ABC host shocked by new poll showing Trump and Biden tied in potential matchup despite Trump's legal 'baggage'

So, how's the spittle spewing outrage working for you?  Just in case nobody has noticed, Democrats have lost the victim card.  And the press doesn't know how to spin the situation.

Maybe just one more indictment will do the trick.  We're still waiting.

ALL you are doing is making excuses for unpatriotic morons, aka MAGA. 

Is it your opinion that the indictments (in particular, the Jan 6th, classified documents and GA) are without merit?

My position is that it makes no difference what the polls say regarding holding Trump accountable.   Two distinct issues.   

Trump set a terrible precedent as PotUS and if he is not held accountable that emboldens others to follow his lead (and, incrementally, do worse).   This is net bad for the nation.

Do you disagree?

As for the poll, if it reflects reality then it indicates an electorate that is heavily irrational, irresponsible and unpatriotic.

Is it your opinion that the indictments (in particular, the Jan 6th, classified documents and GA) are without merit?

The question is whether or not the phony outrage of elitist liars has merit.  It's not just about Trump.  People don't believe the over-the-top charges against Trump has merit.  Democrats are once again using government in a dishonest, partisan manner to lie, cheat, swindle, scam, flimflam, and gaslight the public.  The indictments against Trump don't have anything to do with democracy, law, or justice.  That's not how Democrats swing.

My position is that it makes no difference what the polls say regarding holding Trump accountable.   Two distinct issues.   

Aren't the polls also indicating a desire to hold the establishment elite mother fuckers accountable?  People aren't singing praises for Trump.  People are upset that Trump is being held accountable while people like Anthony Fauci are praised.  And there's no denying that Fauci did as much or more harm to democracy than did Trump.   

Trump set a terrible precedent as PotUS and if he is not held accountable that emboldens others to follow his lead (and, incrementally, do worse).   This is net bad for the nation.

Democrats are once again using government in a dishonest, partisan manner to lie, cheat, swindle, scam, flimflam, and gaslight the public.  The indictments against Trump don't have anything to do with democracy, law, or justice.  That's not how Democrats swing.  The charges and indictments against Trump are overblown, entirely political, and are only an excuse for Democrats to lie, cheat, swindle, scam, flimflam, and gaslight the public.

If Trump is not convicted of something then everyone is expecting Democrats to once again encourage burning cities, looting, gong to war against police, and public displays of extreme violence.  If Democrats don't get their way then they'll make people suffer.  People are planning for the worst because where Democrats are involved there is no hope of anything better.

People don't believe the over-the-top charges against Trump has merit. 

Do you believe the charges are without merit?   If so, make your case.

And there's no denying that Fauci did as much or more harm to democracy than did Trump.   

Fascinating.

The indictments against Trump don't have anything to do with democracy, law, or justice. 

What is your argument then that the charges are without merit?   Just making a claim is not an argument (and it is ridiculous).

Do you believe the charges are without merit?   If so, make your case.

I believe the charges are over-blown.  Yes, there are valid reasons to indict Trump.  But RICO laws?  Conspiracy to overthrow the US government?  A coup without military support?  An insurrection without an armed assault?  Really?

What is unprecedented (at least in the US) is how the DOJ has mutated into a secret police engaged in political retribution.  That level of political corruption has historically been associated with totalitarian governments.   

What is your argument then that the charges are without merit?   Just making a claim is not an argument (and it is ridiculous).

The military was not involved.  Trump did not lead an armed uprising.  Trump limited his challenge of the election results to use (or misuse) of legal interpretations and the courts.  Trump did not encourage burning, looting, or destroying private and public property around the country to get his way.  Trump utilized inflammatory language that Democrat politics had already normalized.  Trump's politics wasn't any more outrageous or dishonest than that of prominent Democrats, like Obama, Clinton, Schumer, Pelosi, or even Adam Schiff.  

Trump limited his challenge of the election results to use (or misuse) of legal interpretations and the courts.

Nonsense. 

Nonsense. 

This is NOT a MAGA insurrection.

This is NOT a MAGA uprising.

This is NOT a MAGA coup.

This is NOT a MAGA attack.

Fascinating.

