╌>

A Pyrrhic Victory.

  

Category:  Op/Ed

By:  vic-eldred  •  3 weeks ago  •  239 comments

A Pyrrhic Victory.
I obviously disagree with this verdict as do many others. I believe that the case will be reversed eventually either in the state or federal systems. However, this was the worst expectation for a trial in Manhattan. I am saddened by the result more for the New York legal system than the former president. I had hoped that the jurors might redeem the integrity of a system that has been used for political purposes."....Jonathan Turley

The woke mob finally got what it wanted yesterday, they finally hung a conviction on Donald Trump. We still, even after this sham trial verdict was rendered, have no idea what the secondary mystery crime was. The judge (illegally IMO) gave the jury the choice of three crimes to choose from and said they didn't need to agree on which ones. We have no idea of the breakdown on that. We don't even know if they were unanimous in what supposedly happened. There is a unanimity requirement and this will only be another item in the long list of reasons this outrageous case will ultimately be challenged & overturned. 

There is a more serious matter that the nation has to deal with. This was a case of judicial malfeasance, a malicious prosecution. The democrats got away with it, which means it will happen again. It also may mean that should the political right attain power that they will likely also use the law in the same way against their opponents. Nobody should be happy about this, though we did see an unhinged level of glee from the degenerate Trump haters when the verdict was read. Many Americans were saddened, and some are angry, which leads us to what will be the effect on Donald Trump.

The last time we looked at polls it seemed that a conviction would take away from Trump's support. The next polls on the issue will tell the tale. 

Will it hurt or help him politically?

Another question for those who weaponized the law: Was the price of corrupting the justice system worth giving Joe Biden the luxury of calling his opponent a convicted felon?

Maybe the left doesn't really care since many of them hate America anyway.


In other news:

Some Republican candidates in competitive Senate races have noticeably softened their position on "abortion."

The Biden administration authorized Ukraine to use US made weapons to strike Russia. A stunning contrast to the way the administration deals with Israel. It is also an indication that Ukraine is in trouble.

The American economy only grew at 1.3% annual rate in the first quarter, slower than initially estimated, as consumers spent less.

PTSD has supposedly "surged" among college students climbing during the pandemic, researchers found.

"T he  rerun election  between the 46th and 45th presidents remains close, but the addition of independent options tips the scales in favor of former President Donald Trump, according to the newest  NPR/Marist Poll .

The survey of 1,261 American adults released Thursday — ahead of Trump’s conviction — shows that President Joe Biden wouldn’t have to move out of the White House next year if it were just a race between he and the presumptive Republican nominee."

Biden campaign in trouble with Kennedy, West and Stein in the race, new poll shows (msn.com)


Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
[]
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1  author  Vic Eldred    3 weeks ago

Good morning.

On a more cheerful note:

31themorning-nl-spelling-bee-winner-jumbo.jpg

Bruhat Soma, 12, from Tampa, Fla., won the Scripps National Spelling Bee. He prevailed in a rare spell-off, blazing through 29 difficult words in 90 seconds.

Bruhat Soma wins the National Spelling Bee after a slow night concludes with a sudden tiebreaker (msn.com)


 
 
 
shona1
Professor Quiet
1.1  shona1  replied to  Vic Eldred @1    3 weeks ago

Evening Vic...the brush tailed possums have just been and eaten the apple I left out for them..

Thought I would just throw that in..

256

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.1.1  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  shona1 @1.1    3 weeks ago

Hopefully all is well down under.

Whatever you do, please don't let it happen there.

 
 
 
shona1
Professor Quiet
1.1.2  shona1  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.1.1    3 weeks ago

Evening..Never in a million years..

As I have said previously we are not that politically motivated to the extent where many of you mob are really obsessed with it..

Tonight we copped 15 minutes of Trump head line news here.. couldn't believe it dragged on for so long..15 minutes of my life I will never get back...one there is the mute button or two the on off button on the TV..

Your elections, your voting system, your candidates, it seems to be one big drama after another...and then after all that it's not compulsory..

If we get sick of it, can only imagine how you mob must feel..my commiserations..

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.1.3  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  shona1 @1.1.2    3 weeks ago
Your elections, your voting system, your candidates, it seems to be one big drama after another.

It all began with a handful of professors from Frankfurt University.


If we get sick of it, can only imagine how you mob must feel..my commiserations..

Fair go, mate. You take care.

 
 
 
shona1
Professor Quiet
1.1.4  shona1  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.1.3    3 weeks ago

And on that note I must depart..it has gone midnight here and Trump is now literally yesterday's news for us...just the way we like it.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
1.1.5  JohnRussell  replied to  shona1 @1.1.2    3 weeks ago

Have you had a Donald Trump (mentally ill malignant narcissist, pathological liar, lifelong crook) lead a political party in Australia ?

You cant understand it until you have experienced it.  

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
1.1.6  Sparty On  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.5    3 weeks ago

Yes, they will never understand derangement like we now have in this country.    Pure, unadulterated, hate filled derangement.    

They say “good  on ya” down under not “bad on ya” like some here can only do.

 
 
 
Greg Jones
Professor Participates
1.1.7  Greg Jones  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.5    3 weeks ago

 "This was a case of judicial malfeasance, a malicious prosecution. The democrats got away with it, which means it will happen again. It also may mean that should the political right attain power that they will likely also use the law in the same way against their opponents."

You can count on it. All the radical left has done is make a martyr out of Trump. They know in their hearts this travesty of justice is going to come back and bite them in the ass....it happens all the time

They got their "convicted felon", which won't matter much to the vast majority of the voters. The big problem for the progressives is that their puppet Biden is considered by millions to be a yet "unconvicted felon" and traitor.

 
 
 
JBB
Professor Principal
1.1.8  JBB  replied to  Greg Jones @1.1.7    3 weeks ago

That comment sounds entirely unhinged when read aloud!

 
 
 
shona1
Professor Quiet
1.1.9  shona1  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.5    3 weeks ago

Morning John.. actually we have but he never got to be Prime Minister thank heavens..but was Premier of the state of Queensland..

Joh Bjelke Peterson..

He was loud mouthed, corrupt, racist, obnoxious, troppo (nuts), a liar and a total embarrassment to the State and Country..plus there were riots in the streets up in Queensland due to him...

Just like Trump people loved him or hated him..he is now dead and buried and the country breathed a sigh of relief on that day..

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
1.1.10  devangelical  replied to  shona1 @1.1.9    3 weeks ago
Just like Trump people loved him or hated him..he is now dead and buried and the country breathed a sigh of relief on that day..

I've been keeping my dancing shoes right next to the front door ...

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
1.1.11  Tessylo  replied to  Greg Jones @1.1.7    3 weeks ago

Yup, the republicans are all about revenge and retribution over their own projection, deflection, denial + delusion along with the mindboggling defense of the indefensible.

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Expert
1.1.12  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  shona1 @1.1.2    3 weeks ago

Come on, shona1, you should appreciate it.  Watching American politics unfold is more fun than watching a circus.  I look forward to what I can watch about it on TV here, and read on the internet.  And as for the NT Front (Home) Page, I realize that it's mostly a waste of time trying to keep a topic other than American politics visible, so instead of wasting a lot of time creating movie games or other totally esoteric to the membership topics like English Literature, Classic Cars and Boats, Physical and Cultural Views of other nations, I'm watching a movie and sometimes two movies a day, and later today my wife and I are going for a walk.  

 
 
 
shona1
Professor Quiet
1.1.13  shona1  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @1.1.12    3 weeks ago

Well Buzz there is one good thing..

We are so far ahead of the States time wise, we can leave it all behind us..🤣🤣

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Expert
1.1.14  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  shona1 @1.1.13    3 weeks ago

jrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
1.1.15  devangelical  replied to  shona1 @1.1.13    3 weeks ago

you're lucky, oz won't let convicted felons get off the plane...

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
1.2  devangelical  replied to  Vic Eldred @1    3 weeks ago
The woke mob finally got what it wanted yesterday

it's hilarious when trumpsters claim that some monolithic movement is to blame for the prosecution of trump's criminal acts, especially when their hero demands their unyielding loyalty under the threat of banishment

We still, even after this sham trial verdict was rendered, have no idea what the secondary mystery crime was

maybe that's because some trumpsters don't/can't recognize criminal activity

This was a case of judicial malfeasance, a malicious prosecution

remind us again how michael cohen was prosecuted and why he served prison time...

