously parts of the conspiracy theories that have evidence and weight behind them. Peter Strzok really happened. All of that should and is currently being investigated. But you didn't need Q anon. Deep state can refer to CIA, FBI, the IRS and Lois Lerner, there are a lot of federal employees who have been using their power for partisan purposes, and hating Trump is no reason to ignore them.
 

Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
48,046
Reaction score
3,252
Points
113
The Fellas appear to have lost the meaning of "rage" and "hate" as they apply it everything remotely critical of them or their Dear Leader. I'm concerned for the mental health of anyone who's lapping up Q-anon garbage as Beeg is.

If you were just remotely critical, or picked your spots, rather than 24/7 rage all the time, I'd cut you a little slack. But you're outrage meter has been 11 for 3 years solid. It's exhausting just watching, and obviously ineffective.
 

GopherJake

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 21, 2009
Messages
18,075
Reaction score
1,961
Points
113
Well, there's obviously parts of the conspiracy theories that have evidence and weight behind them. Peter Strzok really happened. All of that should and is currently being investigated. But you didn't need Q anon. Deep state can refer to CIA, FBI, the IRS and Lois Lerner, there are a lot of federal employees who have been using their power for partisan purposes, and hating Trump is no reason to ignore them.
Yeah, whatever. I'm not buying any of it. I don't pay much attention, because really, what's the point? As if any of us actually know what's going on. It's the CIA and FBI. My guess is that there are lots of lifers in there that span different administrations. And, being in law enforcement, there are at least a few conservatives in the bunch. So all this talk of some grand conspiracy is a bunch of wishful thinking garbage to justify YOUR RAGE. It's just stupid, really, if you consider how many people would have to be involved. These are big organizations. Like any big organization, there are lots of actors. Some bad, some good. Should we be concerned about the bad ones? Well of course. But finding two dumbasses exchanging texts about how they hate the president isn't really that shocking to me. I'm guessing there have been about 10 trillion of those in every organization on the planet in the past 2 years.
 

bga1

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
43,125
Reaction score
4,382
Points
113
Yeah, whatever. I'm not buying any of it. I don't pay much attention, because really, what's the point? As if any of us actually know what's going on. It's the CIA and FBI. My guess is that there are lots of lifers in there that span different administrations. And, being in law enforcement, there are at least a few conservatives in the bunch. So all this talk of some grand conspiracy is a bunch of wishful thinking garbage to justify YOUR RAGE. It's just stupid, really, if you consider how many people would have to be involved. These are big organizations. Like any big organization, there are lots of actors. Some bad, some good. Should we be concerned about the bad ones? Well of course. But finding two dumbasses exchanging texts about how they hate the president isn't really that shocking to me. I'm guessing there have been about 10 trillion of those in every organization on the planet in the past 2 years.

Yep, Strzok the same guy that ran both the Clinton email investigation and the Trump Russia counter intel operation. Nothing to see there. There was a small group conspiracy, no doubt about it. It widened because people had your attitude or an attitude of going along to get along. Once they went along, they had to stay on for the ride. They were corrupted. Apathetic people like you lose a nation.
 

GopherJake

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 21, 2009
Messages
18,075
Reaction score
1,961
Points
113
Yep, Strzok the same guy that ran both the Clinton email investigation and the Trump Russia counter intel operation. Nothing to see there. There was a small group conspiracy, no doubt about it. It widened because people had your attitude or an attitude of going along to get along. Once they went along, they had to stay on for the ride. They were corrupted. Apathetic people like you lose a nation.
Conspiracy nutjobs like you lose a nation. You think you know everything about it. But I see how you come to your conclusions and I'm not impressed.
 

Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
48,046
Reaction score
3,252
Points
113
Yeah, whatever. I'm not buying any of it. I don't pay much attention, because really, what's the point? As if any of us actually know what's going on. It's the CIA and FBI. My guess is that there are lots of lifers in there that span different administrations. And, being in law enforcement, there are at least a few conservatives in the bunch. So all this talk of some grand conspiracy is a bunch of wishful thinking garbage to justify YOUR RAGE. It's just stupid, really, if you consider how many people would have to be involved. These are big organizations. Like any big organization, there are lots of actors. Some bad, some good. Should we be concerned about the bad ones? Well of course. But finding two dumbasses exchanging texts about how they hate the president isn't really that shocking to me. I'm guessing there have been about 10 trillion of those in every organization on the planet in the past 2 years.

You don’t have to pay attention or buy any of it. What you’re doing is telling others that they can’t pay attention or care about it or they’re crazy. There’s certainly something there. Is it grand probably not.
Obviously I hear about the deep state and some of the controversies, but the rest of this stuff doesn’t make it into my bubble. Howies all over it tho.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
48,046
Reaction score
3,252
Points
113
Conspiracy nutjobs like you lose a nation. You think you know everything about it. But I see how you come to your conclusions and I'm not impressed.

