Desperately seeking closure with Liz Cheney

But if we said Trump always put his left shoe on first, people like you would turn that into some kind of marker or proof of evil. Of course, you have a lot of company- many of those feeding at the MSM trough swallow the same garbage.

Every powerful person gets accused of a variety of BS, in many cases because the accusers plan to get paid to go away.
Did Trump get convicted of assault and rape? Ever been convicted of any crime?

The number of reasons to charge and convict Hillary are virtually a book. The Biden family has several... and yet has escaped a lot more by privilege. The potential for charges of actions where Joe and Hunter have shared the ill-gotten gains would seem likely to produce several pages of charges, and of things highly relevant to the abuse of office. But, you didn't see a thing. Your detailed and diligent research never went there, because it is selective, not

You stand convicted of Trump hate, in my opinion. Your motives are strictly personal- and subjective, not objective. No cred.

 

Such a classy person who is hated for not bowing at the alter of Trump. How sad is that?

Partisans suck, regardless of their flavor.

 

We don't need to look at how he puts on his shoes to know that Trump is a criminal. We have tons of criminal activity to choose from. Much of it done in public.

I know you WISH we were criticizing Trump for putting on his shoes wrong. But that's a privilege reserved for Presidents like Biden. Whose only "crime" the right has been able to demonstrate is that he stumbled going up the steps to board AF1. In the case of Trump, we have many things that are much MUCH worse than that... Including many that would have already landed anybody who is not a former President* in prison for life....

 

Why don't you just list and document Trumps criminal convictions? If you are half the "researcher" you think you are, and half as honest as you think you are, you should have a list and be able to back it up.
You have that, don't you? Or- are his offenses all things that you just personally choose to label "crimes".

The crime is- offending your emotions, apparently.

 

I said CRIMES he has committed. You might want to start polishing up on your reading skills before this starts going ugly for Trump. Otherwise you might completely miss out on what's going on.

 

If he has committed crimes, he would be convicted. If he is accused of crimes he, would be charged or indicted- but innocent until proven guilty.

"Committed" isn't proven- and I think it's your opinion, not fact. I realize you may think your opinion should be the equivalent of conviction, but you know it's no such thing.

Now if you want to claim that in your opinion you think he has committed crimes, qualify it as such. Otherwise- that's defamation of character and slander.
You being such an upright guy, we know you wouldn't stoop that low, so you must have proof of conviction.... But apparently you do not want to share it. We should- take you word?

And you are not on the high ground here. Claiming it, but in my opinion- doing so from the hole you keep digging.

Nothing gets fixed by rants, accusations, complaints or hate- but perceptions of both those who do it and some of those who hear it get distorted. Just what America needs- more confusion, more division.

You're a smart guy. You should know that, and I have to wonder why you don't come with solutions instead. Do you have any solutions?
Or do you see your purpose in life as existing to point out and diss all the people that offend you?

Tell me you have solutions. Solutions that work- for all the country, not just the haters.

 

Where I think we can all agree, right/left/center/top/middle/bottom is that the purpose of OUR government is for us to mutually secure OUR rights, and, We are People with a government, not the other way around, as Ronald Reagan quipped.

Out-of-touch politicians ask, ‘Is it me?’ then blame voters for their loss.

"Though it had been predicted for months, Rep. Liz Cheney’s loss to Harriet Hageman dominated politics this week, in Wyoming and beyond."

"White House Chief of Staff Ron Klain warned that the outcome proved “the American people are going to have to fight for their democracy.” CNN anchor Alisyn Camerota doubled-down, asking of Wyoming voters, “What does that mean for our democracy?”'

"It seems the problem with our democracy is that citizens keep voting for people the Beltway doesn’t like. Both Democratic pols and Never Trump Republicans condemned the Cowboy State rabble."

They think they are a government with a people.



"It reminds me of Principal Skinner from “The Simpsons,” asking “Am I out of touch?” before quickly deciding, “No, it’s the children who are wrong.”'

 

You don't investigate without predication and republicans have brought no evidence to justify any investigation They tried over 60 times in court and lost every case

Your premise is therefore false

 

For example...

