I Dare Any Democrat Supporters To Defend This

[SavannahMann]

OK......make that double-dog-dare-ya'.

I admit it's a trap, 'cause if you do agree with this, you will have slapped the label Nazi, Fascist, Bolshevik, on your party.......exactly as I have said each and every day.

Here ya' go:

"CNN's Jake Tapper floats banning Republicans from shows over 'Big Lie': 'Why should I put any of them on TV?'​

"...insisting that the "Big Lie" that the election was "stolen"..."


"The lie about the election on its own is anti-democracy and it is sowing seeds of ignorance in the populous and, obviously, it has the potential to incite violence, but beyond that is if you're willing to lie about that, what are you not willing to lie about?" Tapper asked. "That's where we are when it comes to the House Republican leadership McCarthy and [Rep. Steve] Scalise and where we are with too many leaders of the Republican Party. They're not willing to tell their voters the truth! What does that say about them?"

CNN's Jake Tapper floats banning Republicans from shows over 'Big Lie': 'Why should I put any of them on TV?'

CNN anchor Jake Tapper suggested on Tuesday that he would ban Republicans from appearing on his programs amid the House leadership clash with Rep. Liz Cheney, R-Wy.

www.foxnews.com

How about this......wanna agree with this????????

"I think it’s become clear that fairness is overrated ... the idea that we should always give two sides equal weight and merit does not reflect the world we find ourselves in," Holt said on Tuesday night while accepting an award at the 45th Murrow Symposium. "That the sun sets in the west is a fact. Any contrary view does not deserve our time or attention," Holt continued. "Decisions to not give unsupported arguments equal time are not a dereliction of journalistic responsibility or some kind of agenda, in fact, it’s just the opposite." NBC's Lester Holt says we don’t need to hear both sides to define truth: ‘Fairness is overrated’

I'll defend it gladly. You see if you have 2 sides in which one side is supported by demonstrable facts and the other side is going against those facts without offering even a semblance of facts only one side should be represented.

For instance large-scale election fraud. Or another instance would be the shape of the Earth. Or not presenting the claim that there's an elite that uses children's faces as a way to keep young. A news agency and I would argue most reasonable people have no problem recognizing that when those kinds of things are discussed only one conclusion is valid and a "counter-argument" should not be entertained without hard and I do mean HARD evidence.

Exactly as I predicted:

...... you will have slapped the label Nazi, Fascist, Bolshevik, on your party.......exactly as I have said each and every day.



Now.....on the issue of "You see if you have 2 sides in which one side is supported by demonstrable facts and the other side is going against those facts without offering even a semblance of facts only one side should be represented."

Watch me ram that back down your lying throat:

First collusion, collusion, collusion, Russia, Russia, Russia, Obstruction, Obstruction, Obstruction. Racist, Racist, Racist, Impeach, Impeach, Impeach, Recession, Recession, Recession, Emoluments, 25th amendment, Stormy Daniels, lies about Charlottesville fine Nazis, Kurds, Ukraine, Quid Pro Quo, ‘lynching,’ the Kavanaugh hoax, the GAO charges, Lev Parnas, impeachment, coronavirus ‘hoax,’ General Flynn perjury trap, no evidence of voter fraud in the stolen election.....

Don’t forget the Democrats told you that Trump was colluding with Russia…and that wasn’t true. They also told you that so was Naval Academy grad Carter Page and so was George Papadopoulos and so was General Michael Flynn, a three star general and former director of the Defense Intelligence Agency….and all of that was a lie.


Anyone on the Right demand censorship, you Fascist??????


...and, AOC lying about her near-death experience in the Capitol Riots.....when she wasn't even in the Capitol.

And that Biden voters as agents provocateur weren't behind the Capitol Riot.....and that Pelosi knew and refused to allow extra security. They lie about everything.......yet here you are, ready to swallow the next lie.

FakeStories: Three years of Russian Collusion stories; altering documents at the DoJ and FBI to railroad political opponents; the state media burying the Hunter Biden Scandal what with Joe getting 10% of the bribes; stories about Kavanaugh rape parties, and Covington Catholic School; Carter Page working for Russia when he was actually working for the CIA….where were those ‘fact checkers’?