Sounds like Russia gate.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

GopherJake

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 21, 2009
Messages
18,075
Reaction score
1,961
Points
113
Sounds like Russia gate.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I'll time you finding a quote saying anything definitive on this. I said repeatedly to let the process play out. It's mostly done and Don did score a pretty major victory. I'm not sure if it's over or not. We'll find out when he leaves office, I think. But I'm not spending much energy on it. So maybe you weren't talking about me?
 

cncmin

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
18,113
Reaction score
2,311
Points
113
Unlike you and CNC, who regularly consume right wing news media to ensure you hear all perspectives and escape your bubble.

Right you are. If we don't indulge in RW media 24/7 like you, then how could we ever know what RW media is saying? Great point. So, you have to wonder, why do people like Howie and myself know so much about what RW media is saying? Think about it longer this time before posting. I have confidence that you can figure it out yourself.
 

cncmin

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
18,113
Reaction score
2,311
Points
113
The conspiracy theorists that believe that the FBI has been corrupted (among other things) get labeled a "terror threat" by the FBI! Nice.

No, dude. They are labeled "terror threats" because they actually perform more acts of domestic terrorism, now, than any other group. It's just logical that those who carry out terror are labeled "terror threats".
 
Last edited:

cncmin

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
18,113
Reaction score
2,311
Points
113
Q Anon is silly. A lot of wacky conspiracy theories that have been proven false. Also silly to get worked up by it. But you have people like Howie who need to be in a constant state of rage.

Q Anon is indeed silly. And brainwashed. And extremely fired up. Why would it be silly to get worked up by something that is both brainwashed and fired up? What ever could go wrong with that combination? You ironically accuse others of not understanding history, when some of history's most obvious lessons fail to connect with you.
 
Last edited:

cncmin

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
18,113
Reaction score
2,311
Points
113
You don’t have to pay attention or buy any of it. What you’re doing is telling others that they can’t pay attention or care about it or they’re crazy. There’s certainly something there. Is it grand probably not.
Obviously I hear about the deep state and some of the controversies, but the rest of this stuff doesn’t make it into my bubble. Howies all over it tho.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

There is a massive difference between "paying attention" and believing total bull****. Massive. You believe a whole lot of the latter. And as I've stated elsewhere, you aren't even close to being the worst around these parts.
 

Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
48,046
Reaction score
3,252
Points
113
There is a massive difference between "paying attention" and believing total bull****. Massive. You believe a whole lot of the latter. And as I've stated elsewhere, you aren't even close to being the worst around these parts.

Give me an example of something I believe that is total BS.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
48,046
Reaction score
3,252
Points
113
Q Anon is indeed silly. And brainwashed. And extremely fired up. Why would it be silly to get worked up by something that is both brainwashed and fired up? What ever could go wrong with that combination? You ironically accuse others of not understanding history, when some of history's most obvious lessons fail to connect with you.

Either Trump was dirty or the Democrats Obama/Hillary were with respect to Russiagate. One side of that has been fully investigated. One side is just now being investigated.
If that turns up some foul play, there certainly will be historical connotations.

Anyone believing in Russian bots and Russia gate can’t look down on Q anon devotees. Same thing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

GopherJake

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 21, 2009
Messages
18,075
Reaction score
1,961
Points
113
Give me an example of something I believe that is total BS.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
That Mueller is crooked. That there was no need to investigate Trump’s interactions with Russia. That nobody tried to commit felony obstruction.
 

Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
48,046
Reaction score
3,252
Points
113
That Mueller is crooked. That there was no need to investigate Trump’s interactions with Russia. That nobody tried to commit felony obstruction.

Cool, I never said Mueller was crooked.

Never said he shouldn’t be investigated.

Tried? Strange loaded language. I don’t think he did.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

bga1

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
43,125
Reaction score
4,382
Points
113
That Mueller is crooked. That there was no need to investigate Trump’s interactions with Russia. That nobody tried to commit felony obstruction.

Mueller is either crooked or a stooge. He went after only Trump in what was supposed to be an investigation of 2016 Russian interference. Any question that went into the dossier, Fusion GPS, or the fake Russians and he had no answers. If I give him the benefit of the doubt then he could be just accused of being used as a front for the Dem lawyers who really wrote the report. It was an attempted hit job either way. They knew from the start that there was no collusion. Strzok himself told them so.
 

cncmin

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
18,113
Reaction score
2,311
Points
113
Give me an example of something I believe that is total BS.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

One example of very, very many: that man significantly affects global warming is scientifically debatable. Another: that tax rate decreases often increase tax revenue.
 

Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
48,046
Reaction score
3,252
Points
113
One example of very, very many: that man significantly affects global warming is scientifically debatable. Another: that tax rate decreases often increase tax revenue.

Yes, I believe it is debatable. Come up with an accurate model and I might change my tune.

