fanup
Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
-
RoboUte
ParticipantI don’t mind the change so much, it’s not where it’ll end up. I think it’s fairly clear the level of underhanded BS going on now looks really similar to what was going on before the NIL even existed. The difference is now the cash cows are allowed to be openly dissatisfied about how the money is used, because they now they legally contribute it. For that reason alone I predict change.
But honestly I’m more dissatisfied with the absolute length of a football game recently. I feel like they didn’t used to last 3/4 of the day. That’s a change I can’t get behind.
-
Tyler Henry
ParticipantThe run game is paramount for us to succeed, especially in Beck’s offense. All we had last year was a run game, but even then, we struggled at doing that. I pointed out how thin we are at RB, so hopefully Dampier can take some carries off of Parker, to keep him healthy. I think we have the WR’s to play WR by committee, we don’t necessarily need a Dorian Singer to haul in all the catches. We just need to establish a solid running game.
-
GameForAnyFuss
ParticipantThe three topics that should never go on a message board:
1. Religion
2. Politics
3. iPhone vs. Android -
RoboUte
ParticipantAh right, you’re incapable of understanding the logical implications of the things you say. That tracks.
By the way, the next year Trump wrote The following (and signed it) to Epstein:
Voice Over: There must be more to life than having everything,” the note began.
Donald: Yes, there is, but I won’t tell you what it is.
Jeffrey: Nor will I, since I also know what it is.
Donald: We have certain things in common, Jeffrey.
Jeffrey: Yes, we do, come to think of it.
Donald: Enigmas never age, have you noticed that?
Jeffrey: As a matter of fact, it was clear to me the last time I saw you.
Trump: A pal is a wonderful thing. Happy Birthday — and may every day be another wonderful secret.Again, though. Want to hear what he has to say about his daughter? From what I can tell you’re a fan of this stuff.
-
Central Coast Ute
ParticipantOr maybe that person should self reflect and realize they shouldn’t bring it up to begin with
-
Central Coast Ute
ParticipantYep. The executive order, although meaningless, is relevant to the forum. Since Trump signed it, it was only a matter of time for this to happen.
-
UteThunder
ParticipantWhat are you even talking about? Where did I say that quote wouldn’t exist?
I didn’t say the quote is disallowed. The point I was making is that a positive comment from Trump about Epstein prior to him being a known sex offender doesn’t prove anything regarding Trump possibly being on the list nor does it prove that Trump was aware of Epstein’s crimes. And it certainly doesn’t implicate Trump in Epstein’s crimes.
You’ve gone completely off the rails. Then again, you were never really on the rails to begin with.
-
RoboUte
ParticipantRight but it’s also the quote you said wouldn’t exist. And why would the quote being from before Epstein was investigated be disallowed? If it were from after him being investigated then it wouldn’t demonstrate that Trump knew what was going on beforehand, yet still chose to associate with him. He very clearly DID NOT sever ties with the man he knew was a pedophile, by your own admission just now. It’s weird, like you started typing before really understanding what you’d even said before. The best you’ve got is that Trump was a kiddie diddler for at least two years???. Haha, ya my dude. That’s enough for most people. Not for you though.
Good thing they don’t move the goalposts in football as often as you do, we’d be even worse at kicking. Should I prepare the material about him being attracted to his own children? There’s a strangely large amount.
-
UteThunder
ParticipantWrong.
Some people just want to let the MSM spoon feed them half truths and verifiable lies, all while doing zero research of their own and applying zero critical thinking to the information they are being presented.
-
UteThunder
ParticipantA quote from 2002 . . . two years before Trump cut ties with Epstein . . . three years before Epstein was being investigated . . . and a full six years before Epstein was a convicted sex offender? That’s what you’ve got?!
Sorry, but a quote from years before Epstein’s true colors were known doesn’t make the point you think it does.
-
-
AuthorPosts