The Unknown Poster

Trumps gonna lose it today lol

How so? Liberal support is down and there are plenty of posts critical of Trudeau in the correct thread. Weird post for this thread.

Brossoit to start.

You might think mocking the idea that people think you support White Nationalism is funny but if you actually didnt supoort that, you'd be upset that people think it. Not sure what a boogieman coming for me means, but believe me, if a guy embracing those "values" came after me, I wouldnt sweat it in the least. Again, you lie and dance around to try and change the narrative. I wont let you. This isnt about MY reaction to the allegation, its about YOURS. I was quite clear in my opinion. YOU attacked ME over Kav vs Avanatti, accusing me of supporting the Democrat. And thus, we go down the rabbit hole. YOU attacked Avanatti. YOU defended Kav. Thats the fact, Jack. End of story. I didnt defend Avanatti at all. I merely pointed out that the exact thing he claims actually occured recently, making it far less far-fetched than one might otherwise think. (I know, you dont even want to mention the Mueller smear attempt or Stormy's false arrest because they're examples of right wing smears),. Your last point is what every right wing person did in the wake of Kav...pretend that ONLY Kav was subject to allegations and judgement and NEVER is any liberal (which is absurd). I NEVER, EVER said Avanatti had "obviously been smeared". You're a liar because you lack the courage of your convictions. Its that simple. If you believed in your position, you would not resort to lying about my words or opinions. And I certainly dont ever recall saying Kav "is guilty" (although the available evidence certainly lends itself to HIS account being BS which lends itself to HER's being more likely). You're trying to play Trump's game of making up lies out of thin air, painting people you dont like with those lies and then claiming they're lying when they point out your lies. Just stop. If you cant engage in discussion without having a Trump-love agenda, then dont bother at all. Its old.

Interesting

You're clearly a supporter of the alt right and white nationalism. As for being a troll, I hate the term but this post in particular speaks sadly in that direction. What relevancy does that have? You drew an equivalency between Kav and Avanatti. You did so because you're a blind Trump supporter and you want to be critical of a Democrat. You accused me of being more apt to believe Avanatti because he's a Democrat over Kav because he's a Republican. The assertion is absurd since I'm a conservative and the point I clearly made repeatedly which you continue to try to avoid, is the stark differences between the scenarios. The reality is, you're guilty of what you're trying to accuse others of. You do this because criticism of Trump seems to personally wound you for some reason and have a propensity to interject with attacks, insults, distractions and obfuscations to move the narrative away from criticism of Trump and the Nationalists. In the case of Kav, you immediately rejected the allegation. In the case of Avanatti, you immediately called his denial a "spin". You further tried to lend an air of impartiality to your opinion that Avanatti should not be believed by claiming you felt the same about Kav but that was not true. When called on it, you laughingly claimed you were playing devil's advocate. Dude...that's just weak sauce. Im not trying to beat up on you, but if you want to play games, Im going to point it out every time. If you consider common sense & logic to be special, then yes. Most people posses them without any special effort though. So you, moments ago, claimed you had no reason to believe either man over their accusers. Moments ago you claimed your defense of Kav was playing devil's advocate. And now, as if you forgot what you just posted, you launch a new defense of Kav to attack Avanatti. And this is why I laid out some key and obvious difference (which you want to ignore). And its clear you STILL dont believe thje allegations against Kav were credible. You further do what gross alt right people do which is to attack Stormy Daniels because of her job (guess you've never watched porn hahaha) as if that has anything to do with the veracity of her claims (which Trump no longer denies). You minimize the very idea that anyone would want to smear small time Avanatti while ignoring the fact that Trump supporting cops did exactly that with a set up and wrongful arrest of her. You conveniently dont even want to discuss the right wing set up attempt of Mueller and you sure dont want to talk about the multiple sexual assault complaints against your guy Trump (although to be fair, thats irrelevant to this specific discussion). This is the kind of crap that gives conservatives a bad name. And Ill expose it every time I see it. No need to reply. 😉

Wait...so your defense of Kav was you playing devil's advocate?? hahaha Dude...look, I know some people get on you hard here...I've never called you a troll. But if you can't admit your position, if you know your perspective is that weak, dont even bother. You're not fooling anyone. You defended Kav and you called Avanatti's denial "spin" so you did the exact opposite of what you're claiming. Tsk tsk tsk. Since you wont stand up for your own convictions, Ill help you out. The obvious differences.... Kav was a public figure up for a lifetime appointment to the highest court in the land, being voted on by publicly elected officials. Avanatti is a private citizen. Kav had several credible allegations publicly made by credible accusers. Avanattie, thus far, has one allegations from a non-credible source (we dont know anything about her) Kav's accusers were supported by numerous people who spoke to the culture of the school, the culture and behavior of Kav and his friends and about hearing of the acts in question. Avanatti has been publicly supported by former partners and has no public statements from anyone suggesting he's violent. Kav's main accuser was heavily vetted (passed lie detector tests and was dug into by media and Trump supporters). Avanatti's accuser is unknown. In Kav's case there was never a suggestion of a set up a scheme prior to the allegations coming forward. In Avanatti's case his highest profile client WAS set up and schemed against by Trump supporting cops and we saw Mueller attempted to be set up for assault which was referred to the FBI. I mean really.

