Sol Rosenberg

Drip Drip Drip

Recommended Posts

11 minutes ago, hermetic said:

then he should be cooperating further with sdny.  from prison

Agreed, and from what he has testified he is, but he should also share it with Congress. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Sol Rosenberg said:
46 minutes ago, hermetic said:

then he should be cooperating further with sdny.  from prison

Agreed, and from what he has testified he is, but he should also share it with Congress. 

not if it impacts sdny's case(s)

congress has no teeth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, hermetic said:
1 hour ago, Sol Rosenberg said:
1 hour ago, hermetic said:

then he should be cooperating further with sdny.  from prison

Agreed, and from what he has testified he is, but he should also share it with Congress. 

not if it impacts sdny's case(s)

congress has no teeth balls

FIFY

Congress still holds the checkbook; the problem is a lack of accountability and responsibility.

We get the politicians we some of us deserve

-DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Drip...drip...drip...

Devin Nunes to submit 8 criminal referrals.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

oh boy! Devin's been honest and straightforward throughout this whole process, I believe him.

Like you @Dog Devin also believes in free speech too.

What did he get wrong?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Dog said:
6 minutes ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

oh boy! Devin's been honest and straightforward throughout this whole process, I believe him.

Like you @Dog Devin also believes in free speech too.

What did he get wrong?

Pardon me if I don't get excited by the President's lap dog in the House making noise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nunu's frantically trying to distract, deny, and divert.....

 It's like watching a top just before it falls over, still spinning, buy really wobbly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We're in a mode now where the AG is obstructing justice. YCMTSU.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dog said:

What did he get wrong?

Prove the negative fallacy.  Always a good one.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Sol Rosenberg said:

Prove the negative fallacy.  Always a good one.  

Nonsense...I'm not asking anyone to prove that something does not exist. I'm asking for proof that something (what Nunes got wrong) does exist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Dog said:

Nonsense...I'm not asking anyone to prove that something does not exist. I'm asking for proof that something (what Nunes got wrong) does exist.

Sure you are.  You are burden shifting.  The burden is on Chief Inspector Nunes to make a case, which he has not yet done, in laughable fashion.  His bullshit is just like yours, it won't grow into the truth no matter how many times you water it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, the Canine is shifting the burden of proof about referrals not even yet made. That's not even proving the negative. It's disproving the nothing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Sol Rosenberg said:

Sure you are.  You are burden shifting.  The burden is on Chief Inspector Nunes to make a case, which he has not yet done, in laughable fashion.  His bullshit is just like yours, it won't grow into the truth no matter how many times you water it. 

No....If you, or anyone else, thinks Nunes got something wrong then the burden is on you, or them, to prove it and that is not being required to prove a negative.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Dog said:

No....If you, or anyone else, thinks Nunes got something wrong then the burden is on you, 

No one has to prove anything about Nunes.  He turned himself into a laughing stock with his actions, and anyone who listens to him now is an r word

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Dog said:

No....If you, or anyone else, thinks Nunes got something wrong then the burden is on you, or them, to prove it and that is not being required to prove a negative.

Fuck yeah.

Last week: the burden is on Schiff.

This week: the burden is on everyone but Nunes.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Dog said:

No....If you, or anyone else, thinks Nunes got something wrong then the burden is on you, or them, to prove it and that is not being required to prove a negative.

What kind of proof you looking for?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Amati said:

What kind of proof you looking for?

Carved stone tablets, burning bushes, that kind of thing.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, MR.CLEAN said:

No one has to prove anything about Nunes.  He turned himself into a laughing stock with his actions, and anyone who listens to him now is an r word

His famous Jan 18, 2018 memo has proven to be accurate. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Amati said:

What kind of proof you looking for?

Anything you've got...GO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Dog said:
35 minutes ago, MR.CLEAN said:

No one has to prove anything about Nunes.  He turned himself into a laughing stock with his actions, and anyone who listens to him now is an r word

His famous Jan 18, 2018 memo has proven to be accurate. 

Yeah?

"Accurate" in the sense of being hyper-partisan drivel?

-DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

Yeah?

"Accurate" in the sense of being hyper-partisan drivel?

