I began the previous post (seems so long ago) in this way:
"There are two ways to defend the support of Donald Trump for president this November:
1. Promoting another four years of improvement of the state of the nation.
2. Preventing another four years of destruction of the state of the nation."
This post covers #2, which is an apt description of what has resulted from having had way too many who should have known better rejecting Trump in 2020.
When voting, most of us hope to vote for someone as opposed to voting against someone. In 2016, I certainly was more the latter than the former, though what Trump campaigned on was worthy of voting for him. But Hillary was just too dangerous to the welfare of the nation, so I'd have to say I was voting more against her than for Trump. When 2020 came around, Trump had proven himself more than worthy of a second term. My "gamble" had paid off and I was happy to support him then. Since he was unjustly and criminally denied, we have two single terms to compare against each other, and Biden is found wanting...which is probably the most blatant and obvious understatement ever uttered.
I had not intended to wait so long to publish this post. It's not a question of whether or not Biden has been the destructive force to which point #2 refers. It's been a question of deciding how to go about listing all the many ways, or which of the very many ways to provide, as the list is incredibly long. He actually makes Obama look like he served the nation. He has totally stolen the title of worst president ever from his old boss and even from the impotent Jimmy Carter, who, by direct comparison, comes off as a saint, albeit a stupid one.
But Joe Biden brings nothing good to the table whatsoever, unless one counts comic relief. But his shit really ain't funny, as it impacts so many millions in so many horrible ways. Again, where to begin? What I've decided to do is simply to list links to articles which do the job for me. In the last post, we touched on whether or not we're better off economically, and Dan's offering wasn't difficult to refute with others touching on the same points. That discussion can still be debated, as one person offered a US Treasury report insisting purchasing power has improved, while the fact that I can't get the same amount of groceries for the same $100 as I could prior to Biden taking office proves that report is administration spin.
Some of what I present is of a general nature, summarizing what a piece of shit he's been since day one, while others look at more specific issues. With both points #1 and #2, I may have a few more posts supportive of Trump for president in 2024, covering these same two points. We'll see. So without further ado and in no particular order:
https://www.aier.org/article/america-cant-afford-bidenomics/
https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2024/05/bidenflation_clocks_in_at_19_1_since_joe_biden_took_office.html
https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2024/05/is_biden_s_final_rule_the_final_straw.html
https://www.theblaze.com/news/biden-your-children-owned-state
https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2023/01/us_army_welcomes_transgenders_again.html
https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2024/05/what_has_biden_accomplished_in_his_presidency_devastation.html
I'm going to leave it there for now, but I've got a massive file of this stuff about this most obvious bad choice for president. It's hard to keep up with all the crap which comes out on an almost daily basis related to this guy's incompetence. Nothing one can say about Trump matches it. All who suggest Trump's presidency was a failure is either a liar or an abject moron.
The bottom line here is that Biden's presidency is what the downfall of America looks like. I support Trump because I want this shit stopped, and while it won't necessarily be stopped to my satisfaction with Trump as president, it's not possible it will in any way be as bad as Biden has made it. Trump isn't that stupid. Trump isn't that incompetent or unfit. Trump has a proven record of beneficial results for all Americans. Biden's got nothing but morons who actually think he's doing a good job.
79 comments:
The sad thing is that the Left doesn't see the Biden administration's destructiveness as a failure but as a success. Sane people need that crook out. In normal times, he would be executed for treason for his China dealings alone.
Indeed! And his open borders should also bring charges of treason...or at least further evidence he's acted in a treasonous manner. The dishonest and hell-inspired irony is how he and his sycophants...including so many Trump-hating voters...pretend it's Trump, or "MAGA" or others on the right who are the greatest threat to "our democracy". It's far too obvious and an understatement to call bullshit on this projection. It will ever be impossible to truly MAGA so long as so many such people exist and vote.
IMO both of those two are the only reasons to vote for Trump.
Craig,
Are you referring to points #1 and #2 from the top of the post?
Yes. Although the do seem to hinge on the comparison to Biden to some degree. Given that Biden was/is the only comparison at this point. (Maybe P-BO, but P-BO didn't really do much while in office)
Neil...
" In normal times, he would be executed for treason for his China dealings alone."
The modern GOP and "conservative " movement is deeply broken.
Y'all want to impeach more moderate and left politicians NOT because of actual high crimes, but because you oppose their border policies, for instance.
Y'all chant, "Lock her up!" NOT because of being convicted of anything, but because you disagree with policies.
Y'all kick the extremely conservative Liz Cheney types out of the GOP, NOT because they aren't extremely conservative, but because they're not conservative ENOUGH.
Y'all call for executing a president NOT because of any actual treason but because you disagree with policies.
I get that you all don't understand this... you no doubt think these people, neighbors, fellow citizens are actually committing atrocities. But they're not.
This inability to agree to disagree is showing some troubling fascist tendencies. Some portion of y'all really would criminalize gay folks marrying and putting LGBTQ people in prison again like in "the good old days," If you had the numbers to force your will again.
I hope and pray your eyes are opened to these fascist, "christian"-nationalist ways before any more serious harm is done.
This criminalizing of the "other" is not normal, rational or good.
Dan
I'm curious, will y'all STILL vote for your pervert king if he is actually convicted of actual crimes by an actual jury of his peers in a legitimate court room?
For all your fantasies of locking up, impeachment and executing people who have, of course, committed no crimes, that you'd even consider voting for a convict would be another bit of evidence of the deeply broken and sickened conservative movement.
Open your eyes, you've been brainwashed. None of this is normal.
Dan
Dan,
Are you really so unaware of the millions of dollars that China and other countries have funneled to Biden through various hidden bank accounts and LLCs?
You make a lot of vague and unsupported charges here, that doesn't seem like the adult behavior you demand from others.
Who, specifically, has been impeached because of their stance on the border?
The "Lock her up." chants were a direct result of HIllary's illegal email server etc. Provide one example of anyone who wants her jailed because of her policies?
Who specifically has called for "executing" a president? At least since Kathy Griffin posed with trump's severed head?
As far as the "inability to disagree" and fascist tendencies. Have you not listened to the pro-Hamas protesters that took over public spaces and prevented people from accessing those spaces? Have you not heard the attacks on Harrison Butker (based on totally false characterizations of what he actually said), and the calls for him to lose his job for exercising his freedom of speech?
As for me. I cannot in good conscience vote in any way that would allow Biden to serve a second term. What "convict" are you referring to? Are you unaware of the "innocent until proven guilty" thing? Are you unaware that the star witness in the current trial lied on the stand, and admitted to multiple felonies? There is nothing is US code that prevents a person from running for office or being elected while appealing a conviction, so I'm not sure why you'd advocate for denying him his constitutional rights.
You are right about one thing. This is not normal. Having two deeply flawed, old, poor candidates running for president is not and should not be normal. The fact that were stuck with this choice is appalling. Unfortunately, I have no choice but to do whatever I can to prevent a second Biden term.
"The modern GOP and "conservative " movement is deeply broken."
The GOP and the conservative movement is not the same thing. Conservatives vote Republican because the GOP comes far closer to the truths, principles and ideals of the American founding and the Judeo-Christian tradition.
The GOP is in some turmoil, that's for certain. But the Democrat Party and the modern progressives are deeply vile and immoral. Their policies have proven extremely harmful to the nation and its culture and there's no end to their designs to push that further, thereby fulfilling the incompetent Obama's pledge to "fundamentally change" the nation.
"Y'all want to impeach more moderate and left politicians NOT because of actual high crimes, but because you oppose their border policies, for instance."
You're a lying moron.
First, the Dems are not in any way "moderate". Those who approach the traditional notion of "moderate" are marginalized by the extremists who run the party. Pro-life Democrats, for one example, are routinely shunned by the infanticidal.
Secondly, Biden and his family are indeed more justly accused of actual crimes than the fictitious crimes for which Trump is being railroaded. There is actual evidence against him which has been gathered for the purpose of impeaching him. I'm prepared to provide if need be.
Thirdly, if it was only border policy, that would be enough to warrant impeachment, if not charges of treason, given all the abject and obvious harm allowing a minimum of 10 million un-vetted invaders access to our nation and our stuff. Lying assholes pretend they're mostly desperate villagers fleeing danger.
"Y'all chant, "Lock her up!" NOT because of being convicted of anything, but because you disagree with policies."
You're a liar. Hillary was guilty of the negligent handling of classified documents. I wonder how she got authority to handle them at all. I've never seen or heard anything describing how she obtained any authority. But there's debate about whether or not intent is necessary for convicting one of negligence in the handling of classified docs. Despite Comey insisting otherwise, there were plenty among the FBI who insisted she was indeed ripe for prosecution on the matter.
Then of course, there's the phony dossier which launched the "Russia! Russia! Russia!" circus of lies. So here's merely two serious points which justify locking her up just for starters.
But of course, your lie here is also in the laughable suggestion that a mere difference in policy proposals had anything to do with the just desire to see her criminally punished, or for such desires for any of the anti-American assholes you support. As is clear at your blog of lies, it is those like you and your kind who seek to criminalize and cancel those whose policies and positions are inconvenient to address or overcome.
"Y'all kick the extremely conservative Liz Cheney types out of the GOP, NOT because they aren't extremely conservative, but because they're not conservative ENOUGH."
A clear and willfully intentional lie. Cheney's crime was to indulge in her hatred for Donald Trump by taking part in the kangaroo court of the Jan 6 Committee, which did not even address their stated purpose, but sought to punish Trump and everyone connected to him for the lie that he and his supporters tried to overturn a fairly decided election. That this just protest was some kind of "insurrection" against the government still headed by Trump himself. She was part of the conspiracy to deny full exposure of all which would have exonerated most everyone involved, and it led to so many unjustly sentenced as if they were terrorists.
But you keep lying, Dan. It's what you do.
"Y'all call for executing a president NOT because of any actual treason but because you disagree with policies."
Don't know what you mean by this. I doubt you do, either.
"I get that you all don't understand this... you no doubt think these people, neighbors, fellow citizens are actually committing atrocities. But they're not."
Oh, yes you are! When you support Gazans, you're supporting those who commit atrocities. That alone blows this moronic statement out of the water. When you support open borders, you enable atrocious criminal behaviors. When you support the Dem party, you support the wholesale murder of hundreds of thousands of people in utero every year. That's an atrocity.
You're a scumbag and you support and enable scumbags.
"This inability to agree to disagree is showing some troubling fascist tendencies."
The left is the faction of this nation which wallows in fascism and fascistic policies. We disagree with that, which is showing reason, intelligence, honesty and actual Christian regard for our fellow man.
"Some portion of y'all really would criminalize gay folks marrying and putting LGBTQ people in prison again like in "the good old days," If you had the numbers to force your will again."
Not likely, but you're such a sick scumbag that you desperately need people to believe those like us are willing to do such things. We'd simply be happy with reversing all laws which force the nation to accept your perversions as normal and acceptable under God and man. You can go on living your lives of perversion and depravity, but your fascism has led to good people being forced to go along with pretending as you do or suffer civil or criminal liability.
"I hope and pray your eyes are opened to these fascist, "christian"-nationalist ways before any more serious harm is done."
I'm sure your Father of Lies listens to your prayers. I doubt Almighty God does. There's been no harm done that you could identify. Conversely, I can start an entire blog devoted to all the harm your kind has brought about in this country alone, if not the world.
"This criminalizing of the "other" is not normal, rational or good."
