You know the board (the old board) ten years ago used to be a pretty friendly place. People did post pics of themselves and their families. I posted pics of my kids. But it turned mean about ten years ago. There was a poster that called several peoples employers and tried to get them in trouble. Same guy called peoples parents and posted financial info and pictures of peoples houses etc etc. So its a good idea but I wouldnt post personal pics here. Many people change their screen names more often than they change underwear. There are several of us that have had the same name since we started. I wish it was more like the old days. We argued a lot and joked a lot but it was fun. I learned a lot from many posters. Some I agreed with and some I didnt. Now we have socks and cussing and bad language. Voicing an alternative viewpoint gets you whacked on the head.

Thanks for the kind words. You misunderstood my invitation for a beer at Georges. It would have been a good time.

Thanks

Oldbear83 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

GrowlTowel said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

You are sir a damn liar or illiterate and can't read.
You sensualize to nonsense. "Smash skulls". Come mods do your job with this idiot.

---

Are you unaware of the process of how they kill the babies? The rip their limbs off and smash the skull. Maybe a little Holy Water could help their poor little souls since you think they're not people. Just to make sure

---

You, sir, are still a damn liar and misogynistist

---

No, that is you. You purposely lead people off the path. You are sick, twisted, and pure evil.

---

Thank you got two right - my intestines are sick and my back muscle is twisted. Thank for your concern.

---

I don't know that I would say you are 'pure evil', Waco ... but you have Satan in a lot of your posts.

Genesis 4:7 "If you do what is right, will you not be accepted? But if you do not do what is right, sin is crouching at your door; it desires to have you, but you must rule over it."

---

So you are taking the log of judgment out of your own eye and beating hell out of me? Interesting.

---

No, just doing what Jesus commanded:

"If he does not listen to the church, treat him as one who does not believe in God and as bad as a tax collector.'"

Matthew 18:17

---

I don't remember Jesus saying, "Be a self righteous jerk if someone disagrees with you."

Waco1947 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

GrowlTowel said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

You are sir a damn liar or illiterate and can't read.
You sensualize to nonsense. "Smash skulls". Come mods do your job with this idiot.

---

Are you unaware of the process of how they kill the babies? The rip their limbs off and smash the skull. Maybe a little Holy Water could help their poor little souls since you think they're not people. Just to make sure

---

You, sir, are still a damn liar and misogynistist

---

No, that is you. You purposely lead people off the path. You are sick, twisted, and pure evil.

---

Thank you got two right - my intestines are sick and my back muscle is twisted. Thank for your concern.

---

I don't know that I would say you are 'pure evil', Waco ... but you have Satan in a lot of your posts.

Genesis 4:7 "If you do what is right, will you not be accepted? But if you do not do what is right, sin is crouching at your door; it desires to have you, but you must rule over it."

---

So you are taking the log of judgment out of your own eye and beating hell out of me? Interesting.

---

No, just doing what Jesus commanded:

"If he does not listen to the church, treat him as one who does not believe in God and as bad as a tax collector.'"

Matthew 18:17

---

I don't remember Jesus saying, "Be a self righteous jerk if someone disagrees with you."

---

Jesus had strong words for Herod, Caiaphas, and the temple merchants.

My rebuke of you is not because I disagree with you, it's because you ignore the Law given by God, and Scripture's clear tenets on life and the duties of priests (and therefore also ministers).

I have twice shown you where Scripture rebukes you. You pretend it's me who will judge you.

Oldbear83 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

GrowlTowel said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

You are sir a damn liar or illiterate and can't read.
You sensualize to nonsense. "Smash skulls". Come mods do your job with this idiot.

---

Are you unaware of the process of how they kill the babies? The rip their limbs off and smash the skull. Maybe a little Holy Water could help their poor little souls since you think they're not people. Just to make sure

---

You, sir, are still a damn liar and misogynistist

---

No, that is you. You purposely lead people off the path. You are sick, twisted, and pure evil.

