Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
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.
What people?The evil radical Trump hating **** thought what she had done was bad enough that she apologized.Except she didn't make fun of his name. She didn't say anything at all negative about the kid or his name.Childish bullying making fun of his name is the level Democrats are at.What was the attack? "You named your kid Barron" isn't an attack on the kid.
When did the party that called Chelsea Clinton a dog become such PC snowflakes?
Shove THAT FACT up your ass!
The problem is she isn't sorry for anything. She's sorry people reacted to it so negatively.
The meme was just a joke man.Actually I'm fairly colorblind.She didn't mock his name.Right she just mocked his name. She certainly didn’t say it as a term of endearment. I already Explained that putting a spotlight on a 13-yr old kid is just not appropriate. And she did that.
She didn't mock him.
She didn't make fun of his disability.
This in no way harmed the kid.
Have to agree to disagree. You are seeing this through blue tinted eyes.
I got you some of these though.
View attachment 293506
I am less a Trumpkin as you call me but a lot more of an Anti Leftist. You need to make yourself feel better by calling me a Trump sycophant and that is fine but you're not addressing the root of what I really am.
Notice I didn't imply you already had "magavision", I said "I got you some of these"
Not intended to offend.
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.
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.
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.
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.
She is a Leftist and stated what the Leftists wanted her to state. The impeachment means nothing and you know that since the Senate will never convict. You're still not over the 2016 loss and you still cannot explain QE in your own words.
LOLOLLOLOLLOLOLSo 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.
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.
She is a Leftist and stated what the Leftists wanted her to state. The impeachment means nothing and you know that since the Senate will never convict. You're still not over the 2016 loss and you still cannot explain QE in your own words.
Who doesn't loathe a law-breaking president? Only sycophants still support him.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.
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.
She is a Leftist and stated what the Leftists wanted her to state. The impeachment means nothing and you know that since the Senate will never convict. You're still not over the 2016 loss and you still cannot explain QE in your own words.
You could see in the anger of her testimony she loathed Trump. It was more than just providing a professional constitutional opinion, it was an opportunity to show her hatred of the man, and that's why she used his son. It was very personal with her.
LOLOLLOLOLLOLOLSo 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.
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.
She is a Leftist and stated what the Leftists wanted her to state. The impeachment means nothing and you know that since the Senate will never convict. You're still not over the 2016 loss and you still cannot explain QE in your own words.
Tell the truth... you voted for Trump last month, didn't ya.
Still, her comment about Trump not being able to make Barron a baron didn't backfire. I don't care how deranged you are. And she still got her point across even though she shouldn't have mentioned Barron; Trump is president, not a king, he is not above the law.
Who doesn't loathe a law-breaking president? Only sycophants still support him.LOLOLLOLOL
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.
She is a Leftist and stated what the Leftists wanted her to state. The impeachment means nothing and you know that since the Senate will never convict. You're still not over the 2016 loss and you still cannot explain QE in your own words.
You could see in the anger of her testimony she loathed Trump. It was more than just providing a professional constitutional opinion, it was an opportunity to show her hatred of the man, and that's why she used his son. It was very personal with her.
They've always been THAT hypocritical.Childish bullying making fun of his name is the level Democrats are at.What was the attack? "You named your kid Barron" isn't an attack on the kid.
"Childish bullying making fun of his name is the level Democrats are at."
is this a joke?
are you being serious?
you support a piece of shit who mocks and makes fun of EVERYONE with insulting names.....
and you seriously say;
"Childish bullying making fun of his name is the level Democrats are at."
trump is the POSTER POS for bullying and making fun of people!
YOU are COMPLETELY FKN DERANGED!
Asked and answered.LOLOLLOLOLLOLOL
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.
She is a Leftist and stated what the Leftists wanted her to state. The impeachment means nothing and you know that since the Senate will never convict. You're still not over the 2016 loss and you still cannot explain QE in your own words.
Tell the truth... you voted for Trump last month, didn't ya.
Still, her comment about Trump not being able to make Barron a baron didn't backfire. I don't care how deranged you are. And she still got her point across even though she shouldn't have mentioned Barron; Trump is president, not a king, he is not above the law.
We will see in 2020. At the end it is all just political theater. So what is QE? Please explain in your own words.
Oh? Is that what Obama was to you for 8 years?Who doesn't loathe a law-breaking president? Only sycophants still support him.LOLOLThe 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.