The democrats got away with it, which means it will happen again. It also may mean that should the political right attain power that they will likely also use the law in the same way against their opponents

which POTUS candidate is already campaigning on political revenge and retribution?

we did see an unhinged level of glee from the degenerate Trump haters when the verdict was read

a significant victory for our constitution, due process, and equal justice under the law...

Was the price of corrupting the justice system worth giving Joe Biden the luxury of calling his opponent a convicted felon?

trumpsters need to ask themselves did trump break the law or not...

Maybe the left doesn't really care since many of them hate America anyway

... maybe only the trumpster's warped concept and version of it.

 
 
 
Igknorantzruls
Freshman Quiet
1.2.1  Igknorantzruls  replied to  devangelical @1.2    3 weeks ago
hich POTUS candidate is already campaigning on political revenge and retribution?

Trump supporters know no borders, that they won't exploit, in an attempt to confuse the matter, as it is blatantly obvious on every screen, as the projectors of projection, are never noticed amongst their infection spread like a pandemic that will just go away, if we keep the bleach outta reach from those possibly too white and not alright. When people fail to accept the obvious, they must run with somehing, and perhaps scissors , could and/or would help, to cut through the LIES all should despise,

All while this verdict, due to affiliations, will only affect a too few, as the worlds greatest conspiracy, confusion, and illussion, continues to drag the cult along , over razor blades and broken glass, until they cut their asz! 

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
1.2.2  devangelical  replied to  Igknorantzruls @1.2.1    3 weeks ago
continues to drag the cult along

the dairy queen comb over cult...

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
1.2.3  Sparty On  replied to  devangelical @1.2.2    3 weeks ago

While the Prozac, Zoloft, ECT crew narrates …..

 
 
 
Igknorantzruls
Freshman Quiet
1.2.4  Igknorantzruls  replied to  devangelical @1.2.2    3 weeks ago
he dairy queen comb over cult...

will remain intolerant of tolerance(and Lactaid acid they dropped}, convinced of convictions without evidence"lock her up, the election was stolen, well aint that golden....cause evidence that holds up in court, is what they cannot dispute, or overcome.

Prepare for the blizzard, coming pre November 

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
1.2.5  devangelical  replied to  Igknorantzruls @1.2.4    3 weeks ago

... its an election year. I'm strapped and prepared to defend the constitution against domestic terrorists 24/7...

 
 
 
bugsy
Professor Participates
1.2.6  bugsy  replied to  devangelical @1.2.5    3 weeks ago

So you are going to leftist college campuses?

 
 
 
Thomas
Senior Guide
1.2.7  Thomas  replied to  devangelical @1.2    3 weeks ago
Maybe the left doesn't really care since many of them hate America anyway

Or maybe they really care for America and that is why they celebrate when a grifter, liar and thief finally gets just a little bit of what is coming to him

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
1.2.8  devangelical  replied to  bugsy @1.2.6    3 weeks ago
So you are going to leftist college campuses?

I wouldn't classify those as target rich environments for domestic terrorism. probably texas...

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
1.2.9  Tessylo  replied to  devangelical @1.2    3 weeks ago

how long has the former 'president's' revenge and retribution campaign been going on now?  it seems like years

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
1.2.10  Tessylo  replied to  devangelical @1.2    3 weeks ago

'a significant victory for our constitution, due process, and equal justice under the law . . .'

finally the big fat wannabe mob boss thug scum is finally being held accountable for something

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
1.2.11  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  Tessylo @1.2.9    3 weeks ago

Why not do your own math instead of asking others to do it for you?  It’s simple addition, use your phone calculator if you need to.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
1.2.12  Tessylo  replied to  devangelical @1.2.2    3 weeks ago

it's just ridiculous when the former 'president' says if it happened to it that it could happen to anyone, no, only those who bought off porn stars to cover up their encounter and playboy bunnies to keep their mouths shut so as not to hurt his chances at erection, I mean, election

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
1.2.13  Tessylo  replied to  Thomas @1.2.7    3 weeks ago

jrSmiley_93_smiley_image.jpg

jrSmiley_81_smiley_image.gif

jrSmiley_13_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
1.2.14  Tessylo  replied to  Tessylo @1.2.9    3 weeks ago

was it when it lost by a landslide which it has been lying about and denying about and projecting about ever since?

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
1.2.15  Tessylo  replied to  Tessylo @1.2.14    3 weeks ago

and inciting failed coups over?

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
1.2.16  Tessylo  replied to  Tessylo @1.2.15    3 weeks ago

or is it insurrection?  same difference?

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
1.2.17  Tessylo  replied to  Tessylo @1.2.16    3 weeks ago

Insurrection, because that's what its' supporters/cult are threatening now -  'another insurrection

 
 
 
JBB
Professor Principal
2  JBB    3 weeks ago

A Pyrrhic Victory? Nope! Trump suffered a humiliating defeat and now becomes our first twice impeached convicted felon ex-President!

original

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
2.1  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  JBB @2    3 weeks ago

A transformative presidency!

 
 
 
JBB
Professor Principal
2.1.1  JBB  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @2.1    3 weeks ago

original original original

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
2.2  Ronin2  replied to  JBB @2    3 weeks ago

[deleted][]

 
 
 
JBB
Professor Principal
2.2.1  JBB  replied to  Ronin2 @2.2    3 weeks ago

original

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
2.2.2  JohnRussell  replied to  Ronin2 @2.2    3 weeks ago

Really ?

Former President  Donald Trump  called for the termination of the Constitution to overturn the 2020 election and reinstate him to power Saturday in a continuation of his election denialism and pushing of fringe conspiracy theories.

“Do you throw the Presidential Election Results of 2020 OUT and declare the RIGHTFUL WINNER, or do you have a NEW ELECTION? A Massive Fraud of this type and magnitude allows for the termination of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution ,” Trump wrote in a post on the social network Truth Social and accused “Big Tech” of working closely with Democrats. “Our great ‘Founders’ did not want, and would not condone, False & Fraudulent Elections!”

Trump calls for the termination of the Constitution in Truth Social post | CNN Politics
 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
2.2.3  Ronin2  replied to  JBB @2.2.1    3 weeks ago

Maybe when you run out of memes you will actually make a real point about something.

 
 
 
Greg Jones
Professor Participates
2.2.4  Greg Jones  replied to  Ronin2 @2.2.3    3 weeks ago

[]

 
 
 
JBB
Professor Principal
2.2.5  JBB  replied to  Ronin2 @2.2.3    3 weeks ago

Oh no no no! A jury of honorable citizens unanimously found that Donald Trump is guilty of thirty four felony counts of criminal behavior related to and leading up to his 2016 run for the Presidency which contributed to his ill-gotten victory!

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
2.2.6  Ronin2  replied to  JohnRussell @2.2.2    3 weeks ago

Since when have Democrats ever done anything by the Constitution?

Be nice if they would start following it and the law.

Remember Trump was originally a Democrat.

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
2.2.7  Ronin2  replied to  JBB @2.2.5    3 weeks ago

Honorable? From that Democrat bastion of stupidity? jrSmiley_86_smiley_image.gif

Democrats need to learn what equal application is under the law.

Then they need to learn WTF a fair and impartial judge and jury is.

 
 
 
GregTx
Professor Guide
2.2.8  GregTx  replied to  Ronin2 @2.2.6    3 weeks ago
Remember Trump was originally a Democrat.

That's probably why they're so scared...

 
 
 
bugsy
Professor Participates
2.2.9  bugsy  replied to  JBB @2.2.5    3 weeks ago
A jury of honorable citizens

Not sure about honorable.

More than likely, because of the voter make up of New York City, they were nothing more than 12 unhinged, triggered Trump haters, who, like their leftist counterparts countrywide, have zero idea why they hate Trump......except that he beat their queen in 2016 and have not gotten over it yet.

 
 
 
bccrane
Freshman Silent
2.2.10  bccrane  replied to  bugsy @2.2.9    3 weeks ago

I wouldn't go so far as disparaging the jurors.  They did what was, in their mind, the best way out of this dilemma.  They couldn't just pick one or even a few of the 34 as guilty and the rest not guilty, it had to be all or none.

One of the major problems was they weren't sequestered and went home to watch the news and got all kinds of opinions, not just the those salivating over a guilty verdict, but also those seeing and easy overturning through the appeals process.  So to save NYC from burning and looting from a not guilty verdict they chose guilty and all the right and Trump supporters hit to the streets and caused huge amounts of destruction, wait a minute, no they didn't, but if they came back with not guilty, do you think the left would've just sat on their hands?

