VP get's fact checked

[Always in His Presence]

Well that is inconvenient.

 

[Nithavela]

View attachment 350979
Well that is inconvenient.

His supreme court justices also said that they wouldn't overturn Roe vs Wade.

 

[Always in His Presence]

His supreme court justices also said that they wouldn't overturn Roe vs Wade.

pssst.... the topic is about a false statement made by the VP about what the former President stated and was shown in multiple places as patently false.

 

[essentialsaltes]

He said he would, and then he said he wouldn't.

I hope we never find out for sure, but this should be settled with greater certainty when the new GOP platform is unveiled. For the past 40+ years, the GOP platform has called for a human life amendment to the Constitution to ban abortion. In 1976, it was not as declarative, but still 'supported those efforts'.

 

[Always in His Presence]

He said he would, and then he said he wouldn't.

I hope we never find out for sure, but this should be settled with greater certainty when the new GOP platform is unveiled. For the past 40+ years, the GOP platform has called for a human life amendment to the Constitution to ban abortion. In 1976, it was not as declarative, but still 'supported those efforts'.

I personally, absolutely hope there is a complete ban on elective abortions - the 1% incases or rape or the mother's health are necessary - the remaining should be banned -

Those same people saying my body should be taking responsibility for the child they carry. That is my opinion

Harris got fact checked and proven in error - that is the truth.

Trump has evolved

 

[essentialsaltes]

pssst.... the topic is about a false statement made by the VP about what the former President stated

Her statement was not about what he said, but about what he "would do".

Harris got fact checked and proven in error - that is the truth.

Some randos on X made a note.

This isn't entirely hairsplitting. 8 years ago, it might have been:

"Trump would personally benefit from foreign governments seeking to curry favor by patronizing his businesses."

Fact Check: Trump stated his businesses would be put into a blind trust, so he would have no knowledge of foreign attempts at influence.

 

[Desk trauma]

I don't believe for one second that he would veto such legislation were it before him.

 

[Nithavela]

pssst.... the topic is about a false statement made by the VP about what the former President stated and was shown in multiple places as patently false.

The topic is not about what Trump stated, but what he will do. Trump has a history of choosing people who say one thing about what they'll do about abortion and then turn around and do the opposite, so I see no reason to take him by his word on this issue.

 

[Pommer]

The topic is not about what Trump stated, but what he will do. Trump has a history of choosing people who say one thing about what they'll do about abortion and then turn around and do the opposite, so I see no reason to take him by his word on this issue.

I find it sad to see people who are driven by principles to “protect human life at all costs” putting their faith into a person who has no principles beyond get power (and hold onto it for as long as possible).

 

[Nithavela]

I find it sad to see people who are driven by principles to “protect human life at all costs” putting their faith into a person who has no principles beyond get power (and hold onto it for as long as possible).

Which people are you talking about?

 

[Pommer]

Which people are you talking about?

Our “pro-life” friends.

 

[probinson]

I don't think Trump has any moral obligations regarding abortion, and I believe that he would do whatever he thought would be most beneficial for him personally and politically if any legislation were put in front of him.

 

[Always in His Presence]

The topic is not about what Trump stated, but what he will do. Trump has a history of choosing people who say one thing about what they'll do about abortion and then turn around and do the opposite, so I see no reason to take him by his word on this issue.

Actually, if you read the title and the OP - the topic is about the VP and her getting fact checked.

 

[Nithavela]

Actually, if you read the title and the OP - the topic is about the VP and her getting fact checked.

The "fact" that was checked was an opinion of what Trump would do, and the links in the twitter comment do not invalidate this opinion.