Interesting. During discussion about Kav you took the opposite position suggesting that all Republicans were in trouble if anyone believed the allegation against him. Ofcourse, thats moot to the question I asked. Which you wont answer after drawing the comparison between Kav and Avanatti...do you not see why they're different?

You're last point is true which is why I dont understand your point. Are you suggesting this Avanatti scenario is the same as Kavanaugh? You dont see the differences? You seem to be applying a false equivalency based on your personal like/dislike

This week's edition of the Wrestling Observer has the history of UFC (its the 25th Anniversary). Its an amazing look. Dave is likely the best "observer" of MMA and his stories always include fascinating details you wouldnt usually see in more mainstream publications. I highly recommend it. For example, the first UFC event was a bought show by event promoter Zane Bresloff who was WWE's live event promoter (was about to quit and go to WCW) and lost money. The first UFC PPV with zero TV and zero marketing garnered 86,000 buys on PPV. The 5th event, still with no TV but with remarkable word of mouth, did 280,000 buys, compared to WWE's WrestleMania at the time doing 300,000-400,000 (with all their TV and marketing). The original draw was the idea of seeing which style of fighter would win (Boxer vs Wrestler vs Martial Arts etc). But when it became clear wrestlers and submission fighters were clearly dominant, interest cooled off. Royce Gracie dropped out because he knew as soon as guys became more rounded, he'd start losing. EDIT: When SEG (UFC's parent company) was struggling, they negotiated a sale to Shane McMahon (or more accurately negotiated a sale WITH Shane McMahon for WWE to buy and Shane run it) but Vince nixed it. He hated it and didnt get it and didnt think you could draw for shoot fights when you didnt control the outcome

I knew you'd say that and thought about providing the differences between the two in my last post but I was curious if you'd actually go there since the differences are so obvious. But serious question, do you not see the differences in these two scenarios?

Not to mention one of the reasons he's President today is because the FBI did investigate Hilary and made that bone head announcement right before the election. Had Comey given the same respect to the election as Mueller (by going dark during the election), its very likely she's President today. Of course, Comey was pushed into it by Trump supporters in the New York FBI office, controlled by Rudy.

Trump is on a mad tirade today. His usual M.O. is to scream lies as loudly as he can. He's harping on Mueller not being "Senate approved" because his own AG was not Senate approved. The Special Counsel doesnt need senate approval, was appointed by Trump's own AG and was universally endorsed and would easily have received Senate approval had it been needed. As we speak there is a bi-partisan motion in the Senate to protect Mueller. And he still wants you to think Mueller is a Democrat. He's a Republican. Trump is desperate.

Should be none.

The crazy part is, his client was the victim of a set up by Trump supporter cops attempting to discredit her. And just in the last week or so, we saw an attempted smear job of Mueller by people looking to pay women to claim sexual assault. So while, on its face, it looks like a spin job by a prick, there is reason to not be so sure. Two ex-wives have come forward to state that he was never abusive and never would be. There is information out there that in L.A. the police are hyper-sensitive to domestic abuse claims and routinely air on the side of arresting the accused (that used to be standard practice everywhere under zero tolerance). If Avanatti hit a woman, he's a piece of garbage and should get whats coming to him and then disappear from public life. In the absence of a credible allegations (because we havent seen it) and only positive statements of support from women he was in relationships with, plus at least two smear jobs/set ups that we know from the alt right, its worth taking a wait and see approach.

I have no idea what this says about the player. Will have to wait to see what the Jets say. I'd suspect the Jets told Vesa he was unlikely to be recalled and he'd prefer to go home.

So women should always be believed when the target is a Democrat? But when its a Republican, its all nonsense right? lol

UFC made a new deal with PPV providers to up their take. Its now a 70-30 split in favour of UFC which is a pretty big deal ($65 million per year or so). Traditionally, the PPV provider always got the larger take (60-40), even with WWE for awhile. I believe it was WWE that first pushed it to 50-50 and they had a few battles over wanting a larger take but couldn't make too many in-roads. With WWE out of the PPV business and boxing down, UFC had leverage. Good deal for them. EDIT: Thats likely pure profit also as fighters' deals where they get PPV points is based on buys, not revenue. So unless UFC increases PPV points or bonuses, this deal is pure profit and quite significant.

I have no idea if he's an ******* but at the deadline, coming into our situation for a few weeks and a playoff run, I think he'd be ideal.

Duchene is circled on my list of trade deadline acquisitions for the Jets.

Incredibly careless or malicious. Either way, she should be sent to Florida or the unemployment line.

What an idiot. Wait. What.

Accidents happen but Nia has several incidents of this. And she was facing Becky. If it was an accident she is reckless and crappy. If she did it on purpose she should be fired. In a way it might help wwe cause I assume they’d have Ronda win but Becky is their hottest star right now. Save it for wm

100% shoot (in the traditional sense). Bret had no idea, although Davey warned him to watch out for it but the idea of happening was so crazy at that time, he immediately dismissed the warning. Vince, HBK, Hunter, Brisco...and I believe Patterson and Jim Ross knew it was happening. Patterson is the one who suggested the reverse sharpshooter spot and Jim Ross made some remarks before the show about it being Bret's last match. I would have believed in the work but it would have come out once Owen died. Plus, Bret's documentary crew filmed it and Vince tried hard to block release of the film.