---

Thank you got two right - my intestines are sick and my back muscle is twisted. Thank for your concern.

---

I don't know that I would say you are 'pure evil', Waco ... but you have Satan in a lot of your posts.

Genesis 4:7 "If you do what is right, will you not be accepted? But if you do not do what is right, sin is crouching at your door; it desires to have you, but you must rule over it."

---

So you are taking the log of judgment out of your own eye and beating hell out of me? Interesting.

---

No, just doing what Jesus commanded:

"If he does not listen to the church, treat him as one who does not believe in God and as bad as a tax collector.'"

Matthew 18:17

---

I don't remember Jesus saying, "Be a self righteous jerk if someone disagrees with you."

---

Jesus had strong words for Herod, Caiaphas, and the temple merchants.

My rebuke of you is not because I disagree with you, it's because you ignore the Law given by God, and Scripture's clear tenets on life and the duties of priests (and therefore also ministers).

I have twice shown you where Scripture rebukes you. You pretend it's me who will judge you.

---

So Cinque, Waco1947, etc suffer rebuke consequences in their lives?

Of course we all do time and again!

Oldbear83 I can play that game too. Ezekiel 13: The word of the Lord came to me: 2 "Son of man, prophesy against the prophets of Israel, who are prophesying, and say to those who prophesy from their own hearts: 'Hear the word of the Lord!' 3 Thus says the Lord God, Woe to the foolish prophets who follow their own spirit, and have seen nothing! 4 Your prophets have been like jackals among ruins, O Israel. 5 You have not gone up into the breaches, or built up a wall for the house of Israel, that it might stand in battle in the day of the Lord. 6 They have seen false visions and lying divinations. They say, 'Declares the Lord,' when the Lord has not sent them, and yet they expect him to fulfill their word. 7 Have you not seen a false vision and uttered a lying divination, whenever you have said, 'Declares the Lord,' although I have not spoken?"
It all depends on where you stand as to who God judges.
May suggest less binary thinking and more "fear and trembling" in working out your beliefs.

Waco1947 said:

---

Oldbear83 I can play that game too. Ezekiel 13: The word of the Lord came to me: 2 "Son of man, prophesy against the prophets of Israel, who are prophesying, and say to those who prophesy from their own hearts: 'Hear the word of the Lord!' 3 Thus says the Lord God, Woe to the foolish prophets who follow their own spirit, and have seen nothing! 4 Your prophets have been like jackals among ruins, O Israel. 5 You have not gone up into the breaches, or built up a wall for the house of Israel, that it might stand in battle in the day of the Lord. 6 They have seen false visions and lying divinations. They say, 'Declares the Lord,' when the Lord has not sent them, and yet they expect him to fulfill their word. 7 Have you not seen a false vision and uttered a lying divination, whenever you have said, 'Declares the Lord,' although I have not spoken?"
It all depends on where you stand as to who God judges.
May suggest less binary thinking and more "fear and trembling" in working out your beliefs.

---

You are mistaken again Waco.

the scripture here too, works against you rather than me.

I never claimed to be a 'prophet' nor used my own words. Instead, I have constantly reminded you o what God said in Scripture. You, on the other hand have sometimes boasted about being a minister, in the same way Scripture warns us the priests and scribes and pharisees behaved, and were scorned by Christ.

You have ignored all the verses which command us to love life.

The very verse you quoted indicts you, Waco, yet you do not see it.

I will use Scripture yet again to point you to the right way:

Deuteronomy 30:19

"This day I call the heavens and the earth as witnesses against you that I have set before you life and death, blessings and curses. Now choose life, so that you and your children may live"

Can we please get back to the COUP? The very foundation of of government is threatened by old men sitting in a circle and discussing the 25th amendment all yall do is rebuke each other.

Have there been any dems arrested for this coup?

Limited IQ Redneck in PU said:

---

Can we please get back to the COUP? The very foundation of of government is threatened by old men sitting in a circle and discussing the 25th amendment all yall do is rebuke each other.

