Jinx 2 said:

---

Kyle said:

---

Jinx 2 said:

---

So there sits Trump with his elaborate coif of fake sprayed blond hair, his metrosexual bronzer staining the collar of his shirt, and his golf-boy paunch calling a roomful of military brass who look and act like real men "babies."

It probably took all the military discipline they could muster not to give him a well-deserved ass-whooping.

---

Do you realize you never actually make substantive arguments but just defer to personal attacks? Do you think these emotional screeds make you appear intelligent or rational?

---

Darlin', I offered an accurate

---

You didn't. And the fact that you think you did, that is on you.

Jinx 2 said:

---

contrario said:

---

I don't even know where to start with you partisan nuts. I've got nuts to the left of me and nuts to the right of me. All of you are hypocrites when it comes to your outrage and you all look like fcking morons trying to be critical of the other side.

---

It's not partisan to want coordinated international action to ensure the future viability of the planet. It's common sense.

Unfortunately, only one party in the United States currently even acknowledges that, Houston, we have a problem. I believe that will continue until parts of Houston are underwater year round.

It'll be interesting to see how Australia responds to its awful summer. My guess is that climate change will become a bigger political priority because people are tired of watching it happen and watching the government ignore it.

---

Here is the thing Jinx, and deep down you know it's true: you would disagree with whatever Trump did and agree with whatever a democrat did. So you will play this expletive game and so will republicans and the ones in the middle holding our hands up in despair will continue to suffer because you partisans will keep blaming the other side while nothing actually gets fixed.

You are a very dishonest, sad little man.

I would have expected you could at least take joy in the Baby Trump balloon, but it seems you are beyond joy and happiness.

And all this before the 2020 elections. You may be in deep depression after November.

Oldbear83 said:

---

You are a very dishonest, sad little man.

I would have expected you could at least take joy in the Baby Trump balloon, but it seems you are beyond joy and happiness.

And all this before the 2020 elections. You may be in deep depression after November.

---

Trump is no heavy favorite to win in 2020.

If the Democrats can get their vote out.....Trump will be in real trouble .

Canada2017 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

You are a very dishonest, sad little man.

I would have expected you could at least take joy in the Baby Trump balloon, but it seems you are beyond joy and happiness.

And all this before the 2020 elections. You may be in deep depression after November.

---

Trump is no heavy favorite to win in 2020.

If the Democrats can get their vote fraud maxed out.....Trump will be in real trouble .

---

FIFY

Don't put anything past the democrat vote fraud machine

Ton of projection and malice in your posts there, Jimmy. Not making you look rational, let alone convincing.

contrario said:

---

Jinx 2 said:

---

contrario said:

---

I don't even know where to start with you partisan nuts. I've got nuts to the left of me and nuts to the right of me. All of you are hypocrites when it comes to your outrage and you all look like fcking morons trying to be critical of the other side.

---

It's not partisan to want coordinated international action to ensure the future viability of the planet. It's common sense.

Unfortunately, only one party in the United States currently even acknowledges that, Houston, we have a problem. I believe that will continue until parts of Houston are underwater year round.

It'll be interesting to see how Australia responds to its awful summer. My guess is that climate change will become a bigger political priority because people are tired of watching it happen and watching the government ignore it.

---

Here is the thing Jinx, and deep down you know it's true: you would disagree with whatever Trump did and agree with whatever a democrat did. So you will play this expletive game and so will republicans and the ones in the middle holding our hands up in despair will continue to suffer because you partisans will keep blaming the other side while nothing actually gets fixed.

---

You aren't in the middle. Saying you are doesn't make it so. Where do you have any substantive policy disagreements with Republicans? Here's a litmus test. You don't "believe in" climate change = you are a Republican in this political environment.

Please don't speak for me.

I've stated, clearly and numerous times, that my major policy issue is climate change. That threat is so grave that it overshadows every other political issue out there. As long as Republicans across the board continue to deny science and, thus, opt the United States out of any meaningful conversations on policy with other nations (since this is a global issue), I will support Democrats.

If and when any Republican steps forward to acknowledge what's happening and that we need to be part of a global effort to mitigate the worst possible outcomes, I'll be all ears. But I'm not optimistic, and that certainly won't happen under Trump's leadership.

What baffles me is that climate change is a HUGE economic threat. If Republicans are (supposedly / ballooning deficit) the party of fiscal responsibility and private corporations are now assessing the impact of climate change on their business models, how is it fiscally responsible to ignore an issue that threatens to wreak economic havoc worldwide?

There are obvious disagreements among Democrats on various issues = why we have umpteen candidates, ranging from moderates like Biden and Buttigieg to those whose policies are more liberal (Sanders and Warren). I took a Washington Post quiz and it turns out the candidate who fits my policy positions best is...Michael Bloomberg.

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

You are a very dishonest, sad little man.

I would have expected you could at least take joy in the Baby Trump balloon, but it seems you are beyond joy and happiness.

And all this before the 2020 elections. You may be in deep depression after November.

---

Thanks for your ad hom comments. But, I'm more concerned that Trump's moronic antics, lack of intelligence, malignant narcissism, and inexperience have already predestined a socialist will win the WH, with both houses lined up behind him/her, and you should be too.

---

^^^ Are you having a senior moment and thinking about our last president named obama?

Jinx 2 said:

---

contrario said:

---

Jinx 2 said:

---

contrario said:

---

I don't even know where to start with you partisan nuts. I've got nuts to the left of me and nuts to the right of me. All of you are hypocrites when it comes to your outrage and you all look like fcking morons trying to be critical of the other side.

