Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Play The Comey Hearing Game!

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • You presumably thought they were wrong though, right? There's a difference between saying 'you're a hypocrite for not calling him a thief' and saying 'he is a thief'. The latter kinda makes it look like you're in a bit of a trump induced melt.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by AnalHamster View Post
      You presumably thought they were wrong though, right? There's a difference between saying 'you're a hypocrite for not calling him a thief' and saying 'he is a thief'. The latter kinda makes it look like you're in a bit of a trump induced melt.
      Obama, like every single President before him, did not own businesses that he would profit for visiting. It's not hypocrisy, AH, its integrity.

      Comment


      • Call it integrity if you like, I don't see the relevance. Are you so far gone you are incapable of admitting it was a mistake to call Trump a thief based on what is currently known?

        Comment


        • You know how many times I heard that Trump was rich enough to pay for his own security and didn't need the money so this would be different and he would t cost America like Obama did? So now he's costing us more while simultaneously enriching himself at businesses everyone swore he would sell off if he were President. And what are we hearing from the same people that said he would cost less and didn't need the money?

          Comment


          • Originally posted by AnalHamster View Post
            Call it integrity if you like, I don't see the relevance. Are you so far gone you are incapable of admitting it was a mistake to call Trump a thief based on what is currently known?
            Ha, what is a thief? Someone that takes what isn't rightly theirs? No government employees are supposed to own the lease to Federal property. He still holds the lease to the Old Post Office. He's stealing our money, when during the campaign he said he wouldn't. It's abuse of power, theft, and worse.

            Comment


            • It has a fairly specific meaning in criminal law which is also the generally accepted common usage. Trump doesn't meet it. Your inability to admit your mistake indicates you have lost rationality here, which just helps all the trumptards dismiss everything else you say as fake news. There are plenty of real things to criticise without making things up.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by AnalHamster View Post
                It has a fairly specific meaning in criminal law which is also the generally accepted common usage. Trump doesn't meet it. Your inability to admit your mistake indicates you have lost rationality here, which just helps all the trumptards dismiss everything else you say as fake news. There are plenty of real things to criticise without making things up.
                I will continue calling him a thief and not regret it and I'm sorry if you feel that's counter productive. He's also a liar, an accused rapist and probably a traitor. Really, thief is sort of a soft name for him. Trump the thief has a good ring to it, though.

                Comment


                • https://twitter.com/newtgingrich/sta...98445244743684

                  https://twitter.com/newtgingrich/sta...28318865952768

                  Comment


                  • Gingrich was on ABC this morning telling Stephonoplous why all the people Mueller hired for his team were Democrats and thus very "bad people". And he said we live in alternate universes and he kept referencing the Kathy Griffin bloody head stunt and the play where Trump is assassinated as proof that we are just living in a "different world" now....what those two things have to do with the special prosecutors investigating Trump only the people living in Gingrich's universe know I guess..lol

                    Comment


                    • Well, let's flip it around: would you be ok with all of the people investigating Hillary having ties to Trump and that they had actually donated money to his campaign? You honestly don't see how that might look kinda bad?

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by CHEEZY08 View Post
                        Well, let's flip it around: would you be ok with all of the people investigating Hillary having ties to Trump and that they had actually donated money to his campaign? You honestly don't see how that might look kinda bad?
                        Under the conditions Gingrich gave there would be no independent counsel he would accept unless it was comprised of all republicans. Kenneth Starr of all people was on yesterday saying the team Mueller pulled together was well respected and top notch. And Ken Starr donated to Republican campaigns when he was assigned as special prosecutor and Gingrich was one of his biggest defenders. Gingrich, as usual, is completely full of shit.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by CHEEZY08 View Post
                          Well, let's flip it around: would you be ok with all of the people investigating Hillary having ties to Trump and that they had actually donated money to his campaign? You honestly don't see how that might look kinda bad?
                          You mean they didn't?

                          Comment


                          • I'd want the most aggressive and competent people they can find to carefully investigate this matter, 'cause I want to be sure we don't have any commie sympathizers running our Gubmint.

                            (that kind of rhetoric used to work all the time with the former Republican party. Not so sure with the current "Putin's our Buddy" Trumpian version that exists now. McCarthyian Republicans would be investigating these folks as possible Communist sympathizers. And if you think the folks being assembled to investigate are bad, imagine what someone like Roy Cohn would do-and btw he's a Trumpian hero).

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by CHEEZY08 View Post
                              Well, let's flip it around: would you be ok with all of the people investigating Hillary having ties to Trump and that they had actually donated money to his campaign? You honestly don't see how that might look kinda bad?
                              That's the thing about "integrity" It's a matter of law that you have to be able to put the law and your job above partisan politics. I'm supposed to believe Chaffetz and the Republicans charged with investigating Hillary's server were able to put their clear and obvious hatred and political motivations aside and give an honest appraisal of the situation. They gave away numerous times that this was a completely biased process but hey that was the game. This dog and pony show in Congress gets it's cover from actual investigations where FBI agents and prosecutors really do put aside politics and conduct honest investigations.

                              So, you know, it's funny to hear you now complain about the integrity of a system that was riddled with partisan politics by the very party now being investigated. "we know we'd be biased, so why should we assume you aren't? Isn't everyone as duplicitous as us?"

                              Comment


                              • Because your beloved dims are never partisan...Amirite??!!

                                Its the system we have. Maybe they're fantastic maybe they're not. You hope and expect the best. All I'm saying is that looks kinda bad that they all seem to have ties to Clinton.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X