Kentucky congressman disinvites AOC to visit coalminers (4-17-2019)

[thinkingman]

nothing is making barr look bad besides the pathetic media saying barr is making himself look bad

there weren’t even any conditions in his letter. he indicates there never were. invite, as made originally, still on.

so…

is he still “scared” of AOC?

this is one of the best examples of the cnn media crap narratives i’ve ever seen.

even worse is this idiot for yahoo news article in op. i would be surprised if this fool even has any journalist credentials

i hope you all learn from this

[CaughtInTheMiddle]

Comer needs to get off this rollercoaster.

[madasheck]

@thinkingman

@biggestal99

@thinkingman

so, no. he didnt

That’s exactly how it went down, invited her unconditionally, put conditions on her new invite, then withdrew the conditions.

So basically it’s back to the original.

Like I said it makes Barr look weak.

Allan

let’s try this…

the letter is avail in the roll call link

can you please point out the text therein where a condition was applied to his invite to her?

How many times do you need to be told the original invite was not the same after the new condition before you stop trying to defend what isn’t there?

[reflechissez]

He won’t admit it.

[madasheck]

@reflechissez

He won’t admit it.

Of course not. That’s what’s behind the endless defense of empty semantics. You’d think on something that blatant they’d at least admit it and walk away.

[thinkingman]

@madasheck

@thinkingman

@biggestal99

@thinkingman

so, no. he didnt

That’s exactly how it went down, invited her unconditionally, put conditions on her new invite, then withdrew the conditions.

So basically it’s back to the original.

Like I said it makes Barr look weak.

Allan

let’s try this…

the letter is avail in the roll call link

can you please point out the text therein where a condition was applied to his invite to her?

How many times do you need to be told the original invite was not the same after the new condition before you stop trying to defend what isn’t there?

there was no condition in the letter

thanks

[biggestal99]

@thinkingman

it never was even a condition. the “before” in the tweet means before in time, not as a “or dont bother coming” condition. the tweet refers directly to his letter

now, for the third time, where in the letter is this “condition?

Calling for an apology before coming is a condition whether you like it or not.

Allan

[thinkingman]

@reflechissez

He won’t admit it.

curious - why dont you pm these kinds of cheerleading, or side comments to fellow posters instead of in the thread? they dont have anything to do with the topic, just the poster.

this is all you do

[thinkingman]

@biggestal99

@thinkingman

it never was even a condition. the “before” in the tweet means before in time, not as a “or dont bother coming” condition. the tweet refers directly to his letter

now, for the third time, where in the letter is this “condition?

Calling for an apology before coming is a condition whether you like it or not.

Allan

ahem

where in the letter is this “condition”?

i’ll keep asking

[thinkingman]

@madasheck

@reflechissez

He won’t admit it.

Of course not. That’s what’s behind the endless defense of empty semantics. You’d think on something that blatant they’d at least admit it and walk away.

none of you can show any kind of “condition” or “disinvite” of any kind

[biggestal99]

@thinkingman

none of you can show any kind of “condition” or “disinvite” of any kind

We showed you the evidence which you choose to ignore

Allan

[thinkingman]

that was the forth time i asked you to show where such a condition exists in his letter

you refuse to answer because you know there isnt any such condition and that it’s all media crap narrative and you swallowed it from a lefty “reporter” article cycled by “yahoo news” like a ham sandwich

[Borgia_dude]

@thinkingman

@biggestal99

@thinkingman

it never was even a condition. the “before” in the tweet means before in time, not as a “or dont bother coming” condition. the tweet refers directly to his letter

now, for the third time, where in the letter is this “condition?

Calling for an apology before coming is a condition whether you like it or not.

Allan

ahem

where in the letter is this “condition”?

i’ll keep asking

Is it possible the tweet clarified his position in the letter? You can’t pretend the tweet did not occur.

[thinkingman]

@Borgia_dude

@thinkingman

@biggestal99

@thinkingman

it never was even a condition. the “before” in the tweet means before in time, not as a “or dont bother coming” condition. the tweet refers directly to his letter

now, for the third time, where in the letter is this “condition?

Calling for an apology before coming is a condition whether you like it or not.

Allan

ahem

where in the letter is this “condition”?

i’ll keep asking

Is it possible the tweet clarified his position in the letter? You can’t pretend the tweet did not occur.

what you think the tweet said is nothing like whats in the letter

can we agree there are no conditions, or “disinvites” in the letter?

[biggestal99]

@thinkingman

what you think the tweet said is nothing like whats in the letter

can we agree there are no conditions, or “disinvites” in the letter?

As long as you will agree there is a condition in the tweet.

Maybe he wanted it both ways. Lol

Allan

[thinkingman]

@biggestal99

@thinkingman

what you think the tweet said is nothing like whats in the letter

can we agree there are no conditions, or “disinvites” in the letter?

As long as you will agree there is a condition in the tweet.

Maybe he wanted it both ways. Lol

Allan

that’s not realistic and frankly silly

there is no condition in the tweet because it refers to the letter, the underlying stance of his position and request, which has absolutely no conditions on the invite

[biggestal99]

@thinkingman

there is no condition in the tweet because it refers to the letter, the underlying stance of his position and request, which has absolutely no conditions on the invite

I call for her to issue an apology is a condition.

You are not seeing that. Lol.

Allan

[reflechissez]

oh, he sees it.

[thinkingman]

@biggestal99

@thinkingman

there is no condition in the tweet because it refers to the letter, the underlying stance of his position and request, which has absolutely no conditions on the invite

I call for her to issue an apology is a condition.

You are not seeing that. Lol.

Allan

there is nothing to see because there is no condition in the letter.

[biggestal99]

@thinkingman

there is nothing to see because there is no condition in the letter

However there was one in the tweet, which you will not admit.

But it is fact without a doubt.

Allan