Have you been 'Trumped'?

[HikerGuy83]

Rumpy got TDS

He's a dick. Seriously.

 

[TNHarley]

The quality of The Other Guy provides ZERO defense for the crimes and "sins" of your Orange Baboon-God... and now an example will be made of him at law.

Lock that statist up, for all i care.

 

[TNHarley]

Donald Trump Once Said He and Ivanka Have “Sex” in Common - true story. we have the video​

Donald Trump's unsettling record of comments about his daughter Ivanka​

'If Ivanka weren't my daughter, perhaps I'd be dating her'​

Yep. His comments are a bit.. unnerving. Difference is, we have no evidence or claims he showered with her and helped cause her sex addiction.

 

[ThisIsMe]

If there was a law against politicians lying to you, Trump would have been locked up a long time ago. On over 4,000 counts.

Lol, nice pivot.

…along with every other politician.

It’s nice, though, how I make a general comment, not pointed at any party, and you come to the defense of politicians being able to lie to the people, but it’s a crime to lie to them.

Why would you defend that?

 

[Dragonlady]

Okay, Trump fans, if you read the GA indictment, it chronicles all of the false statements regarding election fraud, just about every claim of election fraud is listed in that indictment. The lies are 'acts in furtherance of a conspiracy to overthrow Biden's legitimate election'.

Now, the first amendment doesn't protect speech done in the furtherance of a criminal conspiracy, so, it seems to me, the only defense for Trump, et al, will be to prove that all of the false statements in the indictment alleged to be false, his defense will be to prove that they are actually true.

If he can prove his false statements as fact, there is no crime. All of this will come out in trial, and we shall find out if he was lying. I know that he was lying, because no proof of any kind has been produced. I've seen it all. Irregularities, isolated instances, sure, they exist in all elections, but a vast conspiracy to steal the election? No way. It's not even logistically possible, if you would take the time to scrutinize exactly what you are alleging.

See. what I think you Trump fans don't realize is that Trump, what he did was, first he planted the idea into the minds of his base by declaring, months before the first ballot was cast 'the only way Democrats can win is if they rig the election', and when the election came, given that all elections have irregularities, he exploited those irregularities, the kind of which occur in every election, the kind of which are not made a big stink about in past elections, but, alas, Trump could 'trump them up' so to speak, make them seem like the 'fraud' he was talking about when he first told the big lie.

And then the scheme (the conspiracy listed in the GA indictment) unfolded to bolster the lie.

Don't you see what Trump has done? You've been a victim of his treachery, all along, and you don't even know it.

Everything about Trump, his defrauding thousands out of millions for a fake university, his fake charity he was fined $2 million for 'illegal activities', I mean, his paying hush money to a porn star, I could go on and on about his crimes, frauds, all the folks in his entourage indicted, convicted, the man is rife with criminality, it oozes from every pore of his being, he poisons everyone he comes into contact with, and they wind up being indicted, convicted and now 6 more of his lawyer's are being indicted, all of the folks who tried to help in in GA, are being indicted, and trying to steal an election, while accusing dems of doing it, is consistent with who Trump is.

And who is Trump?

It's really simple.

He's the biggest criminal, con man America has ever experienced, and you've been Trumped.

Vote for someone else, Chris Christy, or someone like that, you know, someone who IS NOT A CRIMINAL. I mean, after the crimes of NIxon, Agnew, Reagan, you'd think you guys would have learned your lesson by now, but, I guess not . Oh, I know you think his popularity is rising, yes, with his hard core base. But, when the trials begin, your boy is going to be sitting in court, day after day, revelations, details of his crimes will come to light, the scheme will be front and center, that Biden actually won and that Trump is, indeed, who the prosecution claims him to be, the biggest con man criminal this country has ever seen in the White House and we shall see if his numbers hold during the general elections.

The ONLY legal way to overturn the election is through the courts. Take your evidence of fraud to court. Anything else is an illegal insurrection.

Trump tried that and LOST. 67 times in front of 90 different judges. All of the lawyers who filed these cases are now being disbarred for lying to the courts, and filing false claims to the courts, with no evidence.

Even if there was election fraud on the level Trump claimed, what he did with the fake electors, and the scheme to overturn the election, was illegal and he'd be facing charges.

 

[Dragonlady]

Yep. His comments are a bit.. unnerving. Difference is, we have no evidence or claims he showered with her and helped cause her sex addiction.

