Liberal Forum

JohnnyYou » 16 Mar 2025, 1:50 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Mar 2025, 1:50 pm

At least I can change things up and not
 

LOOKS LIKE YOU AREN'T TAKING YOUR VERY HUMILIATING DEFEAT VERY WELL...!!      

https://youtu.be/W1L4MdADYhU?si=VdMLtFtOS3yvhBzL
 

JohnnyYou » 16 Mar 2025, 1:38 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Mar 2025, 1:38 pm

Defeat you?   All I
 

LOOKS LIKE YOU AREN'T TAKING YOUR VERY HUMILIATING DEFEAT VERY WELL...!!       

https://youtu.be/W1L4MdADYhU?si=VdMLtFtOS3yvhBzL
 

*Huey » 16 Mar 2025, 1:16 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Mar 2025, 1:16 pm

Game over.  You can prattle all day of you like.

Have you forgotten your rule on answers?

*GHETTOBLASTER » 16 Mar 2025, 2:07 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Mar 2025, 2:07 pm

LOOKS LIKE YOU AREN'T TAKING YOUR VERY HUMILIATING DEFEAT VERY WELL...!!       

https://youtu.be/W1L4MdADYhU?si=VdMLtFtOS3yvhBzL

Calling out I'll be in Transit..

Radio Free Europe

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hqqxtKaCjxQ

JohnnyYou » 16 Mar 2025, 2:46 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Mar 2025, 2:46 pm

Calling out I'll be in Transit..

Radio Free Europe

https://www.youtube.

POOR GUY......YOU AREN'T TAKING YOUR VERY HUMILIATING DEFEAT VERY WELL....!!       
https://youtu.be/W1L4MdADYhU?si=VdMLtFtOS3yvhBzL
 
 

*GHETTOBLASTER » 16 Mar 2025, 3:24 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Mar 2025, 3:24 pm

POOR GUY......YOU AREN'T TAKING YOUR VERY HUMILIATING DEFEAT VERY WELL....!!       
https://youtu.be/W1L4MdADYhU?si=VdMLtFtOS3yvhBzL

Your mother is a whore!

Blackvegetable » 16 Mar 2025, 5:17 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Mar 2025, 5:17 pm

Your mother is a whore!

Wasn't it your mother who **** titled family members for food and shelter?  Stop projecting.
 

Blackvegetable » 16 Mar 2025, 12:16 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Mar 2025, 12:16 pm

I'm not shy about sharing the facts which make my opinions so remarkably well informed...


 

          Now this I have to see. YOUR thoughts only though, coward. **** your usual hiding behind the internet. No copy/paste. 

Go, the forum is excited to see this. 


1. Evade of course. 
2. Hide, turn it on me.

*Huey » 16 Mar 2025, 5:28 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Mar 2025, 5:28 pm

Wasn't it your mother who **** titled family members for food and shelter?  Stop projecting.

No...not once...not ever...


that's just your box wine yapping.
 

Vegas » 16 Mar 2025, 6:33 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Mar 2025, 6:33 pm

          Now this I have to see. YOUR thoughts only though, coward. **** your usual hiding behind the internet. No copy/paste. 

Go, the forum is excited to see this. 

1. Evade of course. 
2. Hide, turn it on me.

You've been seeing it for years...

Blackvegetable » 16 Mar 2025, 6:54 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Mar 2025, 6:54 pm

You've been seeing it for years...

I see that this is your new go-to copout. No surprise.

Blackvegetable » 16 Mar 2025, 5:17 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Mar 2025, 5:17 pm

Your mother is a whore!

But at least @GHETTO BLASTER  's Mom taught him how to copy and paste the same phooking thing over and over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over

I guess we'll get over it someday
I think I will call him Mr Ree Pete..  How folks get so dumb is MystEARious..
 

