It's a fair question, beevee.RebelGator » 13 minutes ago » wrote: ↑Then why were you enamored with Bolton....because he looked like a ***?
Did he feed israeli intelligence?Cannonpointer » 29 minutes ago » wrote: ↑ Say more about THAT.
Did he feed israeli intelligence?
If he DID, would you hold it against him?
hitchens-razor.png (375×360)Cannonpointer » 31 minutes ago » wrote: ↑ What was he DOING WITH THESE DOCUMENTS?
That matters greatly.
Chances are, he was feeding israeli intelligence.
Be honest. Would you hold that against him?
MR-7 » Today, 11:37 am » wrote: ↑ Bolton built an entire career on acting like he was the only adult in the room. Turns out he was the **** leaving the safe open, sending classified files through Gmail, and storing NDI in his house. And now he’s pleading guilty. Kelly is next....
RebelGator » 18 minutes ago » wrote: ↑ Then why were you enamored with Bolton....because he looked like a ***?
RebelGator » 23 minutes ago » wrote: ↑ Then why were you enamored with Bolton....because he looked like a ***?
..because he looked like a ***?
show me...Beekeeper » 10 minutes ago » wrote: ↑ YOU are the one who called him a "hero" and a "patriot"!!
Defend it.
Lol. THat second question should have been easy for you to answer.MR-7 » 18 minutes ago » wrote: ↑ Did he feed israeli intelligence?
I don’t know...but what I do know is this: If you spend years running your **** mouth calling other people reckless with classified info, and then YOU end up pleading guilty to mishandling national defense material… that’s not foreign policy, that’s hypocrisy.
If he DID, would you hold it against him?This isn’t about me, Israel, or TRUMP. This is about Bolton’s own actions catching up to him. If you preach national‑security purity for a decade and then get nailed for violating the same laws you lectured others about, that’s on YOU. So, no...I’m not playing your little ‘gotcha’ game. Bolton’s mess belongs to Bolton. Anyway, should someone else come forward and declare they are guilty, or a JURY finds them guilty, then once again, their mess belongs to them. But right now, that **** bolton is guilty.
Then he should be asking you...Cannonpointer » 18 minutes ago » wrote: ↑ It's a fair question, beevee.
That was a glory hole stash if ever there were one.
I never gushed over the man.
You repeatedly expressed the yearning to ride that stache to multiple orgasms.
You're trying to deflect.Blackvegetable » 6 minutes ago » wrote: ↑ You repeatedly expressed the yearning to ride that stache to multiple orgasms.
Ask @Vegas ....he was there.
Poor Veghead. Always a victim.Blackvegetable » 6 minutes ago » wrote: ↑ You repeatedly expressed the yearning to ride that stache to multiple orgasms.
Ask @Vegas ....he was there.
Oh, trust me, nobody’s shedding a tear over Bolton finally getting the charges he spent years moralizing about. The schadenfreude is premium‑grade. But let’s not pretend this is some Maxwell‑style mystery box. Bolton’s case is about mishandling national defense information...not espionage, not trafficking, not some shadowy ‘who was the customer’ conspiracy. The indictment spells out exactly what he did: the **** transmitted NDI through personal accounts and kept classified material at home. That’s the whole ballgame. Sometimes a rat gets caught because he mishandled classified intel. Sometimes a rat gets caught because he sold it. Bolton’s charges are the first category, and he’s reportedly pleading guilty to it. If more comes out, great...drag every last person involved. But I’m not inventing extra villains just to feel like the plot is deeper. Right now, the only confirmed criminal conduct on the table is Bolton’s. We can absolutely agree on this: Catching the rat is good. Finishing the job is better. But I’m not filling in blanks the evidence hasn’t filled in yet.Cannonpointer » 25 minutes ago » wrote: ↑ Lol. THat second question should have been easy for you to answer.
I notice it wasn't. It remains an open question.
We certainly agree that no *** needed these charges shoved up it more than bolton's. That he will die a convicted felon is a veritable FOUNT of shadenfreude in Pointerville.
But unlike you, I am greatly bothered when someone gets in trouble for a thing like mishandling intel and there is no mention of WHO PROFITED FROM THE BREACH. It's reminiscent of Gislane Maxwell pandering children to no one. It signals there is very likely a protected criminal in the mix, NOT being identified and punished. And I think that should bother you.
We can applaud a rat being caught while still demanding that the job be finished, can we not?
It comes with knowledge. Not everyone can live with Trump Blinders on.
JuCo 5 percenter...72
“Show me the man and I’ll find you the crime” ~ LAVRENTIY BERIA
"Try to get past your passionate ignorance and learn to accept what actually happened." ~ brown's unheeded words of wisdom Yeah.. I am chuckling in memory now..MR-7 » Today, 11:41 am » wrote: ↑ @Johnny You I remember when you posted, "He sure had the hard on for Bolton."