You have absolutley no evidence of any such behaviour by Joe Biden either. But we have creepy pictures of Donald and Ivanka. We have Donald on tape calling her a "nice piece of ass" on Howard Stern, and suggesting he'd be dating her.

I find that last one laughable. Is Ivanka a sex trade worker and gold digger? Those are the only women Trump dated.

 

[TNHarley]

You have absolutley no evidence of any such behaviour by Joe Biden either. But we have creepy pictures of Donald and Ivanka. We have Donald on tape calling her a "nice piece of ass" on Howard Stern, and suggesting he'd be dating her.

I find that last one laughable. Is Ivanka a sex trade worker and gold digger? Those are the only women Trump dated.

Yeah, his daughter just lies to herself in a personal journal she thinks no one else will see.
CULT.

 

[kyzr]

I'll file that in the unicorn fantasy file. I would engage, but I can't take you seriously, given the caliber of your comment. There is no point.
Me mum and pop are British, but I was actually born in Texas, sorry.
Well, I will acknowledge that some 25% or so of Americans seriously lack wisdom. Anyone who votes for Trump has no concept of what wisdom is.
But, you're not really a serious debater, given the cartoonish tired trope characterizations in your 'list'.

1. Thanks for the Brit mum and pop note, explains why you have some "Brit", if no TX in your responses.

2. 75% of Americans say the US is on the "wrong track" under Biden.

3. My claims are all true. I can back them up with credible links. That you can't disprove ANY of them speaks volumes to your childish non-response. Here they are again:

If you look at democrat policies, most Americans are opposed to them:

From their MSM propaganda networks and hi-tech oligarchs
to the FBI orchestrating cover ups and fake Russian disinformation claims
to their university leftist programming centers
to their CRT propaganda teachings in schools
to their "deep state" hold on the government
to their creeping attacks on family values & religious beliefs
to their lawless prosecutors
to their drug culture
to their "great replacement" operation
to their grip on school boards, calling parents “domestic terrorists”
to their tranny bullshit getting little kids butchered
to their warped views of the US military
to their vicious attacks on parental rights
to their voter fraud networks
to their hatred of religions, calling Catholics “domestic terrorists”
to their war on Christmas
to their hatred of the Founding Fathers
to their fake history and racism
to their drag shows in grade schools
to their late term abortions
To the FBI spying on Catholics
to their hatred of Patriotism, the American flag, and THE 4TH OF JULY
to the Marxists pushing for the US military to use EV vehicles
to their deviant policies, where Catholics can't adopt, but these guys can

 

[Rumpole]

1. Thanks for the Brit mum and pop note, explains why you have some "Brit", if no TX in your responses.

2. 75% of Americans say the US is on the "wrong track" under Biden.

3. My claims are all true. I can back them up with credible links. That you can't disprove ANY of them speaks volumes to your childish non-response. Here they are again:

If you look at democrat policies, most Americans are opposed to them:

From their MSM propaganda networks and hi-tech oligarchs
to the FBI orchestrating cover ups and fake Russian disinformation claims
to their university leftist programming centers
to their CRT propaganda teachings in schools
to their "deep state" hold on the government
to their creeping attacks on family values & religious beliefs
to their lawless prosecutors
to their drug culture
to their "great replacement" operation
to their grip on school boards, calling parents “domestic terrorists”
to their tranny bullshit getting little kids butchered
to their warped views of the US military
to their vicious attacks on parental rights
to their voter fraud networks
to their hatred of religions, calling Catholics “domestic terrorists”
to their war on Christmas
to their hatred of the Founding Fathers
to their fake history and racism
to their drag shows in grade schools
to their late term abortions
To the FBI spying on Catholics
to their hatred of Patriotism, the American flag, and THE 4TH OF JULY
to the Marxists pushing for the US military to use EV vehicles
to their deviant policies, where Catholics can't adopt, but these guys can
View attachment 816273

You are confused. One's choice of not responding to spam posts is not a concession,.


Take one or two points, and we shall debate them, one, maybe two, at a time.


I do not engage with spam posts (long shit lists, and rest assured, my shit list on Trump is far worse than anything you have posted on dems).

Caveat, please abstain from memes, jpegs, loaded language (politically charged rhetoric), and regarding your alleged statements of fact, link your claims with anything you believe substantiates your claim. Your links should be wep pages or PDF files, if you post a video, give the timestamp of the relevant part is if it is longer than a couple of minutes.