Collusion is a term in common English, it is not a term that has any meaning in law. I have read the Mueller report, I have read although not completely I will admit the report released by the commission led by Ron Johnson, not exactly what I'd call a Democrat about what transpired in the Trump campaign. Both reports confirm that there was collusion between Russia and the campaign in the dictionary sense of the word.

What the Mueller report concluded is that that collusion would be hard to prove to have risen to what would be a criminal conspiracy. Something that does have legal meaning and parameters that are quite a lot more stringent than the word collusion.

I also notice that besides calling me names and trying to deflect you haven't tried to actually answer the heart of what I say. And your actual premise of the OP.

There are plenty of examples of cases where 2 sides of an argument are so unequal that both do not have to be presented as equal. That is not censorship, that is called being reasonable. If you want to post clips on youtube that the earth is flat, go right ahead. If you want Jake Tapper to give you a platform on national TV and seat you next to an actual astronomer in the interest of "fairness" you are out of your mind.

Who are the Republicans who demanded censorship, the silencing of opposing opinions, you lying low-life?????????



None.....only your sort.


A real Liberal wrote this book:


View attachment 487981

You mean like the House of Representatives Republicans who just voted Liz Cheney out of her leadership position for not advocating the discredited conspiracy theories?

"discredited conspiracy theories?"


Name them.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2021/04/29/don-wagner-vaccine-tracking-devices/

6 conspiracy theories about the 2020 election – debunked

Joe Biden won the 2020 presidential election. Here's why conspiracies saying otherwise are false.

www.cbsnews.com

 

[PoliticalChic]

OK......make that double-dog-dare-ya'.

I admit it's a trap, 'cause if you do agree with this, you will have slapped the label Nazi, Fascist, Bolshevik, on your party.......exactly as I have said each and every day.

Here ya' go:

"CNN's Jake Tapper floats banning Republicans from shows over 'Big Lie': 'Why should I put any of them on TV?'​

"...insisting that the "Big Lie" that the election was "stolen"..."


"The lie about the election on its own is anti-democracy and it is sowing seeds of ignorance in the populous and, obviously, it has the potential to incite violence, but beyond that is if you're willing to lie about that, what are you not willing to lie about?" Tapper asked. "That's where we are when it comes to the House Republican leadership McCarthy and [Rep. Steve] Scalise and where we are with too many leaders of the Republican Party. They're not willing to tell their voters the truth! What does that say about them?"

CNN's Jake Tapper floats banning Republicans from shows over 'Big Lie': 'Why should I put any of them on TV?'

CNN anchor Jake Tapper suggested on Tuesday that he would ban Republicans from appearing on his programs amid the House leadership clash with Rep. Liz Cheney, R-Wy.

www.foxnews.com

How about this......wanna agree with this????????

"I think it’s become clear that fairness is overrated ... the idea that we should always give two sides equal weight and merit does not reflect the world we find ourselves in," Holt said on Tuesday night while accepting an award at the 45th Murrow Symposium. "That the sun sets in the west is a fact. Any contrary view does not deserve our time or attention," Holt continued. "Decisions to not give unsupported arguments equal time are not a dereliction of journalistic responsibility or some kind of agenda, in fact, it’s just the opposite." NBC's Lester Holt says we don’t need to hear both sides to define truth: ‘Fairness is overrated’

I'll defend it gladly. You see if you have 2 sides in which one side is supported by demonstrable facts and the other side is going against those facts without offering even a semblance of facts only one side should be represented.

For instance large-scale election fraud. Or another instance would be the shape of the Earth. Or not presenting the claim that there's an elite that uses children's faces as a way to keep young. A news agency and I would argue most reasonable people have no problem recognizing that when those kinds of things are discussed only one conclusion is valid and a "counter-argument" should not be entertained without hard and I do mean HARD evidence.

Exactly as I predicted:

...... you will have slapped the label Nazi, Fascist, Bolshevik, on your party.......exactly as I have said each and every day.



Now.....on the issue of "You see if you have 2 sides in which one side is supported by demonstrable facts and the other side is going against those facts without offering even a semblance of facts only one side should be represented."

