I don't see anything to gain, today, from going after Clinton. He's obviously done, and aside from trying to pull Hillary down with him, there's just nothing there anymore. She's done running, she's probably nearing the end of her "influence".
I don't see anything to gain, today, from going after Clinton. He's obviously done, and aside from trying to pull Hillary down with him, there's just nothing there anymore. She's done running, she's probably nearing the end of her "influence".
Because rather than criticize a sitting president's bad actions, its better to do so to a guy who hasn't been in office in almost 20 years.
If you want to attempt to sensationalize the innocuous actions of Trump from 27 years ago, then don't complain when anyones actions from that long ago are put under similarl scrutiny. That the actions of so many progressives are found to be far more worthy of opprobrium is a consequence of the comparisons you were trying to make, not what we're willing to criticize. It's just that if you can't criticize Trump's archival behavior then you've got nothing except he hurts your feels while being a much more successful president than your messiah Obama
By going back to 1992 trying [STRIKE]desperately[/STRIKE] [real hard] to tie Trump to Epstein, I would say [STRIKE]the left is moving the time horizon on that statute of limitations you're pushing[/STRIKE] [hold everyone to the same standard]. If what Trump did then [STRIKE]is germane[/STRIKE] [matters], then how much more so what the Clintons did [STRIKE]contemporaneously[/STRIKE] [at the same time] when they were high government officials
It almost seems you're arguing that justice should be [STRIKE]tempered[/STRIKE] [influenced] by a consideration of how important the subject of an investigation is now, rather than consider [STRIKE]the depth of their perfidy[/STRIKE] [their actual crimes] when they actually committed the offenses
By that standard, wouldn't you be arguing the Israelis should have let Eichmann go?
I'm not in the know to determine if Trumps actions, from 27 years ago, were innocuous. I'm not sure that Cheetos jesus is a more successful president than the Muslim Kenyan messiah. Just out of curiosity, is your post a "think," or "know," commentary?
So... now I can openly use the "N word", so long asI'm not using it with a racist motivation?You're also not in the know to determine that they were not. Yin-Yang
It is possible to recognize an attempt to sensationalize something for political gain empirically; if I attempted to delve into your motivations for same, that would require knowledge I couldn't possibly have
The difference between "Trump's tweets on Ilhan are racist" and "Trump's tweets on Ilhan appear to be racist" Motivation can never be known unless the prime actor tells you his/her/its motivation (and actually tells the truth)
So... now I can openly use the "N word", so long asI'm not using it with a racist motivation?
The Clintons will always be a favorite target of people on the right.
You are just painting a fart, Bug. It isn't just the far left that believes Trump is a moron, a sexual deviant and a bully. Much of middle America feels the same.
His behavior has been made obvious by his inability to keep his mouth shut and/or his fingers away from a keyboard. By defending him so vigorously, it ultimately calls into question your values and possible behaviorand conduct away from your keyboard.
Weird, being as Trump got elected as the President of the United States........ TWICE.
Weird, being as Trump got elected as the President of the United States........ TWICE.
How do Americans feel again?
You are just painting a fart, Bug. It isn't just the far left that believes Trump is a moron, a sexual deviant and a bully. Much of middle America feels the same.
His behavior has been made obvious by his inability to keep his mouth shut and/or his fingers away from a keyboard. By defending him so vigorously, it ultimately calls into question your values and possible behaviorand conduct away from your keyboard.