Here is Biden shouting political outrage while surrounded by nationalist symbols, the military, and emblems of autocratic authority.  Yet Trump is the danger.  Fascinating, indeed.  

"At the end of the day Trump is a philosopher. He is a philosopher of "fuck you -ism".  "

Steve Schmidt

ALL irrelevant to what Trump did. 

This is   NOT   a MAGA uprising.

True, its not any kind of uprising. 

Really?

You are being vague.   At the very least you should list the charges you feel are without merit.   

The military was not involved.  Trump did not lead an armed uprising.

He is not charged with that.

Looks like you need help understanding the actual charges against Trump.   Here are the counts in just the Jan 6th indictment:

Count 1: 18 U.S.C. § 371 (Conspiracy to Defraud the United States)

Count 2: 18 U.S.C. § 1512(k) (Conspiracy to Obstruct an Official Proceeding)

Count 3: 18 U.S.C. §§ 1512(c)(2), 2 (Obstruction of and Attempt to Obstruct an Official Proceeding)

Count 4: 18 U.S.C. § 241 (Conspiracy Against Rights)

Here is a profile of Count 1 (the actual indictment has dozens of pages of detail the you can and should read):

The Conspiracy

6. From on or about November 14, 2020, through on or about January 20, 2021, in the District of Columbia and elsewhere, the Defendant,

DONALD J. TRUMP,

did knowingly combine, conspire, confederate, and agree with co-conspirators, known and unknown to the Grand Jury, to defraud the United States by using dishonesty, fraud, and deceit to impair, obstruct, and defeat the lawful federal government function by which the results of the presidential election are collected, counted, and certified by the federal government.

Purpose of the Conspiracy

7. The purpose of the conspiracy was to overturn the legitimate results of the 2020 presidential election by using knowingly false claims of election fraud to obstruct the federal government function by which those results are collected, counted, and certified.

Manner and Means

1. The Defendant's conspiracy to impair, obstruct, and defeat the federal government function through dishonesty, fraud, and deceit included the following manner and means:
2. The Defendant and co-conspirators used knowingly false claims of election fraud to get state legislators and election officials to subvert the legitimate election results and change electoral votes for the Defendant's opponent, Joseph R. Biden, Jr., to electoral votes for the Defendant. That is, on the pretext of baseless fraud claims, the Defendant pushed officials in certain states to ignore the popular vote; disenfranchise millions of voters; dismiss legitimate electors; and ultimately, cause the ascertainment of and voting by illegitimate electors in favor of the Defendant.
3. The Defendant and co-conspirators organized fraudulent slates of electors in seven targeted states (Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, New Mexico, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin), attempting to mimic the procedures that the legitimate electors were supposed to follow under the Constitution and other federal and state laws. This included causing the fraudulent electors to meet on the day appointed by federal law on which legitimate electors were to gather and cast their votes; cast fraudulent votes for the Defendant; and sign certificates falsely representing that they were legitimate electors. Some fraudulent electors were tricked into participating based on the understanding that their votes would be used only if the Defendant succeeded in outcome-determinative lawsuits within their state, which the Defendant never did. The Defendant and co-conspirators then caused these fraudulent electors to transmit their false certificates to the Vice President and other government officials to be counted at the certification proceeding on January 6.

1. The Defendant and co-conspirators attempted to use the power and authority of the Justice Department to conduct sham election crime investigations and to send a letter to the targeted states that falsely claimed that the Justice Department had identified significant concerns that may have impacted the election outcome; that sought to advance the Defendant's fraudulent elector plan by using the Justice Department's authority to falsely present the fraudulent electors as a valid alternative to the legitimate electors; and that urged, on behalf of the Justice Department, the targeted states' legislatures to convene to create the opportunity to choose the fraudulent electors over the legitimate electors.
2. The Defendant and co-conspirators attempted to enlist the Vice President to use his ceremonial role at the January 6 certification proceeding to fraudulently alter the election results. First, using knowingly false claims of election fraud, the Defendant and co-conspirators attempted to convince the Vice President to use the Defendant's fraudulent electors, reject legitimate electoral votes, or send legitimate electoral votes to state legislatures for review rather than counting them. When that failed, on the morning of January 6, the Defendant and co-conspirators repeated knowingly false claims of election fraud to gathered supporters, falsely told them that the Vice President had the authority to and might alter the election results, and directed them to the Capitol to obstruct the certification proceeding and exert pressure on the Vice President to take the fraudulent actions he had previously refused.
3. After it became public on the afternoon of January 6 that the Vice President would not fraudulently alter the election results, a large and angry crowd— including many individuals whom the Defendant had deceived into believing the Vice President could and might change the election results— violently attacked the Capitol and halted the proceeding. As violence ensued, the Defendant and co-conspirators exploited the disruption by redoubling efforts to levy false claims of election fraud and convince Members of Congress to further delay the certification based on those claims.

