(12-06-2020 09:49 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(12-06-2020 12:21 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(12-05-2020 06:44 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(12-05-2020 05:46 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(12-05-2020 05:30 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  So who did any of that?

Seriously?

We didn't argue about whether or not Trump did any of those?

More lies and innuendo presented as proven facts

1. Legally paying off porn stars? The problem in that is....? Paying them? or doing it legally? Odd to see the adherents of the party of Clinton objecting to porn stars. At least they were not in the White House.
2.Intentionally enriching himself through taxpayer funds? Not a shred of proof, just innuendo and finger-pointing. Again, presented as fact. Just because you believe it, just because you by it, does not make it so.
3. Committing obstruction of justice? Mueller did not say so. Once again, accusations from enemies does not constitute proof. Talk about baseless claims...
4. Being racist? We thrashed this out, but if you want to believe, I guess you can. At least he never said blacks had to vote for him or they weren't black.
5. being sexist? Probably no more so than a lot of democrats in private. Never heard his female staffers and appointees complain of him like they did Biden and Clinton.

Just stick to the facts. Not what you believe, but what you can prove.

The funny thing is that lad kind of blindly leaves off the things he would rather go silent.

All the while being rather (actually not rather, but heavily) sanctimonious about not having to argue about the supposed failings of another.

Kind of beautiful in the purity of thought and action in evidence there.

Hey man, you’re the one that started this by criticizing Biden and his dog-playing - so maybe slow the roll on the sanctimonious firebomb.

If you are so peeved by Biden pulling a dog’s tail, boy do I have some stories for you about Trump!

I’m not sure what I’m silent on - you have this bad habit of wanting people to write novels in their responses and guess exactly what you want them to talk about. And if the poster fails to read your mind, you attack them as if they are being intentionally evasive.

It’s a cheap tactic.

'peeved'? Far from it lad. Again, cute display of historonics.

Laughing at a sundowner who you all think is presidential? Absolutely.

Laughing at evidence of a sundowner (again, who the fk chases puppies getting out of the shower and trying to pull its tail -- best answer is a 4 year old)... again absolutely.

Watching you go on a rampage about the so-called Trump issues? cute.

Watching you studiously avoid the same level of issues on Biden in your litany? Kind of classic.