So maybe, just maybe, you can perceive what is happening?
Insults aside, of course. It is after all, “the PIT.”
I imagine you do - since you responded.
Of course, since I bothered to comment, I’m not gong to pretend your opinion is a matter of complete indifference to me - that’s a childish tactic.
A bit touchy at having your nonsense explained as nonsense, are you?
A promotions flack wrote one (or possibly more) e-mails touting himself as a major player in the politics of the Democratic Party connected to the Clintons. In that e-mail, he mentioned nothing that was actually illegal. That e-mail, (or a version of it that may have been modified by a third party after it was hacked–and which still did not note illegal activity), has now been reviewed in an Op-Ed piece to which you linked, demanding that the IRS investigate the Clinton Foundation for non-illegal activities that you have failed to describe or support with any evidence.
Meanwhile, actual organizations who make it their business to analyze and critique charitable organizations continue to give the Clinton Foundation high marks for actually providing charitable services.
You started off as silly and now you are getting angry because you persist in publicly demonstrating that you have no idea what you are talking about. It must be a burden to be you.
Gotcha. I find myself fresh out of shits to give about the insult, one way or another. If folks say Democrat party, I’m not worried; if folks are worried, I’m not worried.
I’m aware that one of them is considered an insult by certain hyper-sensitive dipshits but I’ll be damned if I can consistently remember which one it is. And I vote for Democrats over 90% of the time.
Uber is missing the rather obvious. The Clinton foundation has almost certainly been investigated by the IRS multiple times. As I understand it, its routine that large companies and charities get audited every five years or so, or more often if the IRS sees something unusual. Since the foundation has been around 19 years it’s certainly been audited more than once. also the foundations tax filings are public.
So now we have Trump, still no released tax returns , by his own admission Trump is audited every single year, which is highly unusual and almost certainly evidence of shenanigans.
Uber: You hypocrite! First remove the beam out of your own eye, and then you can see clearly to remove the speck out of your brother’s eye.
seriously? that’s all you’ve got? wow. you sure changed my mind.
Nitpick: large 501(c)(3) orgs don’t routinely get audited by the IRS. They are required to go through a third-party auditing process (that they get to pay for themselves) every 5 years or so, and submit that paperwork to the IRS.
Give it up T&D. Your sophomoric attempt to apply the hand-waving flavor in re-characterizing the scenario is at best, amusing.
You should join Mr. Eakers in savoring some of the factual flavor of this one of many not-so-big Clinton email surprise fat throbbing phallus’s presently being stuck up the country’s butt.
Hey über, answer my post #146 please
The police called. Your Composition 101 teacher is out on the ledge, threatening to jump.
And yet here you are. Go live your life and stop wasting our time.
His mom was also his Comp 101 teacher?
You know how home schooling is.
I just re-read that post and still do not see any punctuation in the form of a question mark. I thought Munch’s response was more than adequate to refute your weak reasoning surrounding the IRS audit process. Your comments might fool a casual observer into believing someone other than Clinton-paid consultants are the foxes in that hen-house, but not me.
You do of course understand how the IRS operates as part the Treasury arm of the executive branch, losing literally hundreds of billions every year in un-collected taxes, right?
Let me know if you wish to go off on that tangent, but assuming they are doing anything resembling a “good job” in terms of not going after the Clintons is just ludicrous.
If the IRS investigated and found nothing amiss, would you then claim that the investigation was rigged?
This is what a Trump supporter looks like. This is absolutely typical of a Trump supporter. This is basically the archetype: shoddy conspiracy theories based on fucking nothing, with a complete aversion to evidence, critical thought, and everything else. They’re like young earth creationists, except more disgustingly offensive and more likely to cause real harm to people. This is disgusting, and whoever is responsible for this (I’d blame the OP, but it’s like blaming a heavily retarded man for breaking a mouse’s neck by accident - he’s clearly not bright enough to understand what he’s doing) should be fucking drawn and quartered.
Calling people stupid does not refute what they are saying.
Nothing I said was untrue. “Democrat Party” is a widely known epithet, that actual people in office have decried. And you admitted you used it to see who it would piss off.
It is thus unsurprising that someone was pissed off. This is the Pit. If you try to piss someone off, they may attack you.
Attacking everyone who disagrees with will not change these facts. I could be the stupidest person in the world, but the facts will not change.
Especially when you attack people like Trinopus who hates Political Correctness.
Since it appears to be lost on some posters, let me just reiterate: The only “fact” in question here is the fact that I am pitting assholes like the majority of responders here, who seem to have an issue with the WSJ piece. There are a couple other less important, less debateable “facts” in the WSJ article itself. Tomndeb made good run at it. There were a few other more-or-less cogent responses.
Is that all you got? Random off-topic-inspired insults from Budget Player Cadoofus? :smack:
That may be what you intended, but it turns out mocking you offers a more immediate sense of satisfaction, because you are so very mockable.