If you can't do this, it is discourteous and I cannot engage, sorry.

 

[kyzr]

You are confused. One's choice of not responding to spam posts is not a concession,.
Take one or two points, and we shall debate them, one, maybe two, at a time.
I do not engage with spam posts (long shit lists, and rest assured, my shit list on Trump is far worse than anything you have posted on dems).

1. Catholic couple not allowed to adopt, but deviants are? Its about morals and values.

It Sounds Like This Couple Had Their Foster Care Application Illegally Rejected

townhall.com

2. Lawless prosecutors and DAs not following the Law.

3. CA and NY are failed states due to democrat policies, like drugs, sanctuary cities, homelessness, businesses closing, and people fleeing to red states.

OK, Lets start with these 3.

 

[Rumpole]

Your worst nightmare.

Suck on it.

Gorsuch said that 'that a good judge is not concerned with the outcome of his rulings'.

That's interesting because, the last time I checked, 'justice' was an outcome, and if a justice, is not concerned with Justice, which IS an outcome, which is it's own namesake, what the hell is he doing as a justice of the Supreme Court?

Kavanaugh is unfit for the court, and the incontrovertible evidence of that fact was his petty rant he made before the Senate confirmation hearings, not to mention he is a pervert, as is Justice Thomas, which makes three pervs owing to Republicans, two on the Court, and one former president.

Congratulations for destroying America.

 

[Godboy]

Okay, Trump fans, if you read the GA indictment, it chronicles all of the false statements regarding election fraud, just about every claim of election fraud is listed in that indictment. The lies are 'acts in furtherance of a conspiracy to overthrow Biden's legitimate election'.

Now, the first amendment doesn't protect speech done in the furtherance of a criminal conspiracy, so, it seems to me, the only defense for Trump, et al, will be to prove that all of the false statements in the indictment alleged to be false, his defense will be to prove that they are actually true.

If he can prove his false statements as fact, there is no crime. All of this will come out in trial, and we shall find out if he was lying. I know that he was lying, because no proof of any kind has been produced. I've seen it all. Irregularities, isolated instances, sure, they exist in all elections, but a vast conspiracy to steal the election? No way. It's not even logistically possible, if you would take the time to scrutinize exactly what you are alleging.

See. what I think you Trump fans don't realize is that Trump, what he did was, first he planted the idea into the minds of his base by declaring, months before the first ballot was cast 'the only way Democrats can win is if they rig the election', and when the election came, given that all elections have irregularities, he exploited those irregularities, the kind of which occur in every election, the kind of which are not made a big stink about in past elections, but, alas, Trump could 'trump them up' so to speak, make them seem like the 'fraud' he was talking about when he first told the big lie.

And then the scheme (the conspiracy listed in the GA indictment) unfolded to bolster the lie.

Don't you see what Trump has done? You've been a victim of his treachery, all along, and you don't even know it.

Everything about Trump, his defrauding thousands out of millions for a fake university, his fake charity he was fined $2 million for 'illegal activities', I mean, his paying hush money to a porn star, I could go on and on about his crimes, frauds, all the folks in his entourage indicted, convicted, the man is rife with criminality, it oozes from every pore of his being, he poisons everyone he comes into contact with, and they wind up being indicted, convicted and now 6 more of his lawyer's are being indicted, all of the folks who tried to help in in GA, are being indicted, and trying to steal an election, while accusing dems of doing it, is consistent with who Trump is.

And who is Trump?

It's really simple.

He's the biggest criminal, con man America has ever experienced, and you've been Trumped.

Vote for someone else, Chris Christy, or someone like that, you know, someone who IS NOT A CRIMINAL. I mean, after the crimes of NIxon, Agnew, Reagan, you'd think you guys would have learned your lesson by now, but, I guess not . Oh, I know you think his popularity is rising, yes, with his hard core base. But, when the trials begin, your boy is going to be sitting in court, day after day, revelations, details of his crimes will come to light, the scheme will be front and center, that Biden actually won and that Trump is, indeed, who the prosecution claims him to be, the biggest con man criminal this country has ever seen in the White House and we shall see if his numbers hold during the general elections.