And yet Trump continues to endure bullshit charges and trials... innocent Americans still await some sort of hearing for the alleged involvement in the Jan 6 protests...ACTUAL Christians are still arrested for preaching life at abortion clinics...concerned parents are still to be regarded as "domestic terrorists" for protesting the sexual abuse of their children through perverse leftist curricula...
You're lying yet again, Dan. It never stops with you.
"I'm curious, will y'all STILL vote for your pervert king if he is actually convicted of actual crimes by an actual jury of his peers in a legitimate court room?"
You keep asking this. First of all, we do not serve or support any "pervert king". We support a man who had proven himself to be a superior president to the bi-sexual president who preceded him...the guy you supported, and clearly superior as both a person as well as a president to the doddering scumbag you think is unfairly accused of impeachable offenses and showered with his daughter. Trump is not a homosexual, he's expressed no desire to surgically alter his appearance to that of a woman, nor has he expressed that regards himself as a woman. He's not known to have dressed in women's clothes to prance provocatively in front of children or read stories about cross-dressers and homosexuals to small children at public libraries. All these are examples of actual perverts and you're a pervert as well because you support them so strongly that you're clearly in the closet.
At present, he's not charged with actual crimes, so he won't be convicted of any if he's convicted at all. But like all lefties, the mere allegation of wrongdoing against a Republican...especially one named "Donald J. Trump"...is itself a conviction in your evil minds. So you pervert the most basic of legal principles in order to see your enemies taken out of the game. No one's a pervert as much as a modern progressive. No one perverts as much as do modern progressives.
"For all your fantasies of locking up, impeachment and executing people who have, of course, committed no crimes, that you'd even consider voting for a convict would be another bit of evidence of the deeply broken and sickened conservative movement."
This is straight out of the pervert progressive playbook. Projection of the worst kind. You are scum. Vile and evil personified. Trump has committed no crimes. You sick assholes have been trying to imprison him since he rode down the escalator.
Go back and lie at your own blog. Not here.
"Open your eyes, you've been brainwashed. None of this is normal."
So you say, but don't prove or even provide actual evidence to support the claim. One who thinks God would bless homosexual unions has no standing to suggest anyone else is brainwashed. You pervert.
Marshal, in an effort to support my point, said:
the Democrat Party and the modern progressives are deeply vile and immoral.
See? It's not sufficient for you to say, "I strongly disagree with Democrat positions..." You have to paint your fellow citizens as deeply vile and immoral. You want to execute the president, kick out GOP conservatives who are not far right enough and imprison political opponents. THIS is a problem.
Marshal, in an effort to support my point, said:
Biden and his family are indeed more justly accused of actual crimes than the fictitious crimes for which Trump is being railroaded.
EVEN THOUGH, you can't point to any actual criminal activity done by Biden, you imagine that he's engaged in "actual crimes." AND, when your pervert prince has DOZENS of indictments from a wide variety of sources and which are often supported by traditional conservatives, you want to pretend/imagine that there is some vast conspiracy when the more rational and obvious explanation is that, on the face of it, Trump is corrupt, dishonest and has likely committed actual crimes.
You will not stand by the criminal justice system when courts and juries find him actually guilty BUT you want to indict liberals when there are not even indictments.
You're broken, Marshal. You're reasoning has been compromised by fearmongering, conspiracy theories, idiotic conmen and apparent brainwashing. Your partisan ideology has blinded you.
You see, the difference between progressives/moderates and today's maga-conservatives is that WE would gladly stand by a court that found Biden or other Democrats actually guilty of actual crimes, but you want to defend your thugs and perverts WHILE calling to "lock up" innocent people without convictions.
You're broken and you just can't see it. Your own words indict you.
At present, he's not charged with actual crimes
Your delusional, brother. He is literally charged with AND indicted for 90+ crimes. Actual crimes. Will you vote for a convicted felon (and he clearly is a pervert by any rational measure) if he's convicted by a jury of his peers in a court of law?
Your "unified Reich" con-man pervert is a moral atrocity and an actual criminal threat to a free Republic.
Dan, in a gracious effort to validate my position of him as a liar, gets right to lying about what I said previous despite being unable to delete it first, as he does at his Blog of Lies.
"See? It's not sufficient for you to say, "I strongly disagree with Democrat positions..." You have to paint your fellow citizens as deeply vile and immoral."
But I strongly disagree with Democrat positions because they're vile and immoral. It's vile and immoral, for example, to falsely assert there's ever a justification for murdering one's own child in utero. That's pretty freakin' vile and absolutely immoral. It's immoral to pretend that any part of the LGBTQ+ agenda is fact based and thus requires the full participation by the rest of society in their blatant lies. It's vile to defend "Drag Queens" in their "Story Hours" or performing vile and misogynistic prancing in front of children. It's vile to assert there's actually more than one sex, that one sex can become the other and to indict as cruel and marginalizing those who disagree with these blatant lies. These are just a few examples of the vile immorality inherent in the Dem positions and platforms. Much more is available upon request.
"You want to execute the president, kick out GOP conservatives who are not far right enough and imprison political opponents."
Treason, if Biden is convicted of it, is worthy of the sentence traditionally regarded as appropriate for the crime. Thus, if he's so convicted, who is more worthy of the punishment for such a crime than the top law enforcement office of the land, one tasked with DEFENDING the Constitution and the sovereignty of the nation? Do I "want" to? No. Is is justified? If convicted of treason, absolutely. You and other assholes like you are now trying a far more true American for far less...none of which is even legitimate.
We don't "kick out" those who aren't "conservative enough". But like that homosexual guy, if there are enough crimes or misbehavior, to remove someone from an official position in the party is appropriate. Cheney is denied (by having voted for someone else, moron) because of her wanton disregard for actual law in the attempted attacks on Trump for "insurrection" for which he was neither guilty of indulging nor guilty of inciting (as no one was even arrested on such a charge). I'd much prefer not to support any conservative to has wasted time and money to oppose Trump in the false ways so many have. Prior to 2016, one had good reason to deny him the nomination. After being nominated, no true conservative was justified in withholding support while a Hillary threatened to win the election. Now, after a successful four years where he benefited all Americans in ways Obama couldn't or refused to do, and clearly Biden hasn't come within a freakin' universe of doing, no conservative of any kind should reject him at risk another four years from which the nation would more likely not recover. Such people hate their own kids.
As to imprisoning political opponents, that's what your Biden and his DOJ has been doing since Day 1 and continues to do now, you lying sack of shit. We don't seek to imprison anyone for merely being stupid...which Dem voters clearly are...but for actual crimes and there's evidence of the kind your side can't find against Trump and his supporters.
"EVEN THOUGH, you can't point to any actual criminal activity done by Biden, you imagine that he's engaged in "actual crimes.""
But I can because the evidence abounds. You simply won't acknowledge any of it is worthy of litigation because you are a liar who exaggerates the flaws of your opponents while pretending none exist in your overlords.
"AND, when your pervert prince has DOZENS of indictments from a wide variety of sources and which are often supported by traditional conservatives, you want to pretend/imagine that there is some vast conspiracy when the more rational and obvious explanation is that, on the face of it, Trump is corrupt, dishonest and has likely committed actual crimes."
I have no "prince" (not being an actual king), and I know few who can match your perversion. And this statement goes on to validate what I just said about your dishonest routine of inflating the negatives of better people while you defend assholes, scumbags and actual perverts and deviants. There's no "traditional conservative" I've thus far seen who supports the actions now attempted against Trump, but I'm aware of two Hillary supporters who I've mentioned several times who attest to the gross miscarriage of the justice system inherent in each of these trials Trump faces. Those would again be Jonathan Turley and Alan Dershowitz, both of whom are considered legal scholars and experts on both Constitutional and criminal issues.
These two, along with many others more knowledgeable than I, affirm the political nature of these trials and attempts to keep Trump from the White House...which is the point and thereby confirming the conspiratorial nature of the whole affair.
The most rational and logical explanation is that like you, TDS is a far more severe disorder than previously thought and hateful assholes like you are obsessed with finding some way to imprison this guy who was far better for American than any president since Ronald Reagan. And you're just a pervert and a liar with a very small capacity for honest, intelligent thought.
"You will not stand by the criminal justice system when courts and juries find him actually guilty BUT you want to indict liberals when there are not even indictments."
More rank stupidity from our favorite abject moron. I stand by a criminal justice system which is not tainted by leftist political influence as is the case now. It has manifested in numerous ways over the last decade or so.
"...BUT you want to indict liberals when there are not even indictments."
It's similar to the court of public opinion versus an actual civil/criminal court. The difference is how many so easily see the blatant disparities in how the law has been applied. You pretend when it's Trump or some other Republican or a conservative that justice and the law are applied as intended by the founders and our well understood system of justice. An honorable adherent to that concept and those principles does not apply terrorism enhancements to charges which in no way warrant it. This has happened recently to Brent Bozell's son, as well as to Proud Boy and Oath Keeper members. An honest judicial system does not pass a law so that charges can be filed against someone protected by existing statutes of limitation...not to mention the defendant not being found guilty of anything worse than calling his accuser a liar.
Yet in the case of lefties...be it Biden, Clinton or whomever...that same system of justice cannot be relied upon to bring its weight down on upon them when evidence of wrongdoing is so much stronger. As such, and indictment by the legal system does not preclude honest observers of indicting those protected by their politics and that of the scum in power. That's how you people roll.
"You're broken, Marshal."
You're evil, fake Christian.
It's vile and immoral, for example, to falsely assert there's ever a justification for murdering one's own child in utero. That's pretty freakin' vile and absolutely immoral.
I GET that this is your personal human opinion. Given that, I would advise you not to have an abortion. But you don't get to decide for everyone else.
And to be clear, having an abortion is not murder. It's just not. That, too, is your personal human opinion. God has not told you that. The Bible has not told you that. Thomas Jefferson and George Washington did not tell you that. Science has not told you that. And the law has not told you that. It's your personal opinion.
This, too, validates my concern about the broken nature of the modern GOP/Maga/"conservative" movement. That you are incapable of allowing that others might have good faith disagreements with your personal human opinions.
You don't see me calling you all manner of vile names because you're not welcoming of refugees and immigrants (except for the very few that you deem to be "worthy.") I get that people have good faith disagreements about how to best handle immigration matters.
You don't see me calling you a murderer because you support the slaughter of innocents in war time as with Hiroshima or with Israel today. We disagree about how to deal with the real problem of violence in regards to Israel and Hamas/Palestine. No need to say you're a murderer. You're literally not a murderer, nor am I, just because I support women having the right to make their own medical decisions.
This is the broken nature of your side.
Treason, if Biden is convicted of it, is worthy of the sentence traditionally regarded as appropriate for the crime
There IS NO treason in having a difference of opinion about how to handle complex border questions or in how to handle complex foreign issue questions. It's literally a disagreement.
Treason:
the crime of betraying one's country, especially by attempting to kill the sovereign or overthrow the government.
the offense of attempting by overt acts to overthrow the government of the state to which the offender owes allegiance or to kill or personally injure the sovereign or the sovereign's family.
Legal definition of treason:
It is the act of waging war against the United States or materially aiding its enemies.
Biden has literally not committed treason. IF he had, you could charge him with the crime and he could be found guilty IF he was guilty. But it's not an issue, EXCEPT in the minds of modern maga-ts who think disagreeing with conservative white opinion is treason.
Clinton had literally committed no crimes. She was endlessly investigated and the worst she was found guilty of was bad handling of emails. Something, no doubt, you've done yourself.
