Sez you....
(Like that one?)
You see, over time I have learned to identify close-mindedness and not waste too much vocabulary on responses to it.
Not meaning you, but the other guy you had to assist with your very detailed (though sarcastic and mean spirited) reply.
He has a completely closed mind and any post he asks for he will probably not even read, much less give a detailed and honest reply like you did.
Hence the brief wave-off to him.
I am also very adept and have been formally trained to identify propaganda.
I still think Clinton to be a good president and was not in favour of impeachment. Factoid: Trump called him the next best modern president after Reagan.
With no actual charge it is relevant when talking about the standard needed to pursue impeachment.
Clinton left office with the highest approval rating of any modern President so you aren't alone. Trump has already been named an unindicted co-conspirator in a felony like Nixon so there is a precedent for him to be impeached. Whether he will depends on Senate Republicans and how much more criminality they can tolerate. I actually don't want impeachment and would rather the GOP lash itself to the Trump mast and go down with the ship. It is the profound dysfunction of that party that brought us Trump after all.
Mere ridiculous deflection. What happened to 'what about Obama...Clinton ?'
Yes, but that's the entire point it's a two way street. You point out hypocrisy that cuts both ways making it entirely meaningless…My 'charge' is the outlandish hypocrisy of the sickening parade from the right calling for Clinton's resignation and who now support
this meazly piece of scum in the WH.
Your bubble is an odd one. The perjury charge had 10 Republicans vote “not guilty” on the obstruction of justice charge 5 Republicans voted “not guilty”. Every democrat kept the party lines.one must protect against such revisionist history. EVERY repub voted to convict Clinton with
Olympia Snowe not guilty and Arlen Specter verbally voting not proven.
Still sounds like whining to me. As I recall Clinton WAS President when those things happened and he lied and obstructed justice during the investigation. Trump's situations are prior to his election or even his campaign.I am not 'whining' about anything. I am comparing the right (GOP) and how they relentlessly went after Clinton and
their oh so holier than thou family and moral values all thought he should resign if not impeached to now,
when they embrace someone 10 times sleazier in trump who makes B. Clinton look like a choirboy.
Sez you....
(Like that one?)
You see, over time I have learned to identify close-mindedness and not waste too much vocabulary on responses to it.
Not meaning you, but the other guy you had to assist with your very detailed (though sarcastic and mean spirited) reply.
He has a completely closed mind and any post he asks for he will probably not even read, much less give a detailed and honest reply like you did.
Hence the brief wave-off to him.
I am also very adept and have been formally trained to identify propaganda.
Bull****, back this up...if you can. You can't because it is you with the closed mind.
But take trump's and the right's obvious hypocrisy as compared to Clinton just fine.
The facts I need are right before your very eyes and you just refuse to see them.
Oh PV, you should have stopped at "sez you" like you originally did. It was mildly witty and if not for your original posts could have been really funny. But you blew it when you babbled on and on about "not wasting your time". It seemed like it would have been easier to just post an example. But PV, here's the thing, there is no excuse you can post to not back up your point at a debate forum.
Vern, my friend, the "debate" process left this thread a long time ago.
...but your advice is sage and I agree.
but with that particular member, there is no debating, just bitching and moaning.
You have seen the type.
Blood pressure is precious to me and i choose to raise it only when warranted.
Answering that person's demands is not such an occasion.
Seems to me that your whining about Clinton's term is the definition of still being in a bubble, my friend.
I think you are looking in a mirror. The left are full of political sleeze, including the Clintons and Obama's deep state.
They are free to insanely babble as well.
If you are interested in actual fascistic behavior....
Federal abuses on Obama's watch represent a growing blight on his legacy
"In all of the discussions about the political weaponization of the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the FBI, alleged corruption at the highest echelons of those agencies and serial abuse of the secret FISA process surrounding the 2016 election, one name has been conspicuously absent: President Barack Obama.
High-ranking officials and other major players in those agencies — which Obama oversaw — are increasingly embroiled in the growing scandal: James Comey, Loretta Lynch, Andrew McCabe, Andrew Weissmann, Sally Yates, Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, Bruce Ohr.