Watch me ram that back down your lying throat:

First collusion, collusion, collusion, Russia, Russia, Russia, Obstruction, Obstruction, Obstruction. Racist, Racist, Racist, Impeach, Impeach, Impeach, Recession, Recession, Recession, Emoluments, 25th amendment, Stormy Daniels, lies about Charlottesville fine Nazis, Kurds, Ukraine, Quid Pro Quo, ‘lynching,’ the Kavanaugh hoax, the GAO charges, Lev Parnas, impeachment, coronavirus ‘hoax,’ General Flynn perjury trap, no evidence of voter fraud in the stolen election.....

Don’t forget the Democrats told you that Trump was colluding with Russia…and that wasn’t true. They also told you that so was Naval Academy grad Carter Page and so was George Papadopoulos and so was General Michael Flynn, a three star general and former director of the Defense Intelligence Agency….and all of that was a lie.


Anyone on the Right demand censorship, you Fascist??????


...and, AOC lying about her near-death experience in the Capitol Riots.....when she wasn't even in the Capitol.

And that Biden voters as agents provocateur weren't behind the Capitol Riot.....and that Pelosi knew and refused to allow extra security. They lie about everything.......yet here you are, ready to swallow the next lie.

FakeStories: Three years of Russian Collusion stories; altering documents at the DoJ and FBI to railroad political opponents; the state media burying the Hunter Biden Scandal what with Joe getting 10% of the bribes; stories about Kavanaugh rape parties, and Covington Catholic School; Carter Page working for Russia when he was actually working for the CIA….where were those ‘fact checkers’?

Collusion is a term in common English, it is not a term that has any meaning in law. I have read the Mueller report, I have read although not completely I will admit the report released by the commission led by Ron Johnson, not exactly what I'd call a Democrat about what transpired in the Trump campaign. Both reports confirm that there was collusion between Russia and the campaign in the dictionary sense of the word.

What the Mueller report concluded is that that collusion would be hard to prove to have risen to what would be a criminal conspiracy. Something that does have legal meaning and parameters that are quite a lot more stringent than the word collusion.

I also notice that besides calling me names and trying to deflect you haven't tried to actually answer the heart of what I say. And your actual premise of the OP.

There are plenty of examples of cases where 2 sides of an argument are so unequal that both do not have to be presented as equal. That is not censorship, that is called being reasonable. If you want to post clips on youtube that the earth is flat, go right ahead. If you want Jake Tapper to give you a platform on national TV and seat you next to an actual astronomer in the interest of "fairness" you are out of your mind.

Who are the Republicans who demanded censorship, the silencing of opposing opinions, you lying low-life?????????



None.....only your sort.


A real Liberal wrote this book:


View attachment 487981

You mean like the House of Representatives Republicans who just voted Liz Cheney out of her leadership position for not advocating the discredited conspiracy theories?

"discredited conspiracy theories?"


Name them.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2021/04/29/don-wagner-vaccine-tracking-devices/

6 conspiracy theories about the 2020 election – debunked

Joe Biden won the 2020 presidential election. Here's why conspiracies saying otherwise are false.

www.cbsnews.com

Democrats lie about everything.

The Bezos WaPo is a Democrat organ.

"No, Dominion voting machines did not change or delete votes for Trump"​

Let's check:

Dominion voting machines do not report the absolute number or sorting of the ballots as cast.......instead, they allow the ‘adjusting’ of the number and selection of the votes.







In the contracts that Dominion signs with municipalities, we find the following:



AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA AND DOMINION VOTING SYSTEMS, INC. This Agreement is entered into between the County of Santa Clara (“County”) and Dominion Voting Systems, Inc. (“Contractor” or “Dominion”) (collectively, the “Parties”).



Section 2.26 "Allows staff to adjust tally based on review of scanned ballot images."



https://www.sccgov.org/sites/rov/Documents/CW2232168 Dominion Final.pdf

 

[PoliticalChic]

OK......make that double-dog-dare-ya'.

I admit it's a trap, 'cause if you do agree with this, you will have slapped the label Nazi, Fascist, Bolshevik, on your party.......exactly as I have said each and every day.