As far as i know, the only crime was committed by two guys no one has ever heard of when they falsified a seal and turned it in. Unless you have evidence of Trump telling them to do that, why would you want to punish Trump for it? All the other RICO charges are for bullshit like getting a phone number for Trump, or sending an email. Those charges are absurd. Those arent crimes.

If youre going to get Trump, dont you at least want to get him for something that HE did?

 

[Father O'Blivion]

I will believe he is convicted. He faces the consquences. I won't know (or care) one way or the other is innocent because there is nothing I can do about it. Life will go on.

Trump has done himself no favors.

Will you accept his acquittal if it happens ?

Yes.

 

[Rumpole]

1. Catholic couple not allowed to adopt, but deviants are? Its about morals and values.

It Sounds Like This Couple Had Their Foster Care Application Illegally Rejected

townhall.com

You are assuming that the denial of the Catholic couple's foster care application is solely based on their religious beliefs and that "deviants" are being allowed to adopt instead. However, it's important to examine the situation more objectively.

First, it's essential to recognize that adoption agencies, including those run by the government, have a responsibility to consider the best interests of the children they place in foster care. This includes ensuring that prospective parents can provide a safe and supportive environment for the child's physical and emotional well-being.

While the article highlights the couple's Catholic faith as the reason for their application being denied, it fails to provide a comprehensive view of the situation. The agency's decision may have been influenced by the couple's expressed lack of support for LGBTQ+ individuals, as stated in their license study. Adoption agencies prioritize finding homes where children will be accepted and supported for who they are, regardless of their sexual orientation or gender identity.

It is important to note that being LGBTQ+ is not equivalent to being a "deviant." LGBTQ+ individuals and couples have successfully adopted and provided loving homes for countless children. Their ability to adopt is not based on deviance, but rather on their capacity to provide a nurturing environment.

Furthermore, it is crucial to understand that religious freedom does not grant individuals the right to discriminate against others or to impose their beliefs on those who do not share them. Adoption agencies must strike a balance between respecting religious freedom and ensuring the rights and well-being of the children they serve.

In conclusion, the denial of the Catholic couple's foster care application may not solely be based on their religious beliefs. Adoption agencies have a responsibility to prioritize the best interests of the children and ensure they are placed in supportive and accepting homes. It is not accurate or fair to label LGBTQ+ individuals as "deviants," and their ability to adopt should not be questioned based on their sexual orientation or gender identity.

2. Lawless prosecutors and DAs not following the Law.

You'll need to substantiate that claim, it is not clear to examples you base your conclusion on.

3. CA and NY are failed states due to democrat policies, like drugs, sanctuary cities, homelessness, businesses closing, and people fleeing to red states.

OK, Lets start with these 3.

On item #3, an analysis:

Your argument asserts that California (CA) and New York (NY) are "failed states" due to Democratic policies, citing issues such as drugs, sanctuary cities, homelessness, businesses closing, and people fleeing to red states. Let's break down the argument and examine each component:

1. Definition of "Failed States": The term "failed state" typically refers to a country with weak institutions, lack of governance, widespread corruption, and inability to provide basic public services. Applying this term to individual U.S. states might be an exaggeration, as both CA and NY have functioning governments, law enforcement, education systems, etc.
2. Drugs: While drug issues are a concern in many places, attributing them solely to Democratic policies oversimplifies a complex issue. Drug problems are influenced by a range of factors, including economic conditions, mental health support, education, and more. Both Democratic and Republican-led states face challenges with drug abuse.
3. Sanctuary Cities: Sanctuary cities are jurisdictions that limit cooperation with federal immigration enforcement. The impact of sanctuary policies is debated, but research has not conclusively shown that they lead to increased crime or economic problems. Some argue that these policies can actually improve community safety by fostering trust between law enforcement and immigrant communities.
4. Homelessness: Homelessness is a complex issue with many contributing factors, including housing affordability, mental health support, and economic opportunity. While CA and NY have significant homelessness challenges, attributing this solely to Democratic policies ignores the multifaceted nature of the problem.
5. Businesses Closing: Business closures can be influenced by many factors, including economic cycles, regulations, taxes, and global events like the COVID-19 pandemic. It's overly simplistic to attribute business closures solely to Democratic policies, especially without considering the broader economic context.
6. People Fleeing to Red States: While some individuals may move from blue to red states, attributing this solely to Democratic policies ignores other factors like cost of living, job opportunities, family considerations, and personal preferences. Migration patterns are complex and cannot be reduced to political affiliations alone.
7. Comparative Analysis: It's also worth noting that both CA and NY have significant economic strengths. California has the largest economy of any U.S. state (itis the 4th largest economy in the entire world) and is a global leader in technology and entertainment. New York is a financial hub and cultural center. Both states have areas of success and challenges, and attributing all negative aspects to Democratic policies overlooks the complexity of governance and policy-making.