Mayorkas (border chief) has literally committed no impeachable offenses. Handling complex border issues differently than you all personally WISH they were handled is NOT a high crime or misdemeanor.
Romney, Bush, Cheney, etc, etc, etc, are LITERALLY very conservative and do not have your imaginary "hatred" of Trump.
ALL of these "crimes" are imaginary, part of your brainwashed "brains," and you have blinded yourself to common sense or reason, opting instead for fear of your own neighbors and slander and endless false accusations.
And again, you lying sack of shit...NO ONE is calling for locking up anyone who HASN'T been convicted of a crime.
You know, of course, that Trump and his minions have routinely chanted and allowed chants of "lock her up" in his idiot brownshirt rallies. There was no asterisk at the end... "Lock her up... IF SHE IS ACTUALLY CONVICTED OF A CRIME..." It was just "lock her up."
Reality is undermining you.
My words:
"You see, the difference between progressives/moderates and today's maga-conservatives is that WE would gladly stand by a court that found Biden or other Democrats actually guilty of actual crimes, but you want to defend your thugs and perverts WHILE calling to "lock up" innocent people without convictions."
YOUR words:
You see, the difference between progressives/dems/socialist/marxists and today's conservatives is that you're fucking liars, haters, destroyer, perverts, criminals and hellspawn while we're average, everyday Americans who not only haven't forgotten our Lord
You see, the reality is that I would stand against Biden if he did 1/10 of the things we know Trump has done.
The reality is that I voted AGAINST Bill Clinton when he had a consensual affair with an underling and YOU voted and regularly promote your pervert king who's had three wives and numerous affairs and 20+ allegations of sexual assault and in his OWN words, he boasts and laughs about sexual assault and ogling naked teenagers.
The reality is that if BIDEN had done the same thing, you'd be calling him the most evil and perverted president ever and yet you actively promote your pervert king and have voted for him and continue to vote for him.
If MY candidate was convicted OR indicted for a crime - or even indicted - I'd want them to step down.
You continue to support your corruption king.
The data is what it is.
YOU stand by your perverts, no matter what.
I vote against any of mine that have been found guilty of even a tenth of what your pervert has done.
Anyone rational can see the difference.
And in all of that, I don't stoop to the demonization of the "other" side, the way you do. I don't refer to "lying sacks of shit" or oppress women with "girly man" or "cunt" the way you do.
Anyone rational can see the difference.
Open your eyes, give up your fears and hatred, and YOU, too, could see the obvious difference between how you and yours are behaving and how I and mine are behaving...
Cont'd...
My colleagues and I work for the homeless, the mentally ill, those with disabilities, the immigrants and refugees, the children, the veterans, the traditionally oppressed. We stand with women and others who've been denied the right to vote and enjoy their human rights. I personally have been the faithful husband of one woman for 40 years as of next year, a Sunday School teacher, music leader, worship leader in my church, a deacon, etc. for all my life. I do not and never have engaged in what you and your pervert king call "locker room talk" or otherwise been denigrating to women in any manner LIKE your pervert boy.
And yet you see fit to call me* (and people like me) "perverted" and un-Christian while defending your actual pervert king and wannabe (possibly actual) rapist and vulgar con-man as a good leader.
Your vision is all messed up by your partisanship, son. You're attacking and trying to demonize actual decent human beings while defending and promoting an actually bad man (probably suffering from a variety of mental illness, probably due to his sick upbringing and the debilitating dementia wealth and power brings).
Look at the data.
Disagreeing in good faith with you is not the same as being evil or corrupt.
Be better.
* And I have to say, with the apostle Paul:
"Since many are boasting in the way the world does, I too will boast. You gladly put up with fools since you are so wise! In fact, you even put up with anyone who enslaves you or exploits you or takes advantage of you or puts on airs or slaps you in the face. To my shame I admit that we were too weak for that!
Whatever anyone else dares to boast about—I am speaking as a fool—I also dare to boast about. Are they Hebrews? So am I. Are they Israelites? So am I. Are they Abraham’s descendants? So am I. Are they servants of Christ? (I am out of my mind to talk like this.) I am more."
In other words, I'm not trying to boast about myself. I'm trying to help you see that the people you defame are good, decent, hard-working people while the people you defend are deviants and abusers and perverts.
Open your eyes.
Be better.
"Your delusional, brother. He is literally charged with AND indicted for 90+ crimes. Actual crimes. Will you vote for a convicted felon (and he clearly is a pervert by any rational measure) if he's convicted by a jury of his peers in a court of law?"
First, I'm not at all "delusional", Worm. I'm someone who actually pays attention to facts, without regard to where they lead.
Second, I'm not your brother, Asshole. I'm no kin to vermin like you who mocks the Lord.
Third, being "indicted" means one is "charged" with a crime.
Fourth, the Moscow show trials of the 1930s, those of the Baathist regime under Saddam Hussein and that of the Commie regime of Mao all had defendants who were indicted for "actual" crimes. That is, that like these current political attacks on Trump, those defendants were not guilty of truly "actual" crimes, but of that which the leftist sons-of-bitches insisted were crimes in order to persecute their political opponents. Those were leftist regimes. We have a leftist regime now doing the same thing to Trump, his supporters and other right-leaning citizens asserting their Constitutionally protected rights, which is inconvenient for the current administration and their party.
Fourth, as to a jury of his peers, that's a perversion of the concept given how he's most, if not all of the presiding judges are Trump-hating Dems...particularly this Merchan asshole and that Engeron piece of shit...both of whom are unworthy of their law licenses, much less their positions as judges. All trials held in New York are not cases of him being judged by a jury of his peers, as those on the the juries are also said to be mostly anti-Trump.
Fifth, I don't regard Trump as a pervert simply because he was into hot babes. Normal men are into hot babes. That he took advantage of women seeking to take advantage of him because of his wealth is simply womanizing. Claims he was abusive is Danish projection based on personal hatred for the man. Homosexuals are perverts by any honest measure and understanding of basic biology. Drag queens and sex-change cases are perverts by definition. Those who enable these people are far worse perverts than Trump on his most immoral day.
So, if Trump was being charged with actual crimes...legitimate charges, rather than this bullshit you take as gospel fact...and then convicted, I would be unlikely to vote for him assuming all appeals failed. At the same time, were each of these charges true, there still remains the fact that he was a far better president than the current Fuck-Up-In-Chief that you had the dishonest or ignorant audacity to presume was a better man and thus the better choice. That was in 2016. That's clearly not the case in the slightest now.
Craig speaks of having to choose between two deeply flawed men. That's not true. Despite his flaws, Trump isn't "deeply" flawed so much as not as ashamed of the flaws he has as one might like. Biden, on the other hand, is gravely flawed, even if he was not a doddering incompetent because of the flawed ideology he espouses. Trump was actually Making America Great Again (though liars like you can't even argue against that obvious fact), while Biden has been destroying us.
You ignore Biden's far more plentiful faults, while doing all you can to find fault with Trump. You're a lying scumbag.
"Your "unified Reich" con-man pervert is a moral atrocity and an actual criminal threat to a free Republic."
This is just abject stupidity of a lie. What has Trump done to harm you or anyone you know? Name it here and let's see if you can draw a line between any policy of his and any harm you may have suffered. C'mon, lying asshole. What have you got?
"The modern GOP and "conservative " movement is deeply broken."
I think it's more accurate to say that the modern political system is broken. If you look at how the founders regarded political parties, it's likely that their worst fears have been realized. But to say that only one side of the political aisle is the only one that has problem is to be willfully blind.
"The GOP and the conservative movement is not the same thing."
Excellent point.
"You have to paint your fellow citizens as deeply vile and immoral."
I suspect that the "vile and immoral" refers to the DFL positions, more so than the entity of those who vote for them. Strangely enough, you paint your "fellow citizens" in very similar terms.
"You want to execute the president,"
Name one (non fringe/whacko) person who is seriously advocating for "executing" Biden. Quotes and links.
" kick out GOP conservatives who are not far right enough"
Much like the DFL has done with por-life democrats.
"and imprison political opponents. THIS is a problem."
Joe Biden and the DFL are literally in the process of trying to "imprison" Biden's political opponent, right now. Where has the GOP engaged in this sort of behavior? Chanting 'Lock her up." at campaign events doesn't count. I'm talking about actual legal efforts to "imprison" people who have committed no actual crimes.
What has Trump done to harm you or anyone you know? Name it here and let's see if you can draw a line between any policy of his and any harm you may have suffered.
First of all, even aside from his policies, his character (or lack thereof), corruption, overt dishonesty, racism, sexism, ableism, fascist-leanings and all-around vulgar beliefs and personality have caused great harm, demonstrably.
1. His mocking of people with disabilities contributes to the great harm and challenges that those with disabilities face. Don't bother denying it. We saw what we saw, it's documented. That sort of vulgar, utterly unintelligent, mocking behavior is another blow against an historically oppressed and mocked group.
2. His sexist, misogynistic attacks on women (figuratively and literally) are beyond the pale. His sneering, vulgar boasting of sexual assault and his power to get away with it and his ogling of naked teenagers and boasting of his power to get away with it is completely unacceptable. Never mind the 20+ allegations of sexual assault of some sort.
These two actions alone should have ended his being considered a legitimate or rational candidate for office. Everyone knows that IF Trump had been a Democrat, you and you all would have lost your minds in your castigation of this vulgar pervert for these two areas. Don't bother denying it. It just makes you look even less rational or credible.
And the harm and oppression of women is a known reality. The objectification of women and treating them like disposable, abusable sex toys is a known reality. Treating Trump like his actions and words are being "just one of the boys" empowers and enables the rapists and vulgar neanderthals who abuse women. With apologies to the neanderthals.
Electing such a vulgar scumbag to office - or even treating him as if he QUALIFIED for office does harm to women, girls and the people who love them.
Just for starters.
The man was never qualified or fit for office. Treating him like he was just undermines your credibility.
History and, I'm quite certain, God, will judge you all harshly for this.
"You will not stand by the criminal justice system when courts and juries find him actually guilty BUT you want to indict liberals when there are not even indictments."
I guess pointing out the reality that Trump has not been found "actually guilty" of an actual crime is pointless.
"You don't see me calling you all manner of vile names..."
I've got multiple posts that literally are full of quotes of you calling me "all manner of vile names", so yeah we do see you live out your double standard.
"You know, of course, that Trump and his minions have routinely chanted and allowed chants of "lock her up" in his idiot brownshirt rallies."
While that did happen, you are assuming that the intent was to "Lock her up." without the benefit of her being charged, tried, and convicted. I've seen the federal government laws on email for those in government. There is no question in my mind that Clinton violated those laws.
Nice humble brag there.
I'll simply note that I addressed multiple specific issues and Dan chose not to respond to them.
I have to note that voting for one deeply flawed and imperfect political candidate over another deeply flawed and imperfect political candidate is the choice that is made in every single election. However, voting for a deeply flawed and imperfect (even immoral) political candidate IS NOT blanket endorsement or support for every single thing that candidate has ever said or done. It's an acknowledgement that candidate X (flawed, imperfect, or immoral as he/she is) is the most closely aligned with my political beliefs and philosophies. To say anything else, absent direct and verified proof, is simply a lie.
"Your "unified Reich" con-man pervert is a moral atrocity and an actual criminal threat to a free Republic."
1. The term "unified Reich" is an attempt to paint Trump as an actual NAZI. This has no basis in reality. If there is proof that Trump or his surrogates have used the term, provide it. If not, just stop.