Remember, there was at least one maybe two lawyers in the jury, wouldn't you think that they had an influence on the verdict knowing a guilty verdict was ripe for an appeal which made it easier to come back with a guilty verdict?  Hey, it was no skin off our noses and let the process sort it out, we're done.

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
2.2.11  Ronin2  replied to  bccrane @2.2.10    3 weeks ago

I am sorry, no excuses for the TDS suffering jury from that Democrat controlled bastion of stupidity.

One of the major problems was they weren't sequestered and went home to watch the news and got all kinds of opinions,

Whose fault is that? The Brandon donating TDS driven judge Merchan. He wanted a guilty verdict, and did everything in his power to get it. I am sure he and his daughter (and the company she works for) will benefit greatly from it.

So to save NYC from burning and looting from a not guilty verdict

That is called any day ending in a "y" in New York. Still no excuse.

Remember, there was at least one maybe two lawyers in the jury, wouldn't you think that they had an influence on the verdict knowing a guilty verdict was ripe for an appeal which made it easier to come back with a guilty verdict?  Hey, it was no skin off our noses and let the process sort it out, we're done.

So pervert the legal system and hope the appeals court does the right thing? What if it doesn't. Pray the federal court, or maybe the Supreme Court even, somewhere down the line does? 

Sorry, but what they did would happen in China, Russia, Ukraine, Iran, Saudi Arabia, or any other dictatorship veiled as a Democracy. The US is supposed to be better. Democrats did that; and they are more than proud of themselves.

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
2.2.12  devangelical  replied to  Ronin2 @2.2.11    3 weeks ago
The Brandon donating TDS driven judge Merchan. He wanted a guilty verdict, and did everything in his power to get it. I am sure he and his daughter (and the company she works for) will benefit greatly from it.

I think you might have your radical left, corrupt and conflicted, judges confused...

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
2.2.13  Tessylo  replied to  devangelical @2.2.12    3 weeks ago

projection - cannon - mushroom lover

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Expert
2.2.14  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  bccrane @2.2.10    3 weeks ago

I find it interesting that lawyers are permitted to be jurors.  In Canada they are not - not only because lawyers are going to be influenced in making a decision based on their knowledge of law, but could confuse it with the facts upon which their decisions are actually to be made, besides the fact that being lawyers they might have an undue inffluence upon the rest of the jurors.  I was summoned to be a juror once (actually it was a case I would have loved to have been a juror for) but had to establish that I was ineligible or I could have caused a mistrial had I actually served.

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
2.3  Sparty On  replied to  JBB @2    3 weeks ago

A very sophomoric analysis ….

 
 
 
JBB
Professor Principal
2.3.1  JBB  replied to  Sparty On @2.3    3 weeks ago

So what was that? Freshmaniacal? MAGA Middle School?

Trump was found Guilty of 34 Fucking Felonies yesterday!

 
 
 
bugsy
Professor Participates
2.3.2  bugsy  replied to  JBB @2.3.1    3 weeks ago
Trump was found Guilty of 34 Fucking Felonies yesterday!

All of which will be overturned.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
2.3.3  TᵢG  replied to  bugsy @2.3.2    3 weeks ago

On what grounds?   

 
 
 
Hallux
PhD Principal
2.3.4  Hallux  replied to  TᵢG @2.3.3    3 weeks ago

On covfefe grounds.

 
 
 
bugsy
Professor Participates
2.3.5  bugsy  replied to  TᵢG @2.3.3    3 weeks ago

Common sense. Something most partisans and Biden supporters don't seem to grasp.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
2.3.6  TᵢG  replied to  bugsy @2.3.5    3 weeks ago

Of course, you offer nothing other than simplistic antagonistic quips.

Make a case.   Show that you actually have an argument that would influence an appeals court.

If you cannot do that, you have no grounds to even suggest this would be appealed.

 
 
 
bugsy
Professor Participates
2.3.7  bugsy  replied to  TᵢG @2.3.6    3 weeks ago

My opinion is just as important as yours. I KNOW it will be appealed because Trump has said he will appeal it.

There has been many legal experts whom have opined that there were quite a few reversible errors in the trial. The New York appellate court may let the conviction stand simply because they are New York justices and just as biased as Merchan, but the SC will definitely take an unbiased look at rule accordingly.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
2.3.8  TᵢG  replied to  bugsy @2.3.7    3 weeks ago
I KNOW it will be appealed because Trump has said he will appeal it.

You claimed all counts will be overturned.   Now you backtrack and pretend you only said Trump would appeal.   We can all see what your wrote @2.3.2

There has been many legal experts whom have opined that there were quite a few reversible errors in the trial. 

For any question one can find those on the pro and on the con side.   Your comment is of no meaning.   Make an argument to back up your claim that all 32 counts WILL be overturned.

 
 
 
JBB
Professor Principal
2.3.9  JBB  replied to  TᵢG @2.3.8    3 weeks ago

Have you noticed how Trump supporters are still claiming not to even understand the charges Trump was convicted of?

They have insisted upon not even trying to understand, at all!

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
2.3.10  TᵢG  replied to  JBB @2.3.9    3 weeks ago

It has been obvious for months now that they will never acknowledge any wrongdoing by Trump.

Trump is the presumptive nominee for the GOP.   They will ignore reality and make absurd claims, pretend that hard facts of reality are undecided, etc. if they believe they are in some way defending Trump.

It works for Trump (most of the time).

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
2.3.11  Tessylo  replied to  Hallux @2.3.4    3 weeks ago

jrSmiley_91_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
MrFrost
Professor Guide
2.3.12  MrFrost  replied to  bugsy @2.3.7    3 weeks ago
Trump has said he will appeal it.

...and trump never lies! LOL 

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
2.3.13  devangelical  replied to  MrFrost @2.3.12    3 weeks ago

maybe he'll actually testify in his own defense next time...

 
 
 
Greg Jones
Professor Participates
2.4  Greg Jones  replied to  JBB @2    3 weeks ago

The failed impeachments didn't hurt Trump a bit. Neither will this sham trial

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
2.4.1  devangelical  replied to  Greg Jones @2.4    3 weeks ago

... especially not to his brain dead supporters, that hate the constitution, democracy, and america.

 
 
 
Snuffy
Professor Participates
2.4.2  Snuffy  replied to  devangelical @2.4.1    3 weeks ago
brain dead supporters, that hate the constitution, democracy, and america.

Why are you so down on Democrats? What have they done to you?

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Principal
2.4.3  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  devangelical @2.4.1    3 weeks ago
brain dead supporters, that hate the constitution, democracy, and america.

Democrats don't support him.  They've all been crying about his since 201 / 2016.

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
Professor Expert
2.4.4  sandy-2021492  replied to  Snuffy @2.4.2    3 weeks ago

Truncating devangelical's comment and responding to it as if he said something he didn't say is dishonest and childish.  

 
 
 
Snuffy
Professor Participates
2.4.5  Snuffy  replied to  sandy-2021492 @2.4.4    3 weeks ago

Ummm, but I see it every day around here. I suggest if you are going to call out one person for this you really should call out everyone who does it. It happens frequently.

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
Professor Expert
2.4.6  sandy-2021492  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @2.4.3    3 weeks ago
Truncating devangelical's comment and responding to it as if he said something he didn't say is dishonest and childish.  

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Principal
2.4.7  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  sandy-2021492 @2.4.6    3 weeks ago

Who are you quoting?

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
Professor Expert
2.4.8  sandy-2021492  replied to  Snuffy @2.4.5    3 weeks ago

So, your defense for using a childish and dishonest tactic is "But they act in a childish and dishonest manner, too"?

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
2.4.9  devangelical  replied to  sandy-2021492 @2.4.4    3 weeks ago

[deleted][]

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
Professor Expert
2.4.10  sandy-2021492  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @2.4.7    3 weeks ago

Myself.

You and Snuffy responded to a deliberately truncated quote from devangelical.  It is a dishonest tactic, and worthy of an elementary schoolyard.

 
 
 
Snuffy
Professor Participates
2.4.11  Snuffy  replied to  sandy-2021492 @2.4.8    3 weeks ago

Nope. Not citing anything for a defense, but calling out a mod for being one-sided. And you can ticket this if you want but IMO if you are going to call me out for what I did then you need to be fair and call out everyone else who does it, when they do it. 

