Forums

OT: the Durham investigation still continues

Started by John Doe October 7, 2021
On Sunday, October 10, 2021 at 2:55:22 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
> On Saturday, October 9, 2021 at 7:03:05 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote: > > On Sunday, October 10, 2021 at 12:31:40 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote: > > > On Thursday, October 7, 2021 at 6:41:04 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote: > > > > On Friday, October 8, 2021 at 3:41:01 AM UT+11, John Doe wrote: > > > > <snip> > > > > The obsession with the Durham investigation is aimed at presenting the Mueller investigation as a device to frame Trump, when it was primarily an investigation into the Russian intervention into the 206 presidential campaign - which was definitely pro-Trump but seems to have been motivate by the entirely correct perception that Trump would be a disaster as a US president, and less effective at giving the Russian kleptocrats a hard time than Hillary Clinton had been when she was Secretary of State or would have been if she''d been elected to the presidency. > > > > > > > > Trump is the kind of crook who would have helped them if he'd known about what was going on, but he'd have also been a horrible security risk, so he probably didn't. > > > > > > The ONLY thing Sloman reads is the WAPO and the ONLY thing he watches is MSNBC! > > > > Flyguy is much too dim to realise that I live in Australia - the newspaper I read is the Sydney Morning Herald, and the news I watch comes from the Australian Broadcasting Coorporation. These are both main-stream media outlets, and not designed to cater to right-wing conspiracy theory addicts. You can get that kind of "news" in Australia from the Murdoch-owned Sky News, which broadcasts the same kind of nonsense as the Murdoch-owned Fox News in the US. > > > > > If it ain't left wing bullshit it doesn't count. Well, the Quinnipiac poll is HARDLY right wing - it is as about as far left as they get, and they say that Joe Biden's numbers are IN THE TOILET: > > > > > > https://poll.qu.edu/poll-release?utm_campaign=wp_the_daily_202&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&wpisrc=nl_daily202&releaseid=3824 > > > > What they actually show is that Joe Biden is less popular now that he was when he was elected, which what normally happens to newly elected presidents. > > > > Flyguy is a half-wit, so he wants to read more into this than the data supports. > > > > > ALL of Joe Biden's numbers are UNDER WATER, and the asshole deserves EVERY ONE OF THEM. I have NEVER seen a President self-destruct in such record time. > > > > Gerald Ford went down faster and further. Of course he hadn't been elected. Flyguy doesn't see anything that he doesn't want to see. > > > > > But I am not surprised because the fool is SENILE. He has committed numerous impeachable offenses, but will skate because the alternative, Kamala Harris , is WORSE! > > > > Flyguy is senile enough to believe Trump's 2019 election propaganda. Ronald Reagan actually was suffering from senile dementia for his last two years in office - he was showing clear (if subtle) early signs of it when he ran for his second term, as was pointed out by a British academic - Brian Butterworth - who we knew. > > > > When somebody digs up something like the Contragate scandal, Flyguy will have something worth complaining about. At the moment he's just churning out particularly fatuous partisan propaganda. > > Hey SNIPPERMAN, now we now how LITTLE news you read or watch - thanks for setting me straight on that.
I've told you the newspaper I read and the news program I watch on TV. These aren't my only information sources. I've had a subscription to the weekly science journal - "New Scientist" for some 35 years now. It's British/Australaan so you won't have heard of it - and I took to subscribing to the "New Yorker" about ten years ago, which isn't in the same league, but can be remarkably informative from time to time. You have might noticed that I post occasional links to scientific articles published in the Proceedings of the (American) Academy of science from time to time, but you won't have a clue what that means.
> No, Reagan WASN'T suffering dementia while in office - if you had PROOF that he was you would STATE it, and by proof I mean a medical diagnosis by an expert who actually examined Reagan, not an CNN bloviator.
Brian Butterworth's evidence was pretty persuasive - he'd been studying speech errors as possible early indicators of dementia, and Ronald Reagan's election speeches during his campaign for a second term had been rich in them. They don't look all that different from regular speech errors, but it's the distribution that mattered, and Reagan was clearly going gaga. Once Reagan had been re-elected, nobody was going to subject him to the kind of examination that would have exposed him as senile, but it is a progressive condition and he'd gone down a long way the time he had left office (leaving Contragate behind him) and it became too obvious to deny some four years or so later in 1993. With enough practice and rehearsal he'd been able to cover up his cognitive deficit for quite a while, but that isn't evidence that he didn't have a problem. There's an argument that says that Reagan was never actually the president, just an actor who had been installed to play the part, and as long he could still learn his lines and delver them he was doing all that he needed to. The 1984 debates with Mondale had been unscripted and that had shown him up. -- Bill Sloman, Sydney
"the concepts "male" and "female" are essentially social constructions" 
(Bozo Bill Sloman, a non-American America-bashing scumbag) 

Bozo Bill, the chronic liar, cannot be reasoned with. When you refute its
lies, it simply makes up more lies to cover its prior lies. Its fiction
never ends. 