2. In the absence of any actual criminal conviction for being a "con man", referring to Trump as one would seem to be slander/libel.
3. Given the increasing evidence of the web of bank accounts and LLCs tied to Biden and his family that certainly appear to be a vast money laundering operation, "con man" seems appropriate for Biden as well.
4. I'll acknowledge that "pervert" isn't completely inaccurate when describing Trump, but given the Biden showing with his daughter thing and his regular sniffing/groping of girls/women, it's not too much of a stretch to apply it to Biden as well.
5. At this point, anyone who complains about Trump's lying while ignoring Biden's is totally lacking credibility.
6. In a world where Weinstein, Maxwell, and Epstein hobnob with DFL presidents and politicians and Soros DAs regularly release violent criminals, I'm not sure "moral atrocity" could be limited to just Trump.
7. Since Trump has not been convicted of any crimes, "criminal threat" seems unfounded and slanderous/libelous.
8. It's interesting that y'all trotted out the "Trump is going to take away your freedoms and turn the country into a police state." bullshit during the first campaign, and it never actually happened. But keep it up, maybe you'll be right next time.
9. I am NOT saying that Biden's flaws legitimize Trump's. What I AM saying is that holding Biden to a lower standard than Trump (or vice versa) is simply hypocritical.
the Moscow show trials of the 1930s, those of the Baathist regime under Saddam Hussein and that of the Commie regime of Mao all had defendants who were indicted for "actual" crimes. That is, that like these current political attacks on Trump, those defendants were not guilty of truly "actual" crimes
Again, your partisanship blinds you. Here are some clues:
THE US IS NOT RUSSIA or any of these other non-free states. We have a legitimate court system.
There IS NOT MASS CONSPIRACY of people across the country trying to make up fake charges against Trump.
The professional judges and prosecutors ARE professional legal administrators. You can't just try to undermine the Justice system we have (flawed, but one of the best ones ever) by making up false slanderous charges against legal experts from the other party.
YOUR attempt (following in the grotesque footprints of your conman pervert king) to slander the press and the court and the justice system are actually a legitimate threat to a free US, to the degree that your orange boss can con enough people into believing slanderous lies.
Failing to recognize the difference between professional legal offices here and kangaroo courts in other nations just demonstrates your blind loyalty to your pimp-goon.
Free yourself from the brainwashing, brother.
And complain all you want. Use grade school names and attacks all you want, you ARE a brother in the sense that we are all brothers, sisters, family to one another. You and I are neighbors and fellow citizens and no amount of vulgar, childish name calling will change that.
If you can't free yourself from the con you've been brainwashed into believing, at least grow up and try to insult with a more rational and better class of insult.
Dan asserts much, proves nothing. For my own convenience, I'll again highlight to which of his many moronic comments I'm providing a response:
May 21, 2024 at 9:04 PM
"It's vile and immoral, for example, to falsely assert there's ever a justification for murdering one's own child in utero. That's pretty freakin' vile and absolutely immoral."
"I GET that this is your personal human opinion. Given that, I would advise you not to have an abortion. But you don't get to decide for everyone else."
It's my personal opinion that murder is an affront to God. No. Actually, that's a fact for those of us who revere His clearly revealed Word presented to us in Scripture. It's insulting to default to a weak come-back in order to insult. I prefer being insulted in an intelligent, creative way. You're too stupid and obsessed with denigrating that you just can't stop it long enough to be imaginative. Whether or not I have the ability to avail myself of abortion is not the point. The point is that it is not opinion that it is murder, regardless of what the law says. It is the unjust taking of innocent life. You're a murderer by virtue of your complicit support for the practice.
And it is also not my "opinion" that abortion is never necessary. I've provided testimony from both obstetricians who specialize in difficult pregnancies as well as reformed abortionists.
Scumbags pretend there's a question regarding the full humanity of the conceived yet not born. Honest people, Christian people, understand that the product of the procreative act is another person endowed by its Creator with the unalienable right to life.
"And to be clear, having an abortion is not murder. It's just not. That, too, is your personal human opinion. God has not told you that. The Bible has not told you that. Thomas Jefferson and George Washington did not tell you that. Science has not told you that. And the law has not told you that. It's your personal opinion."
This is rank sophistry. In other words, intentional dishonesty. It's that or abject stupidity. Abortion is murder because the conceived yet unborn are people. Like nazis toward Jews, or Trabues toward their slaves, you arrogantly and unjustly suppose you're in a position to determine the humanity of another on the basis of immutable characteristics in the same way racists belittle black people because of skin color, ageists according years on earth, sexists according to sex... in this same way you deny humanity to those who have just entered this world through the actions designed to invite them for no other reason than they are minutes old, microscopic and that you can. You use all manner of cheap rationalizations to deny your disregard for the lives of these people. You're a scumbag of the worst kind.
And here's another point which shows you're lying about me. The fact of the matter is, regardless of who's immigration policy is enacted, it requires determining the worthiness of those seeking entry. Right now, you lefty assholes simply assert all are worthy. This is why you're a moron and not competent to vote or speak on matters of import. You're a typical sheep of your America-destroying political overlords.
"You don't see me calling you a murderer because you support the slaughter of innocents in war time as with Hiroshima or with Israel today."
Again you lie. Never have I stated any support for "slaughtering" innocents, while you happily support the slaughter of the most innocent and defenseless people in utero. There's no justification for calling me a murderer because I'm not willing to risk the death of our soldiers or citizens to avoid the possibility that the enemy's civilians might be collateral damage. You're a murderer because you actually support the slaughter of innocents by your defense of abortion.
"We disagree about how to deal with the real problem of violence in regards to Israel and Hamas/Palestine."
You lie about "the real problem of violence" between those factions. I deal in the facts and the facts support my position on the issue. You support assholes.
"No need to say you're a murderer."
Because you've not justification for doing so.
"You're literally not a murderer, nor am I, just because I support women having the right to make their own medical decisions."
The "medical" decision to do what? The decision to murder their own children. You're complicit by your support of that fictional "right". You're a murderer. I don't support in any way anything like that, say nothing of anything so obvious as the murderous act of abortion.
"This is the broken nature of your side."
This is you lying. It who you are. A liar.
May 21, 2024 at 9:11 PM
"Treason, if Biden is convicted of it, is worthy of the sentence traditionally regarded as appropriate for the crime"
"There IS NO treason in having a difference of opinion about how to handle complex border questions or in how to handle complex foreign issue questions. It's literally a disagreement.
Treason:
the crime of betraying one's country, especially by attempting to kill the sovereign or overthrow the government.
the offense of attempting by overt acts to overthrow the government of the state to which the offender owes allegiance or to kill or personally injure the sovereign or the sovereign's family.
Legal definition of treason:
It is the act of waging war against the United States or materially aiding its enemies.
Biden has literally not committed treason. IF he had, you could charge him with the crime and he could be found guilty IF he was guilty. But it's not an issue, EXCEPT in the minds of modern maga-ts who think disagreeing with conservative white opinion is treason."
That's more than a matter of opinion to his disadvantage:
https://www.westernjournal.com/biden-guilty-crime-punishable-death-david-horowitz-declares/
https://www.westernjournal.com/bidenomics-restaurant-bloodbath-continues-tgi-fridays-joins-applebees-red-lobster-closures/
The second link was presented in the first and I found it to be another example of Biden's policies destroying the nation. This is more in the area of "unintended consequences", though his economic policies were seen as destructive when he first promoted them, and enacted them anyway. This next one lists ten reasons for investigating Biden toward a possible impeachment trial, and among them are acts which definitely compromise American security:
https://jonathanturley.org/2023/09/30/ten-reasons-why-the-biden-impeachment-inquiry-is-justified/
So with just these few offerings, there clearly is plenty to suggest that Biden has acted in a treasonous manner, and should they be properly investigated and found to justify the charge, then execution is on the table. Whether or not he conspires, however, his actions do result in great harm to the nation, and justify removal from the office. I would suggest that he gets enough support for that which he proposes that many others should be denied access to the levers of power as well. There have been no such actions perpetrated by Trump, yet you think he's actually a threat to the republic, while Biden continues to perpetrate actual harm.
So you're again playing semantic games to once again minimize the true danger your guy poses to the nation while inflating insignificant issues about Trump to pretend you're vile, grace embracing hatred for the man is justified. It isn't. You're just a liar.
"Clinton had literally committed no crimes. She was endlessly investigated and the worst she was found guilty of was bad handling of emails. Something, no doubt, you've done yourself."
Clinton literally committed crimes, and among those who would refuse to charge her were many who found charging her to be appropriate. The fact that the GOP didn't take off the kid gloves in dealing with her criminality does not mean no crimes were committed, in the same way your party's kangaroo court trials against Trump...indeed all of them throughout his presidency as well...means he was ever guilty of anything justifying them.
"Mayorkas (border chief) has literally committed no impeachable offenses. Handling complex border issues differently than you all personally WISH they were handled is NOT a high crime or misdemeanor."
https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2022/10/remember_when_joe_biden_promised_to_fire_alejandro_mayorkas.html
https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2024/02/well_done_gop_mayorkas_finally_gets_impeached.html
Since President Shit-For-Brains won't fire the guy, impeachment is the proper alternative. Myorkas clearly is an incompetent as well as a Trabue-level liar by daring to suggest and defend the notion that the border is in any way secure.
But you liars all stick together.
"Romney, Bush, Cheney, etc, etc, etc, are LITERALLY very conservative and do not have your imaginary "hatred" of Trump."
No. They have YOUR hatred of Trump, unjustified as well. Trump performed better than GW Bush (though Bush was nowhere near as bad a president as Obama and Biden) and Romney's proven himself to be a horse's ass. Given Trump's LITERALLY very conservative policies as president, they have no justifiable reason for not supporting Trump in 2024, and didn't have one back in 2020.
"ALL of these "crimes" are imaginary, part of your brainwashed "brains," and you have blinded yourself to common sense or reason, opting instead for fear of your own neighbors and slander and endless false accusations."
The crimes of Biden and the Democrats, literal and otherwise, are obvious and plentiful and constantly perpetrated and supported. Dumbass moron liars like you aren't intelligent enough to know you're cutting the throats of your own children and grandchildren by rejecting Trump in favor of assholes like Biden and the Democrats. I've said nothing false. You're "Nyuh uh" responses are the true lies. You and your kind are the true threat to the republic.
More later.
Just this one brief one before I take a break to be productive:
May 21, 2024 at 9:14 PM
"And again, you lying sack of shit...NO ONE is calling for locking up anyone who HASN'T been convicted of a crime."
"You know, of course, that Trump and his minions have routinely chanted and allowed chants of "lock her up" in his idiot brownshirt rallies. There was no asterisk at the end... "Lock her up... IF SHE IS ACTUALLY CONVICTED OF A CRIME..." It was just "lock her up."
Reality is undermining you."
The reality is only a liar like you would pretend that it means lock her up without proving guilt in a court of law. Trump has no "brownshirt" rallies, but we constantly see violent lefty protests in which people dress in black (antifa) or like terrorists (pro-Gaza/anti-Israel). You wouldn't know reality if it kicked you in your lady bits.
More later.
"The professional judges and prosecutors ARE professional legal administrators."
Well then they suck at their jobs.
Fani Willis is embroiled in an controversy because she farmed out he job as prosecutor to her boyfriend and got caught.