Here ya' go:

"CNN's Jake Tapper floats banning Republicans from shows over 'Big Lie': 'Why should I put any of them on TV?'​

"...insisting that the "Big Lie" that the election was "stolen"..."


"The lie about the election on its own is anti-democracy and it is sowing seeds of ignorance in the populous and, obviously, it has the potential to incite violence, but beyond that is if you're willing to lie about that, what are you not willing to lie about?" Tapper asked. "That's where we are when it comes to the House Republican leadership McCarthy and [Rep. Steve] Scalise and where we are with too many leaders of the Republican Party. They're not willing to tell their voters the truth! What does that say about them?"

CNN's Jake Tapper floats banning Republicans from shows over 'Big Lie': 'Why should I put any of them on TV?'

CNN anchor Jake Tapper suggested on Tuesday that he would ban Republicans from appearing on his programs amid the House leadership clash with Rep. Liz Cheney, R-Wy.

www.foxnews.com

How about this......wanna agree with this????????

"I think it’s become clear that fairness is overrated ... the idea that we should always give two sides equal weight and merit does not reflect the world we find ourselves in," Holt said on Tuesday night while accepting an award at the 45th Murrow Symposium. "That the sun sets in the west is a fact. Any contrary view does not deserve our time or attention," Holt continued. "Decisions to not give unsupported arguments equal time are not a dereliction of journalistic responsibility or some kind of agenda, in fact, it’s just the opposite." NBC's Lester Holt says we don’t need to hear both sides to define truth: ‘Fairness is overrated’

I'll defend it gladly. You see if you have 2 sides in which one side is supported by demonstrable facts and the other side is going against those facts without offering even a semblance of facts only one side should be represented.

For instance large-scale election fraud. Or another instance would be the shape of the Earth. Or not presenting the claim that there's an elite that uses children's faces as a way to keep young. A news agency and I would argue most reasonable people have no problem recognizing that when those kinds of things are discussed only one conclusion is valid and a "counter-argument" should not be entertained without hard and I do mean HARD evidence.

Exactly as I predicted:

...... you will have slapped the label Nazi, Fascist, Bolshevik, on your party.......exactly as I have said each and every day.



Now.....on the issue of "You see if you have 2 sides in which one side is supported by demonstrable facts and the other side is going against those facts without offering even a semblance of facts only one side should be represented."

Watch me ram that back down your lying throat:

First collusion, collusion, collusion, Russia, Russia, Russia, Obstruction, Obstruction, Obstruction. Racist, Racist, Racist, Impeach, Impeach, Impeach, Recession, Recession, Recession, Emoluments, 25th amendment, Stormy Daniels, lies about Charlottesville fine Nazis, Kurds, Ukraine, Quid Pro Quo, ‘lynching,’ the Kavanaugh hoax, the GAO charges, Lev Parnas, impeachment, coronavirus ‘hoax,’ General Flynn perjury trap, no evidence of voter fraud in the stolen election.....

Don’t forget the Democrats told you that Trump was colluding with Russia…and that wasn’t true. They also told you that so was Naval Academy grad Carter Page and so was George Papadopoulos and so was General Michael Flynn, a three star general and former director of the Defense Intelligence Agency….and all of that was a lie.


Anyone on the Right demand censorship, you Fascist??????


...and, AOC lying about her near-death experience in the Capitol Riots.....when she wasn't even in the Capitol.

And that Biden voters as agents provocateur weren't behind the Capitol Riot.....and that Pelosi knew and refused to allow extra security. They lie about everything.......yet here you are, ready to swallow the next lie.

FakeStories: Three years of Russian Collusion stories; altering documents at the DoJ and FBI to railroad political opponents; the state media burying the Hunter Biden Scandal what with Joe getting 10% of the bribes; stories about Kavanaugh rape parties, and Covington Catholic School; Carter Page working for Russia when he was actually working for the CIA….where were those ‘fact checkers’?

Collusion is a term in common English, it is not a term that has any meaning in law. I have read the Mueller report, I have read although not completely I will admit the report released by the commission led by Ron Johnson, not exactly what I'd call a Democrat about what transpired in the Trump campaign. Both reports confirm that there was collusion between Russia and the campaign in the dictionary sense of the word.

