You’re still arguing with voices in your head. Please show me where I said anything of the sort. I’m hardly in awe of the Cheeto’s lies (or senile/crazy ramblings)–I don’t even think he’s a competent liar, let alone charismatic about it, and I’ve never said anything that even remotely suggests such a thing. Nor have I ever suggested that I’m normalizing it or that Donald is my “buddy”.
Again, I’m not interested in arguing with voices that only you can hear. Perhaps you could wrap your head with tinfoil. I understand that this does wonders to block out alien signals transmitted into your brain and thus allow you to argue with me about words that I personally wrote, rather than things you imagine you’re reading. And repeatedly explaining to you that I’m not the person with whom you are trying to argue is getting dull.
OK I got that aluminum foil hats etc funny. Ouch. Have you no mercy?
This is you man. Arguing that donald didn’t run on the truth ticket. After setting out this description, and comparison of the two types of lying, well how would you describe your position?
So hillary claimed a special truthfulness that needed to be held to a higher standard somehow than anyone else? (Because she asked for that and nobody else did I guess.) You felt very free about putting some oddly structured inflammatory phrases in her mouth.
What is so egregious about her lies that it motivates you to do this?
Hilary promised to do no harm to Medicare and Social Security. Trump said exactly the same thing! So, there you are, liberal smartypants! Now, both programs are in grave doubt, so they both lied! Totally equivalent!
Clinton didn’t make a mistake trusting GWB. Clinton is not a person to take a principled stand. She saw which way the wind was blowing and went with it. When the wind shifted direction so did she.
The evidence that GWB was hoodwinking the country about Hussein was there. The media just ignored it. In addition, as a senator, she presumably is privy to intelligence we mere citizens don’t have.
Whatever you want to say about the Clintons even their most diehard critics will admit they are savvy politicians. It is highly unlikely she was fooled by GWB and had no clue what he was about. She just didn’t care. The public was riled up so she threw them some meat.
Maybe we should just pick our leaders solely on what they did then about the war. As long as it’s consistent i don’t have a problem with that. But the only reason this comes up is to single out her decisions and leave other people and the context out.
Dude, again…voices in your head; not words I wrote. I am going to disengage now as I think he would be better served seeking help rather than trying to argue with the voices you think are mine.
Wondering if the report now circulating that Chaffetz received, the day after he leaked the contents of the Comey briefing to his committee, $10,000,000 from Thrump makes Chaffetz’ resignation far more understandable?
The author of that report claims to know that Chaffetz is being investigated for Campaign finances fraud because of that huge donation from Thrump. He speculates, too, that Thrump simply directed money from Moscow to Chaffetz’ coffers, rather than dirty his own hands.
Oh ferchrissakes. A libertarian friend of mine on Facebook posted an article scolding liberals for falling for dumbshit, Breitbart-equivalent conspiracy theory websites like Palmerreport. I told her she was wrong, that I’d never heard of that website, much less seen any liberal falling for it.
Thanks for proving me wrong and her right!
For real, one of the few pleasures of being a progressive over the last quarter century has been at least that we don’t fall for bullshit fake news as often as our conservative counterparts do. If she’s right, that that’s changing, I’ll be super pissed.
Right there with you. As I’ve recently said elsewhere, though, you have gotten the believe-anything stuff from liberals online for a while. It’s in the comments of lots of articles. It’s just that establishment (MSNBC, etc. and higher-tier politicians) have been much more responsible and don’t repeat the crazy crap (birtherism, etc.) like Fox News does (and as a result, IMO, don’t get as high ratings). They don’t pander to the extremists as much. I hope that remains the same through Trump’s presidency. There are lots of reasons to investigate right now - but don’t start with the conclusions already decided. And don’t start repeating stuff from fringe sources that don’t have a good track record. I’m rather saddened to see some commenters on other forums sending people to Mensch to check out what she says. Especially when they list things she’s gotten right without listing things she’s gotten wrong. That’s not the kind of sources we need.