---

It's not partisan to want coordinated international action to ensure the future viability of the planet. It's common sense.

Unfortunately, only one party in the United States currently even acknowledges that, Houston, we have a problem. I believe that will continue until parts of Houston are underwater year round.

It'll be interesting to see how Australia responds to its awful summer. My guess is that climate change will become a bigger political priority because people are tired of watching it happen and watching the government ignore it.

---

Here is the thing Jinx, and deep down you know it's true: you would disagree with whatever Trump did and agree with whatever a democrat did. So you will play this expletive game and so will republicans and the ones in the middle holding our hands up in despair will continue to suffer because you partisans will keep blaming the other side while nothing actually gets fixed.

---

You aren't in the middle. Saying you are doesn't make it so. Where do you have any substantive policy disagreements with Republicans? Here's a litmus test. You don't "believe in" climate change = you are a Republican in this political environment.

Please don't speak for me.

I've stated, clearly and numerous times, that my major policy issue is climate change. That threat is so grave that it overshadows every other political issue out there. As long as Republicans across the board continue to deny science and, thus, opt the United States out of any meaningful conversations on policy with other nations (since this is a global issue), I will support Democrats.

If and when any Republican steps forward to acknowledge what's happening and that we need to be part of a global effort to mitigate the worst possible outcomes, I'll be all ears. But I'm not optimistic, and that certainly won't happen under Trump's leadership.

What baffles me is that climate change is a HUGE economic threat. If Republicans are (supposedly / ballooning deficit) the party of fiscal responsibility and private corporations are now assessing the impact of climate change on their business models, how is it fiscally responsible to ignore an issue that threatens to wreak economic havoc worldwide?

There are obvious disagreements among Democrats on various issues = why we have umpteen candidates, ranging from moderates like Biden and Buttigieg to those whose policies are more liberal (Sanders and Warren). I took a Washington Post quiz and it turns out the candidate who fits my policy positions best is...Michael Bloomberg.

---

LMAO you poor little thingy

Where's your Cinque personality? Taking a break with that one???

Sam Lowry said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

You're a bunch of dopes and babies': Inside Trump's stunning tirade against generals
The new book "A Very Stable Genius" documents how Trump lashed out at attempts by military leaders and diplomats to teach him about U.S. alliances and obligations around the globe.

Read in The Washington Post: https://apple.news/AgjLcLQRWT3SuR4lC1YWTig

---

If Trump is questioning the post-war international order, it's because he was elected to do so.

---

You elected him to suck up to Putin and Kim and the Sauds? To commit political assassination?

Jinx 2 said:

---

contrario said:

---

Jinx 2 said:

---

contrario said:

---

I don't even know where to start with you partisan nuts. I've got nuts to the left of me and nuts to the right of me. All of you are hypocrites when it comes to your outrage and you all look like fcking morons trying to be critical of the other side.

---

It's not partisan to want coordinated international action to ensure the future viability of the planet. It's common sense.

Unfortunately, only one party in the United States currently even acknowledges that, Houston, we have a problem. I believe that will continue until parts of Houston are underwater year round.

It'll be interesting to see how Australia responds to its awful summer. My guess is that climate change will become a bigger political priority because people are tired of watching it happen and watching the government ignore it.

---

Here is the thing Jinx, and deep down you know it's true: you would disagree with whatever Trump did and agree with whatever a democrat did. So you will play this expletive game and so will republicans and the ones in the middle holding our hands up in despair will continue to suffer because you partisans will keep blaming the other side while nothing actually gets fixed.

---

You aren't in the middle. Saying you are doesn't make it so. Where do you have any substantive policy disagreements with Republicans? Here's a litmus test. You don't "believe in" climate change = you are a Republican in this political environment.

Please don't speak for me.

I've stated, clearly and numerous times, that my major policy issue is climate change. That threat is so grave that it overshadows every other political issue out there. As long as Republicans across the board continue to deny science and, thus, opt the United States out of any meaningful conversations on policy with other nations (since this is a global issue), I will support Democrats.

If and when any Republican steps forward to acknowledge what's happening and that we need to be part of a global effort to mitigate the worst possible outcomes, I'll be all ears. But I'm not optimistic, and that certainly won't happen under Trump's leadership.

What baffles me is that climate change is a HUGE economic threat. If Republicans are (supposedly / ballooning deficit) the party of fiscal responsibility and private corporations are now assessing the impact of climate change on their business models, how is it fiscally responsible to ignore an issue that threatens to wreak economic havoc worldwide?

There are obvious disagreements among Democrats on various issues = why we have umpteen candidates, ranging from moderates like Biden and Buttigieg to those whose policies are more liberal (Sanders and Warren). I took a Washington Post quiz and it turns out the candidate who fits my policy positions best is...Michael Bloomberg.

---

https://theresurgent.com/2019/07/18/reminder-climate-change-is-about-rich-elites-controlling-you/

quash said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

You're a bunch of dopes and babies': Inside Trump's stunning tirade against generals
The new book "A Very Stable Genius" documents how Trump lashed out at attempts by military leaders and diplomats to teach him about U.S. alliances and obligations around the globe.

Read in The Washington Post: https://apple.news/AgjLcLQRWT3SuR4lC1YWTig

---

If Trump is questioning the post-war international order, it's because he was elected to do so.

---

You elected him to suck up to Putin and Kim and the Sauds? To commit political assassination?

---

If he did, he's not getting what he voted for.

Canada2017 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

You are a very dishonest, sad little man.