Have there been any dems arrested for this coup?

---

I see LIQR is still enjoying his vacay in an alternate universe, where only one convenient definition applies for 'coup'.

Would you kindly point me to a dictionary that includes sitting around and talking. You dont have to quote it, just the link . Thanks in advance.

Limited IQ Redneck in PU said:

---

Would you kindly point me to a dictionary that includes sitting around and talking. You dont have to quote it, just the link . Thanks in advance.

---

You're still not discussing what really happened.

Honesty is important to a fruitful discussion.

Just imagine if the President in this matter were Obama. How would the media cover it?

Limited IQ Redneck in PU said:

---

Can we please get back to the COUP? The very foundation of of government is threatened by old men sitting in a circle and discussing the 25th amendment all yall do is rebuke each other.

Have there been any dems arrested for this coup?

---

If they're talking about using the 25th Amendment as a political weapon, it absolutely does threaten the foundation of the government.

Presidents are supposed to be removed for inability, not intractability. The difference is no minor detail.

It's hilarious to watch all these media companies spin this to these random stories after 2 years of pushing this fake Russian narrative that has blown up in their faces. They can't help it, they want this stuff to be true so bad.

Oldbear83 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Oldbear83 I can play that game too. Ezekiel 13: The word of the Lord came to me: 2 "Son of man, prophesy against the prophets of Israel, who are prophesying, and say to those who prophesy from their own hearts: 'Hear the word of the Lord!' 3 Thus says the Lord God, Woe to the foolish prophets who follow their own spirit, and have seen nothing! 4 Your prophets have been like jackals among ruins, O Israel. 5 You have not gone up into the breaches, or built up a wall for the house of Israel, that it might stand in battle in the day of the Lord. 6 They have seen false visions and lying divinations. They say, 'Declares the Lord,' when the Lord has not sent them, and yet they expect him to fulfill their word. 7 Have you not seen a false vision and uttered a lying divination, whenever you have said, 'Declares the Lord,' although I have not spoken?"
It all depends on where you stand as to who God judges.
May suggest less binary thinking and more "fear and trembling" in working out your beliefs.

---

You are mistaken again Waco.

the scripture here too, works against you rather than me.

I never claimed to be a 'prophet' nor used my own words. Instead, I have constantly reminded you o what God said in Scripture. You, on the other hand have sometimes boasted about being a minister, in the same way Scripture warns us the priests and scribes and pharisees behaved, and were scorned by Christ.

You have ignored all the verses which command us to love life.

The very verse you quoted indicts you, Waco, yet you do not see it.

I will use Scripture yet again to point you to the right way:

Deuteronomy 30:19

"This day I call the heavens and the earth as witnesses against you that I have set before you life and death, blessings and curses. Now choose life, so that you and your children may live"

---

Silly don't play semantics with me - prophet are not you try to play high and holy ground but have not love.

Waco1947 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Oldbear83 I can play that game too. Ezekiel 13: The word of the Lord came to me: 2 "Son of man, prophesy against the prophets of Israel, who are prophesying, and say to those who prophesy from their own hearts: 'Hear the word of the Lord!' 3 Thus says the Lord God, Woe to the foolish prophets who follow their own spirit, and have seen nothing! 4 Your prophets have been like jackals among ruins, O Israel. 5 You have not gone up into the breaches, or built up a wall for the house of Israel, that it might stand in battle in the day of the Lord. 6 They have seen false visions and lying divinations. They say, 'Declares the Lord,' when the Lord has not sent them, and yet they expect him to fulfill their word. 7 Have you not seen a false vision and uttered a lying divination, whenever you have said, 'Declares the Lord,' although I have not spoken?"
It all depends on where you stand as to who God judges.
May suggest less binary thinking and more "fear and trembling" in working out your beliefs.

---

You are mistaken again Waco.

the scripture here too, works against you rather than me.