-DSK

No, I was thinking more of content. High ranking individuals in the FBI did in fact use the unverified dossier to fraudulently obtain a warrant to spy on Carter Page and by extension the Trump campaign. They did in fact know it was funded by the Clinton campaign and the DNC. Accurate like that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Dog said:
13 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

"Accurate" in the sense of being hyper-partisan drivel?

 

No, I was thinking more of content. High ranking individuals in the FBI did in fact use the unverified dossier to fraudulently obtain a warrant to spy on Carter Page and by extension the Trump campaign. They did in fact know it was funded by the Clinton campaign and the DNC. Accurate like that.

Zackly

They say the clouds are nice & fluffy in DreamWorld, does everything really smell like kittens and rainbows there?

-DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Dog said:

No, I was thinking more of content. High ranking individuals in the FBI did in fact use the unverified dossier to fraudulently obtain a warrant to spy on Carter Page and by extension the Trump campaign. They did in fact know it was funded by the Clinton campaign and the DNC. Accurate like that.

Hey Dog - read the Mueller report yet?

Oh, wait, you are bullshitting because you'd rather us forget that. Anyways, carryon supporting your boy Shitstain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

Hey Dog - read the Mueller report yet?

Oh, wait, you are bullshitting because you'd rather us forget that. Anyways, carryon supporting your boy Shitstain.

Still believe the Russian collusion fantasy?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Dog said:

No, I was thinking more of content. High ranking individuals in the FBI did in fact use the unverified dossier to fraudulently obtain a warrant to spy on Carter Page and by extension the Trump campaign. They did in fact know it was funded by the Clinton campaign and the DNC. Accurate like that.

Actually the FISA warrant application was made by a Supervisory Special Agent whose name is redacted. Probably a Communist.

image.png.c439702118bd067ed21f8f9062c9aefe.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Dog said:

No, I was thinking more of content. High ranking individuals in the FBI did in fact use the partially unverified dossier to fraudulently obtain a warrant to spy on further investigate Carter Page (who had drunkenly spilled the beans about Russian collusion to an Australian operative), and by extension the Trump campaign. They did in fact know it was funded by the Clinton campaign and the DNC, and before that, the Repulican party. Accurate like that.

Sigh.

FIFY. Again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sol Rosenberg said:

Sure you are.  You are burden shifting.  The burden is on Chief Inspector Nunes to make a case, which he has not yet done, in laughable fashion.  His bullshit is just like yours, it won't grow into the truth no matter how many times you water it. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Nice! said:

Sigh.

FIFY. Again.

This one still believes. And BTW you've got your conspirators mixed up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dog said:
1 hour ago, MR.CLEAN said:

No one has to prove anything about Nunes.  He turned himself into a laughing stock with his actions, and anyone who listens to him now is an r word

His famous Jan 18, 2018 memo has proven to be accurate. 

His sneaky trips to the WH, and all that entailed, make me doubt his integrity and whether he is more loyal to the country or the POTUS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Bus Driver said:

His sneaky trips to the WH, and all that entailed, make me doubt his integrity and whether he is more loyal to the country or the POTUS.

Fair enough. but that much maligned memo has panned out.

That said Mr. Schiff could put this all to bed by releasing his more than circumstantial evidence if he's not lying about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Dog said:

Fair enough. but that much maligned memo has panned out.

That said Mr. Schiff could put this all to bed by releasing his more than circumstantial evidence if he's not lying about it.

There's plenty of more-than-circumstantial evidence in the public domain. Schiff doesn't need to release anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Dog said:

Fair enough. but that much maligned memo has panned out.

That said Mr. Schiff could put this all to bed by releasing his more than circumstantial evidence if he's not lying about it.

Prove that he's wrong.....GO!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Clove Hitch said:

Prove that he's wrong.....GO!

Doesn't it seem odd that he would allow the Trump presidency to continue and the country to go through all this turmoil while he sits on the evidence. I can't prove he doesn't have it but I don't believe him. You're not stupid, you probably don't believe him either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Couple of things: Trump promised to release his tax returns, now Mulvaney says we will never see them. Trump was all about releasing the Mueller report - now he and the GOP are doing everything possible to stop that.