I would have expected you could at least take joy in the Baby Trump balloon, but it seems you are beyond joy and happiness.

And all this before the 2020 elections. You may be in deep depression after November.

---

Trump is no heavy favorite to win in 2020.

If the Democrats can get their vote out.....Trump will be in real trouble .

---

The reasons Trump is in very good shape would take its own thread to fully discuss, and the Left side of the aisle is clearly not going to accept any reality they don't like.

You are correct that turnout is key, but you ignore the driving factors at work right now.

TexasScientist said:

---

Florda_mike said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

You are a very dishonest, sad little man.

I would have expected you could at least take joy in the Baby Trump balloon, but it seems you are beyond joy and happiness.

And all this before the 2020 elections. You may be in deep depression after November.

---

Thanks for your ad hom comments. But, I'm more concerned that Trump's moronic antics, lack of intelligence, malignant narcissism, and inexperience have already predestined a socialist will win the WH, with both houses lined up behind him/her, and you should be too.

---

^^^ Are you having a senior moment and thinking about our last president named obama?

---

Just lamenting the conundrum of a reckless president, and what that foretells about November.

---

Wondering if your "science" job has lost government funding due to Trump?

You speak with such anger for Trump that you appear to have lost money from Trump being president

Obama was such a drag on private economy that it made me despise him fwiw. Still do

Jinx 2 said:

---

contrario said:

---

Jinx 2 said:

---

contrario said:

---

I don't even know where to start with you partisan nuts. I've got nuts to the left of me and nuts to the right of me. All of you are hypocrites when it comes to your outrage and you all look like fcking morons trying to be critical of the other side.

---

It's not partisan to want coordinated international action to ensure the future viability of the planet. It's common sense.

Unfortunately, only one party in the United States currently even acknowledges that, Houston, we have a problem. I believe that will continue until parts of Houston are underwater year round.

It'll be interesting to see how Australia responds to its awful summer. My guess is that climate change will become a bigger political priority because people are tired of watching it happen and watching the government ignore it.

---

Here is the thing Jinx, and deep down you know it's true: you would disagree with whatever Trump did and agree with whatever a democrat did. So you will play this expletive game and so will republicans and the ones in the middle holding our hands up in despair will continue to suffer because you partisans will keep blaming the other side while nothing actually gets fixed.

---

What baffles me is that climate change is a HUGE economic threat. If Republicans are (supposedly / ballooning deficit) the party of fiscal responsibility and private corporations are now assessing the impact of climate change on their business models, how is it fiscally responsible to ignore an issue that threatens to wreak economic havoc worldwide?

---

They're rightly more concerned about the cost of overreacting.

quash said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

You're a bunch of dopes and babies': Inside Trump's stunning tirade against generals
The new book "A Very Stable Genius" documents how Trump lashed out at attempts by military leaders and diplomats to teach him about U.S. alliances and obligations around the globe.

Read in The Washington Post: https://apple.news/AgjLcLQRWT3SuR4lC1YWTig

---

If Trump is questioning the post-war international order, it's because he was elected to do so.

---

You elected him to suck up to Putin and Kim and the Sauds? To commit political assassination?

---

Every president who tries to resolve conflicts and avoid wars is accused of sucking up. It's par for the course.

Florda_mike said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Florda_mike said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

You are a very dishonest, sad little man.

I would have expected you could at least take joy in the Baby Trump balloon, but it seems you are beyond joy and happiness.

And all this before the 2020 elections. You may be in deep depression after November.

---

Thanks for your ad hom comments. But, I'm more concerned that Trump's moronic antics, lack of intelligence, malignant narcissism, and inexperience have already predestined a socialist will win the WH, with both houses lined up behind him/her, and you should be too.

---

^^^ Are you having a senior moment and thinking about our last president named obama?

---

Just lamenting the conundrum of a reckless president, and what that foretells about November.

---

Wondering if your "science" job has lost government funding due to Trump?

You speak with such anger for Trump that you appear to have lost money from Trump being president

Obama was such a drag on private economy that it made me despise him fwiw. Still do

---

Nope. I just believe principle and character should transcend politics.

TexasScientist said:

---

Florda_mike said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Florda_mike said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

You are a very dishonest, sad little man.

I would have expected you could at least take joy in the Baby Trump balloon, but it seems you are beyond joy and happiness.

And all this before the 2020 elections. You may be in deep depression after November.

---

Thanks for your ad hom comments. But, I'm more concerned that Trump's moronic antics, lack of intelligence, malignant narcissism, and inexperience have already predestined a socialist will win the WH, with both houses lined up behind him/her, and you should be too.

---

^^^ Are you having a senior moment and thinking about our last president named obama?

---

Just lamenting the conundrum of a reckless president, and what that foretells about November.

---

Wondering if your "science" job has lost government funding due to Trump?

You speak with such anger for Trump that you appear to have lost money from Trump being president

Obama was such a drag on private economy that it made me despise him fwiw. Still do

---

Nope. I just believe principle and character should transcend politics.

---

Policy outcomes > political party > personal morality

The above is true because policy outcomes are all that matter. Are Americans more free or less free? Are American borders more secure or less secure. If Ron Jeremy would lower taxes, cut spending, cut entitlements, reduce regulation, veto new laws, uphold the constitution and secure the borders, I'd be happy to vote for him. He could engage in orgies in the Lincoln bedroom and if we were freer because he advanced good policies, I would not care.

We don't vote for preachers. We don't vote for saints. We vote for politicians.