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
Professor Expert
2.4.12  sandy-2021492  replied to  Snuffy @2.4.11    3 weeks ago

I am not using purple ink, and not acting as a mod.  I'm calling out a childish and dishonest tactic on your part.  And FWIW, I did so because I'm accustomed to seeing better behavior from you, and was disappointed.

When you see somebody else doing it, flag it.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Principal
2.4.13  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  sandy-2021492 @2.4.12    3 weeks ago
I am not using purple ink, and not acting as a mod.

Never said you were.  It appears as it does when somebody is quoted.  That is why I ask who you were quoting.  Trying to make heads or tails of what you are trying to say.

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
Professor Expert
2.4.14  sandy-2021492  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @2.4.13    3 weeks ago

You and Snuffy both engaged in the same tactic.  I responded to him, then quoted my response as a response to you.

Never said you were.

I was responding to Snuffy.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
2.4.15  TᵢG  replied to  Snuffy @2.4.11    3 weeks ago

Partial quotes are okay unless they are used to change the meaning of the sentence.  For example:

Trump is an irresponsible, pathological liar and traitor who should never be PotUS.

A partial quote of the above “Trump is an irresponsible, pathological liar and traitor …” as context to rebut the characterization of Trump is fair.

But a partial quote “an irresponsible, pathological liar” with a reply that shifts the subject from Trump to Biden is dishonest.

 
 
 
Snuffy
Professor Participates
2.4.16  Snuffy  replied to  TᵢG @2.4.15    3 weeks ago

Yet we see it all over the place. All I was asking for was consistency. 

 
 
 
Snuffy
Professor Participates
2.4.17  Snuffy  replied to  sandy-2021492 @2.4.12    3 weeks ago

So what about 2.4.9?  Is that allowed?

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Principal
2.4.18  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  sandy-2021492 @2.4.10    3 weeks ago
You and Snuffy responded to a deliberately truncated quote from devangelical.

We responded to a comment on an open forum.  Your making a big deal because we left off "especiall"?  Really?

It is a dishonest tactic,

Like quoting one person in a reply to somebody else?

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
Professor Expert
2.4.19  sandy-2021492  replied to  Snuffy @2.4.17    3 weeks ago

Flag it if you find it objectionable.  I can no longer moderate on this thread.

 
 
 
Greg Jones
Professor Participates
2.4.20  Greg Jones  replied to  devangelical @2.4.1    3 weeks ago

Uh huh....so in your mind, ~75.000.000 million Americans hate the Constitution, democracy, and America?

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
Professor Expert
2.4.21  sandy-2021492  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @2.4.18    3 weeks ago
Your making a big deal because we left off "especiall"?  Really?

Doubling down on the dishonest tactic, I see.  No, the objection was to leaving out words that allowed you to try to make devangelical's comment about Democrats rather than Trump supporters.  But you know that already.

Like quoting one person in a reply to somebody else?

If you read back through carefully, you'll see that I was quoting to and responding to everybody with whom I have interacted here in an honest manner.

 
 
 
Greg Jones
Professor Participates
2.4.22  Greg Jones  replied to  sandy-2021492 @2.4.4    3 weeks ago
"especially not to his".... 
He absolutely made the above comment, eliminating those words changes it how?

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
Professor Expert
2.4.23  sandy-2021492  replied to  Greg Jones @2.4.22    3 weeks ago

You and everybody here can see that Snuffy and Jeremy both left out words from Devangelical's comment about Trump supporters and responsed to him as if he were talking about Democrats.  Do you not agree that the tactic is dishonest and childish?

I mean, even Snuffy, who was the one who did it, seems to agree that it is, but defends it with "others do it, too."  He admits to what his intentions were when he did it.  Do you disagree with his acquiescence?

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Principal
2.4.24  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  sandy-2021492 @2.4.21    3 weeks ago
Doubling down on the dishonest tactic,

Nope. Just calling out the petty bullshit. Seems you have a problem being called out.

he objection was to leaving out words that allowed you to try to make devangelical's comment about Democrats rather than Trump supporters.

I let out "especially". [deleted][]

 
 
 
Igknorantzruls
Freshman Quiet
2.4.25  Igknorantzruls  replied to  Greg Jones @2.4.20    3 weeks ago
75.000.000 million Americans hate the Constitution, democracy, and America?

of course that is what he meant

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
Professor Expert
2.4.26  sandy-2021492  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @2.4.24    3 weeks ago
Nope.  Just calling out the petty bullshit.  Seems you have a problem being called out.

We can all read what happened there, Jeremy.  We all know devangelical didn't say what you implied that he said, and that that makes the implication dishonest.

From there I  identified the people she was describing more specifically.

No, you changed the people whom he (you deliberately misgendered him) to those whom you wanted those words to describe.  And then you denied doing so, despite the whole thing playing out right here where everybody can see it.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
2.4.27  TᵢG  replied to  Snuffy @2.4.16    3 weeks ago

And I was trying to illustrate how one might not recognize the nuance and deem "inconsistency!" when it may not be the case.

To wit, merely quoting a portion of a sentence is not, in itself, dishonest.   If done honestly, it would be to provide the portion of the sentence that the reply applies to.   As long as the reply does not attempt to distort the meaning of the full sentence (e.g. by switching the subject) then that is fine.

But when one leaves out important details and then substitutes their own details in the response, that is dishonest.   That is the practice that Sandy identified.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Principal
2.4.28  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  sandy-2021492 @2.4.26    3 weeks ago
We can all read what happened there, Jeremy.

We do.  You're having a hissy fit because I left off "especially not to his".  

We all know devangelical didn't say what you implied that he said, and that that makes the implication dishonest.

He was talking about "brain dead supporters, that hate the constitution, democracy, and America"  Only ones I know that do that are Democrats.  Now if that bothers you, it's not my problem.  

 
 
 
Snuffy
Professor Participates
2.4.29  Snuffy  replied to  sandy-2021492 @2.4.19    3 weeks ago

I wasn't asking you to moderate it, I was asking you in your position as a moderator if that was ok.

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
Professor Expert
2.4.30  sandy-2021492  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @2.4.28    3 weeks ago
He was talking about "brain dead supporters, that hate the constitution, democracy, and America"  Only ones I know that do that are Democrats.  Now if that bothers you, it's not my problem.  

So, you admit you deliberately substituted your words for his, and are acting as if he said them, but you object to being called out on that dishonest and childish tactic.

I'm not the one having the hissy fit, Jeremy.  I pointed out bad behavior on your part, and you are objecting strenuously, if ineffectively, to having it called out.

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
Professor Expert
2.4.31  sandy-2021492  replied to  Snuffy @2.4.29    3 weeks ago

I would say that it is a sweeping generalization, and could be moderated as such.

I would also say that there are quite a few sweeping generalizations made here every day, and those who want them ticketed when made by the opposition should not bitch when those made by their own team are similarly ticketed.

 
 
 
GregTx
Professor Guide
2.4.32  GregTx  replied to  sandy-2021492 @2.4.31    3 weeks ago

Was the comment that started this @2.4.1 a sweeping generalization? 

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
Professor Expert
2.4.33  sandy-2021492  replied to  GregTx @2.4.32    3 weeks ago
I would say that it is a sweeping generalization, and could be moderated as such. I would also say that there are quite a few sweeping generalizations made here every day, and those who want them ticketed when made by the opposition should not bitch when those made by their own team are similarly ticketed.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Principal
2.4.34  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  sandy-2021492 @2.4.30    3 weeks ago
So, you admit you deliberately substituted your words for his,

I didn't substitute any thing. Try reading what was actually posted (2.4.3)

Again, the only thing I left off was "especially not to his". Which doesn't change a goddamn thing.

[deleted][]

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
Professor Expert
2.4.35  sandy-2021492  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @2.4.34    3 weeks ago
I didn't substitute any thing.

You implied his comment was about Democrats, and responded to it as such.  That was a dishonest manipulation of his words, while ignoring the actual words he typed.

And you continue to double down and deny.

And we can all read the thread, and know who is using dishonest tactics, and who isn't, and whose comments are childish and emotion-driven, and whose aren't.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Principal
2.4.36  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  sandy-2021492 @2.4.35    3 weeks ago
You implied his comment was about Democrats, and responded to it as such.

I don't imply anything. If I have something to say, I say it. You read something that wasn't there. And are upset it didn't go along with the narrative. Again, that is not my problem.

[deleted][]

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
2.4.37  devangelical  replied to  devangelical @2.4.1    3 weeks ago
... especially not to his brain dead supporters, that hate the constitution, democracy, and america.
.
the left doesn't really care since many of them hate America anyway
 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
2.4.38  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  sandy-2021492 @2.4.35    3 weeks ago

As long as you are up to answering questions, at what point does repeated memes celebrating a verdict become taunting?

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
Professor Expert
2.4.39  sandy-2021492  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.4.38    3 weeks ago

Do you see disagreeing with you politically as taunting, Vic?  

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
2.4.40  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  sandy-2021492 @2.4.39    3 weeks ago

I allowed two of them to post memes. When they continued, I flagged them. Someone allowed those taunts.

You know what I flagged. That wasn't discussion.

 
 
 
GregTx
Professor Guide
2.4.41  GregTx  replied to  sandy-2021492 @2.4.33    3 weeks ago

Okay, I agree. You seem to be taking issue with a members post, that was a sweeping generalization, being used to make a sweeping generalization. Yet I haven't noticed where that member has been chided in this thread..

Seems curious to me is all.

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
Professor Expert
2.4.42  sandy-2021492  replied to  GregTx @2.4.41    3 weeks ago

I haven't chided anybody for making a sweeping generalization in this thread, from either side.

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
Professor Expert
2.4.43  sandy-2021492  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.4.40    3 weeks ago

The article is about Trump's conviction.  You knew when you posted it that there would be plenty of people who agree with and will celebrate that conviction.  Trump is not entitled to protection from people posting in agreement with the court.  Dissension is not taunting.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
2.4.44  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  sandy-2021492 @2.4.43    3 weeks ago

Ok Sandy. Thank you for taking the time.

I do appreciate it.

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
2.4.45  Ronin2  replied to  devangelical @2.4.37    3 weeks ago

Both absolutely true statements.

Don't them? Then stop supporting Democrats.

 
 
 
GregTx
Professor Guide
2.4.46  GregTx  replied to  sandy-2021492 @2.4.42    3 weeks ago

Right,... instead you told two others (presumably from the other side) that they were childish and dishonest for using the words of that post to make their own generalization. Like I said, just seems curious..

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
Professor Expert
2.4.47  sandy-2021492  replied to  GregTx @2.4.46    3 weeks ago

What they did was childish and dishonest.  It was also a sweeping generalization, but I did not chide them for that.  I spoke specifically to the childish and dishonest tactic.  And you seem to have a problem with that.  Why does it bother you that I called out a childish and dishonest tactic?  Do you support the use of childish and dishonest tactics?

 
 
 
Greg Jones
Professor Participates
2.4.48  Greg Jones  replied to  sandy-2021492 @2.4.23    3 weeks ago

Dev's comment was obviously and plainly about Trump's supporters, not a bit about Democrats. You interpretation is simply wrong, in my opinion.

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
Professor Expert
2.4.49  sandy-2021492  replied to  Greg Jones @2.4.48    3 weeks ago

Good grief, Greg, I never said Dev's comment was about Democrats.

I said that Snuffy and Jeremy truncated it and then responded to it as if it was about Democrats.

Because that's what they did.

 
 
 
bugsy
Professor Participates
2.4.50  bugsy  replied to  sandy-2021492 @2.4.26    3 weeks ago

Shouldn't someone lock this thread for you inciting other members to taunt, calling them out by name, and tit for tat trolling?

I know you would have done it had you been acting like as a mod.

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
Professor Expert
2.4.51  sandy-2021492  replied to  bugsy @2.4.50    3 weeks ago

I haven't incited anybody to taunt anybody.

I've pointed out the use of a dishonest tactic.  

Do you support the use of dishonest and childish debate tactics?

 
 
 
bugsy
Professor Participates
2.4.52  bugsy  replied to  sandy-2021492 @2.4.51    3 weeks ago
Do you support the use of dishonest and childish debate tactics?

Not when a mod should use what tools they have to not keep up the back and forth. Continuing to answer does not accomplish this. Mods are supposed to be above this type of actions.

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
Professor Expert
2.4.53  sandy-2021492  replied to  bugsy @2.4.52    3 weeks ago

You evaded the question, bugsy.

I called out dishonesty.  I didn't do it in the way you might have liked, but I am not required to do so.  I think we all know there is no way I could have done so in a manner that would have satisfied you, so there is no point even trying.  But that does not mean that I have to allow dishonest comments to stand without remarking on them.  And I am allowed to participate here as a member, and not just as a moderator.

But hey, we get it.  It really bothers you that I called out dishonesty.  The dishonesty itself, not so much.

 
 
 
bugsy
Professor Participates
2.4.54  bugsy  replied to  sandy-2021492 @2.4.53    3 weeks ago
It really bothers you that I called out dishonesty. 

The dishonesty is a mod carrying on a thread where anyone else would have been ticketed for taunting. Like you have told us multiple times, if you don't like what was written, just walk away from it and it will probably save you from being ticketed.

Shame that you do not see your biases.

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
Professor Expert
2.4.55  sandy-2021492  replied to  bugsy @2.4.54    3 weeks ago

I  have been honest and aboveboard in this entire exchange.

I don't tell anybody to walk away if they don't like what was written.  That would silence debate.  I tell them they can ticket it if it is an offense, or respond within the CoC.  Or, if they like, they can walk away.  I responded within the CoC.

 
 
 
bugsy
Professor Participates
2.4.56  bugsy  replied to  sandy-2021492 @2.4.55    3 weeks ago

I'm going to take the high road and walk away from this.

[I][removed][]

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
2.4.57  devangelical  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.4.40    3 weeks ago
I flagged them. You know what I flagged.

how'd you do? most of mine took...

btw, you're welcome for those 50+ comments that my comments generated...

 
 
 
charger 383
Professor Silent
2.4.58  charger 383  replied to  bugsy @2.4.54    3 weeks ago

2.4.54 was responded to by member addressed; therefore, it stays in play.  

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
2.4.59  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.4.38    3 weeks ago

I think at least 34 memes about a guilty verdict = 34 guilty counts is appropriate and anymore than that, okay

lol

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
2.4.60  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Tessylo @2.4.59    3 weeks ago

You are right, it is laughable.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
2.4.61  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  devangelical @2.4.57    3 weeks ago
how'd you do?

I'd say fairly well.

I made a point and I have a certain site policy being reevaluated.

And no, you weren't even involved.

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
2.4.62  devangelical  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.4.61    3 weeks ago
I made a point and I have a certain site policy being reevaluated.

yeah well, after decades in sales I can tell you that if you didn't close the deal then, you don't have one now...

as I've stated to you here for years, I'm willing to discuss a compromise between us in the public forum anytime...

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
2.4.63  Tessylo  replied to  sandy-2021492 @2.4.55    3 weeks ago

YOU are always honest and aboveboard in every single exchange

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
Professor Expert
2.4.64  sandy-2021492  replied to  Tessylo @2.4.63    3 weeks ago

Thank you, Tessy.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
2.4.65  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.4.60    3 weeks ago

I'm always correct

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
2.4.66  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Tessylo @2.4.65    3 weeks ago

Yes, you've proved that / S

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
2.5  Ozzwald  replied to  JBB @2    3 weeks ago
Trump suffered a humiliating defeat and now becomes our first twice impeached convicted felon ex-President!

Don't forget an adjudged rapist....

 
 
 
Greg Jones
Professor Participates
2.5.1  Greg Jones  replied to  Ozzwald @2.5    3 weeks ago

That would be Bill Clinton.

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
2.5.2  Ozzwald  replied to  Greg Jones @2.5.1    3 weeks ago

That would be Bill Clinton.

Reading is fundamental..

adjudge
verb
ad·​judge ə-ˈjəj 
adjudged; adjudging
Synonyms of adjudge
transitive verb

1
a
: to decide or rule upon as a judge : ADJUDICATE
b
: to pronounce judicially : RULE

 
 
 
MrFrost
Professor Guide
2.5.3  MrFrost  replied to  Greg Jones @2.5.1    3 weeks ago
Bill Clinton.

Not a convicted felon, like trump is. 