She is a Leftist and stated what the Leftists wanted her to state. The impeachment means nothing and you know that since the Senate will never convict. You're still not over the 2016 loss and you still cannot explain QE in your own words.
You could see in the anger of her testimony she loathed Trump. It was more than just providing a professional constitutional opinion, it was an opportunity to show her hatred of the man, and that's why she used his son. It was very personal with her.
Trump is just a weapon to annoy Leftists like you and it is working perfectly. You're case in point. What is QE? Do explain it please.
Oh? Is that what Obama was to you for 8 years?Who doesn't loathe a law-breaking president? Only sycophants still support him.LOLOL
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.
She is a Leftist and stated what the Leftists wanted her to state. The impeachment means nothing and you know that since the Senate will never convict. You're still not over the 2016 loss and you still cannot explain QE in your own words.
You could see in the anger of her testimony she loathed Trump. It was more than just providing a professional constitutional opinion, it was an opportunity to show her hatred of the man, and that's why she used his son. It was very personal with her.
Trump is just a weapon to annoy Leftists like you and it is working perfectly. You're case in point. What is QE? Do explain it please.
Trump wanted to investigate Hunter Biden because he was a board member of a foreign country while his father was VP and you call Trump corrupt????? Sick hypocrites.They've always been THAT hypocritical.Childish bullying making fun of his name is the level Democrats are at.What was the attack? "You named your kid Barron" isn't an attack on the kid.
"Childish bullying making fun of his name is the level Democrats are at."
is this a joke?
are you being serious?
you support a piece of shit who mocks and makes fun of EVERYONE with insulting names.....
and you seriously say;
"Childish bullying making fun of his name is the level Democrats are at."
trump is the POSTER POS for bullying and making fun of people!
YOU are COMPLETELY FKN DERANGED!
Actually, no, Trump wanted Biden investigated because he wrongly believed Hoe Biden held up a billion dollars in aid to Ukraine to get Shokin fired for investigating Burisma. But that was a lie Trump told Zelensky as Shokin wasn't actively investigating Burisma when he was fired.Trump wanted to investigate Hunter Biden because he was a board member of a foreign country while his father was VP and you call Trump corrupt????? Sick hypocrites.They've always been THAT hypocritical.Childish bullying making fun of his name is the level Democrats are at.What was the attack? "You named your kid Barron" isn't an attack on the kid.
"Childish bullying making fun of his name is the level Democrats are at."
is this a joke?
are you being serious?
you support a piece of shit who mocks and makes fun of EVERYONE with insulting names.....
and you seriously say;
"Childish bullying making fun of his name is the level Democrats are at."
trump is the POSTER POS for bullying and making fun of people!
YOU are COMPLETELY FKN DERANGED!
In what way did she "use" him?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.
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.
She is a Leftist and stated what the Leftists wanted her to state. The impeachment means nothing and you know that since the Senate will never convict. You're still not over the 2016 loss and you still cannot explain QE in your own words.
You could see in the anger of her testimony she loathed Trump. It was more than just providing a professional constitutional opinion, it was an opportunity to show her hatred of the man, and that's why she used his son. It was very personal with her.
Rush Limbaugh on impeachment: We are watching pure, raw hatredLeading off with people who have a history of calling for impeachment since Trump got elected, have zero first hand knowledge of any events and go public with deranged attacks on a 13 year old child is most telling.
So what’s next? Do we get to hear about the First Lady? Trumps wardrobe? How the White House is decorated for Christmas?
Witness: *sobbing* I hate Trump soooooo much!!!!!!
Schiff: Let the record show the witness has proven Trump has committed high crimes and misdemeanors, therefore must be impeached!
Pamela Karlan Mentions Barron Trump During Impeachment Hearing
Actually, no, Trump wanted Biden investigated because he wrongly believed Hoe Biden held up a billion dollars in aid to Ukraine to get Shokin fired for investigating Burisma. But that was a lie Trump told Zelensky as Shokin wasn't actively investigating Burisma when he was fired.
In what way did she "use" him?LOLOLLOLOL
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.
She is a Leftist and stated what the Leftists wanted her to state. The impeachment means nothing and you know that since the Senate will never convict. You're still not over the 2016 loss and you still cannot explain QE in your own words.
You could see in the anger of her testimony she loathed Trump. It was more than just providing a professional constitutional opinion, it was an opportunity to show her hatred of the man, and that's why she used his son. It was very personal with her.