JohnnyYou » 17 Mar 2025, 2:13 am » wrote: ↑

17 Mar 2025, 2:13 am

But at least @GHETTO BLASTER  's Mom taught him how to copy and paste the same phooking thing over and over,

POOR GUY......YOU AREN'T TAKING YOUR VERY HUMILIATING DEFEAT VERY WELL....!!       
https://youtu.be/W1L4MdADYhU?si=VdMLtFtOS3yvhBzL
 

*GHETTOBLASTER » 17 Mar 2025, 2:17 am » wrote: ↑

17 Mar 2025, 2:17 am

POOR GUY......YOU AREN'T TAKING YOUR VERY HUMILIATING DEFEAT VERY WELL....!!       
https://youtu.be/W1L4MdADYhU?si=VdMLtFtOS3yvhBzL

Best Day phook in red hat.  Done for today.  Time to Go Move The Frigerashun. You can stay stuck in front of your Color TV.
You are a reminder this place is a enormous waste of time and energy.  And they actually matter.


 
 
 

Blackvegetable » 16 Mar 2025, 6:54 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Mar 2025, 6:54 pm

No...not once...not ever...

that's just your box wine yapping.

Really.  I guess you ied.  You weren’t raised in in titled fa,ilies.  My bad.

*Huey » 17 Mar 2025, 5:11 am » wrote: ↑

17 Mar 2025, 5:11 am

Really.  I guess you ied.  You weren’t raised in in titled fa,ilies.  My bad.

That made her a "wife"...

No different from your landlord.

Unless you want to insist that she sold herself as cheap as your mom did.
 

Blackvegetable » 17 Mar 2025, 5:13 am » wrote: ↑

17 Mar 2025, 5:13 am

That made her a "wife"...

No different from your landlord.

Unless you want to insist that she sold herself as cheap as your mom did.

I don’t ave a landlord.  And and as your story goes your whore of a Mother only married one one of them.

 

*Huey » 17 Mar 2025, 5:15 am » wrote: ↑

17 Mar 2025, 5:15 am

I don’t ave a landlord.  And and as your story goes your whore of a Mother only married one one of them.

Who occupies the Master Bedroom?  Not you. Your legal status is "Tenant at Will"..


Your whore of a wife sold herself cheaper than your whore of a mother did... but probably not as cheap as those whores who whelped your grandkids.


Are we done now?

 

Blackvegetable » 16 Mar 2025, 9:29 am » wrote: ↑

16 Mar 2025, 9:29 am

https://futurism.com/grok-trump-russian-asset

Elon’s Grok Chatbot Calculates Probability That Trump Is a Russian Asset

Sucks for you that you are SO **** EASY TO MANIPULATE, DIKSUKM!! ASKING the same question gives a TOTALLY different result on Grok!!

https://x.com/i/grok/share/c1H3EycRXwDYuhCqW1nLOua23

Based on public information and the claim that Donald Trump has "failed to ever say anything negative" about Vladimir Putin, I’d approach this rating by weighing available evidence and context. The idea of Trump being a "Putin-compromised asset" stems largely from speculation, political rhetoric, and certain documented interactions, but it lacks definitive, public proof of direct compromise (e.g., explicit financial control or blackmail). Let’s break it down:

Trump has indeed made numerous positive or neutral statements about Putin over the years. For example, during the 2016 campaign, he praised Putin’s leadership style, calling him a "strong leader," and has often avoided direct criticism, even when pressed on issues like Russia’s annexation of Crimea or election interference. In 2018, at the Helsinki summit, Trump appeared to side with Putin’s denial of election meddling over U.S. intelligence findings, which fueled speculation. His reluctance to consistently condemn Putin stands out compared to other U.S. leaders.

However, "never saying anything negative" isn’t entirely accurate. Trump did approve actions against Russia—like sanctions in 2017 (albeit reluctantly, under congressional pressure) and the expulsion of Russian diplomats after the Skripal poisoning in 2018. He also authorized lethal aid to Ukraine, something Obama avoided. These moves contradict the behavior of a fully "compromised asset," though critics argue they were half-hearted or forced by circumstance.