In conclusion, the argument that CA and NY are "failed states" due to Democratic policies is an oversimplification that doesn't account for the multifaceted nature of the issues mentioned. While there may be legitimate critiques of specific policies or governance approaches in these states, attributing all challenges to one political party ignores the complexity of real-world problems and the diversity of solutions that may be required to address them.

In short, your argument is simplistic, is utterly undeveloped as an argument given that it lacks the robustness one would expect of a serious debater on a multi-faceted, dynamic and complex subject.

IF this is the best you can do, I would not care to debate you, because there are too many simplistic morons in the world, especially on the right, and there is no joy in debating idiots.

Prove to me you are not an idiot, and give a serious, thought out, robust, nuanced, argument.

It does, however, appear to me, you are not up to that task.

 

[kyzr]

You are assuming that the denial of the Catholic couple's foster care application is solely based on their religious beliefs and that "deviants" are being allowed to adopt instead. However, it's important to examine the situation more objectively.

First, it's essential to recognize that adoption agencies, including those run by the government, have a responsibility to consider the best interests of the children they place in foster care. This includes ensuring that prospective parents can provide a safe and supportive environment for the child's physical and emotional well-being.

While the article highlights the couple's Catholic faith as the reason for their application being denied, it fails to provide a comprehensive view of the situation. The agency's decision may have been influenced by the couple's expressed lack of support for LGBTQ+ individuals, as stated in their license study. Adoption agencies prioritize finding homes where children will be accepted and supported for who they are, regardless of their sexual orientation or gender identity.

It is important to note that being LGBTQ+ is not equivalent to being a "deviant." LGBTQ+ individuals and couples have successfully adopted and provided loving homes for countless children. Their ability to adopt is not based on deviance, but rather on their capacity to provide a nurturing environment.

Furthermore, it is crucial to understand that religious freedom does not grant individuals the right to discriminate against others or to impose their beliefs on those who do not share them. Adoption agencies must strike a balance between respecting religious freedom and ensuring the rights and well-being of the children they serve.

In conclusion, the denial of the Catholic couple's foster care application may not solely be based on their religious beliefs. Adoption agencies have a responsibility to prioritize the best interests of the children and ensure they are placed in supportive and accepting homes. It is not accurate or fair to label LGBTQ+ individuals as "deviants," and their ability to adopt should not be questioned based on their sexual orientation or gender identity.

You'll need to substantiate that claim, it is not clear to examples you base your conclusion on.


On item #3, an analysis:

Your argument asserts that California (CA) and New York (NY) are "failed states" due to Democratic policies, citing issues such as drugs, sanctuary cities, homelessness, businesses closing, and people fleeing to red states. Let's break down the argument and examine each component:

1. Definition of "Failed States": The term "failed state" typically refers to a country with weak institutions, lack of governance, widespread corruption, and inability to provide basic public services. Applying this term to individual U.S. states might be an exaggeration, as both CA and NY have functioning governments, law enforcement, education systems, etc.
2. Drugs: While drug issues are a concern in many places, attributing them solely to Democratic policies oversimplifies a complex issue. Drug problems are influenced by a range of factors, including economic conditions, mental health support, education, and more. Both Democratic and Republican-led states face challenges with drug abuse.
3. Sanctuary Cities: Sanctuary cities are jurisdictions that limit cooperation with federal immigration enforcement. The impact of sanctuary policies is debated, but research has not conclusively shown that they lead to increased crime or economic problems. Some argue that these policies can actually improve community safety by fostering trust between law enforcement and immigrant communities.
4. Homelessness: Homelessness is a complex issue with many contributing factors, including housing affordability, mental health support, and economic opportunity. While CA and NY have significant homelessness challenges, attributing this solely to Democratic policies ignores the multifaceted nature of the problem.
5. Businesses Closing: Business closures can be influenced by many factors, including economic cycles, regulations, taxes, and global events like the COVID-19 pandemic. It's overly simplistic to attribute business closures solely to Democratic policies, especially without considering the broader economic context.
6. People Fleeing to Red States: While some individuals may move from blue to red states, attributing this solely to Democratic policies ignores other factors like cost of living, job opportunities, family considerations, and personal preferences. Migration patterns are complex and cannot be reduced to political affiliations alone.
7. Comparative Analysis: It's also worth noting that both CA and NY have significant economic strengths. California has the largest economy of any U.S. state (itis the 4th largest economy in the entire world) and is a global leader in technology and entertainment. New York is a financial hub and cultural center. Both states have areas of success and challenges, and attributing all negative aspects to Democratic policies overlooks the complexity of governance and policy-making.