I never claimed to be a 'prophet' nor used my own words. Instead, I have constantly reminded you o what God said in Scripture. You, on the other hand have sometimes boasted about being a minister, in the same way Scripture warns us the priests and scribes and pharisees behaved, and were scorned by Christ.

You have ignored all the verses which command us to love life.

The very verse you quoted indicts you, Waco, yet you do not see it.

I will use Scripture yet again to point you to the right way:

Deuteronomy 30:19

"This day I call the heavens and the earth as witnesses against you that I have set before you life and death, blessings and curses. Now choose life, so that you and your children may live"

---

Silly don't play semantics with me - prophet are not you try to play high and holy ground but have not love.

---

Again Waco, you are playing at semantics, not me. I just point out the relevant Scripture, and context.

And slaughtering babies can in no way be considered "love".

Oldbear83 said:

---

Limited IQ Redneck in PU said:

---

Would you kindly point me to a dictionary that includes sitting around and talking. You dont have to quote it, just the link . Thanks in advance.

---

You're still not discussing what really happened.

Honesty is important to a fruitful discussion.

Just imagine if the President in this matter were Obama. How would the media cover it?

---

So you couldnt find one could you?

Probably the same way they covered the total obstructionism the repubs pulled on Obama. You know the strategy of "if he is for it we are against it". And Obama was elected by a majority of voters. I understand the electoral college. More voters were on Obamas side than the repub side but the will of the people did not matter. But what difference does it make? Obama will never be president again.

Anyway, keep looking for a definition that fits what is passing for a coup.

Limited IQ Redneck in PU said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Limited IQ Redneck in PU said:

---

Would you kindly point me to a dictionary that includes sitting around and talking. You dont have to quote it, just the link . Thanks in advance.

---

You're still not discussing what really happened.

Honesty is important to a fruitful discussion.

Just imagine if the President in this matter were Obama. How would the media cover it?

---

So you couldnt find one could you?

Probably the same way they covered the total obstructionism the repubs pulled on Obama. You know the strategy of "if he is for it we are against it". And Obama was elected by a majority of voters. I understand the electoral college. More voters were on Obamas side than the repub side but the will of the people did not matter. But what difference does it make? Obama will never be president again.

Anyway, keep looking for a definition that fits what is passing for a coup.

---

Okay. I will play. What word would you use when unelected, high ranking federal officials discuss trying to implement the 25th amendment because of political differences?

GrowlTowel said:

---

Limited IQ Redneck in PU said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Limited IQ Redneck in PU said:

---

Would you kindly point me to a dictionary that includes sitting around and talking. You dont have to quote it, just the link . Thanks in advance.

---

You're still not discussing what really happened.

Honesty is important to a fruitful discussion.

Just imagine if the President in this matter were Obama. How would the media cover it?

---

So you couldnt find one could you?

Probably the same way they covered the total obstructionism the repubs pulled on Obama. You know the strategy of "if he is for it we are against it". And Obama was elected by a majority of voters. I understand the electoral college. More voters were on Obamas side than the repub side but the will of the people did not matter. But what difference does it make? Obama will never be president again.

Anyway, keep looking for a definition that fits what is passing for a coup.

---

Okay. I will play. What word would you use when unelected, high ranking federal officials discuss trying to implement the 25th amendment because of political differences?

---

disloyalty. poor judgement, not a coup

Osodecentx said:

---

GrowlTowel said:

---

Limited IQ Redneck in PU said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Limited IQ Redneck in PU said:

---

Would you kindly point me to a dictionary that includes sitting around and talking. You dont have to quote it, just the link . Thanks in advance.

---

You're still not discussing what really happened.

Honesty is important to a fruitful discussion.

Just imagine if the President in this matter were Obama. How would the media cover it?

---

So you couldnt find one could you?

Probably the same way they covered the total obstructionism the repubs pulled on Obama. You know the strategy of "if he is for it we are against it". And Obama was elected by a majority of voters. I understand the electoral college. More voters were on Obamas side than the repub side but the will of the people did not matter. But what difference does it make? Obama will never be president again.