The "compromised asset" theory often ties to unverified claims, like the Steele Dossier’s allegations of Russian leverage, or Trump’s business ties to Russian oligarchs (e.g., past real estate deals). No public evidence—court documents, financial records, or firsthand testimony—conclusively proves Putin controls Trump. Mueller’s 2019 report found no direct evidence of a conspiracy between Trump’s campaign and Russia, though it documented Russian outreach and Trump associates’ receptiveness.

Public perception amplifies this narrative due to Trump’s demeanor and Russia’s apparent preference for his presidency (e.g., 2016 interference). Yet correlation isn’t causation. His silence on Putin could reflect strategic flattery, personal admiration, or political calculation—not necessarily compromise.

On a 1-100 scale, where 1 is "no evidence of compromise" and 100 is "definitive proof," I’d rate this a 35. There’s enough smoke—unusual praise, odd deference, and historical ties—to warrant suspicion, but not enough fire (hard evidence) to push it higher. The "never negative" claim is exaggerated, and policy actions muddy the narrative. Without classified data or new revelations, it’s an educated guess, not a slam dunk.
 
 

*Beekeeper » 17 Mar 2025, 5:26 am » wrote: ↑

17 Mar 2025, 5:26 am

Sucks for you that you are SO **** EASY TO MANIPULATE, DIKSUKM!! ASKING the same question gives a TOTALLY different result on Grok!!

https://x.com/i/grok/share/c1H3EycRXwDYuhCqW1nLOua23

Based on public information and the claim that Donald Trump has "failed to ever say anything negative" about Vladimir Putin, I’d approach this rating by weighing available evidence and context. The idea of Trump being a "Putin-compromised asset" stems largely from speculation, political rhetoric, and certain documented interactions, but it lacks definitive, public proof of direct compromise (e.g., explicit financial control or blackmail). Let’s break it down:

Trump has indeed made numerous positive or neutral statements about Putin over the years. For example, during the 2016 campaign, he praised Putin’s leadership style, calling him a "strong leader," and has often avoided direct criticism, even when pressed on issues like Russia’s annexation of Crimea or election interference. In 2018, at the Helsinki summit, Trump appeared to side with Putin’s denial of election meddling over U.S. intelligence findings, which fueled speculation. His reluctance to consistently condemn Putin stands out compared to other U.S. leaders.

However, "never saying anything negative" isn’t entirely accurate. Trump did approve actions against Russia—like sanctions in 2017 (albeit reluctantly, under congressional pressure) and the expulsion of Russian diplomats after the Skripal poisoning in 2018. He also authorized lethal aid to Ukraine, something Obama avoided. These moves contradict the behavior of a fully "compromised asset," though critics argue they were half-hearted or forced by circumstance.

The "compromised asset" theory often ties to unverified claims, like the Steele Dossier’s allegations of Russian leverage, or Trump’s business ties to Russian oligarchs (e.g., past real estate deals). No public evidence—court documents, financial records, or firsthand testimony—conclusively proves Putin controls Trump. Mueller’s 2019 report found no direct evidence of a conspiracy between Trump’s campaign and Russia, though it documented Russian outreach and Trump associates’ receptiveness.

Public perception amplifies this narrative due to Trump’s demeanor and Russia’s apparent preference for his presidency (e.g., 2016 interference). Yet correlation isn’t causation. His silence on Putin could reflect strategic flattery, personal admiration, or political calculation—not necessarily compromise.

On a 1-100 scale, where 1 is "no evidence of compromise" and 100 is "definitive proof," I’d rate this a 35. There’s enough smoke—unusual praise, odd deference, and historical ties—to warrant suspicion, but not enough fire (hard evidence) to push it higher. The "never negative" claim is exaggerated, and policy actions muddy the narrative. Without classified data or new revelations, it’s an educated guess, not a slam dunk.

Who is "I"?

Why should I care?