The Defendant's Knowledge of the Falsity of His Election Fraud Claims

1. The Defendant, his co-conspirators, and their agents made knowingly false claims that there had been outcome-determinative fraud in the 2020 presidential election. These prolific lies about election fraud included dozens of specific claims that there had been substantial fraud in certain states, such as that large numbers of dead, non-resident, non-citizen, or otherwise ineligible voters had cast ballots, or that voting machines had changed votes for the Defendant to votes for Biden. These claims were false, and the Defendant knew that they were false. In fact, the Defendant was notified repeatedly that his claims were untrue—often by the people on whom he relied for candid advice on important matters, and who were best positioned to know the facts— and he deliberately disregarded the truth. For instance:  { omitted details, see actual indictment }

The Criminal Agreement and Acts to Effect the Object of the Conspiracy

The Defendant's Use of Deceit to Get State Officials to Subvert the Legitimate Election Results and Chanpe Electoral Votes

1. Shortly after election day—which fell on November 3, 2020—the Defendant launched his criminal scheme. On November 13, the Defendant's Campaign attorneys conceded in court that he had lost the vote count in the state of Arizona—meaning, based on the assessment the Defendant's Campaign advisors had given him just a week earlier, the Defendant had lost the election. So the next day, the Defendant turned to Co-Conspirator 1, whom he announced would spearhead his efforts going forward to challenge the election results. From that point on, the Defendant and his co-conspirators executed a strategy to use knowing deceit in the targeted states to impair, obstruct, and defeat the federal government function, including as described below.

Arizona

1. On November 13, 2020, the Defendant had a conversation with his Campaign Manager, who informed him that a claim that had been circulating, that a substantial number of non-citizens had voted in Arizona, was false.
2. On November 22, eight days before Arizona's Governor certified the ascertainment of the state's legitimate electors based on the popular vote, the Defendant and Co-Conspirator 1 called the Speaker of the Arizona House of Representatives and made knowingly false claims of election fraud aimed at interfering with the ascertainment of and voting by Arizona's electors, as follows:
3. The Defendant and Co-Conspirator 1 falsely asserted, among other things, that a substantial number of non-citizens, non-residents, and dead people had voted fraudulently in Arizona. The Arizona House Speaker asked Co- Conspirator 1 for evidence of the claims, which Co-Conspirator 1 did not have, but claimed he would provide. Co-Conspirator 1 never did so.
4. The Defendant and Co-Conspirator 1 asked the Arizona House Speaker to call the legislature into session to hold a hearing based on their claims of election fraud. The Arizona House Speaker refused, stating that doing so would require a two-thirds vote of its members, and he would not allow it without actual evidence of fraud.
5. The Defendant and Co-Conspirator 1 asked the Arizona House Speaker to use the legislature to circumvent the process by which legitimate electors would be ascertained for Biden based on the popular vote, and replace those electors with a new slate for the Defendant. The Arizona House Speaker refused, responding that the suggestion was beyond anything he had ever heard or thought of as something within his authority.
6. On December 1, Co-Conspirator 1 met with the Arizona House Speaker. When the Arizona House Speaker again asked Co-Conspirator 1 for evidence of the outcome-determinative election fraud he and the Defendant had been claiming, Co-Conspirator 1 responded with words to the effect of, "We don't have the evidence, but we have lots of theories."