Things that make you wonder......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, d'ranger said:

Couple of things: Trump promised to release his tax returns, now Mulvaney says we will never see them. Trump was all about releasing the Mueller report - now he and the GOP are doing everything possible to stop that.

Things that make you wonder......

No wondering required. Simple; he’s a pathological liar. I think we have that figured out by now. At least most of us. 

Trump says what he thinks works best for him in the moment. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Dog said:

Doesn't it seem odd that he would allow the Trump presidency to continue and the country to go through all this turmoil while he sits on the evidence. I can't prove he doesn't have it but I don't believe him. You're not stupid, you probably don't believe him either.

Ok, so you take a Nunes-- a lackey and buffoon-- at his word but demand a totally different level of scrutiny to somebody actually trying to provide oversight to Trump.

Now might be a good time to remind the class that you're an "independent" with "no interest in defending Republicans."

 

 

 

giphy.gif

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Dog said:

No....If you, or anyone else, thinks Nunes got something wrong then the burden is on you, or them, to prove it and that is not being required to prove a negative.

No, that's not how it works. Nunes makes the claim - Nunes, or those supporting his claims, have the burden of proof. We don't have to do anything as we can assume he is wrong until shown otherwise. Especially given his history. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Clove Hitch said:

Ok, so you take a Nunes-- a lackey and buffoon-- at his word but demand a totally different level of scrutiny to somebody actually trying to provide oversight to Trump.

Now might be a good time to remind the class that you're an "independent" with "no interest in defending Republicans."

Did Dog ever claim to be an "independent"?  I don't remember that.

Now, Jack has.  He's always good for a chuckle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Bus Driver said:

Did Dog ever claim to be an "independent"?  I don't remember that.

Now, Jack has.  He's always good for a chuckle.

Independent. No. He has repeatedly claimed to not be a Republican or Trump supporter. Which goes to show that his actions count far more than his words.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Bus Driver said:

Did Dog ever claim to be an "independent"?  I don't remember that.

 

Several times.  He also doesn't support Trump and has no interest in defending Republicans. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/5/2019 at 10:25 AM, Nailing Malarkey Too said:

Hey did I miss the metaphor? Are DRIPS lefty tears?  

Trump's gonorrhea

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Dog said:

Anything you've got...GO

So you should already be satisfied.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's this rum, only legally bought on the island of Carriacou, in the Grenadines.... It's very potent, and causes hallucinations I've heard. I've tasted it, but never had a full drink of it, being well fore warned....

 BUT...... I have watched lots of people drink it, and I've seen what it does to the brains of people who drink it regularly.....

It's called "Jack Iron".

 And the people who have been damaged by it are said to have been "Jack Dogged".....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Mrleft8 said:

There's this rum, only legally bought on the island of Carriacou, in the Grenadines.... It's very potent, and causes hallucinations I've heard. I've tasted it, but never had a full drink of it, being well fore warned....

 BUT...... I have watched lots of people drink it, and I've seen what it does to the brains of people who drink it regularly.....

It's called "Jack Iron".

 And the people who have been damaged by it are said to have been "Jack Dogged".....

Is "Jack Dogged" similar to "Flinted"? That could explain a lot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Bent Sailor said:

No, that's not how it works. Nunes makes the claim - Nunes, or those supporting his claims, have the burden of proof. We don't have to do anything as we can assume he is wrong until shown otherwise. Especially given his history. 

Not true, we now have solid evidence that the Nunes memo was accurate. We have the FISA applications and testimony from Ohr et al that corroborate Nunes's account. It's fine to continue to defame him if that's you thing but not because he was wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Clove Hitch said:

Ok, so you take a Nunes-- a lackey and buffoon-- at his word but demand a totally different level of scrutiny to somebody actually trying to provide oversight to Trump.

Now might be a good time to remind the class that you're an "independent" with "no interest in defending Republicans."

No.... I did not take Nunes at his word, I waited for corroboration before I deemed his account to be accurate.  I will not take Schiff at his word either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Dog said:

Not true, we now have solid evidence that the Nunes memo was accurate. We have the FISA applications and testimony from Ohr et al that corroborate Nunes's account. It's fine to continue to defame him if that's you thing but not because he was wrong.