Anyway, keep looking for a definition that fits what is passing for a coup.

---

Okay. I will play. What word would you use when unelected, high ranking federal officials discuss trying to implement the 25th amendment because of political differences?

---

disloyalty. poor judgement, not a coup

---

Really? Removing an elected president in secret is mere disloyalty? Interesting.

So if your wife sucks another man's thing but doesn't put in her thing, mere poor judgment?

Osodecentx said:

---

GrowlTowel said:

---

Limited IQ Redneck in PU said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Limited IQ Redneck in PU said:

---

Would you kindly point me to a dictionary that includes sitting around and talking. You dont have to quote it, just the link . Thanks in advance.

---

You're still not discussing what really happened.

Honesty is important to a fruitful discussion.

Just imagine if the President in this matter were Obama. How would the media cover it?

---

So you couldnt find one could you?

Probably the same way they covered the total obstructionism the repubs pulled on Obama. You know the strategy of "if he is for it we are against it". And Obama was elected by a majority of voters. I understand the electoral college. More voters were on Obamas side than the repub side but the will of the people did not matter. But what difference does it make? Obama will never be president again.

Anyway, keep looking for a definition that fits what is passing for a coup.

---

Okay. I will play. What word would you use when unelected, high ranking federal officials discuss trying to implement the 25th amendment because of political differences?

---

disloyalty. poor judgement, not a coup

---

I kinda like the word "BIASED". Our girl did not win so let's all take this MFer out!

"So you couldnt find one could you? "

I simply chose not to play the fool's game by his rules.

It's clear what was going on, and the dishonesty by Trump haters is obscene.

But you want to play games, because you are so sure it will never happen to your side.

History says such stupidity often leads to disaster.

GrowlTowel said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

GrowlTowel said:

---

Limited IQ Redneck in PU said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Limited IQ Redneck in PU said:

---

Would you kindly point me to a dictionary that includes sitting around and talking. You dont have to quote it, just the link . Thanks in advance.

---

You're still not discussing what really happened.

Honesty is important to a fruitful discussion.

Just imagine if the President in this matter were Obama. How would the media cover it?

---

So you couldnt find one could you?

Probably the same way they covered the total obstructionism the repubs pulled on Obama. You know the strategy of "if he is for it we are against it". And Obama was elected by a majority of voters. I understand the electoral college. More voters were on Obamas side than the repub side but the will of the people did not matter. But what difference does it make? Obama will never be president again.

Anyway, keep looking for a definition that fits what is passing for a coup.

---

Okay. I will play. What word would you use when unelected, high ranking federal officials discuss trying to implement the 25th amendment because of political differences?

---

disloyalty. poor judgement, not a coup

---

Really? Removing an elected president in secret is mere disloyalty? Interesting.

So if your wife sucks another man's thing but doesn't put in her thing, mere poor judgment?

---

That the discussion took place is not a coup. I have no idea how you get there.

if you guys want some credibility in this you need words like "allegedly" and "conspiracy" . And then you need some evidence that anything more than a discussion happened. Do you have evidence of that?

quash said:

---

GrowlTowel said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

GrowlTowel said:

---

Limited IQ Redneck in PU said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Limited IQ Redneck in PU said:

---

Would you kindly point me to a dictionary that includes sitting around and talking. You dont have to quote it, just the link . Thanks in advance.

---

You're still not discussing what really happened.

Honesty is important to a fruitful discussion.

Just imagine if the President in this matter were Obama. How would the media cover it?

---

So you couldnt find one could you?

Probably the same way they covered the total obstructionism the repubs pulled on Obama. You know the strategy of "if he is for it we are against it". And Obama was elected by a majority of voters. I understand the electoral college. More voters were on Obamas side than the repub side but the will of the people did not matter. But what difference does it make? Obama will never be president again.

Anyway, keep looking for a definition that fits what is passing for a coup.

---

Okay. I will play. What word would you use when unelected, high ranking federal officials discuss trying to implement the 25th amendment because of political differences?

---

disloyalty. poor judgement, not a coup

---

Really? Removing an elected president in secret is mere disloyalty? Interesting.

So if your wife sucks another man's thing but doesn't put in her thing, mere poor judgment?

---

That the discussion took place is not a coup. I have no idea how you get there.

if you guys want some credibility in this you need words like "allegedly" and "conspiracy" . And then you need some evidence that anything more than a discussion happened. Do you have evidence of that?

---

Well, there is some evidence that a special counsel was appointed shortly after the discussion.

Sam Lowry said:

---

quash said:

---

GrowlTowel said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

GrowlTowel said:

---

Limited IQ Redneck in PU said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Limited IQ Redneck in PU said:

---

Would you kindly point me to a dictionary that includes sitting around and talking. You dont have to quote it, just the link . Thanks in advance.

---

You're still not discussing what really happened.

Honesty is important to a fruitful discussion.

Just imagine if the President in this matter were Obama. How would the media cover it?

---

So you couldnt find one could you?

Probably the same way they covered the total obstructionism the repubs pulled on Obama. You know the strategy of "if he is for it we are against it". And Obama was elected by a majority of voters. I understand the electoral college. More voters were on Obamas side than the repub side but the will of the people did not matter. But what difference does it make? Obama will never be president again.

Anyway, keep looking for a definition that fits what is passing for a coup.

---

Okay. I will play. What word would you use when unelected, high ranking federal officials discuss trying to implement the 25th amendment because of political differences?

---

disloyalty. poor judgement, not a coup

---

Really? Removing an elected president in secret is mere disloyalty? Interesting.

So if your wife sucks another man's thing but doesn't put in her thing, mere poor judgment?

---

That the discussion took place is not a coup. I have no idea how you get there.

if you guys want some credibility in this you need words like "allegedly" and "conspiracy" . And then you need some evidence that anything more than a discussion happened. Do you have evidence of that?

---

Well, there is some evidence that a special counsel was appointed shortly after the discussion.

---

That isn't a coup. It may be something with bad intentions, but coup seems like an overreach.

GrowlTowel said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

GrowlTowel said:

---

Limited IQ Redneck in PU said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Limited IQ Redneck in PU said:

---

Would you kindly point me to a dictionary that includes sitting around and talking. You dont have to quote it, just the link . Thanks in advance.

---

You're still not discussing what really happened.

Honesty is important to a fruitful discussion.

Just imagine if the President in this matter were Obama. How would the media cover it?

---

So you couldnt find one could you?

Probably the same way they covered the total obstructionism the repubs pulled on Obama. You know the strategy of "if he is for it we are against it". And Obama was elected by a majority of voters. I understand the electoral college. More voters were on Obamas side than the repub side but the will of the people did not matter. But what difference does it make? Obama will never be president again.

Anyway, keep looking for a definition that fits what is passing for a coup.

---

Okay. I will play. What word would you use when unelected, high ranking federal officials discuss trying to implement the 25th amendment because of political differences?

---

disloyalty. poor judgement, not a coup

---

Really? Removing an elected president in secret is mere disloyalty? Interesting.

So if your wife sucks another man's thing but doesn't put in her thing, mere poor judgment?

---

Was Trump removed?
Is a philandering wife a coup?

Osodecentx said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

quash said:

---

GrowlTowel said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

GrowlTowel said:

---

Limited IQ Redneck in PU said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Limited IQ Redneck in PU said:

---

Would you kindly point me to a dictionary that includes sitting around and talking. You dont have to quote it, just the link . Thanks in advance.

---

You're still not discussing what really happened.

Honesty is important to a fruitful discussion.

Just imagine if the President in this matter were Obama. How would the media cover it?

---

So you couldnt find one could you?

Probably the same way they covered the total obstructionism the repubs pulled on Obama. You know the strategy of "if he is for it we are against it". And Obama was elected by a majority of voters. I understand the electoral college. More voters were on Obamas side than the repub side but the will of the people did not matter. But what difference does it make? Obama will never be president again.

Anyway, keep looking for a definition that fits what is passing for a coup.

---

Okay. I will play. What word would you use when unelected, high ranking federal officials discuss trying to implement the 25th amendment because of political differences?

---

disloyalty. poor judgement, not a coup

---

Really? Removing an elected president in secret is mere disloyalty? Interesting.

So if your wife sucks another man's thing but doesn't put in her thing, mere poor judgment?

---

That the discussion took place is not a coup. I have no idea how you get there.

if you guys want some credibility in this you need words like "allegedly" and "conspiracy" . And then you need some evidence that anything more than a discussion happened. Do you have evidence of that?

---

Well, there is some evidence that a special counsel was appointed shortly after the discussion.

---

That isn't a coup. It may be something with bad intentions, but coup seems like an overreach.

---

That remains to be seen. I think it's fair to call it an attempted coup.

Sam Lowry said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

quash said:

---

GrowlTowel said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

GrowlTowel said:

---

Limited IQ Redneck in PU said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Limited IQ Redneck in PU said:

---

Would you kindly point me to a dictionary that includes sitting around and talking. You dont have to quote it, just the link . Thanks in advance.

---

You're still not discussing what really happened.

Honesty is important to a fruitful discussion.

Just imagine if the President in this matter were Obama. How would the media cover it?

---

So you couldnt find one could you?

Probably the same way they covered the total obstructionism the repubs pulled on Obama. You know the strategy of "if he is for it we are against it". And Obama was elected by a majority of voters. I understand the electoral college. More voters were on Obamas side than the repub side but the will of the people did not matter. But what difference does it make? Obama will never be president again.

Anyway, keep looking for a definition that fits what is passing for a coup.

---

Okay. I will play. What word would you use when unelected, high ranking federal officials discuss trying to implement the 25th amendment because of political differences?

---

disloyalty. poor judgement, not a coup

---

Really? Removing an elected president in secret is mere disloyalty? Interesting.

So if your wife sucks another man's thing but doesn't put in her thing, mere poor judgment?

---

That the discussion took place is not a coup. I have no idea how you get there.

if you guys want some credibility in this you need words like "allegedly" and "conspiracy" . And then you need some evidence that anything more than a discussion happened. Do you have evidence of that?

---

Well, there is some evidence that a special counsel was appointed shortly after the discussion.

---

That isn't a coup. It may be something with bad intentions, but coup seems like an overreach.

---

That remains to be seen. I think it's fair to call it an attempted coup.

---

Respectfully, I think coup is an overreach, but I want to know more about the discussions in the FBI. Discussing the 25th Amendment isn't a coup.

coup d'tat - a sudden decisive exercise of force in politics

Sam Lowry said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

quash said:

---

GrowlTowel said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

GrowlTowel said:

---

Limited IQ Redneck in PU said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Limited IQ Redneck in PU said:

---

Would you kindly point me to a dictionary that includes sitting around and talking. You dont have to quote it, just the link . Thanks in advance.

---

You're still not discussing what really happened.

Honesty is important to a fruitful discussion.

Just imagine if the President in this matter were Obama. How would the media cover it?

---

So you couldnt find one could you?

Probably the same way they covered the total obstructionism the repubs pulled on Obama. You know the strategy of "if he is for it we are against it". And Obama was elected by a majority of voters. I understand the electoral college. More voters were on Obamas side than the repub side but the will of the people did not matter. But what difference does it make? Obama will never be president again.

Anyway, keep looking for a definition that fits what is passing for a coup.

---

Okay. I will play. What word would you use when unelected, high ranking federal officials discuss trying to implement the 25th amendment because of political differences?

---

disloyalty. poor judgement, not a coup

---

Really? Removing an elected president in secret is mere disloyalty? Interesting.

So if your wife sucks another man's thing but doesn't put in her thing, mere poor judgment?

