Edmo Posted May 18, 2017 Share Posted May 18, 2017 13 minutes ago, SnowRider said: Did you do the same with Hillary? It was proven Hillary was careless with emails and confidential info. This Russia stuff hasn't been proven. Big difference. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Platinum Contributing Member SnowRider Posted May 18, 2017 Platinum Contributing Member Share Posted May 18, 2017 Just now, Snoslinger said: wtf are you babbling about now? the topic is the Russian connections and the question is what do you think they were about? MN Momo really is a stupid fuck What separates him is he truly believes he's intelligent Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Platinum Contributing Member Highmark Posted May 18, 2017 Platinum Contributing Member Share Posted May 18, 2017 I got two bets for any of the NeverTrump crowd. 1. No collusion is found. $100 2. Dems do not accept it. $100 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zambroski Posted May 18, 2017 Share Posted May 18, 2017 5 minutes ago, Snoslinger said: wtf are you babbling about now? the topic is the Russian connections and the question is what do you think they were about? Who cares? Maybe it was clearing up old business. Maybe it was to share ideas on handling the ME FUCKERY. Maybe there was none at all. What did the Russians do to affect the election? What could they do? should I wait? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zambroski Posted May 18, 2017 Share Posted May 18, 2017 Just now, Highmark said: I got two bets for any of the NeverTrump crowd. 1. No collusion is found. $100 2. Dems do not accept it. $100 I noticed you've dropped the bet amounts. Makes sense. You're gonna have to go lower though if anybody is gonna pick up that bet. Will you accept nickel bets? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snoslinger Posted May 18, 2017 Share Posted May 18, 2017 1 minute ago, Zambroski said: Who cares? Maybe it was clearing up old business. Maybe it was to share ideas on handling the ME FUCKERY. Maybe there was none at all. What did the Russians do to affect the election? What could they do? should I wait? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T1R9sledder Posted May 18, 2017 Share Posted May 18, 2017 3 minutes ago, Highmark said: I got two bets for any of the NeverTrump crowd. 1. No collusion is found. $100 2. Dems do not accept it. $100 #2 is a suckers bet Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snoslinger Posted May 18, 2017 Share Posted May 18, 2017 2 minutes ago, Highmark said: I got two bets for any of the NeverTrump crowd. 1. No collusion is found. $100 2. Dems do not accept it. $100 i'll take the $100 bet. if collusion is found with either trump, his admin, or former aides, you pay a charity of my choice. none, i'll pay yours. don't try pulling any BS either, like claiming the collusion didn't have any effect on the election, therefore it doesn't matter. do we need to make things any more clear? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zambroski Posted May 18, 2017 Share Posted May 18, 2017 2 minutes ago, Snoslinger said: Good answer! I can't believe I waited.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zambroski Posted May 18, 2017 Share Posted May 18, 2017 Just now, Snoslinger said: i'll take the $100 bet. if collusion is found with either trump, his admin, or former aides, you pay a charity of my choice. none, i'll pay yours. don't try pulling any BS either, like claiming the collusion didn't have any effect on the election, therefore it doesn't matter. do we need to make things any more clear? "I'll take the bet but am gonna change the parameters so I can argue the loss later." SUCH A PERFECT DEM!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snoslinger Posted May 18, 2017 Share Posted May 18, 2017 what did you expect from that lame response? but i'll give you credit, at least you tried, unlike many others. maybe they were just a little smarter and knew nothing was really justifiable? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snoslinger Posted May 18, 2017 Share Posted May 18, 2017 Just now, Zambroski said: "I'll take the bet but am gonna change the parameters so I can argue the loss later." SUCH A PERFECT DEM!!!! no, I'm making the bet very clear. I know how you fucking clowns operate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snoslinger Posted May 18, 2017 Share Posted May 18, 2017 what parameters did I change anyway? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zambroski Posted May 18, 2017 Share Posted May 18, 2017 Just now, Snoslinger said: no, I'm making the bet very clear. I know how you fucking clowns operate. Whatever you say. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snoslinger Posted May 18, 2017 Share Posted May 18, 2017 (edited) I swear broski is a webba/huzy clone. types shit before his mind thinks about anything, and writes books about his thoughts, thinking everyone is interested and takes him seriously Edited May 18, 2017 by Snoslinger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zambroski Posted May 18, 2017 Share Posted May 18, 2017 Just now, Snoslinger said: what parameters did I change anyway? Don't start arguing the loss with me already. High mark will get back to you. GOOD LUCK (with the excuses as to why you lost). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Platinum Contributing Member Highmark Posted May 18, 2017 Platinum Contributing Member Share Posted May 18, 2017 2 minutes ago, Snoslinger said: i'll take the $100 bet. if collusion is found with either trump, his admin, or former aides, you pay a charity of my choice. none, i'll pay yours. don't try pulling any BS either, like claiming the collusion didn't have any effect on the election, therefore it doesn't matter. do we need to make things any more clear? Cool. We need to define collusion a little bit first. An indictment must be filed against someone or do you suggest something else? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zambroski Posted May 18, 2017 Share Posted May 18, 2017 Just now, Snoslinger said: I swear broski is a webba.huzy clone. types shit before his mind thinks about anything, and writes books about his thoughts, thinking everyone is interested and takes him seriously You should really focus on trying to NOT get your ass handed to you by more than one member here at a time. It gets gross. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Platinum Contributing Member Highmark Posted May 18, 2017 Platinum Contributing Member Share Posted May 18, 2017 5 minutes ago, T1R9sledder said: #2 is a suckers bet They know how that would turn out because they won't accept it themselves. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snoslinger Posted May 18, 2017 Share Posted May 18, 2017 Just now, Highmark said: Cool. We need to define collusion a little bit first. An indictment must be filed against someone or do you suggest something else? now who's changing shit? you made no mention of an indictment. collusion is pretty simple Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zambroski Posted May 18, 2017 Share Posted May 18, 2017 9 minutes ago, Snoslinger said: now who's changing shit? you made no mention of an indictment. collusion is pretty simple Oh...you get to change and set up your own parameters...not him? Seems his are pretty simple. Yours are convoluted and extensive. Meh....easier to make an argument after the loss that way I guess. PERFECT DEM!!!!!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Platinum Contributing Member Highmark Posted May 18, 2017 Platinum Contributing Member Share Posted May 18, 2017 (edited) 12 minutes ago, Snoslinger said: now who's changing shit? you made no mention of an indictment. collusion is pretty simple Really? Collusion is simple....what's your definition? A talked to B.? Edited May 18, 2017 by Highmark Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Platinum Contributing Member Skidooski Posted May 18, 2017 Platinum Contributing Member Share Posted May 18, 2017 30 minutes ago, Snoslinger said: i'll take the $100 bet. if collusion is found with either trump, his admin, or former aides, you pay a charity of my choice. none, i'll pay yours. don't try pulling any BS either, like claiming the collusion didn't have any effect on the election, therefore it doesn't matter. do we need to make things any more clear? 25 minutes ago, Highmark said: Cool. We need to define collusion a little bit first. An indictment must be filed against someone or do you suggest something else? Slinger is the only one allowed to make clarifications to a bet!!!!!11111 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Momorider Posted May 18, 2017 Share Posted May 18, 2017 57 minutes ago, SnowRider said: Dude - it's the same approach they took to any Hillary news 100% for years about everything Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snoslinger Posted May 18, 2017 Share Posted May 18, 2017 I can see where highmark is headed with this bet already. had a similar bet been made about Russian involvement at all, he'd be running around "where's the proof? just because the fbi and 5800 other agencies say it's true doesn't mean it's true" pretty fucking simple really - if evidence is found that one of the mentioned people were caught working with the Russians to damage Hillary, and help trump, that is collusion. it can be a memo, a recording, a money trail, etc. so do we have a deal or not? broski, maybe you should stay the fuck out of this? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.