{ see the indictment for remaining details }

This is just a profile of Count 1 of the Jan 6th indictment; there are three more counts in this indictment alone.  Trump is also indicted on classified documents and GA election tampering.  You have categorically declared that all these counts are bogus.   Obviously it is impossible to go through each charge so we need to be brief.   Accordingly I have given you quite a bit of information about one count in one indictment.

Explain specifically why the charges in this count are without merit.

What is fascinating is that your comments suggest being entirely oblivious to the fact that Trump attempted to corruptly defraud the US government in an attempt to steal the 2020 presidential election.

But, but, but - the former 'president' is still a better choice than President Biden.

The title of the article for that picture is:  "Biden warns US democracy imperiled by Trump and Maga extremists".

It is best to not let one's partisan imagination lead to delusion and/or conspiracy theories.

Projection, deflection and denial to an unimaginable and unbelievable extent.  Ridiculous.

You have categorically declared that all these counts are bogus.

That is incorrect.  What I have 'declared' is the charges are overblown.  As an example, the premise for the indictment equates politics and fraud.  A campaign or a political organization challenging election results in a political manner would constitute fraud under the metrics established by the indictment.  I doubt people are stupid enough to accept that metric will be universally applied.  

Biden's national address about threats to equality and democracy delivered with Independence Hall as the backdrop constitutes fraud under the same metrics.  Biden demagogued, used deceit, evoked fear, and misrepresented both events and dangers.  Truth died on the stage under Biden's phony outrage.  Biden's politics wasn't different than Trump's.  But Biden deliberately used (or misused) government to perpetrate a fraud.

Wasnt that the speech where Biden derided the lying sack of shits that have spent two and a half years trying to undermine the 2020 election? 

The MAGA scum should be more careful what they choose to lie about if they dont want to be criticized. 

That is incorrect.  What I have 'declared' is the charges are overblown.

Okay Nerm, use whatever word you wish.   

A campaign or a political organization challenging election results in a political manner would constitute fraud under the metrics established by the indictment. 

Wrong, that is not what the indictment does.   Have you even read the indictment?

In short, your comment fails to address my challenge.

Wasnt that the speech where Biden derided the lying sack of shits that have spent two and a half years trying to undermine the 2020 election? 

Yes, I think so.  That day he pivoted from the Uniter-in-Chief to the Divider-in-Chief.

 That day he pivoted from the Uniter-in-Chief to the Divider-in-Chief.

Biden has done precious little to bring people together. 

Okay Nerm, use whatever word you wish.   

So, words only matter when you say they matter.  Bogus and overblown are not interchangeable.

Wrong, that is not what the indictment does.   Have you even read the indictment?

The indictment charges a conspiracy to defraud against a group and not against an individual.  Did the state of Georgia enforce its own election laws by prohibiting electioneering for mailed ballots?  For a mailed ballot doesn't the mailing address become a polling location?  Don't prohibitions on electioneering mean that door knocking campaigns and mailed campaign literature are illegal after mail in voting begins?

It's not allowed to coerce or influence voters at a polling station.  For mailed ballots, the voter's mailing address becomes a polling station.  And the voter is in process of voting from the time the ballots are received in the mail until election day.  In fact, allowing political campaigns to continue political activities after ballots are mailed would be problematic.  Broadcasting campaign advertising inside a polling station would definitely raise questions about the integrity of the election at that polling station.  And when mailing addresses become polling stations then any broadcasts into that mailing address would amount to electioneering and raise questions about the integrity of the votes.

How is it possible to defraud a fraudulent election?  Georgia is selectively enforcing its own election laws and lying about the integrity of its own elections.  The indictment may have some merit but the charges have been overblown.

So, words only matter when you say they matter.  Bogus and overblown are not interchangeable.

Don't give me that shit.   I just agreed to go with 'overblown'.   My question at 1.2.11 asked you to show the charges that were without merit.   Now if you want to show a charge is without merit due to it being overblown, bogus, or whatever adjective you wish, that is fine.   Just answer the question without the bullshit.

The indictment charges a conspiracy to defraud against a group and not against an individual.  Did the state of Georgia enforce its own election laws by prohibiting electioneering for mailed ballots?  ...

I am not seeing you illustrate why these charges are 'overblown'.   You are bloviating with a bunch of questions that are unrelated to the indictment (especially count 1).   Further, the indictment in question is the Jan 6th, not the GA indictment.   