Pleas show us the evidence. I will willing support your claims of the unredacted FISA applications prove you out. Let's see them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Ishmael said:

Is "Jack Dogged" similar to "Flinted"? That could explain a lot.

Jack Iron (Or simply "Jack" as it's known locally)  is "guaranteed not less than 97% alcohol".... IE: very strong. People who are drunk on Jack start speaking a different language. To an outsider, it sounds like they're speaking in tongues. BUT..... If there is more than one person drunk on Jack, they can understand each other, and carry on what appears to be a perfectly rational conversation. And they'll remember it when they wake up....

 Oh, and that's another thing. Jack Iron almost never causes a hangover. The theory is that it's so strong that you can't drink enough of it to develop a hangover before you pass out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Dog said:

Not true, we now have solid evidence that the Nunes memo was accurate. We have the FISA applications and testimony from Ohr et al that corroborate Nunes's account. It's fine to continue to defame him if that's you thing but not because he was wrong.

You imagine I said something about the accuracy of Nunes' memo. I didn't. Your accusation I defame the man is based purely on your memo fixation, but making shit up is "your thing", so we all sort of expected you'd try to use it to dodge the point. It's not like this is your first (or even tenth) time trying to deflect from your twaddle when caught Doggy-styling.

Now that we've gotten your bullshit out of the way and your deflection is shown up for the pile of crap it usually is; the fact remains that the burden of proof is still on Nunes and those supporting his claims. Until that proof is provided, it is still reasonable to simply assume he is wrong until shown otherwise. Especially given his history. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Bent Sailor said:

You imagine I said something about the accuracy of Nunes' memo. I didn't. Your accusation I defame the man is based purely on your memo fixation, but making shit up is "your thing", so we all sort of expected you'd try to use it to dodge the point. It's not like this is your first (or even tenth) time trying to deflect from your twaddle when caught Doggy-styling.

Now that we've gotten your bullshit out of the way and your deflection is shown up for the pile of crap it usually is; the fact remains that the burden of proof is still on Nunes and those supporting his claims. Until that proof is provided, it is still reasonable to simply assume he is wrong until shown otherwise. Especially given his history. 

Oh yeah, well you can't prove that Chief Inspector Nunes' evidence doesn't exist!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it looks like we're gonna have 2 months of whacknut speechifying about the politically redacted mueller report.  then in mid june the doj ig report will drop

these two alone - with the obligatory congressional and senate hearings - should keep everyone amused until election year fun starts in the fall

y'all keep those facebook / twitter / utube accounts active

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Remodel said:
5 hours ago, Dog said:

Not true, we now have solid evidence that the Nunes memo was accurate. We have the FISA applications and testimony from Ohr et al that corroborate Nunes's account. It's fine to continue to defame him if that's you thing but not because he was wrong.

Pleas show us the evidence. I will willing support your claims of the unredacted FISA applications prove you out. Let's see them.

We've had solid evidence for years that Dog just makes shit up, when he doesn't have fictional Repugnican talking points handed to him to follow.

-DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Steam Flyer said:

We've had solid evidence for years that Dog just makes shit up, when he doesn't have fictional Repugnican talking points handed to him to follow.

-DSK

Yet you can't cite one example.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Dog said:
1 hour ago, Steam Flyer said:

We've had solid evidence for years that Dog just makes shit up, when he doesn't have fictional Repugnican talking points handed to him to follow.

 

Yet you can't aren't interested in taking the time to cite one more examples again.

FIFY

When a liar lies about lying, it gets old after a while. Not funny more

-DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Dog said:

Yet you can't cite one example.

Did someone say Birther?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

FIFY

When a liar lies about lying, it gets old after a while. Not funny more

-DSK

Case in point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Olsonist said:

Did someone say Birther?

You're not suggesting that Dog is a Birther, are you?  I would have to disagree, but perhaps we could find some common ground by noting that it does present an interesting question. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Navig8tor said:

Oh god, is dog really just a mutt?

No pedigree, no papers?

Only the papers he peed on.  :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dog said:

Yet you can't cite one example.

 

8 hours ago, Dog said:

Not true, we now have solid evidence that the Nunes memo was accurate. We have the FISA applications and testimony from Ohr et al that corroborate Nunes's account. It's fine to continue to defame him if that's you thing but not because he was wrong.

