(06-20-2023 01:28 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  WTF are you babbling about? Both were not great people. That's not a double standard!

So you didn't vote for or support Bill Clinton due to his political scandals and personal life?

(06-20-2023 01:29 PM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote:  

(06-20-2023 01:23 PM)shere khan Wrote:  

(06-20-2023 01:21 PM)WalkThePlank Wrote:  Did you hold Clinton to the same standard in 92 and 96?

Of course not.

I never thought bad of Clinton for getting a blow job from an intern. I mean look at what he married

He was just ****** president

The only problem I had with it was when my ~4 year old son said, "Daddy what's a blow job?"

My oldest was in the 3rd grade, and very proudly came home from school to announce at the dinner table (in front of his two younger sisters) that HE KNEW what Bill Clinton was in trouble for ... "He was sexing Monica Lewinski."

From our youngest: "What does 'sexing' mean?"

From my wife: "It means kissing."

From our middle child: "Is that bad?"

From me: "Yes, if you are president you are not allowed to kiss other women."

From our son: "That's not what sexing means."

From my wife: "That's enough."

(06-20-2023 01:36 PM)AdoptedMonarch Wrote:  

(06-20-2023 01:29 PM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote:  

(06-20-2023 01:23 PM)shere khan Wrote:  

(06-20-2023 01:21 PM)WalkThePlank Wrote:  Did you hold Clinton to the same standard in 92 and 96?

Of course not.

I never thought bad of Clinton for getting a blow job from an intern. I mean look at what he married

He was just ****** president

The only problem I had with it was when my ~4 year old son said, "Daddy what's a blow job?"

My oldest was in the 3rd grade, and very proudly came home from school to announce at the dinner table (in front of his two younger sisters) that HE KNEW what Bill Clinton was in trouble for ... "He was sexing Monica Lewinski."

From our youngest: "What does 'sexing' mean?"

From my wife: "It means kissing."

From our middle child: "Is that bad?"

From me: "Yes, if you are president you are not allowed to kiss other women."

From our son: "That's not what sexing means."

From my wife: "That's enough."

My wife tells the story that her grandparents asked her, her older sister, brother, and cousins what oral sex was...

(06-20-2023 01:33 PM)WalkThePlank Wrote:  

(06-20-2023 01:28 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  WTF are you babbling about? Both were not great people. That's not a double standard!

So you didn't vote for or support Bill Clinton due to his political scandals and personal life?

That's not why I don't support trump. He doesn't know how to run the executive office. It was a giant **** show. And he also either doesn't care one iota about NDI or doesn't have the first clue on how to protect it.

Dude, there's nothing here. Move along.

Even further, I was not even voting yet when Clinton ran!

(06-20-2023 01:41 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(06-20-2023 01:36 PM)AdoptedMonarch Wrote:  

(06-20-2023 01:29 PM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote:  

(06-20-2023 01:23 PM)shere khan Wrote:  

(06-20-2023 01:21 PM)WalkThePlank Wrote:  Did you hold Clinton to the same standard in 92 and 96?

Of course not.

I never thought bad of Clinton for getting a blow job from an intern. I mean look at what he married

He was just ****** president

The only problem I had with it was when my ~4 year old son said, "Daddy what's a blow job?"

My oldest was in the 3rd grade, and very proudly came home from school to announce at the dinner table (in front of his two younger sisters) that HE KNEW what Bill Clinton was in trouble for ... "He was sexing Monica Lewinski."

From our youngest: "What does 'sexing' mean?"

From my wife: "It means kissing."

From our middle child: "Is that bad?"

From me: "Yes, if you are president you are not allowed to kiss other women."

From our son: "That's not what sexing means."

From my wife: "That's enough."

My wife tells the story that her grandparents asked her, her older sister, brother, and cousins what oral sex was...

Ans: The driving force in my life

(06-20-2023 01:16 PM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote:  This is the point that the idiots simply don't get. It's not about Trump, it's about equal justice under the law.

And they'll say "well if Hillary and Biden went to jail I'm ok with that too".

All the while KNOWING that will never happen.

Societal crotch rot.

Someone has to be the person to be made an example of... I'm all for any one of them being charged and the rest held to the same standard.

But.that.is.never.going.to.happen.

Obviously I have to say it slowly.

When vilify the opposition is the practice post election, purge the opposition isn't far behind, especially when the election results aren't clean and universally believed.

If you want to straighten it out the gamesmanship over election standards needs to be eliminated. Hard rules and hard enforcement and any polling site which claims a late problem and needs to be shut down for any length of time and have the deadline extended needs a legal team representing all parties involved to take over everything at that polling location. Such teams need to be ready to go in all major cities and enough to handle several polling sites if necessary. Anymore and State Police need to enter the premises and shut it down until a team arrives.

Poll workers who violate protocols and falsify information need to be tried and sentenced.