Bearitto said:

---

Policy outcomes > political party > personal morality

The above is true because policy outcomes are all that matter. Are Americans more free or less free? Are American borders more secure or less secure. If Ron Jeremy would lower taxes, cut spending, cut entitlements, reduce regulation, veto new laws, uphold the constitution and secure the borders, I'd be happy to vote for him. He could engage in orgies in the Lincoln bedroom and if we were freer because he advanced good policies, I would not care.

We don't vote for preachers. We don't vote for saints. We vote for politicians.

---

Then why did Repubs impeach Bill Clinton?

Jinx 2 said:

---

contrario said:

---

Jinx 2 said:

---

contrario said:

---

I don't even know where to start with you partisan nuts. I've got nuts to the left of me and nuts to the right of me. All of you are hypocrites when it comes to your outrage and you all look like fcking morons trying to be critical of the other side.

---

It's not partisan to want coordinated international action to ensure the future viability of the planet. It's common sense.

Unfortunately, only one party in the United States currently even acknowledges that, Houston, we have a problem. I believe that will continue until parts of Houston are underwater year round.

It'll be interesting to see how Australia responds to its awful summer. My guess is that climate change will become a bigger political priority because people are tired of watching it happen and watching the government ignore it.

---

Here is the thing Jinx, and deep down you know it's true: you would disagree with whatever Trump did and agree with whatever a democrat did. So you will play this expletive game and so will republicans and the ones in the middle holding our hands up in despair will continue to suffer because you partisans will keep blaming the other side while nothing actually gets fixed.

---

You aren't in the middle. Saying you are doesn't make it so. Where do you have any substantive policy disagreements with Republicans? Here's a litmus test. You don't "believe in" climate change = you are a Republican in this political environment.

Please don't speak for me.

I've stated, clearly and numerous times, that my major policy issue is climate change. That threat is so grave that it overshadows every other political issue out there. As long as Republicans across the board continue to deny science and, thus, opt the United States out of any meaningful conversations on policy with other nations (since this is a global issue), I will support Democrats.

If and when any Republican steps forward to acknowledge what's happening and that we need to be part of a global effort to mitigate the worst possible outcomes, I'll be all ears. But I'm not optimistic, and that certainly won't happen under Trump's leadership.

What baffles me is that climate change is a HUGE economic threat. If Republicans are (supposedly / ballooning deficit) the party of fiscal responsibility and private corporations are now assessing the impact of climate change on their business models, how is it fiscally responsible to ignore an issue that threatens to wreak economic havoc worldwide?

There are obvious disagreements among Democrats on various issues = why we have umpteen candidates, ranging from moderates like Biden and Buttigieg to those whose policies are more liberal (Sanders and Warren). I took a Washington Post quiz and it turns out the candidate who fits my policy positions best is...Michael Bloomberg.

---

NO ONE IS DENYING SCIENCE!!! Everyone agrees that the climate is changing. But your "sky is falling" routine is what most people do not subscribe to...including scientists.

Jinx 2 said:

---

Bearitto said:

---

Policy outcomes > political party > personal morality

The above is true because policy outcomes are all that matter. Are Americans more free or less free? Are American borders more secure or less secure. If Ron Jeremy would lower taxes, cut spending, cut entitlements, reduce regulation, veto new laws, uphold the constitution and secure the borders, I'd be happy to vote for him. He could engage in orgies in the Lincoln bedroom and if we were freer because he advanced good policies, I would not care.

We don't vote for preachers. We don't vote for saints. We vote for politicians.

---

Then why did Repubs impeach Bill Clinton?

---

From your precious CNN "President Bill Clinton faced impeachment for something much more personal and salacious: he had an affair in the Oval Office and then lied about it to cover it up."

Jinx 2 said:

---

Bearitto said:

---

Policy outcomes > political party > personal morality

The above is true because policy outcomes are all that matter. Are Americans more free or less free? Are American borders more secure or less secure. If Ron Jeremy would lower taxes, cut spending, cut entitlements, reduce regulation, veto new laws, uphold the constitution and secure the borders, I'd be happy to vote for him. He could engage in orgies in the Lincoln bedroom and if we were freer because he advanced good policies, I would not care.

We don't vote for preachers. We don't vote for saints. We vote for politicians.

---

Then why did Repubs impeach Bill Clinton?

---

Only thing that saved Clinton was Republicans getting Congress in '94

Then Gingrich saved economy and Clinton followed republican economic orders into a second term

Clinton stayed in office just like Trump will. Get over Clinton

fadskier said:

---

Jinx 2 said:

---

Bearitto said:

---

Policy outcomes > political party > personal morality

The above is true because policy outcomes are all that matter. Are Americans more free or less free? Are American borders more secure or less secure. If Ron Jeremy would lower taxes, cut spending, cut entitlements, reduce regulation, veto new laws, uphold the constitution and secure the borders, I'd be happy to vote for him. He could engage in orgies in the Lincoln bedroom and if we were freer because he advanced good policies, I would not care.

We don't vote for preachers. We don't vote for saints. We vote for politicians.

---

Then why did Repubs impeach Bill Clinton?

---

From your precious CNN "President Bill Clinton faced impeachment for something much more personal and salacious: he had an affair in the Oval Office and then lied about it to cover it up."

---

Trump paid off his paramours; Michael Cohen is now doing time for his role in that.

Trump withheld foreign aide to force a foreign government to investigate a political opponent. While his sons, Dumb and Dumber, and daughter have done worse than Hunter Biden and Republicans haven't uttered a peep.