 

On the very same page, even.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Nice! said:

 

 

On the very same page, even.

Dog's gone full retard. Next he'll deny he's Dog.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If this thread were to disappear in a puff of purple smoke, would Dog follow it to where ever it went?

Can we try it just to see?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Dog said:

 

Watch this....

"Nunes files $150M lawsuit against McClatchy, alleging conspiracy to derail Clinton, Russia probes"

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/nunes-files-150m-lawsuit-against-mcclatchy-alleging-conspiracy-to-derail-clinton-russia-probes

Ha ha ha

https://www.fresnobee.com/news/business/article210912434.html

story looks solid.  Too bad Devin, don’t have a cow.

Love “mom”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From AXIOS

During a House Appropriations Committee hearing Attorney General William Barr said he is assembling a team to investigate counterintelligence decisions by Justice Department and FBI officials during the summer of 2016, reports Bloomberg.

What this means: Barr is essentially looking into claims that the investigation into President Trump and possible collusion with Russia has been affected by those with anti-Trump sentiments, per NBC.

Show less

“I am reviewing the conduct of the investigation and trying to get my arms around all the aspects of the counterintelligence investigation that was conducted during the summer of 2016."

— Barr told a House panel on Tuesday

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Navig8tor said:

From AXIOS

During a House Appropriations Committee hearing Attorney General William Barr said he is assembling a team to investigate counterintelligence decisions by Justice Department and FBI officials during the summer of 2016, reports Bloomberg.

What this means: Barr is essentially looking into claims that the investigation into President Trump and possible collusion with Russia has been affected by those with anti-Trump sentiments, per NBC.

Show less

“I am reviewing the conduct of the investigation and trying to get my arms around all the aspects of the counterintelligence investigation that was conducted during the summer of 2016."

— Barr told a House panel on Tuesday

Bring it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, jerseyguy said:
15 hours ago, Navig8tor said:

Oh god, is dog really just a mutt?

No pedigree, no papers?

Only the papers he peed on.  :rolleyes:

Oh boy another person who denigrates the review of papers by peers.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh boy the WSJ has a story that literally all of Trump’s senior leadership on his campaign knew about the porn payoff.  Hope Hicks, Schiller and on and on.  The SDNY knew this independent of Cohen.  Clear campaign finance violation and overall just so gross and sleazy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Olsonist said:

Dog likes him too.

By liking him you mean not being a dupe. I think the guy is an asshole.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Dog said:

By liking him you mean not being a dupe. I think the guy is an asshole.

Yes, Dog's likes him an asshole.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Olsonist said:

Yes, Dog's likes him an asshole.

Dogs spend a lot of time licking and caring for their assholes, this one is just carrying on a canine tradition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Ishmael said:

Now Barr is launching an offensive. I guess he is thoroughly bought and paid for. https://www.thedailybeast.com/attorney-general-william-barr-i-think-spying-did-occur-on-trump-campaign?ref=home

I presume next will be an investigation into Hillary's emails and Benghazi.

 

It's Groundhog Day all over again..............

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Dog said:

By liking him you mean not being a dupe. I think the guy is an asshole.

And yet here you are defending him.  Because he's for the party, and you are a party animal. Puds Mcdouchey, life of PA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Ishmael said:

Now Barr is launching an offensive. I guess he is thoroughly bought and paid for. https://www.thedailybeast.com/attorney-general-william-barr-i-think-spying-did-occur-on-trump-campaign?ref=home

I presume next will be an investigation into Hillary's emails and Benghazi.

 

I very much look forward to that lengthy investigation.  Then the Dem-nominated AG giving us HIS summary of what the real report states.

Because, you know, redactions and third-party embarrassment and such.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, another 505 sailor said:

An asshole that ypu defend at almost every turn. It's refreshing.

By defend you mean refuting bullshit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dog inhales what he knows to be bullshit from the Right.

Did someone say Birther?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Olsonist said:

Dog inhales what he knows to be bullshit from the Right.

Did someone say Birther?

You did...What about it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Dog said:

You did...What about it?

Would you agree that Birtherism is bullshit from the Right? Your boy Shitstain certainly is a Birther.

(Prediction: Dog will blame Birtherism on Hillary supporters.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites