Trump found guilty on all 34 counts

[ralliann]

I simply voted for Clinton out of logic. She was an experienced politician, Trump wasn't. Trump was more of a gamble based on that. But I didn't like her. And I wasn't too surprised and not worried that Trump won. And I was kinda glad too because I don't like the left mentality and didn't care for from the very beginning what looked like a hatchet job against Trump which went way beyond the pale. And the way they freaked out all across the country after the election solidified that.

I remember I could not believe my eyes when he began to win. I called my sister, a huge Trump supporter, To see how she was reacting to what was happening. She was so discouraged she could not watch! She could not even bring herself to watch him lose. She was shocked. I went up in the bedroom where my husband was sleeping. Opened the door and said, "we have a new president of the united states, his name is DONALD TRUMP". He poked his head up and said "really"?
We were made to feel like scum. Lawrence O donnel (whatever his name is) on CNN, just so spoke of us dripping with disdain. This was an election that began the high emotion because of how they spoke of us, the voter. Not the issues, not the policies. It is still going on 9 years in.

 

[ozso]

I remember I could not believe my eyes when he began to win. I called my sister, a huge Trump supporter, To see how she was reacting to what was happening. She was so discouraged she could not watch! She could not even bring herself to watch him lose. She was shocked. I went up in the bedroom where my husband was sleeping. Opened the door and said, "we have a new president of the united states, his name is DONALD TRUMP". He poked his head up and said "really"?
We were made to feel like scum. Lawrence O donnel (whatever his name is) on CNN, just so spoke of us dripping with disdain. This was an election that began the high emotion because of how they spoke of us, the voter. Not the issues, not the policies. It is still going on 9 years in.

I found it quite amusing considering all the there's no way on earth that he's going to win statements. I myself wasn't certain of that at all.

 

[childeye 2]

Now you accused Trump of slander, but failed to say who he slandered and why it was slander. It was just a blanket accusation.

Here is an example of slandering Democrats that many people are aware of:

Trump: All of us here today do not want to see our election victory stolen by emboldened radical-left Democrats, which is what they're doing. And stolen by the fake news media. That's what they've done and what they're doing. We will never give up, we will never concede. It doesn't happen. You don't concede when there's theft involved.

 

[ozso]

Here is an example of slandering Democrats that many people are aware of:

Trump: All of us here today do not want to see our election victory stolen by emboldened radical-left Democrats, which is what they're doing. And stolen by the fake news media. That's what they've done and what they're doing. We will never give up, we will never concede. It doesn't happen. You don't concede when there's theft involved.

Trump specified "radical-left Democrats", the way Biden specified "Maga Republicans".

“Too much of what’s happening in our country today is not normal. Donald Trump and the MAGA Republicans represent extremism that threatens the very foundations of our republic,” "MAGA Republicans have made their choice. They embrace anger. They thrive on chaos. They live not in the light of truth but in the shadow of lies,"...

Here's an NBC News article to substantiate what Biden said, including footage of him saying it:

Biden attacks Trump, MAGA Republicans as a threat to democracy in blistering speech

“Democracy cannot survive when one side believes there are only two outcomes to an election: either they win, or they were cheated,” Biden said in remarks in Philadelphia.

www.nbcnews.com

 

[ozso]

Last time I checked, what's supposed to be Steve Bannon, isn't Donald Trump.

 

[rambot]

If a president is an outstanding Christian, a really moral guy, a total peach, but is doing a really lousy job of running the country, should his character matter more than his performance? The correct answer is, no of course not.

"Lousy job of running the country" is an subjective statement.

And that's why character counts

Incorrect. I said if a president is the most wonderful guy in the world, but is doing a really lousy job of running the country, his performance matters more than his character in regard to him being president.

Again....that is a subjective statement.

It's a matter of perception and subjectivity. First of all the often repeated buzz-term "moral failings" is too vague to define.

It's not too vague. There is just no possible response when having to deal with who trump actually. All that's left is obfuscation; as if a political rival would receive the same grace and excuse making.

Too vague

There's nothing "vague" about it. Pastors are saying that their congregants are telling them that Jesus message is too weak and he needs to be tough.

I've posted the article about half a dozen times here.

 

[rambot]

,” "MAGA Republicans have made their choice. They embrace anger. They thrive on chaos.

Sounds right to me. It's all about strength.

 

[ozso]

Sounds right to me. It's all about strength.

Yeah but it sounds like slander to many Republicans, which was the point in me posting that.

 

[childeye 2]

Trump specified "radical-left Democrats", the way Biden specified "Maga Republicans".

It doesn't matter that he specified "radical left-wing Democrats", because the point of the matter is that since Trump had no proof the election was stolen, he was spreading slander.