Then Trump and Senate republicans obstructed justice by failing to comply with legitimate subpeonas. No matter how often Fox News tells you this isn't a legitmate investigation, it is. If either Bill or Hillary Clinton had pulled the stunts Trump pulled, you'd have had both of them up in stocks on the White House lawn and allowed voters to pelt them with rotten vegetables.

There's no way you can claim Clinton did anything worse than what Trump has done both during his campaign and while in office. But, of course, you do. Most Republicans aren't stupid enough to believe what's happening is in any way legit. They just want to keep control by any means possible. Which now means cover-ups, obstruction, obfuscation and trying to reduce the number of voters they think might not vote for them.

Jinx 2 said:

---

fadskier said:

---

Jinx 2 said:

---

Bearitto said:

---

Policy outcomes > political party > personal morality

The above is true because policy outcomes are all that matter. Are Americans more free or less free? Are American borders more secure or less secure. If Ron Jeremy would lower taxes, cut spending, cut entitlements, reduce regulation, veto new laws, uphold the constitution and secure the borders, I'd be happy to vote for him. He could engage in orgies in the Lincoln bedroom and if we were freer because he advanced good policies, I would not care.

We don't vote for preachers. We don't vote for saints. We vote for politicians.

---

Then why did Repubs impeach Bill Clinton?

---

From your precious CNN "President Bill Clinton faced impeachment for something much more personal and salacious: he had an affair in the Oval Office and then lied about it to cover it up."

---

Trump paid off his paramours; Michael Cohen is now doing time for his role in that.

Trump withheld foreign aide to force a foreign government to investigate a political opponent. While his sons, Dumb and Dumber, and daughter have done worse than Hunter Biden and Republicans haven't uttered a peep.

Then Trump and Senate republicans obstructed justice by failing to comply with legitimate subpeonas. No matter how often Fox News tells you this isn't a legitmate investigation, it is. If either Bill or Hillary Clinton had pulled the stunts Trump pulled, you'd have had both of them up in stocks on the White House lawn and allowed voters to pelt them with rotten vegetables.

There's no way you can claim Clinton did anything worse than what Trump has done both during his campaign and while in office. But, of course, you do. Most Republicans aren't stupid enough to believe what's happening is in any way legit. They just want to keep control by any means possible. Which now means cover-ups, obstruction, obfuscation and trying to reduce the number of voters they think might not vote for them.

---

I didn't claim Clinton did anything. I quoted CNN. You continue to lump me in with people that watch foxnews...but find where I have quoted FoxNews....Trump withholding aide has not been proven but Biden bragged about it on video...and once again, why can you not have a dicsussion with personal attacks and name-calling. You accuse Trump of it, but you do the same thing. Hypocrite much?

Jinx 2 said:

---

Bearitto said:

---

Policy outcomes > political party > personal morality

The above is true because policy outcomes are all that matter. Are Americans more free or less free? Are American borders more secure or less secure. If Ron Jeremy would lower taxes, cut spending, cut entitlements, reduce regulation, veto new laws, uphold the constitution and secure the borders, I'd be happy to vote for him. He could engage in orgies in the Lincoln bedroom and if we were freer because he advanced good policies, I would not care.

We don't vote for preachers. We don't vote for saints. We vote for politicians.

---

Then why did Repubs impeach Bill Clinton?

---

Again, I welcome you to not respond to any of my posts. I prefer not to interact with toxic personalities like yours. Thanks for understanding.

Jinx 2 said:

---

fadskier said:

---

Jinx 2 said:

---

Bearitto said:

---

Policy outcomes > political party > personal morality

The above is true because policy outcomes are all that matter. Are Americans more free or less free? Are American borders more secure or less secure. If Ron Jeremy would lower taxes, cut spending, cut entitlements, reduce regulation, veto new laws, uphold the constitution and secure the borders, I'd be happy to vote for him. He could engage in orgies in the Lincoln bedroom and if we were freer because he advanced good policies, I would not care.

We don't vote for preachers. We don't vote for saints. We vote for politicians.

---

Then why did Repubs impeach Bill Clinton?

---

From your precious CNN "President Bill Clinton faced impeachment for something much more personal and salacious: he had an affair in the Oval Office and then lied about it to cover it up."

---

Trump paid off his paramours; Michael Cohen is now doing time for his role in that.

Trump withheld foreign aide to force a foreign government to investigate a political opponent. While his sons, Dumb and Dumber, and daughter have done worse than Hunter Biden and Republicans haven't uttered a peep.

Then Trump and Senate republicans obstructed justice by failing to comply with legitimate subpeonas. No matter how often Fox News tells you this isn't a legitmate investigation, it is. If either Bill or Hillary Clinton had pulled the stunts Trump pulled, you'd have had both of them up in stocks on the White House lawn and allowed voters to pelt them with rotten vegetables.

There's no way you can claim Clinton did anything worse than what Trump has done both during his campaign and while in office. But, of course, you do. Most Republicans aren't stupid enough to believe what's happening is in any way legit. They just want to keep control by any means possible. Which now means cover-ups, obstruction, obfuscation and trying to reduce the number of voters they think might not vote for them.

---

It's not clear that the Cohen payoffs were illegal; I don't believe so. In any case, nothing that any of the Trumps have been accused of comes close to Clinton's campaign finance violations and obstruction. There are legitimate reasons to resist subpoenas. Congress could test Trump's reasons in court, but they backed down. Wonder why?

