- May 29, 2012
- 41,108
- 24,128
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
Not this time, Comrade.Or perhaps evidence is in the eye of the beholder?
Upvote
0
Not this time, Comrade.Or perhaps evidence is in the eye of the beholder?
Respectfully, I cannot imagine a single person who is not already in the Trump camp switching over. I do realize that some people only watch media sources which, when confronted with daily scandals, scour the airwaves so they can feature on a justice of the peace in Podunk, USA who accepted a bribe. I sometimes watch Fox News just to see, when the biggest stories break, how many times they can dust off Hillary's emails and pretend (ho-hum) that they were EVER significant.
But don't you think that the anti-Trump camp is galvanized, too?
They didn't come out in force in 2016, partly because they weren't inspired by Hillary, and partially because they thought that their friends and neighbors would see through Trump's lies, narcissism, greed, ignorance, sloth, and cheating and vote for Hillary--or stay home.
I remember sitting at the organ in church before the 2016 election, and hearing two parishioners in the front row bemoaning that they would be "required" to vote for Trump because he was "pro-life." I felt like shaking them and saying, "No, you are not required. If your gut tells you that he is completely untrustworthy and unqualified, you have to either stay home, ask for a write-in ballot, or vote for Hillary or a minor party candidate." How could anyone trust that Trump stood for anything--but making money for his company while in office?
Everything which is wrong with the American Right: a divorcee, adulterer, shady businessman who treats women like objects, bankruptcy enthusiast, confessed looter of charity for personal game who snuggles up to dictators and fills his administration with criminals and woefully under qualified yes men who has spent 25% of his tenure playing golf and needs ‘handlers’ is best because of the magic ‘R’.I do not care about Trump's money, his business, or even the assinie way he goes about doing things at times. I want liberals out.
Thank goodness for the law. Otherwise, we'd have lawlessness based on peoples' feelings.
Then find a crime you actually have evidence of Trump committing and then show that evidence to a judge in court. That's how it works.
BTW, news articles and opinion pieces do not count as evidence.
That seems to be the main issue they don't have anything
Looks like the far right talking points haven't caught up with the recent release of transcripts from the recent closed-door hearings on Donald's Ukraine problem.
Everything which is wrong with the American Right: a divorcee, adulterer, shady businessman who treats women like objects, bankruptcy enthusiast, confessed looter of charity for personal game who snuggles up to dictators and fills his administration with criminals and woefully under qualified yes men who has spent 25% of his tenure playing golf and needs ‘handlers’ is best because of the magic ‘R’.
‘Murica!
Looks like the far right talking points haven't caught up with the recent release of transcripts from the recent closed-door hearings on Donald's Ukraine problem.
Indeed -- it's a three-part defense.
1. There was no quid pro quo.
2. There was a quid pro quo, but it wasn't illegal.
3. There was a quid pro quo and it was illegal, but it's all Giuliani's fault.
Most of the GOP is transitioning to step 2, with a couple trying out step 3... don't get Left Behind!
Seems like someone else is kinda behind, the narrative has morphed into bribery and back into obstruction of justice (the very old fallback position when things look grim)
Guess that's what happens when all the popular rhetoric is failing and you actually read what constitutes a high crime and misdemeanor, and bribery just happens to be on that list
Which bit about my characterisation of Mr Trump is in error?And again, a lot of those topics you bring up are manufactured narratives. Wanna talk about ukraine? What about Zbigniew Brzezinski? Even tho some are dead focused on Trump many realise this was started during the Carter admin. 1980's. You are so worried about a phone call... well what corruption is Trump actualy talking about?
Oboma used Nazi's to perform regime change in the ukraine under the guise of ANTIFA. McCain, and Biden were part of it.
Just remember, when you turn your head and refuse to look, that is why you are stuck on Trump. You are not being told the whole story. This entire fabrication about Trump is a coverup.
Since when has being "anti-Nazi" been an extremist position?
Since when has being "anti-Nazi" been an extremist position?
This administration is going after some very powerful international entities as part of the globalist cabal. There is blowback. That is what we are seeing.
I also remember attempts at character assassination against at least 1 decorated veteran. Have we moved on from that talking point already?Indeed -- it's a three-part defense.
1. There was no quid pro quo.
2. There was a quid pro quo, but it wasn't illegal.
3. There was a quid pro quo and it was illegal, but it's all Giuliani's fault.
Most of the GOP is transitioning to step 2, with a couple trying out step 3... don't get Left Behind!
I also remember attempts at character assassination against at least 1 decorated veteran. Have we moved on from that talking point already?
I was trying to restrict it to last week.One? I can think of at least half a dozen of those incidents.
They didn't. It was one man's politically inspired opinion.Remember when those words mattered?
They didn't. It was one man's politically inspired opinion.
Democrats proved him wrong ... and Democrats, by taking the position he advocated then, are wrong now.
I can't argue with that.Which means his words now don't matter either, seeing as how his principles change with the tide.
I rarely try to defend Lindsey Graham.Sounds like you're saying his words were wrong then and they're wrong now... because the Democrats successfully defended Clinton.
That sound about right?
I can't argue with that.
I'm always leery of what Lindsey Graham says. What he actually does matters more.
I rarely try to defend Lindsey Graham.