“Often”. Not very scientific. It can. Laffer curve is obviously true. That’s the dumb kind of point I thought you’d make. No chance you disagree.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

bga1

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
43,125
Reaction score
4,382
Points
113
One example of very, very many: that man significantly affects global warming is scientifically debatable. Another: that tax rate decreases often increase tax revenue.

Few say that man has no effect. Unfortunately the left has lied so heavily about global warming that it now has to be called climate change in order to keep the furor going when things don't work out as predicted. It is likely that man does not have much effect and that herculean efforts to undo that small effect would have disasterous impacts on mankind worldwide. Even the real reasons for the global warming/ climate change efforts are lied about by the left. The driving force is really globalism and socialism- not climate. Climate is a tool.
 

bga1

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
43,125
Reaction score
4,382
Points
113
One example of very, very many: that man significantly affects global warming is scientifically debatable. Another: that tax rate decreases often increase tax revenue.

Bush tax cuts, Reagan tax cuts and Kennedy tax cuts all led to significant booms that increased tax revenues.
 

cncmin

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
18,113
Reaction score
2,311
Points
113
Yes, I believe it is debatable. Come up with an accurate model and I might change my tune.

“Often”. Not very scientific. It can. Laffer curve is obviously true. That’s the dumb kind of point I thought you’d make. No chance you disagree.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ok thanks for proving my point and doubling down on it. Good job thanks.
 

Deleted_User

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2011
Messages
7,831
Reaction score
532
Points
113
Bush tax cuts, Reagan tax cuts and Kennedy tax cuts all led to significant booms that increased tax revenues.

And, it left budgets with increasingly larger deficits. Nope, in total, your revenue still fell further short of the mark of balancing the budget. What is the deficit today with these decades of tax cuts? Let's see. I think they have exponentially increased in size at a far greater rate than revenue. BGA1, your math doesn't work with objective of balanced budgets. And, at least half of those years have been run by a single party of Republicans in both the executive and legislative branches.

I call your post idiotic, below grotesque stupidity.

Always the promise. Never the delivery.
 

bga1

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
43,125
Reaction score
4,382
Points
113
And, it left budgets with increasingly larger deficits. Nope, in total, your revenue still fell further short of the mark of balancing the budget. What is the deficit today with these decades of tax cuts? Let's see. I think they have exponentially increased in size at a far greater rate than revenue. BGA1, your math doesn't work with objective of balanced budgets. And, at least half of those years have been run by a single party of Republicans in both the executive and legislative branches.

I call your post idiotic, below grotesque stupidity.

Always the promise. Never the delivery.

Focus Dean, focus. What was the question? Historically, have tax cuts increased revenues? Answer: yes. That's just a fact. Did I say tax cuts balance budgets? Nope. That would require spending restraint. Congress isn't good at that.

Your post? D- for less than adequate for Dean.

Next study- do tax increases increase revenue and balance budgets? See France for a nice study in this.
 

Costa Rican Gopher

Mind of a Scientist
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
23,794
Reaction score
2,167
Points
113
That Mueller is crooked. That there was no need to investigate Trump’s interactions with Russia. That nobody tried to commit felony obstruction.

No, there was no need to investigate Trump's interactions with Russia. That's the whole point. Because they knew there was "no there, there", in regards to Russia, they appear to have concocted the story, with the hope of baiting Trump into an obstruction/process charge, on a case that wasn't even legitimate. It looks like a coup d'etat attempt. Now it's time to ask the Mueller team & the FBI, some hard questions. Barr, Dunham, Huber & Horowitz will get to the bottom of it. If they have nothing to hide, there should be no problem.
 

Costa Rican Gopher

Mind of a Scientist
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
23,794
Reaction score
2,167
Points
113
Dumb post, BGA.

Jake, you haven't followed the case that closely. What Beeg says is spot on, in that Mueller was tasked with investigating Russian interference in our election, but would only investigate things that could incriminate Trump. They knew the dossier was bunk. They knew Russian intel chiefs had supplied the info. They never lifted a finger to find out if Steele was working with the Russians to undermine our democracy, or if they had simply hoodwinked him. They never lifted a finger to investigate the links between Glenn Simpson of Fusion GPS and the Russian lawyer he was meeting with before & after the Trump Tower meeting. The FBI allegedly launched the entire investigation because George Papadopolous told Alexander Downer (a Clinton mega-donor) he'd heard the Russians have dirt on Hillary. So why not launch a similar investigation into Joseph Mifsud, the man who told Papadopolous in the first place? Mueller had Mifsud in his office & Mifsud lied to them on 3 seperate occasions. Why no arrest of Mifsud? Mueller claims Mifsud is a Russian spy. Isn't that precisely what he was supposed to be investigating? On and on and on it goes. At every turn, Mueller bent over backwards NOT to get to the bottom of anything Russia if it might absolve Trump. It's all going to come out.
 
Top Bottom