Futile. As long as their are democrats, there will be no unification
So, swatting then?You must be better at using every means available to destroy your opponents or you will be the victim. You either are willing to win with what is available to you to use or you are the loser. Taking the moral high ground in politics will only accelerate your demise. Just remember that in national politics your decision will affect more than just you and your convictions. Winners make the rules.
If he thinks Democrats are so bad that he has to quit the party, why is he still caucusing with them? Ideas so bad he can't stay in the party, but he still votes with them? Yeah, that's meant to be futile.Futile. As long as their are democrats, there will be no unification
As Trump himself has said, winning is not enough, that was the outcome in 2020, he must win beyond the margin of cheating…LOL, some of you amuse me. If the Dems stole the last couple elections what makes you think suddenly they are going to be legitimate.
What law did he break? Did he get a fair trial? Or does the end justify the means? You really make it sound like the latter.I mean…that sounds pretty good to me.
Prosecute Clinton? **** yeah…long overdue.
Prosecute Obama, Biden, Pelosi, AOC…whoever? Sure…go for it.
I don‘t view prosecuting politicians for their crimes as a bad thing…I sincerely hope we see much more of this type of thing.
Trump’s prosecution does more to drain the swamp than his presidency ever could.
Surely you remember those conversations. Don't you? You guys talk about playing the same game they do, or to that affect. I say, nah. We don't have to sink to the same depths. You claim I want to play by Marquis of Queensbury rules.
So I press you on it. Just what do you mean by that? What are you saying we should be willing to do exactly? So then you list things that aren't actually breaking any rules. Then why the claims about Marquis of Queensbury rules, if you're not actually advocating things that would break them?
So I have a couple choices how I could have interpreted that. Either a) you're blowing off steam with that "do what they do" shtick and didn't really mean it. Or b) you really meant it, but didn't want to admit on a public forum the things you think conservatives should do to fight as dirty as progressives do. I let it go because that seemed to be the end of the Marquis of Queensbury nonsense. But. Maybe I should ask. Which was it, a or b?
All four of those you mentioned (media, science, court and system) have been screwing people over for decades. Especially prosecutors, who in my opinion, have more power than anyone else in our country and they wield it discriminately on the regular.Trust the established media. Trust the science. Trust the court. Trust the system. Because no one would abuse their power. That would be selfish. And we all know humans aren’t selfish.
I know what I said, the topic is what you are accusing others including me of saying and you have not produced the goods…I don’t need to for my sake. You know yourself what you said.
Interesting take.
Do you have no unease about the basterdization of law that was used to prosecute Trump?
Bonus question, per your post... What crime has 0bama committed that is worthy of prosecution (in your view)?
What law did he break?
Did he get a fair trial?
And what was the required crime that enabled that charge to be brought?Trump was convicted on 34 counts of Falsifying Business Records in the first degree, a Class E felony under New York state law.
And what was the required crime that enabled that charge to be brought?
And what was the required crime that enabled that charge to be brought?
Non answer noted.
Careful what you wish for.
Can you say with a straight face that that was an impartial jury, when chosen in a city that voted 10-1 against Trump? Can you say it was a fair trial when the Marchan wasn't even on the panel of 24 from whom the judge was to be chosen? Marchan, whose daughter works for the DNC? Who wouldn't let the defense call the witnesses they wanted to call? The whole thing was a sham from the beginning.Non answer? It’s a nonsense question, the whole point of a trial is to establish the validity of the complaint…and this jury found this defendant guilty as charged.
Did Judge in Trump Case Violate Constitution With His Jury Instructions? These Attorneys Think So.
The judge gave the jury a choice of three separate crimes that they could select to convict former President Donald Trump.www.dailysignal.com