On Saturday, October 9, 2021 at 9:36:05 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> On Sunday, October 10, 2021 at 2:55:22 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote: > > On Saturday, October 9, 2021 at 7:03:05 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote: > > > On Sunday, October 10, 2021 at 12:31:40 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote: > > > > On Thursday, October 7, 2021 at 6:41:04 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote: > > > > > On Friday, October 8, 2021 at 3:41:01 AM UT+11, John Doe wrote: > > > > > > <snip> > > > > > The obsession with the Durham investigation is aimed at presenting the Mueller investigation as a device to frame Trump, when it was primarily an investigation into the Russian intervention into the 206 presidential campaign - which was definitely pro-Trump but seems to have been motivate by the entirely correct perception that Trump would be a disaster as a US president, and less effective at giving the Russian kleptocrats a hard time than Hillary Clinton had been when she was Secretary of State or would have been if she''d been elected to the presidency. > > > > > > > > > > Trump is the kind of crook who would have helped them if he'd known about what was going on, but he'd have also been a horrible security risk, so he probably didn't. > > > > > > > > The ONLY thing Sloman reads is the WAPO and the ONLY thing he watches is MSNBC! > > > > > > Flyguy is much too dim to realise that I live in Australia - the newspaper I read is the Sydney Morning Herald, and the news I watch comes from the Australian Broadcasting Coorporation. These are both main-stream media outlets, and not designed to cater to right-wing conspiracy theory addicts. You can get that kind of "news" in Australia from the Murdoch-owned Sky News, which broadcasts the same kind of nonsense as the Murdoch-owned Fox News in the US. > > > > > > > If it ain't left wing bullshit it doesn't count. Well, the Quinnipiac poll is HARDLY right wing - it is as about as far left as they get, and they say that Joe Biden's numbers are IN THE TOILET: > > > > > > > > https://poll.qu.edu/poll-release?utm_campaign=wp_the_daily_202&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&wpisrc=nl_daily202&releaseid=3824 > > > > > > What they actually show is that Joe Biden is less popular now that he was when he was elected, which what normally happens to newly elected presidents. > > > > > > Flyguy is a half-wit, so he wants to read more into this than the data supports. > > > > > > > ALL of Joe Biden's numbers are UNDER WATER, and the asshole deserves EVERY ONE OF THEM. I have NEVER seen a President self-destruct in such record time. > > > > > > Gerald Ford went down faster and further. Of course he hadn't been elected. Flyguy doesn't see anything that he doesn't want to see. > > > > > > > But I am not surprised because the fool is SENILE. He has committed numerous impeachable offenses, but will skate because the alternative, Kamala Harris , is WORSE! > > > > > > Flyguy is senile enough to believe Trump's 2019 election propaganda. Ronald Reagan actually was suffering from senile dementia for his last two years in office - he was showing clear (if subtle) early signs of it when he ran for his second term, as was pointed out by a British academic - Brian Butterworth - who we knew. > > > > > > When somebody digs up something like the Contragate scandal, Flyguy will have something worth complaining about. At the moment he's just churning out particularly fatuous partisan propaganda. > > > > Hey SNIPPERMAN, now we now how LITTLE news you read or watch - thanks for setting me straight on that. > I've told you the newspaper I read and the news program I watch on TV. These aren't my only information sources. I've had a subscription to the weekly science journal - "New Scientist" for some 35 years now. It's British/Australaan so you won't have heard of it - and I took to subscribing to the "New Yorker" about ten years ago, which isn't in the same league, but can be remarkably informative from time to time. > > You have might noticed that I post occasional links to scientific articles published in the Proceedings of the (American) Academy of science from time to time, but you won't have a clue what that means. > > No, Reagan WASN'T suffering dementia while in office - if you had PROOF that he was you would STATE it, and by proof I mean a medical diagnosis by an expert who actually examined Reagan, not an CNN bloviator. > Brian Butterworth's evidence was pretty persuasive - he'd been studying speech errors as possible early indicators of dementia, and Ronald Reagan's election speeches during his campaign for a second term had been rich in them. They don't look all that different from regular speech errors, but it's the distribution that mattered, and Reagan was clearly going gaga. > > Once Reagan had been re-elected, nobody was going to subject him to the kind of examination that would have exposed him as senile, but it is a progressive condition and he'd gone down a long way the time he had left office (leaving Contragate behind him) and it became too obvious to deny some four years or so later in 1993. With enough practice and rehearsal he'd been able to cover up his cognitive deficit for quite a while, but that isn't evidence that he didn't have a problem. > > There's an argument that says that Reagan was never actually the president, just an actor who had been installed to play the part, and as long he could still learn his lines and delver them he was doing all that he needed to. The 1984 debates with Mondale had been unscripted and that had shown him up. > > -- > SNIPPERMAN, Sydney
Hey SNIPPERMAN, how much did Butterworth examine Reagan? Answer: ZERO. You have, again, ZERO evidence to back up what you claim. What Butterworth can do now is look at ALL of Lyin' Biden's verbal fuckups - there are PLENTY to keep him busy. Here are his latest missteps: https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/1503348/joe-biden-speech-Illinois-vaccines-stumbling-incoherent-sky-news-australia-us-politics-vn
On Tuesday, October 12, 2021 at 3:29:50 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
> On Saturday, October 9, 2021 at 9:36:05 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote: > > On Sunday, October 10, 2021 at 2:55:22 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote: > > > On Saturday, October 9, 2021 at 7:03:05 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote: > > > > On Sunday, October 10, 2021 at 12:31:40 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote: > > > > > On Thursday, October 7, 2021 at 6:41:04 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote: > > > > > > On Friday, October 8, 2021 at 3:41:01 AM UT+11, John Doe wrote: > > > > > > > > <snip> > > > > > > The obsession with the Durham investigation is aimed at presenting the Mueller investigation as a device to frame Trump, when it was primarily an investigation into the Russian intervention into the 206 presidential campaign - which was definitely pro-Trump but seems to have been motivate by the entirely correct perception that Trump would be a disaster as a US president, and less effective at giving the Russian kleptocrats a hard time than Hillary Clinton had been when she was Secretary of State or would have been if she''d been elected to the presidency. > > > > > > > > > > > > Trump is the kind of crook who would have helped them if he'd known about what was going on, but he'd have also been a horrible security risk, so he probably didn't. > > > > > > > > > > The ONLY thing Sloman reads is the WAPO and the ONLY thing he watches is MSNBC! > > > > > > > > Flyguy is much too dim to realise that I live in Australia - the newspaper I read is the Sydney Morning Herald, and the news I watch comes from the Australian Broadcasting Coorporation. These are both main-stream media outlets, and not designed to cater to right-wing conspiracy theory addicts. You can get that kind of "news" in Australia from the Murdoch-owned Sky News, which broadcasts the same kind of nonsense as the Murdoch-owned Fox News in the US. > > > > > > > > > If it ain't left wing bullshit it doesn't count. Well, the Quinnipiac poll is HARDLY right wing - it is as about as far left as they get, and they say that Joe Biden's numbers are IN THE TOILET: > > > > > > > > > > https://poll.qu.edu/poll-release?utm_campaign=wp_the_daily_202&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&wpisrc=nl_daily202&releaseid=3824 > > > > > > > > What they actually show is that Joe Biden is less popular now that he was when he was elected, which what normally happens to newly elected presidents. > > > > > > > > Flyguy is a half-wit, so he wants to read more into this than the data supports. > > > > > > > > > ALL of Joe Biden's numbers are UNDER WATER, and the asshole deserves EVERY ONE OF THEM. I have NEVER seen a President self-destruct in such record time. > > > > > > > > Gerald Ford went down faster and further. Of course he hadn't been elected. Flyguy doesn't see anything that he doesn't want to see. > > > > > > > > > But I am not surprised because the fool is SENILE. He has committed numerous impeachable offenses, but will skate because the alternative, Kamala Harris , is WORSE! > > > > > > > > Flyguy is senile enough to believe Trump's 2019 election propaganda. Ronald Reagan actually was suffering from senile dementia for his last two years in office - he was showing clear (if subtle) early signs of it when he ran for his second term, as was pointed out by a British academic - Brian Butterworth - who we knew. > > > > > > > > When somebody digs up something like the Contragate scandal, Flyguy will have something worth complaining about. At the moment he's just churning out particularly fatuous partisan propaganda. > > > > > > Hey SNIPPERMAN, now we now how LITTLE news you read or watch - thanks for setting me straight on that. > > > > I've told you the newspaper I read and the news program I watch on TV. These aren't my only information sources. I've had a subscription to the weekly science journal - "New Scientist" for some 35 years now. It's British/Australaan so you won't have heard of it - and I took to subscribing to the "New Yorker" about ten years ago, which isn't in the same league, but can be remarkably informative from time to time. > > > > You have might noticed that I post occasional links to scientific articles published in the Proceedings of the (American) Academy of science from time to time, but you won't have a clue what that means. > > > > > No, Reagan WASN'T suffering dementia while in office - if you had PROOF that he was you would STATE it, and by proof I mean a medical diagnosis by an expert who actually examined Reagan, not an CNN bloviator. > > > > Brian Butterworth's evidence was pretty persuasive - he'd been studying speech errors as possible early indicators of dementia, and Ronald Reagan's election speeches during his campaign for a second term had been rich in them. They don't look all that different from regular speech errors, but it's the distribution that mattered, and Reagan was clearly going gaga. > > > > Once Reagan had been re-elected, nobody was going to subject him to the kind of examination that would have exposed him as senile, but it is a progressive condition and he'd gone down a long way the time he had left office (leaving Contragate behind him) and it became too obvious to deny some four years or so later in 1993. With enough practice and rehearsal he'd been able to cover up his cognitive deficit for quite a while, but that isn't evidence that he didn't have a problem. > > > > There's an argument that says that Reagan was never actually the president, just an actor who had been installed to play the part, and as long he could still learn his lines and delver them he was doing all that he needed to. The 1984 debates with Mondale had been unscripted and that had shown him up. > > Hey Sloman, how much did Butterworth examine Reagan? Answer: ZERO. You have, again, ZERO evidence to back up what you claim.