 

[childeye 2]

Last time I checked, what's supposed to be Steve Bannon, isn't Donald Trump.

The Bannon tape is proof that Bannon knew Trump was going to say he won the election even if he hadn't.
Here is Trump doing exactly what Bannon said he would do:

 

[rambot]

Yeah but it sounds like slander to many Republicans, which was the point in me posting that.

I've seen PLENTY of Republicans say what I said to me. They LOVE those parts of his personality.

 

[ozso]

"Lousy job of running the country" is an subjective statement.

And that's why character counts

Judging character is more subjective. Losey job running the country can be backed up by statistics. And in my analogy it was a fact.

Again....that is a subjective statement.

In my analogy it's factual. If it's a fact the president is a great person, but a fact that he does a bad job of running the country, then performance means more than character when it comes to being president.

It's not too vague. There is just no possible response when having to deal with who trump actually. All that's left is obfuscation; as if a political rival would receive the same grace and excuse making.

There's absolutely no details whatsoever in "moral failings". It's an undefined blanket term that doesn't explain what the supposed "moral failings" are. Totally vague as in completely unspecific.

There's nothing "vague" about it. Pastors are saying that their congregants are telling them that Jesus message is too weak and he needs to be tough.

That explanation is less vague but still vague with no citation.

I've posted the article about half a dozen times here.

But since you didn't post it in your reply to me what you said was too vague and lacking citation. I don't read every reply you make to everyone else you know. And in checking through your posts in this thread, I saw no such article.

 

[Whyayeman]

There's absolutely no details whatsoever in "moral failings". It's an undefined blanket term that doesn't explain what the supposed "moral failings" are.

I have detailed a few. I could easily find more.

You have still avoided my question. After all this time (and so many posts) I conclude that you have no answer to my question:

Do you think that a criminal of such moral turpitude is a suitable candidate to 'make America great again'?​

​

Well?

 

[ozso]

I've seen PLENTY of Republicans say what I said to me. They LOVE those parts of his personality.

You saw what they said to you? Unsubstantiated personal anecdotes don't count for much.

 

[ozso]

I have detailed a few.

Not to me you didn't.

I could easily find more.

Sure thing.

You have still avoided my question. After all this time (and so many posts) I conclude that you have no answer to my question:

Do you think that a criminal of such moral turpitude is a suitable candidate to 'make America great again'?​

​

Well?

That's not a yes or no question because I don't know what you are calling moral turpitude. And you're not likely to ever get an answer from anyone asking loaded partisan questions like that. And as usual you're completely leaving out anything performance wise that makes one question his ability to make America great again. Just a whole lot of 'orange man bad'.

 

[Pommer]

Yeah but it sounds like slander to many Republicans, which was the point in me posting that.

Truth is a defense against a charge of slander.

 

[ozso]

Truth is a defense against a charge of slander.

In absolute truth, yes. In a subjective perception of the truth, no.

 

[NxNW]

Just like Joe Biden's Christian supporters don't ignore his moral failings. Joe Biden is a Catholic. He is pro gay marriage and pro abortion.

Neither is true. He's just against forcing his religious beliefs on his constituents.

Also, Biden is a racist.

Just look at his Vice President!

You know that thing that left wingers use to screech about Christians ignoring that no longer seems to be a big deal with Biden.

Because they're not true.

 

[childeye 2]

Biden boasting about African American voter support.

It would be helpful to see what Biden is responding to. I wouldn't call his claim of greater support amongst black constituents as boasting if he is defending against an accusation or insinuation.

He mocked a man's weight. "Look, fat, look."

Bad audio. Biden may have called the man fat, or he may have stuttered when trying to say look man look. It doesn't make sense to say look fat look. Overall, this is not an example of slander because the man does look overweight, but also this man is accusing Biden, without any evidence, of sending his son to work for Burisma.

Called a reporter a "stupid son of a *****".
I can't post the video here for obvious reasons.

Sounds like Biden was defending himself from an insinuation in a question Biden didn't like. Without seeing the question it's hard to determine if the reporter was doing that.

Continues to claim Trump called white supremacists "very fine people" even though that was debunked years ago.

Actually, the problem with this is that Biden doesn't say Trump called white supremacists fine people. It's true that Biden may have intended to remind people that Trump ended up having to explain why he expressed an equivalency between those who were ran over by the Nazi sympathizer and the white supremacists when Trump said this: "But we're closely following the terrible events unfolding in Charlottesville, Va.. We condemn in the strongest possible terms this egregious display of hatred, bigotry and violence on many sides, on many sides."

 

[RoBo1988]

Maybe your god just ain't the best at picking leaders.

He doesn't call the qualified, He qualifies the called. ( C.H. Spurgeon)