Clean up the process. If candidates want to get dirty during an election with remarks made about each other so be it. Retaliation after the election should be an impeachable offense.

We aren't going to get our civility back, restore our tolerance for differences of opinion, in this political climate. And any house member who wants to start impeachment proceedings needs to have evidence that the SCOTUS will see as weighty enough to pursue. Frivolous filings of impeachment need to lead to censure of those filing them.

Our society and government is headed post haste into dissolution if we do not address these issues and restore order.

And frankly I blame much of it on the number of bull**** lawyers who occupy the House of Representatives. I think it should be okay for lawyers to serve in the Senate, but the House needs to be reserved for business people. Business people operate based upon mutual self interest. Attorneys make their living bickering, pulling tricks, seeing what they can get away with, and remaining contentious. Enough! We need reason restored to our government, not constantly challenged by narcissistic fools.

Do that and we have a chance. Eliminate PAC money and we'll be fine.

(06-20-2023 03:15 PM)JRsec Wrote:  When vilify the opposition is the practice post election, purge the opposition isn't far behind, especially when the election results aren't clean and universally believed.

If you want to straighten it out the gamesmanship over election standards needs to be eliminated. Hard rules and hard enforcement and any polling site which claims a late problem and needs to be shut down for any length of time and have the deadline extended needs a legal team representing all parties involved to take over everything at that polling location. Such teams need to be ready to go in all major cities and enough to handle several polling sites if necessary. Anymore and State Police need to enter the premises and shut it down until a team arrives.

Poll workers who violate protocols and falsify information need to be tried and sentenced.

Clean up the process. If candidates want to get dirty during an election with remarks made about each other so be it. Retaliation after the election should be an impeachable offense.

We aren't going to get our civility back, restore our tolerance for differences of opinion, in this political climate. And any house member who wants to start impeachment proceedings needs to have evidence that the SCOTUS will see as weighty enough to pursue. Frivolous filings of impeachment need to lead to censure of those filing them.

Our society and government is headed post haste into dissolution if we do not address these issues and restore order.

And frankly I blame much of it on the number of bull**** lawyers who occupy the House of Representatives. I think it should be okay for lawyers to serve in the Senate, but the House needs to be reserved for business people. Business people operate based upon mutual self interest. Attorneys make their living bickering, pulling tricks, seeing what they can get away with, and remaining contentious. Enough! We need reason restored to our government, not constantly challenged by narcissistic fools.

Do that and we have a chance. Eliminate PAC money and we'll be fine.

we've hashed this out too many times to count...

w/o a nat'l voting standard for NATIONAL FK'N ELECTIONS, one is simply pissing into a gale looking at that as the divining 'rod'...

I'm literally sick of talking about this g'dammed bs...

ya either g'dammed fix it (constitutional convention) or ya continue to swallow
piss....

(you know I'm not teeing off on you, JR!)

yeah, that rattled muh noodle for sec...

(06-20-2023 03:15 PM)JRsec Wrote:  When vilify the opposition is the practice post election, purge the opposition isn't far behind, especially when the election results aren't clean and universally believed.

If you want to straighten it out the gamesmanship over election standards needs to be eliminated. Hard rules and hard enforcement and any polling site which claims a late problem and needs to be shut down for any length of time and have the deadline extended needs a legal team representing all parties involved to take over everything at that polling location. Such teams need to be ready to go in all major cities and enough to handle several polling sites if necessary. Anymore and State Police need to enter the premises and shut it down until a team arrives.

Poll workers who violate protocols and falsify information need to be tried and sentenced.

Clean up the process. If candidates want to get dirty during an election with remarks made about each other so be it. Retaliation after the election should be an impeachable offense.

We aren't going to get our civility back, restore our tolerance for differences of opinion, in this political climate. And any house member who wants to start impeachment proceedings needs to have evidence that the SCOTUS will see as weighty enough to pursue. Frivolous filings of impeachment need to lead to censure of those filing them.

Our society and government is headed post haste into dissolution if we do not address these issues and restore order.

And frankly I blame much of it on the number of bull**** lawyers who occupy the House of Representatives. I think it should be okay for lawyers to serve in the Senate, but the House needs to be reserved for business people. Business people operate based upon mutual self interest. Attorneys make their living bickering, pulling tricks, seeing what they can get away with, and remaining contentious. Enough! We need reason restored to our government, not constantly challenged by narcissistic fools.

Do that and we have a chance. Eliminate PAC money and we'll be fine.

One in 10,000 has honor.

(06-20-2023 01:22 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(06-20-2023 01:21 PM)WalkThePlank Wrote:  

(06-20-2023 01:08 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Sorry, the dude's not a good person. Serial liar, cheater on his wife, scammed people in business

Did you hold Clinton to the same standard in 92 and 96?

Bill Clinton was a slimeball. But he was also 100 times the president trump was.

No, he wasn’t.

(06-20-2023 01:25 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(06-20-2023 01:16 PM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote:  

(06-20-2023 01:09 PM)WalkThePlank Wrote:  Trump shouldn't be indicted because the left doesn't police their own candidates/politicians. No equal justice, no jail. None of the details matter because we live in a two tiered justice system.

This is the point that the idiots simply don't get. It's not about Trump, it's about equal justice under the law.

And they'll say "well if Hillary and Biden went to jail I'm ok with that too".

All the while KNOWING that will never happen.

Societal crotch rot.

Your rant might hold water if ANY former president had done ANYTHING even remotely comparable to what trump's accused of.

There simply IS no equal act from another president, VP, SOS, etc. So how can you have equal justice for unequal activities?

And yours might hold water if ANY former president were placed under the same scrutiny.

There simply IS no way to make that claim because no other former president has been put under this kind of examination.

Repeating your lie over and over isn’t going to make it true.

So Trump last week said the documents were planted. Today in an interview he said he did have classified documents. What's sad is his supporters not only will not recognize the fact he has to be lying in one of those, and that's not some small lie. They will probably believe both to be true at the same time simply because Trump said so.

(06-20-2023 08:06 PM)Eagleyed Wrote:  So Trump last week said the documents were planted. Today in an interview he said he did have classified documents. What's sad is his supporters not only will not recognize the fact he has to be lying in one of those, and that's not some small lie. They will probably believe both to be true at the same time simply because Trump said so.

My best guess would be that both are true. Trump had some classified documents, and more were planted.

(06-20-2023 08:13 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(06-20-2023 08:06 PM)Eagleyed Wrote:  So Trump last week said the documents were planted. Today in an interview he said he did have classified documents. What's sad is his supporters not only will not recognize the fact he has to be lying in one of those, and that's not some small lie. They will probably believe both to be true at the same time simply because Trump said so.

My best guess would be that both are true. Trump had some classified documents, and more were planted.

Agree. Neither the Garland D.o.J. nor Donald Trump have much care about staying faithful to the truth.

The difference is that the latter is too arrogant, lazy and stupid to bother with the truth. The former is too graspingly evil to do so.

(06-20-2023 08:13 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(06-20-2023 08:06 PM)Eagleyed Wrote:  So Trump last week said the documents were planted. Today in an interview he said he did have classified documents. What's sad is his supporters not only will not recognize the fact he has to be lying in one of those, and that's not some small lie. They will probably believe both to be true at the same time simply because Trump said so.

My best guess would be that both are true. Trump had some classified documents, and more were planted.

Then he should have said that. If he actually believes that the documents were planted that's an odd thing to leave out of the interview.

I believe this interview and the 3rd different story he's now given on the documents it's actually the most likely to be true. That they were mixed in with personal stuff. He thought he was going to remain president by some last minute action and had to pack up fast. Since personal stuff was mixed up with them he didn't want people pouring over them. etc. etc.

If he had led with that I wouldn't have as much of a problem. But, now it's the 3rd straight different story he has had on this.

(06-20-2023 08:33 PM)Eagleyed Wrote:  

(06-20-2023 08:13 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(06-20-2023 08:06 PM)Eagleyed Wrote:  So Trump last week said the documents were planted. Today in an interview he said he did have classified documents. What's sad is his supporters not only will not recognize the fact he has to be lying in one of those, and that's not some small lie. They will probably believe both to be true at the same time simply because Trump said so.

My best guess would be that both are true. Trump had some classified documents, and more were planted.

Then he should have said that. If he actually believes that the documents were planted that's an odd thing to leave out of the interview.

I believe this interview and the 3rd different story he's now given on the documents it's actually the most likely to be true. That they were mixed in with personal stuff. He thought he was going to remain president by some last minute action and had to pack up fast. Since personal stuff was mixed up with them he didn't want people pouring over them. etc. etc.

If he had led with that I wouldn't have as much of a problem. But, now it's the 3rd straight different story he has had on this.

Agreed. I think he's slowly getting closer to the truth. But that still doesn't explain him possibly showing people the Iran attack plans at Bedminster.

The MAL raid was what, 10 months ago? Not. Once. Has a trump lawyer made a claim on the record in a court of law that so much as one document was planted.

But sure, go on believing documents were.

You guys will believe anything from the mouth of that swine. And many here want to claim his detractors are the ones suffering from some sort of derangement?!?

(06-21-2023 06:44 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  The MAL raid was what, 10 months ago? Not. Once. Has a trump lawyer made a claim on the record in a court of law that so much as one document was planted.

Nor has any Trump lawyer made a claim that the documents were declassified (again, lying in a pleading or making a claim with no backing is serious no-no in Federal court.)

In the Cannon Special Master, that is seemingly the *only* place that has a bearing, since it has zero impact in the 793 and/or obstruction cases. It had a bearing there, but crickets on the claim in any filing.

In fact, Trump attorneys dodged very specific and very direct queries from the Special Master on that.