The NY prosecutors built their entire case on the testimony of a witness who lied on the stand and admitted to committing crimes on the stand.
The judge's gag order ruling as well as his refusal to allow the defense to put on a critical witness don't seem like the actions of a professional, do they?
"There IS NOT MASS CONSPIRACY"
No there isn't. It's just the Biden administration DOJ colluding with a few hand picked Soros funded prosecutors to keep Trump tied up with legal bullshit. It's the kind of move a coward makes.
"Free yourself from the brainwashing, brother.
And complain all you want. Use grade school names and attacks all you want,..."
Do as Dan says, not as Dan does.
May 21, 2024 at 9:41 PM
"You see, the reality is that I would stand against Biden if he did 1/10 of the things we know Trump has done."
The reality is that you "know" very little that is true about Trump, and ignore all that has been more obvious about Biden.
"The reality is that I voted AGAINST Bill Clinton when he had a consensual affair with an underling..."
Once again, you're exposing yourself as the moron I've long been convinced by myriad evidence you are. This is just more of it. Tales of Clinton's infidelities were widely known in Arkansas. His 12 yr affair with Gennifer Flowers was revealed during the primaries prior to the '92 election he won. The Clinton/Lewinsky scandal broke on January 21, 1998. He had been reelected in 1996 and inaugurated in Jan. '97. He didn't run for a third term, nor was he allowed to do so. So to which "underling" are you referring?
"... and YOU voted and regularly promote your pervert king who's had three wives and numerous affairs and 20+ allegations of sexual assault and in his OWN words, he boasts and laughs about sexual assault and ogling naked teenagers"
I don't have a king, Danny-boy. And no more of a pervert than those you support and far less a pervert than yourself. Had he run in 2016 against a person with character, rather than against a hag with far worse character than his, as well as one who promoted crappy policies, I may not have voted for Trump at that time. When he proved himself far more fit for the job than Hillary was, Obama was and certainly than Biden was...he whose boss asserted that one can leave Joe to f**k things up...Trump again remained the most obvious better choice. He remains so today.
And again, allegations are not convictions or statements of fact until they are proven to be so. He innocent of every damned one of those allegations until proven guilty. He's not been proven guilty of any of them. If you have proof of guilt, present it here. Otherwise, you're slandering the man. Then again, that's what "embrace grace" means to you.
As to those "boasts", there's no proof they're anything more than that. You pretend this guy you insist is a pathological liar can be trusted when he says these things you again regard as fact without proof. Honest people don't do that, even when the things said are objectionable. Then again, that's what "embrace grace" means to you.
"The reality is that if BIDEN had done the same thing, you'd be calling him the most evil and perverted president ever and yet you actively promote your pervert king and have voted for him and continue to vote for him."
I don't have a pervert king. Biden displays far more perverse creepiness than does Trump. The reality is that I don't care who is proven guilty of wrongdoing, I will withhold judgement until such proof can be presented and confirmed. I actively promote Trump and will continue to do so, because he's proven himself a far more beneficially effective president on behalf of ALL Americans, even assholes like you, while those you support haven't.
"If MY candidate was convicted OR indicted for a crime - or even indicted - I'd want them to step down."
Indictment means nothing. Convictions are not the same thing in the least. Many have been wrongly convicted of far more serious crimes than any made up to seek Trump's banishment from public service. Unlike the vast majority of those cases, what's happening to Trump is no different than the Soviet, Communist Chinese and Baathist examples I mentioned earlier, and perpetrated by scumbag leftists cut from the same cloth...as are you, evidently.
"You continue to support your corruption king."
I have no king. The candidate you support has far more solid evidence of corruption in his history than has the candidate I support. Biden is as corrupt an individual as you are. You both are far more corrupt than Trump
"The data is what it is."
None of which supports your vile, demonic hatred for the best president we've had since Reagan.
"YOU stand by your perverts, no matter what."
You're projecting again, and as such are intentionally lying.
"I vote against any of mine that have been found guilty of even a tenth of what your pervert has done."
So you say. You word is crap.
"Anyone rational can see the difference."
How would you know? You don't understand what "rational" is. You certainly have proven yourself wholly IRrational.
"And in all of that, I don't stoop to the demonization of the "other" side, the way you do."
You have no justification for doing so, though you do indeed do it by suggesting I'm supporting some "pervert king". Sounds pretty fucking "demonizing" to me, you immoral lying sack.
"I don't refer to "lying sacks of shit" or oppress women with "girly man" or "cunt" the way you do."
You're lying again, you lying sack of shit. If you're going to continue lying, you're a proven lying sack of shit. Women are not in the least bit "oppressed" by some guy calling a lying sack of shit fake Christian feminist a "girly man". Some women (and men if one is British) are indeed worthy of the word "cunt", if one is cool with using foul language. Your level of moral bankruptcy and corruption certainly qualifies you for the term. But hey...you keep making crap up to demonize better people.
"Open your eyes, give up your fears and hatred, and YOU, too, could see the obvious difference between how you and yours are behaving and how I and mine are behaving..."
The difference could not be more clear. You're a lying sack of shit, immoral to the core and a mocker of God.
May 21, 2024 at 9:42 PM
"My colleagues and I work for the homeless, the mentally ill, those with disabilities, the immigrants and refugees, the children, the veterans, the traditionally oppressed. We stand with women and others who've been denied the right to vote and enjoy their human rights. I personally have been the faithful husband of one woman for 40 years as of next year, a Sunday School teacher, music leader, worship leader in my church, a deacon, etc. for all my life. I do not and never have engaged in what you and your pervert king call "locker room talk" or otherwise been denigrating to women in any manner LIKE your pervert boy."j
First of all, you've often run this crap and you think good works cover for your blatantly immoral acts. They do not any more than Al Capone's soup kitchens made up for his. Matt 5:46-47
Second of all, I have no king but Christ Jesus. When men talk amongst themselves jokingly about women, as do women when they talk jokingly about men, the denigration is more on the part of women, who general do so with their husbands or boyfriends in mind. When men do it, it's not about the women, but about their experiences with them or some peculiarity of a particular one. This is so commonplace (not that it makes it pleasing to God) that you're on outlier. Beyond what such men and women say are far more among the population who think such things without saying it. Far worse than that is for a sanctimonious fake Christian to regard such people as especially evil for engaging in harmless fun, pretending that it puts women (or men) at risk for so engaging. That's an intentional lie, as you can't provide any evidence that such talk presents an actual threat to anyone. You just want to believe it because that's what "embrace grace" means to you.
"And yet you see fit to call me* (and people like me) "perverted" and un-Christian while defending your actual pervert king and wannabe (possibly actual) rapist and vulgar con-man as a good leader."
I see fit to call you and people like you perverts because you plainly and demonstrably are. Unlike you, I've actually demonstrated often what I say is demonstrable, particularly about your perversions. You're unChristian because you refer to your perversions as "good" and potentially blessed by God, which is blasphemous.
And again, lying sack of shit, I have no "pervert king" of any kind. And now you're daring to call him a rapist? This is what "embrace grace" means to you. Unfounded accusations. No support whatsoever, which would get me deleted if I made such at your Blog of Lies. And you still haven't told me what the "con" is, how Trump profits and who is conned out of whatever. Yet, you continue to use that term in reference to him, again demonstrating your hypocrisy in making unsupported claims.
"Your vision is all messed up by your partisanship, son."
I'm not your son, asshole. I love when scumbags like you dare to condescend.
"These two actions alone should have ended his being considered a legitimate or rational candidate for office."
"These two actions alone" don't answer the question even slightly. So typical of the artful question dodger.
"Everyone knows that IF Trump had been a Democrat, you and you all would have lost your minds in your castigation of this vulgar pervert for these two areas."
You don't know everyone. None of us who supports Trump for president because he's so much better than anyone your party of liars and perverts have to offer has ever disregarded his character flaws, but simply put them into their proper context. You consistently vote for assholes, so you have absolutely no room to talk.
"And the harm and oppression of women is a known reality. The objectification of women and treating them like disposable, abusable sex toys is a known reality. Treating Trump like his actions and words are being "just one of the boys" empowers and enables the rapists and vulgar neanderthals who abuse women."
This is nonsensical as it has no basis in reality. Who's been harmed by anything Trump has done in his personal life with regard to his appreciation for hot babes? Name someone like my question requires. Rapists are not enabled by his character. That's just something you add on to your list of rationalizations for your grace embracing hatred.
"Electing such a vulgar scumbag to office - or even treating him as if he QUALIFIED for office does harm to women, girls and the people who love them."
Bullshit. Abject bullshit. It does NOT answer the question. It's just your bullshit false and unsupported...as well as unsupportable...claim becuase you're a fake Christian who lies. The true vulgar scumbag is you.
"The man was never qualified or fit for office. Treating him like he was just undermines your credibility."
His first term proves the terminal stupidity of this baseless belief. He did more for all Americans than Obama came anywhere close to accomplishing and did so in half the time. Biden hasn't come close to doing a single damned thing which benefits anyone but his criminal son.
"History and, I'm quite certain, God, will judge you all harshly for this."
Another wild fantasy from the mind of a moron, a liar and a fake Christian.
more later
"You see, the reality is that I would stand against Biden if he did 1/10 of the things we know Trump has done."
The reality is that you simply choose to ignore 9/10 of what Biden has done.
"History and, I'm quite certain, God, will judge you all harshly for this."
Hubris unleashed. The fact that Dan feels himself up to the job of speaking for history, and YHWH. is quite impressive.
It's strange because from what I can tell about Dan, he doesn't really believe that YHHW will actually judge anyone in any meaningful manner. He's seemed definitive that any "eternal" punishment cannot possibly happen, and he's never been really specific on whether or not any punishment will actually happen. He's been pretty clear that many people who've only committed a "few" "minor" sins will get off easy, but not much beyond that. If I had to guess, I'd conclude that whatever sin this is that he's condemning you for is a really major sin.
His hubris is pretty funny though.
"The reality is that you simply choose to ignore 9/10 of what Biden has done."
Good point, Craig! What's more, aside from what I recall was some objection to a Biden policy regarding the paroling of illegal invaders...because, as you know, we're to welcome with open arms any and all who choose to come here for whatever reason regardless of the potential negative impact on us....I don't think Dan's actually stood against 1/10 of the many illicit things Biden's done.
And "hubris"? The late Chicago mayor, Harold Washington (not one of the worst lefties Chicago elected) referred to hubris as "arrogance gone wild!" That fits Dan to a T.
Before moving on to the rest of the ludicrous Louisville liar's comments, I wish to revisit one point he stupidly tried to assert showed knowledge and understanding of reality:
"Clinton had literally committed no crimes. She was endlessly investigated and the worst she was found guilty of was bad handling of emails."
The "worst she was found guilty of" was being in violation of 18 U.S. Code § 793(f), which refers to her negligence in the handling of classified materials. "Negligence", particularly where national security is concerned, is no small thing. It's a crime and the word itself is by definition, not dependent upon intent...which is why the leftist Comey saw fit to withhold charges many others working the case insisted were absolutely warranted. Note that the crime of "negligent homicide" results in serious punishment. So does negligent vehicular homicide, criminal neglect or endangerment of a child, negligent storage of firearms, or negligent keeping of a dangerous dog. Clinton's crime was indeed quite worthy of punishment and it should have been pursued by Congress at the time, or by Trump once he was in office, given he agreed she should've been locked up. That he dropped that after being elected was a major negative of his presidency. Her and her husband have been involved in actual criminal behavior of a degree Dan wished could be true of Trump so he can justly carry on his hatred more vigorously.