Sam Lowry said:

---

Jinx 2 said:

---

fadskier said:

---

Jinx 2 said:

---

Bearitto said:

---

Policy outcomes > political party > personal morality

The above is true because policy outcomes are all that matter. Are Americans more free or less free? Are American borders more secure or less secure. If Ron Jeremy would lower taxes, cut spending, cut entitlements, reduce regulation, veto new laws, uphold the constitution and secure the borders, I'd be happy to vote for him. He could engage in orgies in the Lincoln bedroom and if we were freer because he advanced good policies, I would not care.

We don't vote for preachers. We don't vote for saints. We vote for politicians.

---

Then why did Repubs impeach Bill Clinton?

---

From your precious CNN "President Bill Clinton faced impeachment for something much more personal and salacious: he had an affair in the Oval Office and then lied about it to cover it up."

---

Trump paid off his paramours; Michael Cohen is now doing time for his role in that.

Trump withheld foreign aide to force a foreign government to investigate a political opponent. While his sons, Dumb and Dumber, and daughter have done worse than Hunter Biden and Republicans haven't uttered a peep.

Then Trump and Senate republicans obstructed justice by failing to comply with legitimate subpeonas. No matter how often Fox News tells you this isn't a legitmate investigation, it is. If either Bill or Hillary Clinton had pulled the stunts Trump pulled, you'd have had both of them up in stocks on the White House lawn and allowed voters to pelt them with rotten vegetables.

There's no way you can claim Clinton did anything worse than what Trump has done both during his campaign and while in office. But, of course, you do. Most Republicans aren't stupid enough to believe what's happening is in any way legit. They just want to keep control by any means possible. Which now means cover-ups, obstruction, obfuscation and trying to reduce the number of voters they think might not vote for them.

---

It's not clear that the Cohen payoffs were illegal; I don't believe so. In any case, nothing that any of the Trumps have been accused of comes close to Clinton's campaign finance violations and obstruction. There are legitimate reasons to resist subpoenas. Congress could test Trump's reasons in court, but they backed down. Wonder why?

---

Time. That shouldn't have stopped them thought. They should be in court now seeking to enforce subpoenas.

TexasScientist said:

---

Bearitto said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Florda_mike said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Florda_mike said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

You are a very dishonest, sad little man.

I would have expected you could at least take joy in the Baby Trump balloon, but it seems you are beyond joy and happiness.

And all this before the 2020 elections. You may be in deep depression after November.

---

Thanks for your ad hom comments. But, I'm more concerned that Trump's moronic antics, lack of intelligence, malignant narcissism, and inexperience have already predestined a socialist will win the WH, with both houses lined up behind him/her, and you should be too.

---

^^^ Are you having a senior moment and thinking about our last president named obama?

---

Just lamenting the conundrum of a reckless president, and what that foretells about November.

---

Wondering if your "science" job has lost government funding due to Trump?

You speak with such anger for Trump that you appear to have lost money from Trump being president

Obama was such a drag on private economy that it made me despise him fwiw. Still do

---

Nope. I just believe principle and character should transcend politics.

---

Policy outcomes > political party > personal morality

The above is true because policy outcomes are all that matter. Are Americans more free or less free? Are American borders more secure or less secure. If Ron Jeremy would lower taxes, cut spending, cut entitlements, reduce regulation, veto new laws, uphold the constitution and secure the borders, I'd be happy to vote for him. He could engage in orgies in the Lincoln bedroom and if we were freer because he advanced good policies, I would not care.

We don't vote for preachers. We don't vote for saints. We vote for politicians.

---

So, what you are saying is the means justify the ends. Didn't Mussolini's followers felt the same way about him? I don't believe someone of Trump's character can consistently advance good policies for the country. At some point, as he has already done, he will put his personal interests above the country's best interest. It's dangerous path you want to follow.

---

You are thinking of Machiavelli. It's a tragedy what the Catholic Church did to his reputation. He was a genius. Nevertheless, no, the ends justifies the means had nothing to do with my point. The point is, the means (policy) create the ends (policy outcomes) and personal morality isn't either. Personal morality isn't policy. Policy is policy.

Sam Lowry said:

---

Jinx 2 said:

---

fadskier said:

---

Jinx 2 said:

---

Bearitto said:

---

Policy outcomes > political party > personal morality

The above is true because policy outcomes are all that matter. Are Americans more free or less free? Are American borders more secure or less secure. If Ron Jeremy would lower taxes, cut spending, cut entitlements, reduce regulation, veto new laws, uphold the constitution and secure the borders, I'd be happy to vote for him. He could engage in orgies in the Lincoln bedroom and if we were freer because he advanced good policies, I would not care.

We don't vote for preachers. We don't vote for saints. We vote for politicians.

---

Then why did Repubs impeach Bill Clinton?

---

From your precious CNN "President Bill Clinton faced impeachment for something much more personal and salacious: he had an affair in the Oval Office and then lied about it to cover it up."

---

Trump paid off his paramours; Michael Cohen is now doing time for his role in that.

Trump withheld foreign aide to force a foreign government to investigate a political opponent. While his sons, Dumb and Dumber, and daughter have done worse than Hunter Biden and Republicans haven't uttered a peep.

Then Trump and Senate republicans obstructed justice by failing to comply with legitimate subpeonas. No matter how often Fox News tells you this isn't a legitmate investigation, it is. If either Bill or Hillary Clinton had pulled the stunts Trump pulled, you'd have had both of them up in stocks on the White House lawn and allowed voters to pelt them with rotten vegetables.

There's no way you can claim Clinton did anything worse than what Trump has done both during his campaign and while in office. But, of course, you do. Most Republicans aren't stupid enough to believe what's happening is in any way legit. They just want to keep control by any means possible. Which now means cover-ups, obstruction, obfuscation and trying to reduce the number of voters they think might not vote for them.