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
2.5.4  Tessylo  replied to  Greg Jones @2.5.1    3 weeks ago

jrSmiley_78_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3  JohnRussell    3 weeks ago
Minutes before Trump, the Republican presumptive nominee,  was found guilty  on all 34 felony counts in the Manhattan hush-money case, Hogan shared a Thursday post on the social media platform X, saying that “regardless” of the outcome, Americans should respect the legal “process” and the verdict. 

“At this dangerously divided moment in our history, all leaders—regardless of party—must not pour fuel on the fire with more toxic partisanship,”   Hogan said . “We must reaffirm what has made this nation great: the rule of law.”

In a little more than an hour, LaCivita, a veteran consultant, who has been  overseeing day-to-day operations  of the Republican National Committee (RNC) since March, fired back at the former governor, saying “ You just ended your campaign .” 

Trump adviser on Hogan's verdict remarks: You just ended your campaign (thehill.com)

800

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3.1  JohnRussell  replied to  JohnRussell @3    3 weeks ago

DT :  The Man Who Shot Conservative Respect For The Rule Of Law

 
 
 
JBB
Professor Principal
3.1.1  JBB  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1    3 weeks ago

original

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
4  author  Vic Eldred    3 weeks ago

The National Rifle Association scored a major victory at the Supreme Court Thursday, as the justices unanimously ruled that appeals judges were too quick to dismiss the NRA’s claims that New York officials violated its First Amendment rights by targeting its insurance business.

The decision reinstated a lawsuit the NRA filed in 2018 against New York state’s top financial services regulator, Maria Vullo, after she announced a plan to pressure banks and insurance companies to stop doing business with the gun-rights organization.

Supreme Court revives NRA’s lawsuit alleging that New York violated its First Amendment rights - POLITICO

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Principal
4.1  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Vic Eldred @4    3 weeks ago

That's going to have the anti-gun nut setting their hair on fire.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
4.1.1  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @4.1    3 weeks ago

The solution is to delegitimize the Court.

That is what they are doing.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Principal
4.1.2  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Vic Eldred @4.1.1    3 weeks ago

They have dealt them some stinging verdicts and opinions.  

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
4.1.3  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @4.1.2    3 weeks ago

Remember how the Court struck down Biden's student loan forgiveness program?

Biden says where there is a will, there is a way.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
5  author  Vic Eldred    3 weeks ago

"Praying for my friend, praying for this nation! People need the Lord!"

GO3HexzWQAAjt1z?format=jpg&name=small
Alveda C King

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
5.1  JohnRussell  replied to  Vic Eldred @5    3 weeks ago
 People need the Lord!"

Take your pick  (its a binary choice)

img.jpg?width=1200&coordinates=0%2C4%2C0%2C4&height=600

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
5.1.1  Ronin2  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1    3 weeks ago

We don't choose Brandon the career criminal traitor.

No matter how hard Democrats pervert the law and Constitution to try and stay in power.

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
5.1.2  Sparty On  replied to  Ronin2 @5.1.1    3 weeks ago

Pervert.    A perfect description considering who we are talking about.

 
 
 
George
Junior Expert
5.1.3  George  replied to  Sparty On @5.1.2    3 weeks ago
Pervert

I wouldn't be surprised to find out Biden molested more underage girls than Epstein.

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
5.1.4  Sparty On  replied to  George @5.1.3    3 weeks ago

True, his hair sniffing fetish may speak to worse things.

 
 
 
Igknorantzruls
Freshman Quiet
5.1.5  Igknorantzruls  replied to  George @5.1.3    3 weeks ago
I wouldn't be surprised to find out Biden molested more underage girls than Epstein

we aren't surprised, about what you wouldn't be surprised by.

When taken is the word of a consistent liar and truth denier, Taken over our courts, our scientists, our Generals, and over our rights, if we do not take a stand and sit it out...

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
5.1.6  Ronin2  replied to  Igknorantzruls @5.1.5    3 weeks ago
When taken is the word of a consistent liar and truth denier, Taken over our courts, our scientists, our Generals, and over our rights, if we do not take a stand and sit it out...

Thank you. You just described Brandon perfectly.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
5.1.7  Tessylo  replied to  Igknorantzruls @5.1.5    3 weeks ago

the projection is palpable with some - confusing President Biden with former 'president' #45

 
 
 
Hal A. Lujah
Professor Guide
5.2  Hal A. Lujah  replied to  Vic Eldred @5    3 weeks ago

People need the lord?  The lord is feckless, impotent, and incapable of making change, despite its reputation of omnipotence.  Throw away the broken crutch already.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
5.3  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @5    3 weeks ago

She's a nobody - shameful - spoiling, shitting on the family name and honor and legacy of Martin Luther King, Jr., like jfk, jr.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
5.3.1  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Tessylo @5.3    3 weeks ago
shitting on the family name and honor and legacy of Martin Luther King, Jr.,

Did you read what she said?

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
5.3.2  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @5.3.1    3 weeks ago

complete waste

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
5.4  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @5    3 weeks ago

Paid supporter?

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
5.4.1  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Tessylo @5.4    3 weeks ago
Paid supporter?

Do you know who she is?

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
5.4.2  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @5.4.1    3 weeks ago

paid supporter

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
5.4.3  Tessylo  replied to  Tessylo @5.4.2    3 weeks ago

and a nobody

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
5.4.4  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @5.4.1    3 weeks ago

5.3

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
5.4.5  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @5.4.1    3 weeks ago

Do you?

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
6  author  Vic Eldred    3 weeks ago

A broadcasters trade association is pulling a philanthropy award it had planned to give to Robert De Niro after the actor  bashed former President Donald Trump  on behalf of the Biden campaign earlier this week.

The National Association of Broadcasters has revoked its award and invitation to the Celebration of Service to America awards event to De Niro because the group thought his recent work and comments on behalf of the president’s re-election campaign would “create a distraction.”

GO2rQN9WIAAGjKw?format=jpg&name=small

Broadcasters association revokes service award for De Niro over his remarks slamming Trump (nypost.com)

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
6.1  Ronin2  replied to  Vic Eldred @6    3 weeks ago

Hope the Brandon campaign paid him well for his piss poor performance outside of the courthouse.

Sounds like he will be part of the struggling former star actors guild for the foreseeable future.

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
6.2  Ozzwald  replied to  Vic Eldred @6    3 weeks ago
A broadcasters trade association is pulling a philanthropy award it had planned to give to Robert De Niro after the actor  bashed former President Donald Trump  on behalf of the Biden campaign earlier this week.

I am sure that De Niro is devastated by the news... <sarc>

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
6.2.1  Ronin2  replied to  Ozzwald @6.2    3 weeks ago

I am sure he is devastated by the loss of money from his acting. He needs all of the good publicity he can get.

Man really needs to pay his taxes, alimony, and child support.

 
 
 
bugsy
Professor Participates
6.2.2  bugsy  replied to  Ronin2 @6.2.1    3 weeks ago
Man really needs to pay his taxes, alimony, and child support.

Leftist = exempt

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
6.2.3  Ozzwald  replied to  bugsy @6.2.2    3 weeks ago
Leftist = exempt

You do realize that Trump has boasted about not paying his taxes...Right?

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
7  Sean Treacy    3 weeks ago

 There's certainly a lot to be said for the idea, as Daniel Friedman wrote,  that a DA of a Democratic city should not be charging the Republican presidential nominee with an esoteric crime that nobody has ever been charged with before in an election year. It could help Trump like the Kavanaugh hearings helped Republicans.  Or Maybe independents will say this is the straw that breaks the camel's back and vote Biden. But I doubt it. 

I'd be surprised if there's much movement in the polls now and what effect there is will wear off as other events surpass this one closer to the election.  Trump will make a lot of money  fundraising in the short term. That's about it. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
7.1  JohnRussell  replied to  Sean Treacy @7    3 weeks ago

Or it could trigger a "moment of truth" for the American people -  Trump is not fit to hold any public office. Anywhere. Ever. 

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
7.1.1  Sean Treacy  replied to  JohnRussell @7.1    3 weeks ago
r it could trigger a "moment of truth" for the American people -  Trump is not fit to hold any public office. Anywhere. Ever.

The polling I saw earlier in the week said there is a two percent gap between  whether a conviction will decrease or increase the likelihood of a voter voting for Trump. It was about 17% decrease, 15% increase and 65% no change. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
7.1.2  JohnRussell  replied to  Sean Treacy @7.1.1    3 weeks ago

Donald Trump is clearly not fit to be the head of a small town sanitation dept. , let alone president of the United States.  This is , at this point, indisputable. 