He had the Reagan-Mondale debates. He is a research psychologist, not a clinical psychiatrist, and he'd been looking at a cheap way to get early warning of the onset of senile dementia, and the Reagan-Mondale debates gave him enough of the kind of interaction that he's been looking at to get that early warning about Reagan.
> What Butterworth can do now is look at ALL of Joe Biden's verbal fuckups - there are PLENTY to keep him busy.
Sure but he's been making them for most of his life. He's been famous for it throughout his career. Senile dementia is a progressive disorder, and Joe Biden doesn't seem to be any worse now that he was thirty years ago. <snipped irrelevant data. He may be make speech errors now - as we all do - but you'd want to show that he was making more of them now. And Brian Butterworth would want you to show that he was making the right kind of speech errors> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Butterworth I imagine that Brian has better things to do with his time than to try to justify Trump's lying election propaganda. -- Bill Sloman, Sydney
On 10/9/2021 1:53 PM, John Doe wrote:
> bitrex <user@example.net> wrote: > >> <the usual hysterical garbage> > > According to the Bible... Jesus does not treat everyone with kid gloves. > Offhand... There is the whipping salesman out of the church foyer thing. Also > in the instruction of his disciples.
John Doe doesn't seem to want to treat people with "kid gloves" either, as he seems to believe Jesus himself appointed him God's current #1 agent on Earth. But not big surprise he read a few juicy tidbits like that in the Bible, it got his dick stiff, and thought Jesus was speaking directly to him and giving him personalized instructions.
> The cannibal leftist troll's opinions as usual are pulled out of a hat.
Likely couldn't cut it as a real cop, so being a cop for Jesus next best option. and much fewer qualifications.
> Preaching about something you disbelieve is blatant hypocrisy..
Does God chat with you regularly? Does your TV set also?
On 10/9/2021 2:07 PM, John Doe wrote:
> Rational discussion does not happen with cannibal leftist chronic liars. > > Arguing with chronic liars is pointless. Doesn't matter how many times you > refute their lies, they simply make up more lies to cover those lies. Their > lies never end. Discussing anything with them just encourages them to lie > more... >
Jesus was the son of God, and a John Doe trying to imitate the son of God is just a clown. Honk honk! God's truth.
Jasen Betts <usenet@revmaps.no-ip.org> wrote:

> On 2021-10-08, John Doe <always.look@message.header> wrote: >> bitrex <user@example.net> wrote: >> >>> John Doe wrote: >> >>>>
https://www.realclearinvestigations.com/articles/2021/10/07/durham_probes_pen tagon_computer_contractors_in_anti-trump_conspiracy_797790.html
>> >>>> That article names (and even pictures) more of the players. It details >>>> the reason for likely further indictments. It's deep, reading >>>> comprehension is required. >> >>> lol >> >> bitrex should dislodge the comedian from the otherwise vacant area between >> its ears. > > Indeed he should but you haved't revealed your identity yet.
That's corny.