 

That's the most naïve statement I have read in a long time. You can commit a crime and not be convicted for years. In fact, you can be PROVEN guilty of a crime, and still not be convicted yet.

The following link might help. Though it's unclear given that you are struggling with even more basic concepts than the ones I try to clarify here.
http://www.politicalforum.com/index...n-we-say-trump-has-been-proven-guilty.603007/

 

Of course that is true- BUT you seem to think that "innocent until proven guilty" doesn't apply here. If Trump were not a public figure- you would be successfully sued for slander, and probably lose everything you have. Now if you want to say "I think Trump has committed crimes", then you speak for your opinion and you're welcome to it. But you don't do that. We don't need a trial or proof, because Golem has spoken?
One can be intelligent but lack wisdom, be devoid of character, of understanding, of many things- and be unable to contribute anything of value because they lack those things. Such people solve no problems, contribute little or nothing of value. When that's true- intelligence has no value either.

I've never seen you apply unbiased judgment in anything. Not once. You should spend time researching the wisdom of failing to question your self, revisit your views from time to time, and the arrogance of automatically assuming everyone who disagrees must be stupid or they would agree with you.

I keep thinking that if you could get a little sunshine in the right place. you would begin to see things you can't right now. I have little hope that will happen soon.

 

Of course it does. I have provided plenty of proof that he's guilty.

 

EXCEPT any proof that any court has ever thought evidence that met the requirements.

You're like the guy who claims he got a huge gold mine and sacks of the stuff and doesn't know that iron pyrite is not really gold.
Fools gold doesn't sell, and neither does fools evidence.

IF you had genuine evidence you would be selling it to the DOJ, not the forum....

Being offensive to you is not a crime.
I ask why?
Are you jealous of the man's capabilities? His self-confidence? Hate him because the hate rolls off his back and you can't make him bleed?

Everyone has faults and weaknesses, Trump included. Where they are, what the are, how small or major they are makes the difference. Commonly, people who
have major presence and influence will always be hated by those who covet those things but do not have them. That's the difference between petty insecure people and strong, secure ones.

You can't claim that the 2000 election was a fake because it hasn't been proved, but Trump's a crook because you say so.
Well- I guess you CAN claim it, provided your standards are like silly putty.

Still waiting on the proof that is more than your opinion.

 

You don't know what a fascist is. Let me give you a clue. A fascist isn't someone who disagrees with your ideology.

 

This poster was kind enough to provide us with a definition.
http://www.politicalforum.com/index...nd-up-and-fight.603041/page-7#post-1073677946

BTW, every time you feel the urge to respond to one of my posts with "you don't know...xxx", read my sig first! It could spare you the embarrassment....

 

No?? The Trump campaign and the two Trump impeachments were commenced w/o any factual evidence.

 

Dude, the way someone wishes to distribute goods and services has nothing to do with whether one is fascist or not. I mean, the father of fascism, Mussolini, was a lefty economically (but highly authoritarian) and Mussolini hated communism.

 

What the hell are you talking about?

 

they had tons of evidence. But, when the 'jury' is in Trump's camp insofar as they won't stand up to Trump, it wouldn't matter much.

 

Mussolini was a lefty who hated communism so how can all fascists be righties?

 

I said factual evidence. There were tons of manufactured and falsified evidence against Trump but no factual evidence.

 

Huh???? Are you feeling ok?

 

"factual evidence" is redundant. And to your point, there is no other kind. "falsified evidence" is an oxymoron.

ANd, of course, you are incorrect, the evidence provided was evidence, the only kind of evidence that is evidence.

 

Mussolini was a lefty who hated communism just like George Orwell was a socialist who hated communism. Some are dead wrong when they equate haters of communism to exclusively righties.

 

If you accept the FBI and Mueller manufactured evidence against the Trump campaign then you must also accept the Trump manufactured evidence about the 2020.

Some investigations are too important to be left to factual evidence. Like are foreign actors influencing our elections (2016 and 2020)? Like are our elections free and fair (like the 2020)?