- Nov 14, 2011
- 122,326
- 70,754
- 2,635
LOLOLLOLOLSo the only way that point could have been made was by bringing a 13-year old into her diatribe? A kid who as far as I can gauge has not said anything. That doesn’t make any sense and you have kids so you know other kids can and will be cruel. Why give them ammo at all? Just admit she should not have done it as that statement has actually backfired.You're taking that to a ridiculous, hypothetical extreme.So Barron goes to school and some asshole kids start calling him a baron and teasing him. What was the point of mentioning his under age son at all. Please explain that to me.Nothing was said about the child. Only his name was mentioned.
The exact words were "he came his son Baron, but he can't make him a Barron."
That says nothing about the boy, only about the father.
As far as why? It points out both the difference between a king and a president and the attitude is someone who would name his kid for nobility.
She apologized for saying his name and that was the end of it. How on Earth did it backfire?
The fact that we are debating it. Many thought it was inappropriate.
You putz, her statement didn't backfire because schmo's like you are trying desperately to make a big deal out of it on the Internet. She testified before Congress that Trump committed impeachable offenses and now the they're drawing up articles of impeachment, in part, from the corroboration of her testimony.
That's some backfire.