On Monday, October 11, 2021 at 11:27:43 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> On Tuesday, October 12, 2021 at 3:29:50 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote: > > On Saturday, October 9, 2021 at 9:36:05 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote: > > > On Sunday, October 10, 2021 at 2:55:22 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote: > > > > On Saturday, October 9, 2021 at 7:03:05 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote: > > > > > On Sunday, October 10, 2021 at 12:31:40 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote: > > > > > > On Thursday, October 7, 2021 at 6:41:04 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote: > > > > > > > On Friday, October 8, 2021 at 3:41:01 AM UT+11, John Doe wrote: > > > > > > > > > > <snip> > > > > > > > The obsession with the Durham investigation is aimed at presenting the Mueller investigation as a device to frame Trump, when it was primarily an investigation into the Russian intervention into the 206 presidential campaign - which was definitely pro-Trump but seems to have been motivate by the entirely correct perception that Trump would be a disaster as a US president, and less effective at giving the Russian kleptocrats a hard time than Hillary Clinton had been when she was Secretary of State or would have been if she''d been elected to the presidency. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Trump is the kind of crook who would have helped them if he'd known about what was going on, but he'd have also been a horrible security risk, so he probably didn't. > > > > > > > > > > > > The ONLY thing Sloman reads is the WAPO and the ONLY thing he watches is MSNBC! > > > > > > > > > > Flyguy is much too dim to realise that I live in Australia - the newspaper I read is the Sydney Morning Herald, and the news I watch comes from the Australian Broadcasting Coorporation. These are both main-stream media outlets, and not designed to cater to right-wing conspiracy theory addicts. You can get that kind of "news" in Australia from the Murdoch-owned Sky News, which broadcasts the same kind of nonsense as the Murdoch-owned Fox News in the US. > > > > > > > > > > > If it ain't left wing bullshit it doesn't count. Well, the Quinnipiac poll is HARDLY right wing - it is as about as far left as they get, and they say that Joe Biden's numbers are IN THE TOILET: > > > > > > > > > > > > https://poll.qu.edu/poll-release?utm_campaign=wp_the_daily_202&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&wpisrc=nl_daily202&releaseid=3824 > > > > > > > > > > What they actually show is that Joe Biden is less popular now that he was when he was elected, which what normally happens to newly elected presidents. > > > > > > > > > > Flyguy is a half-wit, so he wants to read more into this than the data supports. > > > > > > > > > > > ALL of Joe Biden's numbers are UNDER WATER, and the asshole deserves EVERY ONE OF THEM. I have NEVER seen a President self-destruct in such record time. > > > > > > > > > > Gerald Ford went down faster and further. Of course he hadn't been elected. Flyguy doesn't see anything that he doesn't want to see. > > > > > > > > > > > But I am not surprised because the fool is SENILE. He has committed numerous impeachable offenses, but will skate because the alternative, Kamala Harris , is WORSE! > > > > > > > > > > Flyguy is senile enough to believe Trump's 2019 election propaganda. Ronald Reagan actually was suffering from senile dementia for his last two years in office - he was showing clear (if subtle) early signs of it when he ran for his second term, as was pointed out by a British academic - Brian Butterworth - who we knew. > > > > > > > > > > When somebody digs up something like the Contragate scandal, Flyguy will have something worth complaining about. At the moment he's just churning out particularly fatuous partisan propaganda. > > > > > > > > Hey SNIPPERMAN, now we now how LITTLE news you read or watch - thanks for setting me straight on that. > > > > > > I've told you the newspaper I read and the news program I watch on TV. These aren't my only information sources. I've had a subscription to the weekly science journal - "New Scientist" for some 35 years now. It's British/Australaan so you won't have heard of it - and I took to subscribing to the "New Yorker" about ten years ago, which isn't in the same league, but can be remarkably informative from time to time. > > > > > > You have might noticed that I post occasional links to scientific articles published in the Proceedings of the (American) Academy of science from time to time, but you won't have a clue what that means. > > > > > > > No, Reagan WASN'T suffering dementia while in office - if you had PROOF that he was you would STATE it, and by proof I mean a medical diagnosis by an expert who actually examined Reagan, not an CNN bloviator. > > > > > > Brian Butterworth's evidence was pretty persuasive - he'd been studying speech errors as possible early indicators of dementia, and Ronald Reagan's election speeches during his campaign for a second term had been rich in them. They don't look all that different from regular speech errors, but it's the distribution that mattered, and Reagan was clearly going gaga. > > > > > > Once Reagan had been re-elected, nobody was going to subject him to the kind of examination that would have exposed him as senile, but it is a progressive condition and he'd gone down a long way the time he had left office (leaving Contragate behind him) and it became too obvious to deny some four years or so later in 1993. With enough practice and rehearsal he'd been able to cover up his cognitive deficit for quite a while, but that isn't evidence that he didn't have a problem. > > > > > > There's an argument that says that Reagan was never actually the president, just an actor who had been installed to play the part, and as long he could still learn his lines and delver them he was doing all that he needed to. The 1984 debates with Mondale had been unscripted and that had shown him up. > > > > Hey Sloman, how much did Butterworth examine Reagan? Answer: ZERO. You have, again, ZERO evidence to back up what you claim. > > He had the Reagan-Mondale debates. He is a research psychologist, not a clinical psychiatrist, and he'd been looking at a cheap way to get early warning of the onset of senile dementia, and the Reagan-Mondale debates gave him enough of the kind of interaction that he's been looking at to get that early warning about Reagan.