What will the "good" people in the middle and on the right do about that now? 

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
7.1.3  Sean Treacy  replied to  JohnRussell @7.1.2    3 weeks ago
ald Trump is clearly not fit to be the head of a small town sanitation dept. , let alone president of the United States.

The problem, which has been obvious for years, is that Joe Biden isn't either. Whoever is elected in 2024 will be a truly terrible, unfit President.

Democrats are so obsessed and blinded by their Trump hatred that they (1) are blind to Biden's manifest faults  (2) don't seem to realize Trump's winning because a large percent of his voters don't like him but believe the the modern left is so evil that voting for Trump is the only option. 

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
7.1.4  Sparty On  replied to  JohnRussell @7.1.2    3 weeks ago

Not sure who you think your crazy hyperbole is going to influence.[]

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
7.1.5  JohnRussell  replied to  Sean Treacy @7.1.3    3 weeks ago

Trump is "winning" because a lot of people have been brainwashed into believing they are losing "their" country to diversity. 

That is the only reason he was ever accepted as a candidate in the first place. He was the king birther. 

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
7.1.6  Sparty On  replied to  JohnRussell @7.1.5    3 weeks ago

Keep trying to demonize half the country.     You can join Hillary in the penalty box.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
7.1.7  Sean Treacy  replied to  JohnRussell @7.1.5    3 weeks ago
is "winning" because a lot of people have been brainwashed into believing they are losing "their" country to diversity. 

So your theory to explain Trump losing white voters and gaining among minorities and the young is that those groups are afraid of diversity?   

It's a perfect example of what I'm saying. You are so invested in your anti-Trump narrative that you don't pay attention to what's actually happening. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
7.1.8  JohnRussell  replied to  Sparty On @7.1.6    3 weeks ago

When Donald Trump announced for the presidency in June of 2015 it was already well know that he is a pathological liar and a mentally ill narcissist. In 2015 he had already been involved in thousands of lawsuits related to business. He had already promoted racist birtherism against Obama. 

Why was he accepted in 2015?   Biden was nowhere in sight and Clinton was not the Democratic nominee yet. 

Obama was president. The first black president who the not yet realized MAGA movement hated. Get the picture yet ? 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
7.1.9  JohnRussell  replied to  Sean Treacy @7.1.7    3 weeks ago

Donald Trump wanted to run for president in 2012 , but in 2011 had no constituency in the Republican party. He looked at birtherism and decided he could gather a following by being a racist birther leader. 

Why would that be? 

Four years later the same dynamic was still in play among conservative voters.  The rest is , sadly, history. 

 
 
 
Igknorantzruls
Freshman Quiet
7.1.10  Igknorantzruls  replied to  Sparty On @7.1.6    3 weeks ago
Keep trying to demonize half the country

Trump is the demonizer, not his critics who see him for the POS he has always been

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
7.1.11  Sparty On  replied to  JohnRussell @7.1.8    3 weeks ago

I get the picture.    Trump, who according to most of my friends on the left had no path to the Presidency, had the temerity to beat your chosen one.

The derangement has only accelerated since.     Hillary is so proud of her useful idiots.    So proud.

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
7.1.12  Sparty On  replied to  Igknorantzruls @7.1.10    3 weeks ago

Nah, the great divider Obama and his puppet the great divider 2.0 …. Biden, make Trump look like Ghandi …..

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
7.1.13  Sean Treacy  replied to  JohnRussell @7.1.9    3 weeks ago

So you look at trumps  growing support among minorities and young voters and think birtherism explains it.

sure.  

no one cares where Obama  was born or what trump said more than a decade ago about it.  No one.  It’s like believing Biden’s support of the Iraq war hurts him with progressives. It’s all ancient history at this point.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
7.1.14  JohnRussell  replied to  Sean Treacy @7.1.13    3 weeks ago

Donald Trump's entire political career has been originated and based on white grievance. 

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
7.1.15  Sparty On  replied to  JohnRussell @7.1.14    3 weeks ago

That comment is based on uninformed, bigoted nonsense.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
7.1.16  Sean Treacy  replied to  JohnRussell @7.1.14    3 weeks ago

Square that with his appeal to minorities. 

 
 
 
George
Junior Expert
7.1.17  George  replied to  Sean Treacy @7.1.13    3 weeks ago
no one cares where Obama  was born or what trump said more than a decade ago about it.

That's obviously wrong, there is definitely a group of butthurt liberals who are still whining about it.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Principal
7.1.18  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  JohnRussell @7.1.8    3 weeks ago
When Donald Trump announced for the presidency in June of 2015

And that was the day the left lost their minds.  9 years later he still lives rent free in their heads and they are still crying about him.

 
 
 
Greg Jones
Professor Participates
7.1.19  Greg Jones  replied to  JohnRussell @7.1.2    3 weeks ago

That's only your emotional opinion, and is not supported by reality, critical thinking, logic, reason, or facts.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
7.1.20  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  JohnRussell @7.1.8    3 weeks ago
In 2015 he had already been involved in thousands of lawsuits related to business

4,095 to date.  2121 as the plaintiff and 1974 as the defendant.

 
 
 
Greg Jones
Professor Participates
7.1.21  Greg Jones  replied to  JohnRussell @7.1.14    3 weeks ago

Sweeping generalization.

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
7.1.22  Ronin2  replied to  Igknorantzruls @7.1.10    3 weeks ago
Trump is the demonizer, not his critics who see him for the POS he has always been

You think Democrats aren't? jrSmiley_86_smiley_image.gif

At least Trump didn't weaponize the DOJ, FBI, CIA, and IRS. Nor have Republicans engaged in lawfare against their political opponents. They also didn't try to keep Brandon off of state ballots during a federal election for no damn reason.

 

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
7.1.23  Sean Treacy  replied to  Ronin2 @7.1.22    3 weeks ago
t least Trump didn't weaponize the DOJ, FBI, CIA, and IRS

Biden actually does what Democrats accuse Trump of doing. . 

 
 
 
George
Junior Expert
8  George    3 weeks ago

Democrat donors rallying around the trump conviction. (s)

Sequoia founder Shaun Maguire donated $300,000 to the Trump campaign

From Geiger capital Group.

The first felony conviction of a former US President wasn’t for the Iraq or Afghanistan wars, illegal CIA coups, drone striking weddings, or spying on Americans… It was because Trump misclassified a $130,000 payment for a porn star’s NDA. Tells you everything you need to know.

Not to mention ordering the execution of American citizens without due process.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
8.1  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  George @8    3 weeks ago

I predict the donations are going to flow in.

 
 
 
Snuffy
Professor Participates
8.1.1  Snuffy  replied to  Vic Eldred @8.1    3 weeks ago

I read some reporting this morning that the Trump campaign donations website crashed yesterday due to the heavy number of people trying to donate.

Isn't this what politics in our country is all about? Something happens and BOTH sides use it for fund raising. The Biden campaign is also using the verdict to raise money. Oy...

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Professor Principal
8.1.2  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Vic Eldred @8.1    3 weeks ago

Heard this morning, $39million in a ten hour period............

 
 
 
Snuffy
Professor Participates
8.1.3  Snuffy  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @8.1.2    3 weeks ago

It was actually 6 hours according to the news...

The former president's campaign announced on Friday morning that it had hauled in $34.8 million in fundraising from 6pm ET to midnight on Thursday, immediately after Trump was found guilty of all 34 felony counts in his criminal trial in New York City.

"From just minutes after the sham trial verdict was announced, our digital fundraising system was overwhelmed with support, and despite temporary delays online because of the amount of traffic, President Trump raised $34.8 million dollars from small dollar donors," Trump campaign senior advisers Chris LaCivita and Susie Wiles wrote in a statement.

They spotlighted that "not only was the amount historic, but 29.7% of yesterday's donor's were brand-new donors to the WinRed platform."

Trump turns conviction into cash, with a record fundraising haul following guilty verdicts in trial | Fox News

That dollar amount doesn't include the large donations to PACs and the like, this was all small dollar donations and almost 30% were new donars. 

Talk about making some lemonade!

 
 
 
Hallux
PhD Principal
8.1.4  Hallux  replied to  Vic Eldred @8.1    3 weeks ago
I predict the donations are going to flow in.

I do love Monday morning predictions ...

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
8.1.5  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Hallux @8.1.4    3 weeks ago

And I love all the trolling.