You are deflecting.    

How is it possible to defraud a fraudulent election? 

Okay, clearly you cannot defend your position.

At this point, I am inclined to believe that you have not even read the Jan 6th indictment.   

To my knowledge , no one has ever presented an actual piece of evidence that there was fraud in the 2020 presidential election. There is far, far, more evidence that figures in Trump's circle tried to overthrow the election results than there is evidence of voter fraud perpetrated by Democrats. For 2 1/2 years we have been asking these people for evidence. Actual evidence, not vague complaints about changed voting procedures. Changed voting procedures does not in itself = illegal votes. 

Frankly, the predominant argument MAGA's make is that Trump got 74 million votes, more than any other incumbent president.  Biden got 81 million which Trump's fans say was impossible. Why is it impossible? Millions of people came out to vote specifically to keep the deranged Trump from getting a second term. Its not rocket science. 

One of the main reasons Trump lost is because tens of thousands of swing state voters who otherwise voted Republican left the presidential line on the ballot blank. In other words, it is his own damn fault. If he wasnt an obvious lunatic maybe he would have got some or most of those missing votes. 

There is a consensus among MAGA that the election was stolen from Trump, but no one among these millions of people can produce a scrap of actual evidence this happened. They talk about "anomalies" , which is another word for wishful thinking. 

I came across a You Tube video the other day which was a PBS/Frontline show about the "stop the steal" movement. THAT is where the frightening thing about the post-election events occurred. A group of crazies (Flynn, Powell, Patrick Byrne) persuaded Trump to go along with wild conspiracy theories and plotted to disenfranchise millions of voters. 

Where is the outrage over that? 

To my knowledge , no one has ever presented an actual piece of evidence that there was fraud in the 2020 presidential election.

As you know, those who will vote for Trump are doing so because he will be their nominee.   They will also, clearly, dismiss all wrongdoings as irrelevant.   Some will claim there are no wrongdoings by Trump.   

Facts do not matter to this group.   The 'arguments' are irrational, support for Trump is irresponsible and voting for Trump is unpatriotic.    But if he is the R nominee, they will vote for and defend him no matter what.

Sounds like the majority of comments of those who project, deflect, or deny when asked to back up their claims or as TiG stated 'defend their position.'

Trump's Legal 'Baggage'

Nice euphemism for "traitor". 

And yet, Biden can only tie with him.

Guess Biden better dust off his old Cornpop-busting days!

Traitors, morons, dupes,  fools , and human excrement get to vote too. Thus we can explain Trump's poll numbers. 

Traitors, morons, dupes,  fools , and human excrement get to vote too.

An excellent description of many Democrats.

More like truth telling. 

How many "arguments" do you make? Zero as far as I can tell. Dont tell people here who post content and make arguments every day that they are "name calling". I do it all. 

I do it all. 

Including name-calling, as he so sensibly stated.

Dont tell people here who post content and make arguments every day that they are "name calling".

Don't tell people what they can and can not do on a semi open forum.  Your post is name calling, simple as that.  Just because you can somehow rationalize it to yourself and other like minded people just shows how weak your "argument "is.

It was suggested that Harry Truman was giving his opponents "hell". He smiled and said "I tell them the truth and they think it is hell". 

LOL

Let me be the first to break it to you:

You ain't no Harry Truman!

"Traitors, morons, dupes, fools , and human excrement get to vote too".

That describes many, many progressives and liberal Democrats as well.

Many people consider Biden to be a traitor too. What with all the irrefutable evidence of meddling in the affairs of Ukraine, bribery, influence peddling, money laundering, etc....all impeachable offenses. 

Trump is being railroaded on a bunch of bogus charges.... which don't include treason.

I have posted more articles, some of which I write myself, than anyone , ever, on Newstalkers. I have also, I think made more comments, although I dont make as many comments as I used to because of the incesssant trolling here. 

The idea that all I do is "name call" is ridiculous on the face of it.  I "name call" for a reason.  What is your reason for posting inane defenses of far right positions day after day? 

