@snood,
snood wrote:
Since you're so bright, no doubt you can figure out which orifice in which to stick your writing suggestions, so I won't suggest one.
Gee, now you're reverting back to form. That's too bad. I had high hopes you might be mellowing.
Quote:I've seen pols who didn't vote for Sessions say that he's been loyal to Trump's agenda, and I've seen "MSM" talking heads saying that Sessions is getting a raw deal, but if anyone is suddenly switching their narrative to say that he's "decent" - I haven't seen that. He has been very determined to bring about the right wing vision of voter suppression, Muslim discrimination, oppressive and unrealistic drug enforcement and weakening police oversight, and that's all I mean when I say he's been loyal.
Again, I certainly didn't take your comment to mean you've suddenly become a fan of Sessions...no need to go all bold. I don't know how more clearly I could have expressed that. You haven't seen or read anyone doing a switch on Sessions, fine, but I have.
Quote:False equivalence. Any list to compare with Trump's garbage would be dwarfed. But you have to mention Clinton in any discussion taking Trump to task, because for some reason you just cannot acknowledge what this man clearly is. Trump is already internationally known as the most corrupt, incompetent disgrace of a man to occupy the white house.
Yeah yeah, we know what you think about Trump and how it drives you insane that there are people who don't agree with you. Are you ever going to get over it or just keep stamping your feet and insisting we all bend to the view of snood? I don't
have to mention "Clinton" ever, but I did because I am pretty damned certain that you didn't withdraw your support for him when he was raping women and taking campaign donations from the Chinese. I could just as easily have brought up LBJ and his despicable behavior or FDR and his internment of thousands of Japanese American citizens or the racist Woodrow Wilson and his being the closest thing to a dictator this nation has ever had, but of course you weren't alive when FDR and Wilson were in the White House and I'm not familiar with the level of your appreciation for LBJ.
(BTW - Neither I nor anyone on the right here accepts the absurd restriction you and your confreres seem to want to impose upon us relative to ever referencing Bill Clinton. I could be wrong, but somehow I really doubt that if are all so fortunate enough to be around after the Trump years, we will never see mention made of Trump by an A2K left-winger)
The point is that someone (oralloy or laymen for sure) if they cared to, could come up with a thorough list of all of the transgressions of any Democrat president and Democrats would challenge them and not change their opinions of the men, so what does your list prove other than you really hate Trump and his supporters which we all know and are more than willing to stipulate to for future reference so you don't have to keep repeating yourself.
Quote:False equivalence. The denial Trump supporters are practicing is unlike anything we've seen before.
No offense but your opinion in any discussion about the shortcomings of Trump is pretty worthless. You simply refuse to see the dangerous recklessness and ethical wretchedness of the man. If they are successful in bringing him or any of his crew to justice, you will then promptly set about minimizing the offenses and denying that justice has been done.
Perhaps anything you've seen before, but I remember so-called feminists who would have called for the head of a Republican president who behaved towards women the way Clinton did, set their principles to the side and rally around them.
No offense but
your opinion in any discussion about the shortcomings of Trump is pretty worthless.
And you don't know what your talking about when it comes to your allegations against me. I've criticized Trump before this matter with Sessions and I will do so again in the future if I see fit. You also can't predict how I will react to the findings of the various investigation. I've stated in the past that if Mueller comes up with legitimate findings, I'll be all for levying appropriate consequences upon whomever is found guilty in a court of law. No doubt your think this is an unacceptable response that leaves me wiggle room, but if so, in a word...tough. I wouldn't be surprised if you were one of the people who insisted that Trump should declare that he would accept the results of the election before it was actually held. That's ridiculous. As unlikely as it may have been that the Democrats would rig the election (obviously they didn't) there was nothing wrong with saying "I think I'll wait and see."
I can just as easily predict that if Mueller comes back with no finding you will be on your soapbox declaring the fix was in from the start, because you are that confident that he will find something.
I don't expect Mueller's investigation to result in phony charges and I certainly don't expect that if it did, a US court would operate as a Kangaroo Court and ram them through, but I won't know that for certain until after the process is concluded. This is a 21st Century, American
Game of Thrones and I don't put anything past anyone involved.
I'll say this though, even though some make an argument that collusion is not a crime, if Mueller finds irrefutable evidence that Trump was involved with or approved of collusion with the Russians to influence the election (and I don't mean accepting opposition research offered to them) I will join the chorus of those calling for Trump to leave or be thrown out of office.
I hardly expect this to satisfy you, but your satisfaction is not my goal, however you're more than welcome to somehow bookmark it so that you can raise it if and when Mueller proves collusion involving or approved by Trump and I don't call for his removal from office.