What the Mueller report concluded is that that collusion would be hard to prove to have risen to what would be a criminal conspiracy. Something that does have legal meaning and parameters that are quite a lot more stringent than the word collusion.

I also notice that besides calling me names and trying to deflect you haven't tried to actually answer the heart of what I say. And your actual premise of the OP.

There are plenty of examples of cases where 2 sides of an argument are so unequal that both do not have to be presented as equal. That is not censorship, that is called being reasonable. If you want to post clips on youtube that the earth is flat, go right ahead. If you want Jake Tapper to give you a platform on national TV and seat you next to an actual astronomer in the interest of "fairness" you are out of your mind.

Who are the Republicans who demanded censorship, the silencing of opposing opinions, you lying low-life?????????



None.....only your sort.


A real Liberal wrote this book:


View attachment 487981

You mean like the House of Representatives Republicans who just voted Liz Cheney out of her leadership position for not advocating the discredited conspiracy theories?

"discredited conspiracy theories?"


Name them.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2021/04/29/don-wagner-vaccine-tracking-devices/

6 conspiracy theories about the 2020 election – debunked

Joe Biden won the 2020 presidential election. Here's why conspiracies saying otherwise are false.

www.cbsnews.com

How stupid must you to be to believe them after this......and every lie reported by the Washington Post????



Here the prism through which every Democrat pronouncement should be viewed: First collusion, collusion, collusion, Russia, Russia, Russia, Obstruction, Obstruction, Obstruction. Racist, Racist, Racist, Impeach, Impeach, Impeach, Recession, Recession, Recession, Emoluments, 25th amendment, Stormy Daniels, lies about Charlottesville fine Nazis, Kurds, Ukraine, Quid Pro Quo, ‘lynching,’ the Kavanaugh hoax, the GAO charges, Lev Parnas, impeachment, coronavirus ‘hoax,’ General Flynn perjury trap, no evidence of voter fraud in the stolen election.....

Don’t forget the Democrats told you that Trump was colluding with Russia…and that wasn’t true. They also told you that so was Naval Academy grad Carter Page and so was George Papadopoulos and so was General Michael Flynn, a three star general and former director of the Defense Intelligence Agency….and all of that was a lie. How stupid must one be to keep believing what they say?

...and, AOC lying about her near-death experience in the Capitol Riots.....when she wasn't even in the Capitol.

And that Biden voters as agents provocateur weren't behind the Capitol Riot.....and that Pelosi knew and refused to allow extra security. They lie about everything.......yet here you are, ready to swallow the next lie.

FakeStories: Three years of Russian Collusion stories; altering documents at the DoJ and FBI to railroad political opponents; the state media burying the Hunter Biden Scandal what with Joe getting 10% of the bribes; stories about Kavanaugh rape parties, and Covington Catholic School; Carter Page working for Russia when he was actually working for the CIA….where were those ‘fact checkers’?




What should you do when they lied to you at least these 25 times already???????????

 

[BULLDOG]

Dear BULLDOG
Normally I find the rightwing has more grounds to argue the leftwing politicizes agenda based on emotionally driven propaganda.

One area I agree that the rightwing take advantage of distrust to ignore basic science and medicine is with the masks that proportionally reduce risks of more severe reactions and hospitalizations by minimalizing the amount of viral load exposure.

All the plain science, and why medical staff use full hazmat gear and safety protocol gets thrown out the window just because fabric masks at maximum 20% filtration don't eliminate infection. But they reduce the degree of viral load exposure. That is not mentioned.
Nor the high cost and damage of long term covid even if the survival rate is high

This shows me the mutual biases are not based on reason, but some weird social or spiritual dynamic skewing public perception on both sides.

The liberal left has an equal blindspot when it comes to HCQ being used to reduce severe reactions and hospitalizations, again because it didn't prevent infections but reduced the more dangerous risks.

So both sides have equal rights and reasons to distrust the other as ignoring, skewing and censoring reports.

Unfortunately, the distrust of the left by the right has backfired and even caused them to reject science that is on their side.