I have posted more articles, some of which I write myself, than anyone , ever, on Newstalkers. I have also, I think made more comments, although I dont make as many comments as I used to because of the incesssant trolling here.  The idea that all I do is "name call" is ridiculous on the face of it.  I "name call" for a reason.  What is your reason for posting inane defenses of far right positions day after day? 

Best to focus on quality rather than sheer volume.

My response is specific to 2.1.1.   To be honest with you I skim over or ignore many of your articles, they are so repetitive they are really not worth my time.

Trump is being railroaded on a bunch of bogus charges.... which don't include treason.

Which of the charges are bogus and why?

Why are you wasting your time? 

I do not expect a thoughtful, honest answer.   I am, of course, shining a light on outrageous (uber partisan) bullshit.

Traitors, morons, dupes,  fools , and human excrement get to vote too. Thus we can explain Trump's poll numbers. 

That does parrot the political narrative of prominent Democrats.

I am, of course, shining a light on outrageous (uber partisan) bullshit.

Thanks for the clarification.  That is not what I would have guessed.

If someone claims that "Trump is being railroaded on a bunch of bogus charges.... which don't include treason." would you not challenge that claim?

If you agree with the claim then my question to you is:   which of the charges are bogus and why?

If you disagree with the claim then it should be quite clear why it was challenged.

That has nothing to do with your goal of shining a light on outrageous (uber partisan) bullshit since you never expected an answer.

But you go with that.

Deflection.   What a surprise.  

The challenge is the light.    

If someone claims that " Trump is being railroaded on a bunch of bogus charges.... which don't include treason. " would you not challenge that claim?

If you   agree  with the claim then my question to you is:    which of the charges are bogus and why?

If you   disagree  with the claim then it should be quite clear why it was challenged.

Pretty dim light.

Of course someone that seems to shine a light on only one side of the political aisle might also be considered an uber partisan

If one cannot recognize criticism of both political parties then one could come to such a misguided conclusion.   IMO the R party far more dysfunctional than the D party so naturally I will be more critical of it.   

Your comment suggests a lack of understanding of partisanship.    Partisans, especially uber-partisans, vote based on their party affiliation.  Uber-partisans (loyalists) will defend their party at all costs.   Uber partisans will adopt their party's positions and defend them even if the argument is brain-dead stupid.

Independents make decisions based on facts and logic and not on party (except in strategic factors such as trying to achieve a balance of power by having a mix of control by political parties).

Most partisans seem unable to even comprehend political independence and stubbornly insist (employing confirmation bias) that independents are actually partisans.   It is as if they do not believe it possible to be politically independent.

Traitors, morons, dupes,  fools , and human excrement get to vote too.

You just described the typical Democrat. It is the only way a career criminal politician gets elected to the highest office of the land. "Most transparent administration ever." The only thing they are transparent about is their abuse of power to go after their political enemies. Not just Trump, but parents that have the audacity to stand up against the leftist indoctrination BS being taught their children.

Democrats do love their criminals; and they get very upset when the rest of us don't.

Truth hurts doesn't it Greg?

Biden's baggage is being brain dead.  It seems that is trumping being called a traitor.

Nice euphemism for "traitor". 

In the constitution: 

Article III, Section 3, Clause 1: Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

You don't think they would bring the charges if they thought they could prosecute?

The media has done next to nothing to turn people against Trump. They want an election "horserace" and will do whatever they have to to make sure that happens. 

There is a lot of apathy and , I guess, mental fatigue, in the country on the subject of Trump. Everyone doesnt have the stomach or the perseverance to stay on top of all this crap over the course of eight years. Millions of people are living the last years of their lives under the millstone of having this piece of crap human being tied like an anchor around the national neck over and over. 

The only people to blame for all this are Trump voters. Obviously , without the unpatriotic morons who lap up MAGA bilge like mothers milk, Trump would exit stage right. 

The saddest part is that the majority of Americans will never accept Trump as president again, and if does get back in it will be one of the strangest and saddest days in American history, which we will never live down. 

The media has done next to nothing to turn people against Trump.

Whatever credibility you had just went out the window with that claim!

LMMFAO!

When was the last time you saw someone in mainstream media call Trump a traitor, even though he obviously is?  They are more likely to talk about his good polls numbers then they are about his traitorous behavior. 