To be fair, Dan did seem to object to the Biden administration proposal to privatize water systems, so there's that.
But beyond that I haven't heard him get too worked up about anything Biden has done. Personally the whole Biden thing of repeatedly releasing illegal immigrants who've committed crimes so they can continue to commit crimes, is a big negative.
May 22, 2024 at 9:11 AM
"Again, your partisanship blinds you."
It's because my eyes are wide open and that I see clearly that I'm a conservative who has no choice but to vote Republican and to support proven leaders like Donald Trump against the abuses of power and law by the vile scum you prefer
"Here are some clues:"
Let me correct that for you so it's more accurate.
Here are some lies:
"THE US IS NOT RUSSIA or any of these other non-free states."
Oh, really? Is this supposed to be some kind of intelligent revelation, as if I was confused? The complaint, justified by what honest people all over the nation can plainly see, is that your Democrat abuses of power extend to the judicial system as well. What's happening to Trump, his supporters, defenders of the conceived still in the womb and parents protesting crap pushed on their kids without their consent or despite the lack of it, is not just prosecutions, but political persecution as has been witnessed in the examples of foreign leftism I listed.
"There IS NOT MASS CONSPIRACY of people across the country trying to make up fake charges against Trump."
I have no idea of how organized this is or isn't, nor does it matter. But when state supreme courts choose to block Trump from being on the ballot on the false claim he's guilty of being an insurrectionist and/or inciting insurrection, it at least shows that all the like-minded, morally/ethically corrupt progressives (is there any other kind) are manifesting variations on the same theme. And it's true, Dan. You're not the only lying lefty scumbag working against the best interests of all that's good and holy. Your kind is legion...and I use that word with specific purpose.
"The professional judges and prosecutors ARE professional legal administrators."
It's not a question of whether they legitimately passed the bar. It's whether or not they're acting ethically in their prosecution of persecution. They're not. They're acting like those aforementioned foreign lefty scumbags with these many show trials, beginning with the Trump impeachment hearings, through the charade called the Jan 6 Hearings to the current bullshit trials Trump now must endure.
"You can't just try to undermine the Justice system we have (flawed, but one of the best ones ever) by making up false slanderous charges against legal experts from the other party."
It's your "legal experts" who are undermining the justice system in order to politically persecute Donald Trump and the others mentioned above. There's no slander necessary to simply point out their bad behaviors. Again, see Jonathan Turley and/or Alan Dershowitz if you need lefties to make you understand...though you reject them because they don't toe the scumbag line.
"YOUR attempt (following in the grotesque footprints of your conman pervert king) to slander the press and the court and the justice system are actually a legitimate threat to a free US, to the degree that your orange boss can con enough people into believing slanderous lies."
More grace embracing by the anti-Christ. I'm not "attempting" to slander anyone. I'm noting the obvious regarding the leftist members of the press and judicial system who are perverting truth and the law in order to deny Trump a second term. We've not needed the best president in the last 35 years...Donald Trump...to say a single word to know what your vermin kind in the Democrat party is doing. The slanderous lies are the puke spewed by your kind about Donald Trump in order to deny him a second term. And here's the truth you are too dishonest to acknowledge: if your party of scum actually had a record of success, and Trump truly had a record of failure, you assholes wouldn't be doing any of this for two reasons:
1. People would clamor for more of that success, and
2. People would reject the suffering brought about by Trump's failures.
Ironically, the very opposite is happening. All you have is your lies and hatred. It's manifested with vigor in this thread.
"her negligence in the handling of classified materials. "Negligence", particularly where national security is concerned, is no small thing..."
It would easier to take your concern about rules IF you could condemn Trump for his blatant mishandling of secret documents and his obtuse refusal to correct himself when he was caught.
I could forgive your king of stupidity for not understanding he was breaking the law for stealing national secrets - the disease-addled man IS an obvious idiot, after all) - but not his belligerent arrogance in complying with legal officials once his crimes were caught.
Dan
"Failing to recognize the difference between professional legal offices here and kangaroo courts in other nations just demonstrates your blind loyalty to your pimp-goon."
I don't have a goon, except for you, Danny-girl. You think there's a significant difference between those foreign show trials I mentioned and what's happening here to Trump and your argument is "these are American judges and prosecutors, so they're good and pure". When you look up "useful idiot" on line, a picture of Dan Trabue appears.
"Free yourself from the brainwashing, brother."
I'm not brainwashed, but you must be to believe I'm a brother to an inveterate, ungodly asshole like you.
What follows are a few links to articles on the subject from the brilliant Andrea Widburg. You'll reject her factual presentation of the issue because you're a lying lefty asshole, but you should read it and never again presume to pretend Trump did anything wrong. So, not necessarily in chronological order of publishing, I present the following. Don't be your usual dick self. Read them and learn something:
https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2022/09/the_eleventh_circuits_unconstitutional_ruling_against_trump.html
https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2023/06/trump_did_not_violate_the_law_because_he_could_not_violate_the_law.html
https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2022/08/no_trump_didnt_committ_actionable_treason_or_espionage.html
https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2023/06/debunking_another_false_claim_that_trump_violated_national_security_law.html
These describe the truth of the matter than the grace-embracing haters dishonestly disregard. You lying bastards know you can't surpass him on the merits of his record as president, so you seek out ways to indict him on "trumped up" charges. That's what liars do. That's what the Stalin, Mao and Hussein governments did. But then, they were lefties, too.
"I could forgive your king of stupidity for not understanding he was breaking the law for stealing national secrets - the disease-addled man IS an obvious idiot, after all) - but not his belligerent arrogance in complying with legal officials once his crimes were caught."
Clearly you're the stupid one, Danny-girl, for not understanding his authority as president as regards classified docs. You are a disease-addled reprobate and an inveterate lying fake Christian idiot, after all... a most contemptible scumbag). But your belligerent arrogance, not justified in any way, much less an expression of what one would think "embracing grace" might mean in daring to suggest you're one to pass judgement on anyone, much less a president who far surpassed those you support. But think about it...you're actually not a Christian but insist you are. Look how belligerent you get at having that pointed out! Imagine how much more so you'd wet your panties if you were an actual Christian! In the meantime, Trump absolutely is guilty of no crime with regard these docs he had, secured far better BEFORE he added locks on the suggestion of the feds, than you reprobate president Biden and you whine he's getting belligerent??? They fucking raided his home and rummaged through his stuff, including Melania's with a team of federal agents despite his having authority over what he had. Biden never had that authority. Pence never had that authority. Hillary never had that authority. Where were the teams of armed and armored agents descending on their homes?
"Dan"
The Dumbass.
So folks...
What we've seen here in this comment thread is Dan doing nothing to refute, rebut or prove wrong any of that which has been presented in the post regarding a good share of Biden's many failures as a president, senator and man, but mostly his impact on the nation since the 2020 election was stolen for the benefit of the Democrat Party. Instead, Dan chooses to rehash about Trump that which has been proven false or unsubstantiated, yet nothing at all about his great work as president. This is actually quite typical of the Trump-hating leftists and others who also hate him. Nothing about his work as president. Hell, despite his great record in general, I can point to a few things which could be used as arguments against him, except they are so few in number. Some put greater weight on those few points of contention than do others, but they remain few compared to what good he did. Obama and Biden can't compare. I don't think the Bush's can and Clinton can't.
One of the most common accusations is that Trump is only thinking of himself. There is no supporting this given his record and the shit he's been willing to endure to continue serving the nation...because unlike Dems, he actually cares about the nation (We The People) and our culture. If the charge is appropriate for anyone, it's most appropriate for Biden, Obama and Clinton. Those are the scumbags who've enriched themselves by being president, not Trump.
Even if all of Dan's concerns about Trump (the sex stuff, because dwelling on it gives Dan a tingle in his lady bits) are absolute fact, what does it say that such a guy can not just be a United States president, but show all the others how it's done? Nothing sticks in the craw of every progressive shithead like Dan than that most obvious truth.
There's no legitimate reason to reject Trump even if all that shit is fact. He's still the one guy most likely to turn around this nation from the shit show Biden has insured it would be. At the very least, he'll have laid the foundation for whomever follows him, so long as that person isn't Democrat, because they're evil assholes.
"It would easier to take your concern about rules IF you could condemn Trump for his blatant mishandling of secret documents and his obtuse refusal to correct himself when he was caught."
It would be easier to take this particular objection seriously if you were consistent.
1. Trump had the authority to declassify documents.
2. It appears as if it's possible that the "evidence" from the FBI raid, where they were authorized to use deadly force apparently might have been exaggerated.
3. You were just as concerned with the fact that an independent council found that Biden (who did not have the authority to declassify documents) accumulated classified documents in multiple locations over a long period of time. The only reason he wasn't charged is that the IC didn't think he was competent to stand trial.
4. Acknowledge that Hillary as Sec State also had no authority to declassify documents, did not have the authority to store classified emails on a private server, and did in fact violate US Code regarding classified documents/emails.
The double standard strikes again.
Art,
Now that I think of it, Dan does seem focused on Trump's sex life. Is it normal to be that focused on the sex life of another guy?
"the disease-addled man IS an obvious idiot, after all"
So, Biden is unable to find his way to the WH door 15 feet behind him, regularly wanders around lost on stages, regularly speaks in gibberish, and repeatedly tells the same old lies about himself and Trump is the "disease-addled" "idiot".
Dr Trabue, can you be specific about what specific "disease" you have diagnosed Trump with?
Referring to Craig's three comments in order of appearance:
Regarding point #2, no "evidence" is actual evidence of wrongdoing unless they can show that what Trump possessed was taken after 12:00PM, Inauguration Day, Jan. 20 2021. Until the specified time of that particular day, Trump was still president with that plenary power.
All in all, your first comment is an easy summary for progressive fake Christians who have no intention of reading my provided links.
"Now that I think of it, Dan does seem focused on Trump's sex life. Is it normal to be that focused on the sex life of another guy?"
It would for a closet homosexual or bi-sexual...especially for one who so adamantly supports, defends, celebrates and enables those of the LGBTQ+ nation.
"the disease-addled man"
Despite always having been some form of idiot, Biden at least knew how to make lots of money while having never worked in the private sector for any significant amount of time. Yet, as you say, he clearly presents as one truly "disease-addled", and has for some time.
And again, disease addled or no, between the two, Trump is clearly the "disease-addled" candidate with the blatantly better record as president and the clearly more competent and fit to serve a second term.
Art,
As I understand it, it's not so much possession as whether or not he declassified it before he left office.
On a related note, it seems like former presidents would retain some level of security clearance after the leave office. I remember several presidents seeking counsel from their predecessors and it seems like that would be facilitated by maintain some level of clearance.
I wasn't going to go that far, but...
There's a Truman quote that talks about how anyone who gets rich in public office is a crook, or words to that affect. The fact that the last few DFL presidents have managed to parlay their presidencies into hundreds of millions of dollars should probably raise more questions than it does. As for Biden the web of shell companies, LLC's, and bank accounts if the names of family members which millions of dollars have flowed through with no apparent legitimate source should raise red flags, but it doesn't.
Trump "over values" some real estate he used for collateral (accepted by the lender after due diligence) and he's public enemy number 1.