Translation of SNIPPERMAN's ramblings: NONE WHATSOEVER!
> > > What Butterworth can do now is look at ALL of Joe Biden's verbal fuckups - there are PLENTY to keep him busy. > > Sure but he's been making them for most of his life. He's been famous for it throughout his career. Senile dementia is a progressive disorder, and Joe Biden doesn't seem to be any worse now that he was thirty years ago.
Hardly, SNIPPERMAN. Lyin' Biden is getting MUCH WORSE of late. His performance last week in Illinois was particularly disturbing as stammered and stumbled and mumbled his way thru his talk.
On Friday, October 15, 2021 at 4:53:13 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
> On Monday, October 11, 2021 at 11:27:43 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote: > > On Tuesday, October 12, 2021 at 3:29:50 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote: > > > On Saturday, October 9, 2021 at 9:36:05 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote: > > > > On Sunday, October 10, 2021 at 2:55:22 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote: > > > > > On Saturday, October 9, 2021 at 7:03:05 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote: > > > > > > On Sunday, October 10, 2021 at 12:31:40 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote: > > > > > > > On Thursday, October 7, 2021 at 6:41:04 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote: > > > > > > > > On Friday, October 8, 2021 at 3:41:01 AM UT+11, John Doe wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > <snip> > > > > > > > > The obsession with the Durham investigation is aimed at presenting the Mueller investigation as a device to frame Trump, when it was primarily an investigation into the Russian intervention into the 206 presidential campaign - which was definitely pro-Trump but seems to have been motivate by the entirely correct perception that Trump would be a disaster as a US president, and less effective at giving the Russian kleptocrats a hard time than Hillary Clinton had been when she was Secretary of State or would have been if she''d been elected to the presidency. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Trump is the kind of crook who would have helped them if he'd known about what was going on, but he'd have also been a horrible security risk, so he probably didn't. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The ONLY thing Sloman reads is the WAPO and the ONLY thing he watches is MSNBC! > > > > > > > > > > > > Flyguy is much too dim to realise that I live in Australia - the newspaper I read is the Sydney Morning Herald, and the news I watch comes from the Australian Broadcasting Coorporation. These are both main-stream media outlets, and not designed to cater to right-wing conspiracy theory addicts. You can get that kind of "news" in Australia from the Murdoch-owned Sky News, which broadcasts the same kind of nonsense as the Murdoch-owned Fox News in the US. > > > > > > > > > > > > > If it ain't left wing bullshit it doesn't count. Well, the Quinnipiac poll is HARDLY right wing - it is as about as far left as they get, and they say that Joe Biden's numbers are IN THE TOILET: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://poll.qu.edu/poll-release?utm_campaign=wp_the_daily_202&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&wpisrc=nl_daily202&releaseid=3824 > > > > > > > > > > > > What they actually show is that Joe Biden is less popular now that he was when he was elected, which what normally happens to newly elected presidents. > > > > > > > > > > > > Flyguy is a half-wit, so he wants to read more into this than the data supports. > > > > > > > > > > > > > ALL of Joe Biden's numbers are UNDER WATER, and the asshole deserves EVERY ONE OF THEM. I have NEVER seen a President self-destruct in such record time. > > > > > > > > > > > > Gerald Ford went down faster and further. Of course he hadn't been elected. Flyguy doesn't see anything that he doesn't want to see. > > > > > > > > > > > > > But I am not surprised because the fool is SENILE. He has committed numerous impeachable offenses, but will skate because the alternative, Kamala Harris , is WORSE! > > > > > > > > > > > > Flyguy is senile enough to believe Trump's 2019 election propaganda. Ronald Reagan actually was suffering from senile dementia for his last two years in office - he was showing clear (if subtle) early signs of it when he ran for his second term, as was pointed out by a British academic - Brian Butterworth - who we knew. > > > > > > > > > > > > When somebody digs up something like the Contragate scandal, Flyguy will have something worth complaining about. At the moment he's just churning out particularly fatuous partisan propaganda. > > > > > > > > > > Hey Sloman, now we now how LITTLE news you read or watch - thanks for setting me straight on that. > > > > > > > > I've told you the newspaper I read and the news program I watch on TV. These aren't my only information sources. I've had a subscription to the weekly science journal - "New Scientist" for some 35 years now. It's British/Australian so you won't have heard of it - and I took to subscribing to the "New Yorker" about ten years ago, which isn't in the same league, but can be remarkably informative from time to time. > > > > > > > > You have might noticed that I post occasional links to scientific articles published in the Proceedings of the (American) Academy of science from time to time, but you won't have a clue what that means. > > > > > > > > > No, Reagan WASN'T suffering dementia while in office - if you had PROOF that he was you would STATE it, and by proof I mean a medical diagnosis by an expert who actually examined Reagan, not an CNN bloviator. > > > > > > > > Brian