@Fawlty v. @HomerThompson 1. Flynn, Stone, Manafort, Page, Kushner, Don Jr, Eric, President Trump, Ivanka, Sessions, DeVos, Preibus, Ryan, Pruitt, Pompeo, Bannon, or Perry will be formally criminally indicted by 23:59 EST 15 June 2018 2. Homer- 2 or more indicted, Fawlty- 1 will be indicted, Tie- 0 are indicted 3. 06/15/18 4. Signature bet 5. 3 months Just need okays from you both for it to be posted
Good with me, noting that it excludes the "both lose" clause. I'm okay dropping that. Signed. Lead, you're a damn good arbiter.
Offering @kahiljabroni a 3 month av and sig bet that at least 5 msm outlets covered the uranium one deal, and at least one had a major story on the topic that was not a defense of Clinton. http://forums.sherdog.com/threads/uranium-1-deal.3570847/#post-131802803
Well if you are willing to bet then I'm sure you know that they exist so I'm not betting. Anyway we might have a different definition of covering a story. Do you mean"covering" like discussing it in a neutral manner for a segment or two? Or do you mean"covering" like they cover trump/russia....leading with the story for weeks, bombarding with leading questions, congressional investigations, tons of innuendo and biased opinions based on nothing? My main point was the coverage was not proportional to the alleged crime. Everyone should know the full details of the story and I bet 8 out of 10 civilians know nothing of it.
So, you haven't done any investigation into what the msm actually says before spouting off, don't know anything about it, but are willing to make a thread ti criticize them for not saying anything in a story that occurred and was covered literally years ago. Good talk.
Being able to make posts like this is just as important a part of the idea of betting as the actual wins.
Take it to the bet thread (but since you brought it up) The $500 bet that you found any excuse to dodge (that you lost) would have went here. Look at this Charity Navigator website that goes to "Freedom of the Press Foundation" which donations to Wikileaks go through. https://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=my.donations.makedonation&ein=460967274 Donations to wikileaks go there. See for yourself https://shop.wikileaks.org/donate You ready to send that $500 yet?
Sure, if you want to have a discussion about it Hans, just because you can give money to something.... doesn't mean it is a charity. I know this concept is impossible for you to grasp. Non-profit =/= charity
Lies. They never announced a bombshell. People assumed. Also since you brought it up I am allowed to defend my position: The $500 bet that you found any excuse to dodge (that you lost) would have went here. Look at this Charity Navigator website that goes to "Freedom of the Press Foundation" which donations to Wikileaks go through. https://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=my.donations.makedonation&ein=460967274 Donations to wikileaks go there. See for yourself https://shop.wikileaks.org/donate
But it is listed at Charity Navigator. I win. If I want to give a charitable donation it is charity. If a man can claim to be a woman I can sure as hell claim that my charitable donation is charity. Case closed
Being able to cut someone a check doesn't make them a charity lol I'm surprised you didn't try and list yourself
Alright how about this: by February charges will be brought against Kushner, or Manafort, or Diaper Don based wholly or in part on this meeting or a chain of evidence of which this meeting is part. AV and sig bet for a month. Good to you?
Aight. If you want it to have a time limit... for some reason then the same terms but once Mueller closes his investigation and we switch to it if Mueller concludes criminal activity occurred in this meeting. Good enough?
I'll stick with charges against those three at the time that Mueller closes the investigation? Good enough?