I was referring to the "evidence" which would require that he took possession of whatever the evidence is in order to accuse him of mishandling. If he took any of it while president, he effectively de-classified it. If somehow he laid hands on it after noon of Jan 20, '21, then he wasn't president with the plenary power to do with it what he chooses. No "evidence" which could have been planted could be that which was not alleged to have been taken after or before he was officially POTUS, in order to allege a crime took place.
can you be specific about what specific "disease" you have diagnosed Trump with?
That you all don't know... that you can't see it, that's a huge part of the problem.
Try this: Imagine Trump was the Democratic candidate/president when he ran in 2016 and that he won. Seriously, think about it.
Then think about ALL the vulgar, diseased, corrupt, dishonest, dangerous things he's said and done as the Democrat president.
THEN, would you be calling him sick, saying he's dishonest, that he's a pervert and unfit for office in hundreds of ways?
Of course, you would. Don't lie, we all know it's true.
Trump:
1. Is a malignant narcissist.
2. Is likely sociopathic.
3. Is entirely amoral.
4. Has no sense of right or wrong or dishonesty or fact. Those considerations are entirely meaningless to him.
5. Has always been in this for himself and himself alone. (see 4)
6. Is the single most overtly corrupt president in our history.
7. Has a long, established history of using the privilege of being a wealthy white guy to get away with a long string of cons and abuses of power.
8. Routinely sues and abuses the court system to avoid being held accountable.
9. Has no use for faithfulness to his wives or ANYONE else.
10. Has a long history of his ALLIES being burned (and almost killed, sometimes) and thrown under the bus and those ALLIES will tell you, to a man (or woman) that he is a deviate, sick and unfit for office.
11. Is not a conservative at all... he just uses people to get what he wants and avoid being held accountable.
Etc, etc.
You could see it if you weren't blinded by his con and your need to believe in conservatism, which is now a meaningless concept. You can tell by the way actual self-respecting conservatives have had to go in hiding.
That you can't see it is, again, part of the problem.
May 24, 2024 at 6:53 PM
Dumbass Danny-Double Standard was asked:
"can you be specific about what specific "disease" you have diagnosed Trump with?"
Without benefit of professional expertise, he replies:
"That you all don't know... that you can't see it, that's a huge part of the problem."
I can't speak for all, but what I see is a guy who performed far better on behalf of all Americans than either the empty suit who preceded him or the empty-headed guy who followed. Given I expect a president to perform on behalf of all Americans, he's certainly done better than either of Obama or Biden. As he now competes and the incredibly incompetent Biden, my choice is obvious. To reject Trump in favor of any Democrat clearly indicate severe mental dysfunction.
"Try this: Imagine Trump was the Democratic candidate/president when he ran in 2016 and that he won. Seriously, think about it."
Who would have been running against? How would his agenda have differed? Without knowing who his GOP opponent would have been, it's a stupid exercise you suggest. Assuming his campaign would be the same, it would be hard not to consider him on the basis of his plans. His personal life had already been a barrier for most of us until he sealed the GOP nomination. The thing which would have worked against him is that he would not have been running against someone as abhorrent a person, as corrupt a person and as leftist a person as Hillary Clinton. Your challenge ignores all of these variables which would have been in play and likely tons more. All because in embracing grace, your hatred for Trump is all that matters. Your hatred for Trump indicates hatred for your nation.
"Then think about ALL the vulgar, diseased, corrupt, dishonest, dangerous things he's said and done as the Democrat president."
He's done nothing as president which is of great concern when balanced against all the great things he's done. My support for him comes with an expectation that he does less of the negative things and lots more of the far many more positive things he's done. There's been nothing he's done as president which has any great...or even modest...negative impact on any American citizen. He's not been "corrupt" unless you're expanding the term to mean things the average American wouldn't regard as such.
"THEN, would you be calling him sick, saying he's dishonest, that he's a pervert and unfit for office in hundreds of ways?"
Look, asshole...few who support Trump disregard the less than Christian aspects of his character and manner. But he's proven himself fit by being a far better president than Obama or Biden...and I'd include everyone going back to Reagan. YOU are far more "pervert" than Trump has ever been on his most lecherous day. You're also more dishonest. I'm still waiting for you to provide examples of any "lie" which had any significance or negative impact on the American voter. When will you provide? Like the lying piece of shit you are, you satisfy yourself with accusations...regarding them as statements of fact.
.
"Of course, you would. Don't lie, we all know it's true."
I don't lie. That's so obviously YOUR bag. I've already stated repeatedly that I opposed Trump in the primaries in favor of Ted Cruz prior to the 2016 election and because of his history of moral problems. He then won and faced the Haggery Clunton. The choice was clear. Trump promised that which appealed. Hillary promised more of what wasn't working. Plus, she's a complete asshole, very much like you are. Trump's a good guy whose done bad things. Trump's a sharp dude whose done bad things. The bad things Trump's done does not mitigate the fact that he's proven himself to be a better president than any leftist marxist asshole you'd offer to run against him. Period.
So far, through two posts on the subject, you've done nothing more than say some variation of "Orange Man Bad", like the intellectual vapid and morally bankrupt asshole you are.
"Trump:
1. Is a malignant narcissist."
Not at all evident in any way you've proven.
"2. Is likely sociopathic."
Another wildly unproven accusation. Support it as you insist I support anything I say at your blog. I'm quite certain you have no idea what the word means, or what an actual sociopath looks like.
According to Psychology Today, "Sociopathy refers to a pattern of antisocial behaviors and attitudes, including manipulation..." how exactly does this manifest in your psychotic hatred? A man of his status must persuade...something others would regard as "manipulative"...or outright insistence because he's the boss and one is supposed to do as the boss wishes. "...deceit..." that, as has been said by many people, is the trait of all politicians. But you've as yet been unable to provide any example of any serious form of it, or even anything which rises (or lowers) to the level of Biden or the typical Democrat! "...aggression..." Have you ever listened to your Depends clad preference, Joe Biden? THAT is an aggressive SOB! "...and a lack if empathy for others>" This guy clearly has more than a little empathy for others or he would not be allowing himself to be unjustly attacked so often as he seeks to serve the nation again. You're a liar and there's professional help for that.
"3. Is entirely amoral."
This might be true with regard to shaggin' babes, but beyond that, you have to just assume based on stories you choose to believe. He clearly knows that it's wrong to allow people to enter our country without the least bit of vetting. He knows it's wrong to not give diplomacy a chance. He knows it's wrong to allow his nation to be taken advantage of by bad treaties and foreign trade agreements. He knows it's wrong to purge the wealth of Americans and expect tax revenues to increase. He knows it's wrong to handcuff the entrepreneur with idiotic regulations. He knows it's wrong to let our military degrade because of woke DEI bullshit.
He's not necessarily down with killing people in the womb, like you are.
"4. Has no sense of right or wrong or dishonesty or fact. Those considerations are entirely meaningless to him."
That's just something you like to believe because...you know...embrace grace and all that bullshit lie. My response to the previous point disputes this redundant padding of your list of lies about him.
"5. Has always been in this for himself and himself alone. (see 4)"
A common theme of the lying leftist Trump-hater, but one never supported. Unlike Biden and Obama, his wealth has lessened while president. But his willingness to endure bullshit like your saying about him on a far larger scale than just the puking of some fake Christian from Louisville, and to do so to serve the nation he loves so fucking obviously belies that rank stupidity that only lefties say such shit. But shit is what you're all about and that's what "embrace grace" clearly means to you.
"6. Is the single most overtly corrupt president in our history."
Often said by complete and utter assholes like you without the slightest effort to back it up with evidence. Prove it, bitch. How is he more corrupt than Biden? Start there.
"7. Has a long, established history of using the privilege of being a wealthy white guy to get away with a long string of cons and abuses of power."
He has a long, established history of being accused of such. But unlike progressives, honest people don't regard accusations as proof of guilt. As to abuse of power, I give you today's Democrat Party. Anyone who actually cares about abuse of power focuses on the worst and ongoing example of it. Progressives are too much the assholes to give real abuse a second thought. They prefer to focus on imagined abused by better people.
"8. Routinely sues and abuses the court system to avoid being held accountable."
More fantasy which titillates Dan. People in his position spend a lot of time in court. You, being a fake Christian, choose to believe without evidentiary basis that he does this sort of thing. Most people use the court to defend against abuses against them. But because you're a hateful liar, you choose to believe he's abusing the system.
"9. Has no use for faithfulness to his wives or ANYONE else."
Thus far, the only point on this list which is anywhere near true. Clearly he's had affairs. No disputes or excuses it.
"10. Has a long history of his ALLIES being burned (and almost killed, sometimes) and thrown under the bus and those ALLIES will tell you, to a man (or woman) that he is a deviate, sick and unfit for office."
Trump has no use for those who are no longer useful. Who would in business or politics? If you hire a painter for your house, do you keep paying him after he's finished the job or proven himself to be bad at it? Trump has plenty of allies and associates who continue to regard their association with him as worthwhile, including women who've been with him in high ranking positions for decades. Good gosh...look at all the people who have left your girl Kamala Harris!!
You clearly have your head up your ass and have no idea about such things.
"That you all don't know... that you can't see it, that's a huge part of the problem."
It's not that we "don't know" as asking you to be specific about your personal issues.
"Then think about ALL the vulgar, diseased, corrupt, dishonest, dangerous things he's said and done as the Democrat president."
Instead, let's think about all of the harmful, bad policies he'd have implemented as the DFL president. Then there would be nothing positive to offset the negatives about his personality/character.
Or we could look at Biden, see his bad policy choices, see his personality/character issues, and see his physical/mental health state and realize that voting against Biden is the only rational alternative for change.
"THEN, would you be calling him sick, saying he's dishonest, that he's a pervert and unfit for office in hundreds of ways?"
Again, the fact that you are so partisan as to pretend that this isn't about policy more than anything else is concerning.
1. All politicians are narcissists, since narcissism doesn't cause cancer "malignant narcissism" has no meaning.
2. Well, Dan is prepared to condemn Trump for what he "likely" is with no proof.
3. You're assuming that some degree of amorality is absolutely a bad thing for a president.
4. Possibly, yet Biden clearly has no sense of being obligated to tell the Truth, so it's a matter of degree.
5. This is simply false. Trump has a history of all sorts of selfless, charitable actions.
6. That's you hunch.
7. As has Biden.
8. That's quite the unsupported claim. I'm sure your vast expertise in the civil legal system gives you secret information. Of course Biden is misusing the legal system against Trump, so it's kind of a wash.
9. Well, neither did multiple DFL presidents, and he clearly has some level of faithfulness. Not as much as I'd prefer, but some.
10. And the Clintons don't?
11. He's not a traditional conservative, but he'd done enough conservative things the convince most that he's more conservative than Biden
Dan is, of course, not blinded in anyway by his hatred for Trump, his hatred of conservatives, his hatred of the GOP, and his unquestioning loyalty to the DFL and his progressive dreams.
Re: malignant narcissism has no meaning....
"Malignant narcissism is a psychological syndrome comprising an extreme mix of narcissism, antisocial behavior, aggression, and sadism.[1] Grandiose, and always ready to raise hostility levels, the malignant narcissist undermines families and organizations in which they are involved, and dehumanizes the people with whom they associate."
That you are unaware of the meaning doesn't mean much.
Dan
Thanks for the definition, Dan. It's helpful in affirming your great dishonest nature. By this definition, Trump doesn't qualify for the term, and even less so than simply narcissism, for which he also doesn't qualify. This is only true in the severe grace-embracing hatred of Trump in your own black, anti-Christ heart.