Given the tight control Obama exercised over every part of his administration and agenda, the idea that any of these appointees and loyalists freelanced their activities without at least his tacit approval or that of his White House strains credulity."
Yes, but that's the entire point it's a two way street. You point out hypocrisy that cuts both ways making it entirely meaningless…
And just to be clear, the concern most republicans had at the time with Clinton is not he was a liar. They believed him to be a rapist based on his long history with charges of such. This would be like getting Trump on that supposed campaign violation [it will not fly] and forgetting to mention the actual reasoning as to why he was under so much scrutiny. Context matters!
And please stop conflating lies with perjury they are two very different things.
Your bubble is an odd one. The perjury charge had 10 Republicans vote “not guilty” on the obstruction of justice charge 5 Republicans voted “not guilty”. Every democrat kept the party lines.
This is getting as bad as trying to make the republicans the party with the history of segregation and racism.
Project. Project. Project.
Still sounds like whining to me. As I recall Clinton WAS President when those things happened and he lied and obstructed justice during the investigation. Trump's situations are prior to his election or even his campaign.
Oh, and Trump's liaisons were consensual, Clinton's not so much.
REread the post YOU yourself quoted.
I choose not to, and I have learned, and told you this before, I also choose to not discuss things with anyone close-minded.
Seeing how you can not grasp this and keep demanding, I have a quote right back at you.
" A fanatic is someone who will never change their mind and can not change the subject".
This is why I prefer to leave you to your own created reality.
Wow your training would be a real benefit to Dems. Any chance you would help out?Sez you....
(Like that one?)
You see, over time I have learned to identify close-mindedness and not waste too much vocabulary on responses to it.
Not meaning you, but the other guy you had to assist with your very detailed (though sarcastic and mean spirited) reply.
He has a completely closed mind and any post he asks for he will probably not even read, much less give a detailed and honest reply like you did.
Hence the brief wave-off to him.
I am also very adept and have been formally trained to identify propaganda.
Again PV, this is a debate forum. there is no excuse for you to not back up your point at a debate forum. And you put effort into making excuses and none into backing up your point. And magically it’s the other poster’s “fault”. The ignorance and dishonesty of the posters I deal with has never been a factor in me proving my point. And since I’m usually proving my point to conservatives I deal with a lot of ignorance and dishonesty. Some how I'm able to persevere.
You have absolutely nothing at all. Not a shred of any argument, just this bull****.
.
Wow your training would be a real benefit to Dems. Any chance you would help out?
So, you're saying that Ann Coulter represents the entire right? I pay no attention to the far right and I could care less about anything Coulter says.
Again PV, this is a debate forum. there is no excuse for you to not back up your point at a debate forum. And you put effort into making excuses and none into backing up your point. And magically it’s the other poster’s “fault”. The ignorance and dishonesty of the posters I deal with has never been a factor in me proving my point. And since I’m usually proving my point to conservatives I deal with a lot of ignorance and dishonesty. Some how I'm able to persevere.
Vern,
Let me make it much simpler for you since you have a problem grasping PERSONAL CHOICE.
I CHOSE to not talk anymore with Pedestrian on this thread, because he proved to me he had a closed mind.
Now I CHOOSE to not talk with you anymore on this thread, because you can not grasp the concept of someone making a personal choice and sticking with it.
I ..me...myself...and no one else, CHOOSE who I talk with and who I do not talk with, and no one else.
As this concept seems foreign to you and you have trouble wrapping your head around it, then I therefore have CHOSEN to not talk with you either on this thread.
...and there is nothing you can do about it.
Deal with my own personal decisions as best you can, but they are mine and your posts tell me you are having trouble understanding this.
That issue is yours to deal with, but you will find as you mature in life not everyone does what you want them to.
Nor is there an obligation on this forum for me to engage in discourse with someone I choose not to.
Refer to my previous posts for my reasons to not bicker back and forth with those who have proven to me to have a closed mind. I have already told you twice.
You now have the floor, but I CHOOSE to not talk with either one of you on this thread.
Handle it as best you can.
Claim the high ground, say I am running away, claim your point is superior to mine, whatever you want. It will not affect me in any way, on-line or off.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?