Basically, none of it really mattered -- it was all just rhetoric to obtain power.
Pretty good synopsis of conservatism.
- Thread starter anon_xl72qcu5isp39
- Start date
Basically, none of it really mattered -- it was all just rhetoric to obtain power.
Does anyone else notice the lib side has zero original thought?
Every one of the current lib tweets and insults is recycled from conservative side of the same from a year ago.
Every one of the current lib tweets and insults is recycled from conservative side of the same from a year ago.
Which were recycled from the lib tweets and insults when their guy wasn’t in the White House.
Ad nauseum.
This IS modern politics.
Outside of the golf outtings, which of these has Trump ACTUALLY done. EOs are done by every president so who cares. Trump hasn't mishandled classified data. If he had, it would be on every news site. Government corruption? I'm 18 months in and still waiting on any actual evidence or indictments indicating such activity. Pleading the 5th? We are projecting a behavior that we suspect will happen, but hasn't actually happened yet.
But what's interesting is how the inverse is oh so true for Libs:
You didn't care about Obama golfing, but now its a big deal that Trump does so. You didn't care about the handling of classified data (as shown by your acceptance of the Clinton email fiasco), yet you are all hopped up on Trump using his own cell phone for Twitter (not exactly classified data). Government corruption? You didn't care when the IRS targeted conservative groups. You didn't care about any of it as it was your party supporting your party. And pleading the 5th? It was all fine for Lois Lerner, Huma Abadin, and a whole slew of cabinet officials under the prior administration. Yet suddenly you care.
What's sad, is if the liberal media had cared at all about any of these things under the prior regime, you'd have the credence necessary for these attacks and criticisms of the current regime to be effective with the general public. But the fact, that the libs set the precedent for accepting this behavior has given Trump (and his followers) the ability to completely disregard your sudden hypocritical outrage.
The president, AKA the commander in chief, making a decision to share specific data with an entity is entirely in his rights to do. This is significantly different than failing to following protocols in securing classified data to the point of not having any earthly idea what has or hasn't been expsosed.
But thanks for playing. Any other faux outrages you want to highlight?
So if they deliberately does it off the cuff in a meeting with Russians, okay...but if it is negligently done there’s gonna be a problem?
Am I reading you right?
Basically. The president deliberately sharing specific data during a discussion with relevant parties is allowed. But negligently failing to secure data in a manner that exposes it to anyone (or everyone as the case may be) is not.
“The information the president relayed had been provided by a U.S. partner through an intelligence-sharing arrangement considered so sensitive that details have been withheld from allies and tightly restricted even within the U.S. government, officials said.
The partner had not given the United States permission to share the material with Russia, and officials said Trump’s decision to do so endangers cooperation from an ally that has access to the inner workings of the Islamic State. After Trump’s meeting, senior White House officials took steps to contain the damage, placing calls to the CIA and the National Security Agency.
“This is code-word information,” said a U.S. official familiar with the matter, using terminology that refers to one of the highest classification levels used by American spy agencies. Trump “revealed more information to the Russian ambassador than we have shared with our own allies.”
None of it really mattered to the Libs when Mr. Obama did it
But, it matters to them now, apparently.
Kinda like having a sexually moral president.
that's my favorite one lately. it was just sex for slick, but now it's "poor Melania" (except for when they are making fun of her accent or refusing to design clothes for her) - having to deal with a philandering husband. think of their son she was pregnant with (unless they are making fun of him and predicting him to be a school shooter).
same people who brought us "just a blow job" (which i agreed with) are now losing their shit over a rich tv guy banging a porn star. the earnestness with which they discuss this as a moral issue is utterly fascinating.
Well, she plainly despises him. I've never seen a husband whose wife treated him with such contempt. I mean hates him. Dude with tiny hands can't keep wifey happy....
Disagree completely, @syskatine @CSCOTTOSUPOKES @davidallen
That is a good synopsis of a lot of the REPUBLICAN PARTY, not conservatism.
True conservatives have consistently been against executive overreach, spending and corruption. That's why the loyal conservatives were so staunchly against Trump in the first place because they felt he would many of what was listed.
I.e. Ben Shapiro, Glenn Beck, Erick Erickson, Mark Levin, etc.
You may not like the above examples, but they’ve been consisten andI think it's very unfair to lump 'conservatives' in with the Republican shills that flipped to quickly to trump (Ted Cruz).
The hypocrisy is ridiculous, but let's be fair in the characterization of conservatives.
That is a good synopsis of a lot of the REPUBLICAN PARTY, not conservatism.
True conservatives have consistently been against executive overreach, spending and corruption. That's why the loyal conservatives were so staunchly against Trump in the first place because they felt he would many of what was listed.
I.e. Ben Shapiro, Glenn Beck, Erick Erickson, Mark Levin, etc.
You may not like the above examples, but they’ve been consisten andI think it's very unfair to lump 'conservatives' in with the Republican shills that flipped to quickly to trump (Ted Cruz).
The hypocrisy is ridiculous, but let's be fair in the characterization of conservatives.
so? I mean there’s literally nothing but your own hatred of the guy to support literally any of that, but even if you are right.... so?
Why do you pretend to care about her happiness?
Hey - help me out... who was the classless ass on this board awhile back calling her a whore? Was that you or am I misremembering?
I like you David. You are a good guy. I know you are wanting to spar a little and I’m happy to but move on to something more realistic than me documenting “specifically” who said that 25 years ago. I get your point and you get mine.
Seems to me it would be easy to say "George Stephapoopalots" or some such. Genuine question as the examples I've heard previously didn't hold water... Was that Gillibrand that Trump went after?
Watching Bill ogle that Melania ass while Hillary stink eyed him was hands down the best inauguration footage of all time.
Similar threads