---

It's not clear that the Cohen payoffs were illegal; I don't believe so. In any case, nothing that any of the Trumps have been accused of comes close to Clinton's campaign finance violations and obstruction. There are legitimate reasons to resist subpoenas. Congress could test Trump's reasons in court, but they backed down. Wonder why?

---

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/01/28/trumps-fantasy-claim-that-michael-cohens-hush-money-payments-were-no-crime/

The Pinocchio Test

Cohen says he committed a crime, prosecutors say he committed a crime, a judge found that he committed a crime, and usually those are all the ingredients you need for a crime.

Trump says he never ordered Cohen to break the law and silence Daniels and McDougal. But when he says such payoffs are not criminal to begin with, his defense goes off the rails. Trump is presenting a legal theory as fact to minimize his fixer's crimes. It's a bizarre claim to make with Cohen heading to prison, and it merits Four Pinocchios.

Four Pinocchios

Jinx 2 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Jinx 2 said:

---

fadskier said:

---

Jinx 2 said:

---

Bearitto said:

---

Policy outcomes > political party > personal morality

The above is true because policy outcomes are all that matter. Are Americans more free or less free? Are American borders more secure or less secure. If Ron Jeremy would lower taxes, cut spending, cut entitlements, reduce regulation, veto new laws, uphold the constitution and secure the borders, I'd be happy to vote for him. He could engage in orgies in the Lincoln bedroom and if we were freer because he advanced good policies, I would not care.

We don't vote for preachers. We don't vote for saints. We vote for politicians.

---

Then why did Repubs impeach Bill Clinton?

---

From your precious CNN "President Bill Clinton faced impeachment for something much more personal and salacious: he had an affair in the Oval Office and then lied about it to cover it up."

---

Trump paid off his paramours; Michael Cohen is now doing time for his role in that.

Trump withheld foreign aide to force a foreign government to investigate a political opponent. While his sons, Dumb and Dumber, and daughter have done worse than Hunter Biden and Republicans haven't uttered a peep.

Then Trump and Senate republicans obstructed justice by failing to comply with legitimate subpeonas. No matter how often Fox News tells you this isn't a legitmate investigation, it is. If either Bill or Hillary Clinton had pulled the stunts Trump pulled, you'd have had both of them up in stocks on the White House lawn and allowed voters to pelt them with rotten vegetables.

There's no way you can claim Clinton did anything worse than what Trump has done both during his campaign and while in office. But, of course, you do. Most Republicans aren't stupid enough to believe what's happening is in any way legit. They just want to keep control by any means possible. Which now means cover-ups, obstruction, obfuscation and trying to reduce the number of voters they think might not vote for them.

---

It's not clear that the Cohen payoffs were illegal; I don't believe so. In any case, nothing that any of the Trumps have been accused of comes close to Clinton's campaign finance violations and obstruction. There are legitimate reasons to resist subpoenas. Congress could test Trump's reasons in court, but they backed down. Wonder why?

---

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/01/28/trumps-fantasy-claim-that-michael-cohens-hush-money-payments-were-no-crime/

The Pinocchio Test

Cohen says he committed a crime, prosecutors say he committed a crime, a judge found that he committed a crime, and usually those are all the ingredients you need for a crime.

Trump says he never ordered Cohen to break the law and silence Daniels and McDougal. But when he says such payoffs are not criminal to begin with, his defense goes off the rails. Trump is presenting a legal theory as fact to minimize his fixer's crimes. It's a bizarre claim to make with Cohen heading to prison, and it merits Four Pinocchios.

Four Pinocchios

---

The author is wrong on some very basic points. Agreement by a defendant, prosecutor, and judge does not constitute all the "ingredients" of a crime. Trump's statement that Cohen didn't commit a crime is a conclusion about a disputed legal issue, which by definition is a statement of opinion. Trump isn't presenting anything "as fact" any more than you are when you express an opinion.

Here's a fact: there are legitimately different opinions as to whether this kind of conduct violates campaign finance law. The author should know this since he quotes some of them in his article. The courts have not clearly answered the question.

Fact-checkers are supposed to know the difference between fact and opinion. Too often they don't. These Pinocchio tests have to be read as critically as anything else.

Sam Lowry said:

---

Jinx 2 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Jinx 2 said:

---

fadskier said:

---

Jinx 2 said:

---

Bearitto said:

---

Policy outcomes > political party > personal morality

The above is true because policy outcomes are all that matter. Are Americans more free or less free? Are American borders more secure or less secure. If Ron Jeremy would lower taxes, cut spending, cut entitlements, reduce regulation, veto new laws, uphold the constitution and secure the borders, I'd be happy to vote for him. He could engage in orgies in the Lincoln bedroom and if we were freer because he advanced good policies, I would not care.

We don't vote for preachers. We don't vote for saints. We vote for politicians.

---

Then why did Repubs impeach Bill Clinton?

---

From your precious CNN "President Bill Clinton faced impeachment for something much more personal and salacious: he had an affair in the Oval Office and then lied about it to cover it up."

---

Trump paid off his paramours; Michael Cohen is now doing time for his role in that.

Trump withheld foreign aide to force a foreign government to investigate a political opponent. While his sons, Dumb and Dumber, and daughter have done worse than Hunter Biden and Republicans haven't uttered a peep.

Then Trump and Senate republicans obstructed justice by failing to comply with legitimate subpeonas. No matter how often Fox News tells you this isn't a legitmate investigation, it is. If either Bill or Hillary Clinton had pulled the stunts Trump pulled, you'd have had both of them up in stocks on the White House lawn and allowed voters to pelt them with rotten vegetables.