The media, in general, has been more than too nice to Trump over the past 8 years. 

That whole post is supposed to be a joke, right?

The media, in general, has been more than too nice to Trump over the past 8 years.

I might agree if all you watched was newsmax or Fox.  All the other media outlets have been slamming him for 8 years.  Just because they have not specifically labeled him a traitor as you seem to require they have not been giving him anywhere near the free ride they are giving brain dead Biden.

Donald Trump was never, ever, fit to be president of the United States. The mainstream media did next to nothing to get the public off Trump, for the good of the country, in 2016. Then they basically stood by while he lied thousands of times , while in office, including his attack on over 600 people, by name, on his twitter account. None of that was normal for a president of the United States to behave like that but the media said next to nothing. 

Mainstream corporate media is all about "both sides", because they dont want to alienate possible viewers of any persuasion. They have not served the country well at all over the past 8 years. 

but the media said next to nothing. 

Google search:

Articles or news reports unfavorable to Trump over last 7 years 1,930,000 Results

The mainstream media did next to nothing to get the public off Trump, for the good of the country, in 2016.

Are you suggesting the media should overtly try to influence the election instead of semi covertly like they have been doing for the last 8 years(for the good of the country)?  They have made it pretty clear they did not want Trump to be president EVERY SINGLE DAY.  What on earth have you been watching?

But have they specifically called him a traitor?  I think that is the requirement at this point.

Articles or news reports unfavorable to Biden 

About 2,070,000 results

bing

articles or news reports unfavorable to the Pope

1,520,000 results

bing

I just debunked your obviously bogus claim about Trump. and now you deflect to others?

Poor form.

Has it occurred to you that the numbers may be high for those folks because Biden has been in politics his whole life practically, and how many Popes have there been?

Of course there are negative articles about Popes since the Catholic Church was harboring pedophiles for so many decades.

Interesting though that there were more unfavorable articles about Biden than Trump and almost as many for the papacy....

Interesting though that there were more unfavorable articles about Biden than Trump and almost as many for the papacy....

Yeah, but Biden is old and been around a very long time. I am sure a good portion of those articles were about Biden be a plagiarizer and I am sure a lot were about the corruptness of the influence-peddling schemes Joe's son ran, selling access to Joe.

Popes covered for pedophiles for decades.

Biden has been in politics his whole life practically,

He won his first election a couple of years after his draft dodging was no longer necessary.

They have not served the country well at all over the past 8 years. 

Translation:

They weren't mean enough to Trump and must have been too mean to Biden.

About 2,070,000 results

Proof that they are covering for biden. That is less than 10 percent than he deserves.

Articles or news reports unfavorable to Biden 

Let's ask the same question instead of changing it.

Articles or news reports unfavorable to Biden over the last 7 years

1,720,000 Results

Articles or news reports unfavorable to the Pope over the last 7 years

395,000 Results

I thought your numbers looked suspicious.

Makes a difference when you ask the same question instead if disingenuously changing the question.

You debunked nothing. There are ,many many many topics on google or bing that have a couple million results. Maybe I should look up negative comments about AOC. What do you think? 

Oh , what do you know-

About 1,840,000 results

You debunked nothing.

Sure I did, and I also PROVED it to you--or at least others can see it.

You said the media said little about Trump.

I showed you almost 2 MILLION stories.

There are ,many many many topics on google or bing that have a couple million results. 

And? WTF kind of argument is that?

 Maybe I should look up negative comments about AOC. What do you think? 

I think your devotion to that blazing idiot is appalling, and I wouldn't be surprised to see lots of negative stories about her.

 She deserves lots of bad press.

Old, Crazy liar tied with old, crazy Liar.

makes sense to me.

Makes sense, if only there was a 3rd option? Maybe that’s why Cornel West gets zero air time. Democrats are scared shitless he will Ross Perot them.

Articles or news reports unfavorable to Biden 

Cornel West is considered to be a marxist. Planning to support him are ya? 

He’s better than Kamala or Dementia Joe.

No, but he might peal enough votes away from Brandon the Human Fuck Up Machine to bring about a Democrat loss.

Democrats are scared shitless that Joe might not be far left enough for their far leftist loons.