 
 
 
MrFrost
Professor Guide
8.1.6  MrFrost  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @8.1.2    3 weeks ago

Heard this morning, $39million in a ten hour period............

Which proves that most trump supporters are stupid... why would these losers give a billionaire money? It's just plain dumb. Besides, trump said he is 100% self funded. 

/eye roll/

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
9  author  Vic Eldred    3 weeks ago

Only a year ago:

 
 
 
MrFrost
Professor Guide
9.1  MrFrost  replied to  Vic Eldred @9    3 weeks ago
Only a year ago:

Yesterday, trump is convicted on all 34 counts. Now officially a convicted felon. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
9.1.1  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  MrFrost @9.1    3 weeks ago

And thousands of years ago Jesus of Nazareth was convicted of treason and executed.

 
 
 
Thomas
Senior Guide
9.1.2  Thomas  replied to  Vic Eldred @9.1.1    3 weeks ago

There are no parallels between the two. 

But execution in this case seems a bit steep. Why would you promote it as punishment for Trump?

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
9.1.3  devangelical  replied to  Vic Eldred @9.1.1    3 weeks ago

uh, when did jesus hump a porn star and then pay her off to keep her from telling his disciples?

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
9.1.4  Tessylo  replied to  devangelical @9.1.3    3 weeks ago

don't forget a playboy bunny, you keep forgetting the playboy bunny

 
 
 
Thomas
Senior Guide
9.1.5  Thomas  replied to  devangelical @9.1.3    3 weeks ago

Well, according to some, the Bible is a Cleaned Up retelling of Jesus's life. Whoa-oooh Mary Magdalene. AKA Cross Eyed Mary

 
 
 
Hallux
PhD Principal
10  Hallux    3 weeks ago

And to no surprise many on this yarn are sounding exactly like Trump in his screed delivered this morning. Everyone captains their own Titanic and Trump is no different ... and hey, it's the iceberg's fault!

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
10.1  devangelical  replied to  Hallux @10    3 weeks ago

meh, it was fun watching him talk himself into a more stringent sentence this morning ...

 
 
 
Hallux
PhD Principal
10.1.1  Hallux  replied to  devangelical @10.1    3 weeks ago

I did like the parts where he fumbled with his crib notes.

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
10.1.2  devangelical  replied to  Hallux @10.1.1    3 weeks ago

he has difficulty remembering his 3 greatest hits in his broken record speeches...

there's at least 50 million american voters that support him and are even more ignorant than he is...

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
11  author  Vic Eldred    3 weeks ago

This just in:

The Trump campaign brought in roughly $35 million after former  President Trump  was found guilty of 34 felony counts in a New York hush money trial Thursday, as his campaign argues the verdict supercharged support among grassroots donors.

“From just minutes after the sham trial verdict was announced, our digital fundraising system was overwhelmed with support, and despite temporary delays online because of the amount of traffic, President Trump raised $34.8 million dollars from small dollar donors,” Trump campaign senior advisers Chris LaCivita and Susie Wiles said in a joint statement Friday.

Trump campaign announces $35M fundraising haul after guilty verdict (thehill.com)

 

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
11.1  devangelical  replied to  Vic Eldred @11    3 weeks ago
Trump raised $34.8 million dollars from small dollar donors

... which represents a small fraction of his mounting legal fees. bummer.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
11.1.1  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  devangelical @11.1    3 weeks ago

That was in a matter of hours, with the website crashing.

Haters may be in big trouble.

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
11.1.2  devangelical  replied to  Vic Eldred @11.1.1    3 weeks ago
Haters may be in big trouble.

I sure hope somebody remembers to accept trump's collect call from prison, when he accepts the GOP nomination for POTUS in july...

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
11.1.3  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  devangelical @11.1.2    3 weeks ago

Prison?  Are you ready for next week's trial?

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
11.1.4  devangelical  replied to  Vic Eldred @11.1.3    3 weeks ago

which trial is that?

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
11.1.5  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  devangelical @11.1.4    3 weeks ago

I'll give you a clue: The key evidence is a laptop that 51 former intelligence officials claimed to resemble "Russian disinformation."

 
 
 
JBB
Professor Principal
11.1.6  JBB  replied to  Vic Eldred @11.1.5    3 weeks ago

What charge will Hunter's trial next week be addressing?

Somethings to do with the paperwork to purchase a gun.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
11.1.7  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  JBB @11.1.6    3 weeks ago

That's right, the more serious charges were allowed to evaporate as the prosecutor sat back and allowed the statute of limitations to expire.

I guess he didn't know how to resurrect expired statues like Alvin Bragg did, nor does he know how to turn misdemeanors into felonies.

Too bad they don't have judge Merchan.

 
 
 
JBB
Professor Principal
11.1.8  JBB  replied to  Vic Eldred @11.1.7    3 weeks ago

What more serious charges? Filing and paying his taxes late? You act like it was something nefarious but it is mundane...

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
11.1.9  Sean Treacy  replied to  JBB @11.1.8    3 weeks ago

What more serious charges

Lol.  His daddy’s doj let him avoid paying hundreds of Thousnds in taxes by intentionally letting the statue of limitations expire.  

that people pretend that’s okay because their pin up idol did it is embarrassing .

also amusing to see the people who constantly demand more gun and background Check laws waive away violations of those laws because their special little boy committed them.

Par for the course who think trump was rightfully charged with a crime they can’t even explain.

 
 
 
JBB
Professor Principal
11.1.10  JBB  replied to  Sean Treacy @11.1.9    3 weeks ago

All of Hunter's taxes have been filed, paid and accepted...

Trump was President for four years somewhere in there!

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
11.1.11  Sean Treacy  replied to  JBB @11.1.10    3 weeks ago

All of Hunter's taxes have been filed, paid and accepted..

no, they weren’t. And you know this because I’ve shown you the proof dozens of times. Why would you keep repeating a falsehood?   

Hunter’s sugar daddy paid off  a couple years off back taxes that hunter didn’t.  Biden’s doj let the statute expire for the two previous years that neither hunter or democratic donors ever paid  for him from when he was banking millions from Ukrainian oligarchs 

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
12  Sparty On    3 weeks ago

Much to the consternation of my hateful friends on the left, Trump won’t serve one minute in jail or one second on probation when this kangaroo court gets overturned.

Hopefully a short term TDS clitty diddle will suffice for them …. But it won’t.     Haters gotta hate.

 
 
 
George
Junior Expert
12.1  George  replied to  Sparty On @12    3 weeks ago

I'm sure there is an ignorant ambulance chaser out there who will tell you there were no reversable errors. 

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
12.2  devangelical  replied to  Sparty On @12    3 weeks ago
Much to the consternation of my hateful friends on the left, Trump won’t serve one minute in jail or one second on probation

I agree, he's really not looking too good lately...

 
 
 
George
Junior Expert
13  George    3 weeks ago

Trump should run as a democrat, a convicted felon who slept with hookers, Shades of Marion Barry and he won in a landslide. Democrats didn't seem to have a problem with it before.

 
 
 
Greg Jones
Professor Participates
13.1  Greg Jones  replied to  George @13    3 weeks ago

And serial sexual abuser Bill Clinton is among their most respected and revered heroes.

 
 
 
George
Junior Expert
13.1.1  George  replied to  Greg Jones @13.1    3 weeks ago

You don't have to go that far back, the current Dem nominee took "inappropriate" showers with his teenage daughter.

 
 
 
MrFrost
Professor Guide
13.1.2  MrFrost  replied to  Greg Jones @13.1    3 weeks ago
sexual abuser Bill Clinton

Who was found liable for rape.....

Oh wait, that was trump, and then there is this too.... Drug addict trump and pedo island frequent flier...trump! 

512

Biden wasn't listed on the Lolita Express like trump was and now trump is a convicted felon and you'll STILL vote for him....Just stop. 

 
 
 
Greg Jones
Professor Participates
13.1.3  Greg Jones  replied to  MrFrost @13.1.2    3 weeks ago
"Biden wasn't listed on the Lolita Express."  
Never said he was, but Bubba Bill was a certified frequent flyer with his good buddy Epstein.

 
 
 
JBB
Professor Principal
13.1.4  JBB  replied to  Greg Jones @13.1.3    3 weeks ago

Clinton is not on our 2024 ballot, but Trump is and he was!

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
13.1.5  Tessylo  replied to  MrFrost @13.1.2    3 weeks ago

and convicted rapist

 
 

Who is online





58 visitors