In conclusion, the argument that CA and NY are "failed states" due to Democratic policies is an oversimplification that doesn't account for the multifaceted nature of the issues mentioned. While there may be legitimate critiques of specific policies or governance approaches in these states, attributing all challenges to one political party ignores the complexity of real-world problems and the diversity of solutions that may be required to address them.
In short, your argument is simplistic, is utterly undeveloped as an argument given that it lacks the robustness one would expect of a serious debater on a multi-faceted, dynamic and complex subject.
IF this is the best you can do, I would not care to debate you, because there are too many simplistic morons in the world, especially on the right, and there is no joy in debating idiots.
Prove to me you are not an idiot, and give a serious, thought out, robust, nuanced, argument. It does, however, appear to me, you are not up to that task.

1. Placing straight kids in a home run by deviants is just as fucked-up as placing a gay kid in a super-religious household. The adoption agency is illegally excluding Catholics from fostering kids. Here in the US we have freedom of religion, its in the US Constitution. Putting LGBTQ stipulations into any adoption or employment opportunity is or should be illegal. I hope the Catholic parents get to foster a nice straight kid. We'll see how this plays out in the courts.

2. Lawless (Soros/democrat) DAs, turning US cities into lawless 3rd world hell-holes:

MSN

Map shows how many Soros-linked prosecutors there are around the country — and how many have been removed - Washington Examiner

The United States has 70 prosecutors in office linked to left-wing billionaire George Soros after 12 left office last year. A map from the Law Enforcement Legal Defense Fund shows the prosecutors scattered across the country. Over the past year, 12 were defeated in elections, resigned, departed...

www.washingtonexaminer.com

3. True that CA and NY are not as failed a state as Somalia, but by comparing them to other US states, many of their citizens are leaving them for red states where more conservative policies provide a more civilized and safe living environment. Its also true that CA has a robust economy. Your critique' of my posting style is funny. Here is a photo pf CA residents in Oakland.

Lawlessness happens when "flash mobs" ransack stores. CA also has a problem with homeless people and druggies and raw sewage all over the place. My point being that people are fleeing CA for safer cities. Liberal democrat policies have failed.

California Nordstrom ransacked in huge 'flash mob' smash-and-grab, $60K to $100K in goods taken: police

The Los Angeles Police Department said a group of criminals stole between $60,000 and $100,000 worth of items from Nordstrom store Saturday afternoon.

www.foxnews.com

 

[Clipper]

You probably don’t grasp how poorly you come across. But you do come across like a retarded hyena. Anyway, I’m glad he canceled that ill-advised press conference. Looks like he has listened to him a lawyers. Good. Save the material for trial.

I leave ass licking to you libtard Brandon ass munchers.

You scumbag libturds have massive problems with simple definitions. Changing your mind isn’t the same as lying, you diseased ancient twat.

Save it for the trial? Sure! Keep thinking that the judge will allow your assbuddy Trump to introduce his deranged nonsense into the trial if that makes you feel better, ass bleeder.

 

[Clipper]

Why do you care? You wouldn't believe him anyway because your whole life is hating him. You have 0 credibility. STFU K?

You're correct. I'm not gullible enough to believe a word bellowed out of Trump's piehole.

 

[blackhawk]

I really do love the it’s only wrong when those I don’t support do it mindset. I don’t care if it’s from the right or the left when you only care when it’s not your guy doing it you don’t care at all. Outrage of convenience is no outrage at all.

 

[Dante Reawakened]

No, shitforbrains, your example was Trump and Melania. You're jonesin for a little girl ain't ya?

You mean his daughter is also one of his wives?

 

[Dante Reawakened]

Trump didn't break the law, the law is broken.

I must say, that is one way to defend attempts to disinfranchise voters and steal an election.