There's no way you can claim Clinton did anything worse than what Trump has done both during his campaign and while in office. But, of course, you do. Most Republicans aren't stupid enough to believe what's happening is in any way legit. They just want to keep control by any means possible. Which now means cover-ups, obstruction, obfuscation and trying to reduce the number of voters they think might not vote for them.

---

It's not clear that the Cohen payoffs were illegal; I don't believe so. In any case, nothing that any of the Trumps have been accused of comes close to Clinton's campaign finance violations and obstruction. There are legitimate reasons to resist subpoenas. Congress could test Trump's reasons in court, but they backed down. Wonder why?

---

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/01/28/trumps-fantasy-claim-that-michael-cohens-hush-money-payments-were-no-crime/

The Pinocchio Test

Cohen says he committed a crime, prosecutors say he committed a crime, a judge found that he committed a crime, and usually those are all the ingredients you need for a crime.

Trump says he never ordered Cohen to break the law and silence Daniels and McDougal. But when he says such payoffs are not criminal to begin with, his defense goes off the rails. Trump is presenting a legal theory as fact to minimize his fixer's crimes. It's a bizarre claim to make with Cohen heading to prison, and it merits Four Pinocchios.

Four Pinocchios

---

The author is wrong on some very basic points. Agreement by a defendant, prosecutor, and judge does not constitute all the "ingredients" of a crime. Trump's statement that Cohen didn't commit a crime is a conclusion about a disputed legal issue, which by definition is a statement of opinion. Trump isn't presenting anything "as fact" any more than you are when you express an opinion.

Here's a fact: there are legitimately different opinions as to whether this kind of conduct violates campaign finance law. The author should know this since he quotes some of them in his article. The courts have not clearly answered the question.

Fact-checkers are supposed to know the difference between fact and opinion. Too often they don't. These Pinocchio tests have to be read as critically as anything else.

---

I'm with Sam. I think it is a clear violation of campaign finance laws but there is a valid argument that it was not. I just don't buy it. At all.

quash said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Jinx 2 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Jinx 2 said:

---

fadskier said:

---

Jinx 2 said:

---

Bearitto said:

---

Policy outcomes > political party > personal morality

The above is true because policy outcomes are all that matter. Are Americans more free or less free? Are American borders more secure or less secure. If Ron Jeremy would lower taxes, cut spending, cut entitlements, reduce regulation, veto new laws, uphold the constitution and secure the borders, I'd be happy to vote for him. He could engage in orgies in the Lincoln bedroom and if we were freer because he advanced good policies, I would not care.

We don't vote for preachers. We don't vote for saints. We vote for politicians.

---

Then why did Repubs impeach Bill Clinton?

---

From your precious CNN "President Bill Clinton faced impeachment for something much more personal and salacious: he had an affair in the Oval Office and then lied about it to cover it up."

---

Trump paid off his paramours; Michael Cohen is now doing time for his role in that.

Trump withheld foreign aide to force a foreign government to investigate a political opponent. While his sons, Dumb and Dumber, and daughter have done worse than Hunter Biden and Republicans haven't uttered a peep.

Then Trump and Senate republicans obstructed justice by failing to comply with legitimate subpeonas. No matter how often Fox News tells you this isn't a legitmate investigation, it is. If either Bill or Hillary Clinton had pulled the stunts Trump pulled, you'd have had both of them up in stocks on the White House lawn and allowed voters to pelt them with rotten vegetables.

There's no way you can claim Clinton did anything worse than what Trump has done both during his campaign and while in office. But, of course, you do. Most Republicans aren't stupid enough to believe what's happening is in any way legit. They just want to keep control by any means possible. Which now means cover-ups, obstruction, obfuscation and trying to reduce the number of voters they think might not vote for them.

---

It's not clear that the Cohen payoffs were illegal; I don't believe so. In any case, nothing that any of the Trumps have been accused of comes close to Clinton's campaign finance violations and obstruction. There are legitimate reasons to resist subpoenas. Congress could test Trump's reasons in court, but they backed down. Wonder why?

---

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/01/28/trumps-fantasy-claim-that-michael-cohens-hush-money-payments-were-no-crime/

The Pinocchio Test

Cohen says he committed a crime, prosecutors say he committed a crime, a judge found that he committed a crime, and usually those are all the ingredients you need for a crime.

Trump says he never ordered Cohen to break the law and silence Daniels and McDougal. But when he says such payoffs are not criminal to begin with, his defense goes off the rails. Trump is presenting a legal theory as fact to minimize his fixer's crimes. It's a bizarre claim to make with Cohen heading to prison, and it merits Four Pinocchios.

Four Pinocchios

---

The author is wrong on some very basic points. Agreement by a defendant, prosecutor, and judge does not constitute all the "ingredients" of a crime. Trump's statement that Cohen didn't commit a crime is a conclusion about a disputed legal issue, which by definition is a statement of opinion. Trump isn't presenting anything "as fact" any more than you are when you express an opinion.

Here's a fact: there are legitimately different opinions as to whether this kind of conduct violates campaign finance law. The author should know this since he quotes some of them in his article. The courts have not clearly answered the question.

Fact-checkers are supposed to know the difference between fact and opinion. Too often they don't. These Pinocchio tests have to be read as critically as anything else.

---

I'm with Sam. I think it is a clear violation of campaign finance laws but there is a valid argument that it was not. I just don't buy it. At all.

---

So the question is, whose money should he have used?