Butterworth's evidence was pretty persuasive - he'd been studying speech errors as possible early indicators of dementia, and Ronald Reagan's election speeches during his campaign for a second term had been rich in them. They don't look all that different from regular speech errors, but it's the distribution that mattered, and Reagan was clearly going gaga. > > > > > > > > Once Reagan had been re-elected, nobody was going to subject him to the kind of examination that would have exposed him as senile, but it is a progressive condition and he'd gone down a long way the time he had left office (leaving Contragate behind him) and it became too obvious to deny some four years or so later in 1993. With enough practice and rehearsal he'd been able to cover up his cognitive deficit for quite a while, but that isn't evidence that he didn't have a problem. > > > > > > > > There's an argument that says that Reagan was never actually the president, just an actor who had been installed to play the part, and as long he could still learn his lines and delver them he was doing all that he needed to. The 1984 debates with Mondale had been unscripted and that had shown him up. > > > > > > Hey Sloman, how much did Butterworth examine Reagan? Answer: ZERO. You have, again, ZERO evidence to back up what you claim. > > > > He had the Reagan-Mondale debates. He is a research psychologist, not a clinical psychiatrist, and he'd been looking at a cheap way to get early warning of the onset of senile dementia, and the Reagan-Mondale debates gave him enough of the kind of interaction that he'd been looking at to get that early warning about Reagan. > > Translation of Sloman's ramblings: NONE WHATSOEVER!
Or, to put it more rationally, nothing that Flyguy could understand, even if he wanted to.
> > > What Butterworth can do now is look at ALL of Joe Biden's verbal fuckups - there are PLENTY to keep him busy. > > > > Sure but he's been making them for most of his life. He's been famous for it throughout his career. Senile dementia is a progressive disorder, and Joe Biden doesn't seem to be any worse now that he was thirty years ago. > > Hardly, Sloman. Joe Biden is getting MUCH WORSE of late.
In Flyguy's ever-so-expert and totally non-partisan opinion.
> His performance last week in Illinois was particularly disturbing as stammered and stumbled and mumbled his way thru his talk.
I'm you went into ecstasy, and creamed your pants. Of course you wouldn't have gone to Illinois to see him, so what you will have looked at will have been a carefully edited video version of his performance. with added extra repetitions and stumbles put in to make you happier. You are a gullible twit, always ready to soak up even more implausible propaganda designed to appeal to the particularly half-witted. -- Bill Sloman, Sydney
On Thursday, October 14, 2021 at 11:43:34 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> On Friday, October 15, 2021 at 4:53:13 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote: > > On Monday, October 11, 2021 at 11:27:43 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote: > > > On Tuesday, October 12, 2021 at 3:29:50 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote: > > > > On Saturday, October 9, 2021 at 9:36:05 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote: > > > > > On Sunday, October 10, 2021 at 2:55:22 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote: > > > > > > On Saturday, October 9, 2021 at 7:03:05 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote: > > > > > > > On Sunday, October 10, 2021 at 12:31:40 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote: > > > > > > > > On Thursday, October 7, 2021 at 6:41:04 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Friday, October 8, 2021 at 3:41:01 AM UT+11, John Doe wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <snip> > > > > > > > > > The obsession with the Durham investigation is aimed at presenting the Mueller investigation as a device to frame Trump, when it was primarily an investigation into the Russian intervention into the 206 presidential campaign - which was definitely pro-Trump but seems to have been motivate by the entirely correct perception that Trump would be a disaster as a US president, and less effective at giving the Russian kleptocrats a hard time than Hillary Clinton had been when she was Secretary of State or would have been if she''d been elected to the presidency. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Trump is the kind of crook who would have helped them if he'd known about what was going on, but he'd have also been a horrible security risk, so he probably didn't. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The ONLY thing Sloman reads is the WAPO and the ONLY thing he watches is MSNBC! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Flyguy is much too dim to realise that I live in Australia - the newspaper I read is the Sydney Morning Herald, and the news I watch comes from the Australian Broadcasting Coorporation. These are both main-stream media outlets, and not designed to cater to right-wing conspiracy theory addicts. You can get that kind of "news" in Australia from the Murdoch-owned Sky News, which broadcasts the same kind of nonsense as the Murdoch-owned Fox News in the US. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If it ain't left wing bullshit it doesn't count. Well, the Quinnipiac poll is HARDLY right wing - it is as about as far left as they get, and they say that Joe Biden's numbers are IN THE TOILET: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://poll.qu.edu/poll-release?utm_campaign=wp_the_daily_202&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&wpisrc=nl_daily202&releaseid=3824 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What they actually show is that Joe Biden is less popular now that he was when he was elected, which what normally happens to newly elected presidents. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Flyguy is a half-wit, so he wants to read more into this than the data supports. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ALL of Joe Biden's numbers are UNDER WATER, and the asshole deserves EVERY ONE OF THEM. I have NEVER seen a President self-destruct in such record time. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Gerald Ford went down faster and further. Of course he hadn't been elected. Flyguy doesn't see anything that he doesn't want to see. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But I am not surprised because the fool is SENILE. He has committed numerous impeachable offenses, but will skate because the alternative, Kamala Harris , is WORSE! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Flyguy is senile enough to believe Trump's 2019 election propaganda. Ronald Reagan actually was suffering from senile dementia for his last two years in office - he was showing clear (if subtle) early signs of it when he ran for his second term, as was pointed out by a British academic - Brian Butterworth - who we knew. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > When somebody digs up something like the Contragate scandal, Flyguy will have something worth complaining about. At the moment he's just churning out particularly fatuous partisan propaganda. > > > > > > > > > > > > Hey Sloman, now we now how LITTLE news you read or watch - thanks for setting me straight on that. > > > > > > > > > > I've told you the newspaper I read and the news program I watch on TV. These aren't my only information sources. I've had a subscription to the weekly science journal - "New Scientist" for some 35 years now. It's British/Australian so you won't have heard of it - and I took to subscribing to the "New Yorker" about ten years ago, which isn't in the same league, but can be remarkably informative from time to time. > > > > > > > > > > You have might noticed that I post occasional links to scientific articles published in the Proceedings of the (American) Academy of science from time to time, but you won't have a clue what that means. > > > > > > > > > > > No, Reagan WASN'T suffering dementia while in office - if you had PROOF that he was you would STATE it, and by proof I mean a medical diagnosis by an expert who actually examined Reagan, not an CNN bloviator. > > > > > > > > > > Brian Butterworth's evidence was pretty persuasive - he'd been studying speech errors as possible early indicators of dementia, and Ronald Reagan's election speeches during his campaign for a second term had been rich in them. They don't look all that different from regular speech errors, but it's the distribution that mattered, and Reagan was clearly going gaga. > > > > > > > > > > Once Reagan had been re-elected, nobody was going to subject him to the kind of examination that would have exposed him as senile, but it is a progressive condition and he'd gone down a long way the time he had left office (leaving Contragate behind him) and it became too obvious to deny some four years or so later in 1993. With enough practice and rehearsal he'd been able to cover up his cognitive deficit for quite a while, but that isn't evidence that he didn't have a problem. > > > > > > > > > > There's an argument that says that Reagan was never actually the president, just an actor who had been installed to play the part, and as long he could still learn his lines and delver them he was doing all that he needed to. The 1984 debates with Mondale had been unscripted and that had shown him up. > > > > > > > > Hey SNIPPERMAN, how much did Butterworth examine Reagan? Answer: ZERO. You have, again, ZERO evidence to back up what you claim. > > > > > > He had the Reagan-Mondale debates. He is a research psychologist, not a clinical psychiatrist, and he'd been looking at a cheap way to get early warning of the onset of senile dementia, and the Reagan-Mondale debates gave him enough of the kind of interaction that he'd been looking at to get that early warning about Reagan. > > > > Translation of SNIPPERMAN's ramblings: NONE WHATSOEVER! > > Or, to put it more rationally, nothing that Flyguy could understand, even if he wanted to. > > > > What Butterworth can do now is look at ALL of Joe Biden's verbal fuckups - there are PLENTY to keep him busy. > > > > > > Sure but he's been making them for most of his life. He's been famous for it throughout his career. Senile dementia is a progressive disorder, and Joe Biden doesn't seem to be any worse now that he was thirty years ago. > > > > Hardly, SNIPPERMAN. Lyin' Biden is getting MUCH WORSE of late. > > In Flyguy's ever-so-expert and totally non-partisan opinion. > > His performance last week in Illinois was particularly disturbing as stammered and stumbled and mumbled his way thru his talk. > I'm you went into ecstasy, and creamed your pants. Of course you wouldn't have gone to Illinois to see him, so what you will have looked at will have been a carefully edited video version of his performance. with added extra repetitions and stumbles put in to make you happier. You are a gullible twit, always ready to soak up even more implausible propaganda designed to appeal to the particularly half-witted. > > -- > SNIPPERMAN, Sydney
Hey SNIPPERMAN, watch Lyin' Biden's talk and THEN tell me he was in FULL CONTROL of his faculties: https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/1503348/joe-biden-speech-Illinois-vaccines-stumbling-incoherent-sky-news-australia-us-politics-vn