---

That the discussion took place is not a coup. I have no idea how you get there.

if you guys want some credibility in this you need words like "allegedly" and "conspiracy" . And then you need some evidence that anything more than a discussion happened. Do you have evidence of that?

---

Well, there is some evidence that a special counsel was appointed shortly after the discussion.

---

That isn't a coup. It may be something with bad intentions, but coup seems like an overreach.

---

That remains to be seen. I think it's fair to call it an attempted coup.

---

Given the evidence thus far you might go with an alleged conspiracy to attempt a coup. Or prudent planning.

Suddenness and violence are often part of the definition, but not always. Here are a couple of examples:

Macmillan Dictionary said:

---

coup: an occasion when a group of people takes over a country, usually by means of military force.

---

Cambridge Dictionary said:

---

coup: a sudden, illegal, often violent, taking of government power, especially by part of an army.

---

Holliday may not be using the word in its absolute strictest sense, but it's hard to think of another word that adequately conveys the seriousness of his claim. No legal justification for the Mueller investigation exists. A special counsel can only be appointed when there's a factual basis to believe a federal crime worthy of prosecution has been committed. Rosenstein provided no such basis, stating only that his decision was "not a finding that crimes have been committed or that any prosecution is warranted."

What McCabe confirmed, in the words of interviewer Scott Pelley, is that "the highest levels of American law enforcement were trying to figure out what to do with the president." Not what to do with Russia. What to do with the president. Think about that. In what kind of regime does law enforcement decide what to do with a duly elected leader? Certainly not in a constitutional one.

Oldbear83 said:

---

"So you couldnt find one could you? "

I simply chose not to play the fool's game by his rules.

It's clear what was going on, and the dishonesty by Trump haters is obscene.

But you want to play games, because you are so sure it will never happen to your side.

History says such stupidity often leads to disaster.

---

Asking you to produce a definition to justify your use of a word is a fools game?

How can you have a discussion if you just make up stuff? You cant find a definition because it doesnt exist.

As far as the "my side, your side", we are both Americans. I am not a democrat. I voted for one dem at the county level 20 years ago. I used to vote republican till they stopped running conservatives so I started voting libertarian.

So if the special council investigation itself is a coup who approved it? Who put Rob Rosenstein in such a place of power? RR is the Attorney General that signed special order 3915-2017. Is this the roots of the so called coup?

Limited IQ Redneck in PU said:

---

So if the special council investigation itself is a coup who approved it? Who put Rob Rosenstein in such a place of power? RR is the Attorney General that signed special order 3915-2017. Is this the roots of the so called coup?

---

Coups are typically carried out by subordinates who are supposed to be working for the leader. That's part of what differentiates them from invasions or civil wars.

LIQR: "As far as the "my side, your side", we are both Americans"

Yet Democrats oppose building the wall, even the ones who a few years ago said we had to build one.

Yet Democrats advocate barring people from choosing their insurance provider.

Yet Democrats constantly apply different standards to behavior by Liberals and Conservatives.

If we are all Americans, it's well past time to stop acting like an enemy of America.

Sam Lowry said:

---

Limited IQ Redneck in PU said:

---

So if the special council investigation itself is a coup who approved it? Who put Rob Rosenstein in such a place of power? RR is the Attorney General that signed special order 3915-2017. Is this the roots of the so called coup?

---

Coups are typically carried out by subordinates who are supposed to be working for the leader. That's part of what differentiates them from invasions or civil wars.

---

They work for us, their oath is to the Constitution. Trump confuses that point, too.

quash said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Limited IQ Redneck in PU said:

---

So if the special council investigation itself is a coup who approved it? Who put Rob Rosenstein in such a place of power? RR is the Attorney General that signed special order 3915-2017. Is this the roots of the so called coup?

---

Coups are typically carried out by subordinates who are supposed to be working for the leader. That's part of what differentiates them from invasions or civil wars.

---

They work for us, their oath is to the Constitution. Trump confuses that point, too.

---

Someone certainly got confused, but in light of McCabe's story it doesn't seem to have been Trump.