Pandemonium.

All I can do is stick to what I have found to be valid on boty sides. And encourage people to stick to these points we can confirm across the spectrum.

Attacking people personally or by groups makes them more defensive and hostile to whatever you are trying to correct.

Now more than ever, we need to stick with medical solutions we can agree to support. And steer clear of left right partisan blame that distracts at dangerous levels we cannot afford.

We are used to bullying for political leverage and sport.

We don't really have that luxury to screw around bullying back and forth in the media anymore.

You impress me as a sincere constructive critic and thinker.

I hope more people like you and me can focus on positive connections and corrections, and get away from the old patterns of bullying back and forth for dominance.

If we can connect on even one or two points we can agree on, those can become more important than the 99 other areas we disagree.

With elections and contested voting rules and reports, I find all parties agree to support their own rules and govt agenda. And all parties protest paying or wasting taxes to fund other party policies they oppose. If we can agree that our differences deserve separate funding by taxpayer choice, that realization can save us from.dividing and destroying our nation over beliefs and biased preferences we admit we do not agree to change by being forced by other people or groups through govt.

We don't have to agree with opponents' beliefs, logic or weird motivations for their biases to protect ourselves and each from imposing such beliefs through govt.

I truly hope and pray more of us can make the commitment to stop haranguing and harassing each other over our different biases and beliefs, let each fund and follow their own, and give everyone equal respect and choice in deciding which policies to fund with our taxes.

We do not have to agree to have a United States. That is the beauty of America and the diversity we have as a country. Take care and best wishes with your political outreach and advocacy. May we all help each other to be more effective in influencing constructive reform and positive change for the better thanks to what we have shared and gained here on USMB. More power to you!

Re:
It's well known that determining what is a fact, and what is not a fact, is not a priority for the right.

Yours is a long and interesting post, and I can see you put some thought into your remarks. I won't address all of it even though I agree with parts of it.
Trump's incompetence and arrogance is the only reason why the country is so divided on our response to covid. Trump was incensed that Fauci wouldn't go along with his fantasy of the virus magically disappearing, and he chose to spread conspiracy theories instead. The right accepted his crap as reality. What kind of idiot would go for medical advice from a crack head that makes pillows instead of trained experts in the field? Ending the pandemic is a problem for science, not politics. and the right wingers are too stupid to realize that. That fact is not skewed on both sides. If the medical community advocated the use of HCQ (what ever that is) the left would gladly embrace it.
Implications that both sides of the isle are the same are absurd.

The problems are much worse than just Trump.
Blaming it all on him are just for convenience.
The problems were there before and continue afterwards.

Obama brought out both more problems and solutions,
and a lot of what Trump brought out was in response to that.
And same with what is still brought up now, much bigger than just Trump alone.

We aren't going to solve these problems by just framing them
in terms of pro and anti Trump.

And yes, the doctors who used HCQ in conjunction with other applications
for the other complications with Covid, are the ones who got the FDA
and CDC to quit rejecting HCQ.

Because other treatments and medial supervision is still needed,
the official position changed was to discretion by doctors.

Even the FDA and CDC were not in a medical competent position
to specify how HCQ needed to be used.

Everyone wants a GENERIC solutions like a magic pill we can all
guarantee works the same way for all people.

But unfortunately this virus affects different people in different ways.

We may never get one solution that works for all cases.

So as long as we keep trying to fight for ONE solution that is better than all the rest,
or ONE scapegoat like Trump to blame everything on, we aren't going to solve
the real problems but keep fighting over which ones work for which cases, etc.

If all we can agree on is that the virus and the resulting economic and human loss
came from the spread in China, then we could unite in investing in helping
both the Chinese and all populations worldwide to build local medical support
proportional to each district.

We could agree the Chinese govt is responsible for resolving human rights abuses,
and apply credits and damages owed for that into building solutions for the workers who have suffered.

In return, the Chinese equally argue the US govt needs to resolve our own civil rights abuses.
So we can do the same and invest resources in democratizing our health care and medical education
to meet the demands of populations per district, state and party precinct.

We do NOT need to agree on the causes of or cures for medical, political or economic problems.

