The house is on fire, Republican style...

[catbyte]

[IMG][/IMG]

[Mojo2]

1. ?

Nothing there

[marble falls]

3. What nothing isn't there?

[Bernardo de La Paz]

4. Your post seems pointless. Pls explain your point, if you have one. Pls don't post pointless posts.

[catbyte]

6. So sorry to have upset you so. This was all over DU, I didn't think I needed to explain further.

Once again, they're "outraged" over the leaks than the shit being leaked.

John Kelly ‘furious’ over leaks from national security advisers over Trump congratulating Putin: report

https://www.rawstory.com/2018/03/john-kelly-furious-someone-leaked-news-trump-ignoring-warnings-not-congratulate-putin-report/?comments=disqus

[Bernardo de La Paz]

7. The meme has nothing to do with Trump calling Putin

It's about tRump conspiring (matches) with Russia to steal US democracy (house on fire) and the GOP (2nd & 3rd most powerful House leaders) wants a second Special Counsel to investigate the Department of Justice (McCabe, Comey, and Rosenstein) who called the fire department (Mueller).

Even if the meme did have something to do with whatever story you are tired of, it does not mean that nothing is there. Further, it's a meme and presumably a new encapsulation. It certainly was new one for me.

Of course you didn't mention any of this. You are the first and only one to mention Kelly or leaks or tRump calling Putin.

If you want to be understood, don't be cryptic. If you don't want to be understand, then why post?

[catbyte]

8. I guess you told me. Please just put me on ignore then.

Sorry to have offended you.

[Rhiannon12866]

9. The reply was to poster #1 - who hasn't posted since.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

11. Thanks for straightening us out! . . . nt

[Rhiannon12866]

12. Oh good!

[Bernardo de La Paz]

14. Ships passing in the night :) I recommended your OP 8th out of 19 so far. Please post more memes.

Rhiannon straightened us out. Thanks again.

The OP is fine. It was post #1 by Mojo2 that was pointless. Then you mistook me as replying to you and I compounded the error by thinking you were Mojo2. Sorry!

Even so, neither you nor Mojo2 have offended me, but Mojo2's post (#1) remains pointless.

As a side note, I have nobody on Ignore at DU and can't remember ever using it. If necessary, I ignore (forget, don't bother with) a post after reading it.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

13. Sorry. I ENJOYED your OP. I was replying to mojo2. Your post seems to think I was replying to you.

With my post (#4) I wasn't replying to you but then I made the mistake of thinking you were Mojo2 (post #1) when you posted #6. I didn't look carefully enough to see who was actually replying when I wrote #7.

Sorry about that.

I enjoyed the meme you posted and interpreted it the way I did, but your interpretation is just fine too, of course. But I wrote #7 as if you had been the one who wrote post #1. It was post #1 with question mark and the two dismissive words that was the pointless one.

[Iliyah]

2. LOL, so real . . . . . .

Who leaked it!

[madinmaryland]

5. Someone on the pee tape ??

[mshasta]

10. so very true

for every day scandals