Dan,
Thanks for the definition. Given that it appears to be a somewhat technical, psychological term, using it out of context does render the term functionally meaningless.
Having acknowledged that, I'll agree with Art that Trump doesn't seem to actually fit the definition you offered.
I do find the willingness of the Trump haters to believe that somehow Trump will remove all of our rights, and turn the country into a fascist dictatorship, this time. Despite the evidence that your crying wolf didn't happen when Trump was actually president.
OOH! Trump was probably saving his fascist dictatorship for his second term!!!
Really. While they carry on with this crap, I've yet to see any lefty provide an example of how "our democracy" has in any way suffered as a result of Trump's first term, and on what basis they can say it will due to a second Trump term. Like the many allegations about Trump, the simple utterance of such makes him absolutely guilty. No need for a trial. He hasn't gotten a fair one so far.
To that, the latest crap from "His Honor" NY State Justice Juan Merchan provides even more evidence validating my comparison of the abuse of the judicial system being currently perpetrated against Trump and his supporters as was inflicted upon defendants in show trials of Stalinist Russian, Mao's China and Hussein's Iraq. This notion that the jury can be divided and still render a guilty verdict on any count flies in the face of basic jurisprudence which requires jury unanimity in finding guilt.
My wife once sat on a jury which lasted about a week, with that jury being sequestered. The defendant had two charges against him in a drunk driving crash which resulted in a fatality. They had a unanimous decision on only one of the charges, with the second being found not proven by enough of the jury to prohibit them from bringing a guilty verdict on that one. By Merchan's allowance, this jury could have had 7 of the twelve finding fault on the second charge and that would have been enough. When has that ever been the policy in the US justice system? Jeanine Piro held the same position in New York and ripped this asshat to shreds over the many actions he's taken in this trial that makes a reversal on appeal almost a slam dunk. This guy should be disbarred. Period.
Yes, the notion that Trump is going to actually do all the crap they said he'd do in his first term in his second is kind of stupid. The fact the people believe that, in spite of the evidence, suggests that the stupidity is contagious.
I don't think "contagious" is the proper word here. Dem politicians rely on the stupidity of a large enough segment of the voting public to win majority support. Those are added to those who are morally bankrupt and dishonest. I think it's harder to get a majority without such numbers.
Andrea Widburg, writing at AT, suggested the SCOTUS could take up this case on their own if there's enough of an outcry. She suggested three ways that could manifest:
1. The vote. Can't trust the vote as this case like all the others against Trump has been put forth to interfere with the election. Dems cheat in elections, so there's no vote which can take place to directly indicate the righteous outrage of honest and true Americans about the lawlessness of these cases, and this one in particular.
2. Violence. The conservative right is unlikely to produce any widespread rioting...nothing to match the violence and size of the moronic BLM/antifa scumbags. Conservatives actually care about the rule of law and thus this option won't do the job.
3. Money. As in, massive donations and contribution to Trump's cause. This is already happening. Biden's trying to appeal for campaign contributions to offset that which is pouring in to aid Trump against this blatant political persecution. That's a tough job given his horribly low poll numbers, nearly vacant rallies and how many long-time Dem voters who feel they've been jacked around by the law and judicial system having great empathy for Trump's situation. I've never donated to a presidential campaign before, reserving my political donations to down ballot individuals I think need the help to push passed especially low character Dem opponents (is there any other kind?). This situation is as clear an example of good vs evil, and contrary to Dr. Jill's lie, this is pure evil perpetrated against Trump, and thus the rest of us. As such, giving a few shekels is the least honest and true Americans and Christians or Jews can do for the nation. A groundswell of contributions, as has begun since this travesty occurred, especially as one-sided as it will be, can grab the attention of SCOTUS, particularly if majority of the total is made up of small, grass-roots donations as opposed to fewer but larger donations Biden might get. It would indicate the outrage is very much widespread which would compel the interest of SCOTUS.
This last is also important as we can't be assured that an Appellate Court would be any less leftist and Trump-hating than was Merchan, Bragg and the jury. While never any guarantee, even the suspect conservative majority is unlikely to regard this verdict as the result of an actual fair, Constitutionally sound legal proceeding. Hell, even one or two of the buffoonish three lefties on the SC might be too embarrassed to support it!
At some point the case will reach an appellate level where sanity will prevail and the law will be followed. The problem is that it'll be almost impossible to expedite the process to take place prior to the election. It's possible that they could file with SCOTUS on an emergency basis that would get ruled on soon, but I don't know how likely it is. It's strange that the DFL has decided that the way to combat election interference, is to engage in election interference.
Again, the likelihood of SCOTUS stepping in and sooner rather than later is no less so than it was in the Bush v Gore situation, and this is affects more than merely one state, as Trump supporters are a vast a growing national faction. Even better, there's no reason Trump can't petition both the appellate level AND SCOTUS at the same time, and clearly great reason why they must.
On a side, but related note, I just saw an article suggesting the three lefties on the SC could recuse themselves from any case involving election interference, which would make a favorable opinion by the remaining almost a guarantee, given they're more devoted to the Constitution. Why they feel recusal is appropriate I didn't take the time to read and discover, but I found it to be great news if true.
While I'm not totally sure, I suspect that if Trump immediately jumped to SCOTUS that he loses any chance for a remedy in a lower court. In any case, you are correct that he can certainly apply, but that the decision is out of his hands.
I find it hard to believe that there would be a conflict of any of the left leaning justices more compelling than that of the justices Trump nominated. It seems like the height of stupidity for them to do so.
In any case, it's all speculation at this point and the Trump legal team hasn't announced any strategy that I've heard going forward.
I don't see why he'd lose by appealing to both the appellate and Supreme Court. More than that, given the appellate court would likely be from the same blue area, his chance for relief would morel likely come from the Supremes. Indeed, the appellate courts have the authority to turn down appeals, as well. That is, they don't have to hear every petition which comes their way. According to lcwlegal.com, "the court of appeal denies the overwhelming majority of petitions for writ of mandamus seeking review of trial court orders." If they are as left as the assholes who railroaded Trump in the first place, they can tell him to piss off. The impact of this bullshit ruling, however, carries massive consequences going forward and because of that, I'm hoping the Supremes will feel compelled to take the case and straighten it out. There have been a ton of legal people from both sides of the ideological divide who regard this case as a travesty.
"I find it hard to believe that there would be a conflict of any of the left leaning justices more compelling than that of the justices Trump nominated."
I don't understand your meaning here. Please clarify.
I've heard nothing, either, other than that they plan to appeal.
I don't thin it's a matter of losing as much as it is of jurisdiction. I don't know if he can skip the entire state appeals process, as well as much of the federal appeals process to jump straight to SCOTUS. If he does, then I'd suspect that he'd lose the ability to pursue any other avenue of appeal. Given that this is a state crime, although based on a federal crime for which he's not been charged or convicted, I'm not sure if he's got standing to get into the federal appeals system. While I remain confident that it'll be overturned on appeal, I don't know how far it'll go,
Obviously the case has far reaching implications, I just don't know that SCOTUS has jurisdiction on a state conviction. Obviously a quick trip to SCOTUS would put this to rest quickly, but we're in uncharted territory and will just have to wait.
That the potential conflict of the left leaning judges is just as significant as that of the justices Trump nominated. This is an inherently political case, and has the potential to affect either or both parties in the future. Therefore I'd argue that no justice should be expected to recuse themselves.
As I listen to a number of more knowledgeable people than I am, one of the first problems is the time it would take to make it through a state appellate to see if your confidence was justified. (I only have confidence he deserves having the whole thing overturned, as I do for the three other BS cases against him. Not that any appellate court would agree or be so devoted to actual justice that they wouldn't also "leak a little" to see Trump convicted and jailed.)
Also according to those more knowledgeable people, there is a means by which the state appeals process can be leapfrogged in order to get to the Supremes. And if the Supremes are watching this charade, they may be champing at the bit to weigh in. I don't recall the exact terminology for the means of doing so, but it came about to settle the Gore v Bush "hanging chad" fiasco and led to Gore weeping in tears.
These same people also speak to the various conflicts with two or three Constitutional protections regarding how one is to be treated in a court. Any Constitutional infraction would make it a federal case if the Supremes should see it as such. And it seems purposely self-serving for the Trump-haters to insist a federal issue is at the heart of this otherwise statute of limitations expired state issue and not then regard the entire fraud as a federal issue worthy of SCOTUS involvement. Also, a state conviction, in my understanding, cannot be in breach of Constitutional protections, so the jurisdiction concern is further diminished in my mind, and hopefully in the minds of the right people in position to correct this miscarriage of justice.
"That the potential conflict of the left leaning judges is just as significant as that of the justices Trump nominated."
I think we're way past the "potential" for conflict of left leaning judges. It's proven they acted out of animus toward DJ Trump. The tissue thin rationalization for charging him alone tells that tale quite blatantly, as any judge devoted to justice wouldn't have allowed any of them to proceed. It's ironic. Trump has far, far more justification for insisting the 2020 election was stolen from him than any of these prosecutors have for insisting Trump committed any actual crime in any of these cases.
" Therefore I'd argue that no justice should be expected to recuse themselves."
Don't know any will. I only saw something which suggested Kagan, Sotomayor and "What's a woman?" were considering it. I didn't read the article to get any details, which is why I didn't say any more about it. My only reason for mentioning it at all was to suggest that Trump would have an even better chance of being exonerated by the Supremes if they did.
I agree that the state appellate system is more stacked against him than it would be in other states, although NY isn't as liberal outside of NYC so who knows. I think the timing thing works both ways. If Trump can kick the can down the road, and win the election, then he'll be fine. As a lame duck he could pardon himself and it wouldn't hurt him much.
I've also seen that it can jump to SCOTUS, and that would be the most expeditious way to handle it. You may be right that they are looking forward to taking the case.
As I, and others, see the state case it seems as though the fact that Trump was never charged (let alone convicted) on a federal charge undermines the entire state case. They based their argument on the assumption (never proven) that Trump violated federal campaign law. I've got extensive remarks from an expert that would disagree, but it's not been charged or adjudicated so who cares.
I'm referring to SCOTUS left wing judges. Obviously the trial judge and prosecutor have shown plenty of animus towards Trump and the judge should have never presided over the trial.
If the three stooges did recuse themselves, that would seem to guarantee Trump a win, and place the responsibility squarely on them.
I also saw an article which suggested the GOP could move up its convention, which would mean that if Trump is nominated as expected, later sentencing by Merchan would be that much more complicated. It would more definitely appear the political persecution it is. Doesn't seem likely, but nothing's guaranteed in these unprecedented times.
What I find kind of stupid is the rush to sentence. It'll obviously be on hold once Trump files an appeal, and it's unlikely that an appeal (unless straight to SCOTUS) will be adjudicated by Nov. It seems like the goal, politically, was the conviction. So it wouldn't hurt to hold off on the sentencing until after the elections (or right before for maximum influence) because if Trump wins it won't matter.
It'll be crazy for sure.
Again, I think the scum will seek to impose whatever harm they can get away with imposing, and for them, the sooner the better. If Trump is nominated to be the GOP candidate, I can see how that would elevate the level of difficulty to see that end.
As to an appeal, I've recently read that he can't until sentencing, which makes no sense to me. The conviction is fraudulent for the many reasons clearly explained by multiple legal experts. It seems the process which led to it is what needs to be addressed. But I don't know.
All that matters is that we can't put anything past a Democrat Party for which anything goes so long as it serves them.
Post a Comment