We just need to agree we cannot afford to fight over differences,
and just reward people and groups for investing in their own solutions.
Even if we don't agree. Just organize in likeminded groups,
pool resources together per group, and fund and follow your own solutions
that you do agree on.

And that is enough to solve the world's problems,
from local to global.

We are already organized by party and religion.
Just use those existing structures to organize resources
and invest in building programs and training people to manage for themselves.

www.earnedamnesty.org

Again, a considered post, but more widespread than I care to discuss. I prefer one subject at a time. in a forum like this. A face to face discussion where there is an opportunity to ask questions as they become apparent and before moving on to the next subject would be a better venue for your remarks. This is not that kind of venue.
I will address your desire to blame China for the virus and all resulting damage, and human loss, however. While nobody doubts the virus originated in China, or that they had the responsibility to keep it from being released on the world, it is absurd to blame them for our mismanagement and lack of any logical response until it had reached such deadly levels. It is obvious who is responsible for our mismanagement and lack of proper response. It is also obvious that the divide in this country concerning vaccinations, and even whether the virus even exists is based on idiots who prefer to support the idiot who delayed our response instead of the scientists who actually warned us of what was happening. Finally, it is obvious who is responsible for our resulting damage and human loss reaching such high levels.

 

[forkup]

Dear BULLDOG
Normally I find the rightwing has more grounds to argue the leftwing politicizes agenda based on emotionally driven propaganda.

One area I agree that the rightwing take advantage of distrust to ignore basic science and medicine is with the masks that proportionally reduce risks of more severe reactions and hospitalizations by minimalizing the amount of viral load exposure.

All the plain science, and why medical staff use full hazmat gear and safety protocol gets thrown out the window just because fabric masks at maximum 20% filtration don't eliminate infection. But they reduce the degree of viral load exposure. That is not mentioned.
Nor the high cost and damage of long term covid even if the survival rate is high

This shows me the mutual biases are not based on reason, but some weird social or spiritual dynamic skewing public perception on both sides.

The liberal left has an equal blindspot when it comes to HCQ being used to reduce severe reactions and hospitalizations, again because it didn't prevent infections but reduced the more dangerous risks.

So both sides have equal rights and reasons to distrust the other as ignoring, skewing and censoring reports.

Unfortunately, the distrust of the left by the right has backfired and even caused them to reject science that is on their side.

Pandemonium.

All I can do is stick to what I have found to be valid on boty sides. And encourage people to stick to these points we can confirm across the spectrum.

Attacking people personally or by groups makes them more defensive and hostile to whatever you are trying to correct.

Now more than ever, we need to stick with medical solutions we can agree to support. And steer clear of left right partisan blame that distracts at dangerous levels we cannot afford.

We are used to bullying for political leverage and sport.

We don't really have that luxury to screw around bullying back and forth in the media anymore.

You impress me as a sincere constructive critic and thinker.

I hope more people like you and me can focus on positive connections and corrections, and get away from the old patterns of bullying back and forth for dominance.

If we can connect on even one or two points we can agree on, those can become more important than the 99 other areas we disagree.

With elections and contested voting rules and reports, I find all parties agree to support their own rules and govt agenda. And all parties protest paying or wasting taxes to fund other party policies they oppose. If we can agree that our differences deserve separate funding by taxpayer choice, that realization can save us from.dividing and destroying our nation over beliefs and biased preferences we admit we do not agree to change by being forced by other people or groups through govt.

We don't have to agree with opponents' beliefs, logic or weird motivations for their biases to protect ourselves and each from imposing such beliefs through govt.

I truly hope and pray more of us can make the commitment to stop haranguing and harassing each other over our different biases and beliefs, let each fund and follow their own, and give everyone equal respect and choice in deciding which policies to fund with our taxes.

We do not have to agree to have a United States. That is the beauty of America and the diversity we have as a country. Take care and best wishes with your political outreach and advocacy. May we all help each other to be more effective in influencing constructive reform and positive change for the better thanks to what we have shared and gained here on USMB. More power to you!

Re:
It's well known that determining what is a fact, and what is not a fact, is not a priority for the right.

I've been really busy this week and it seems we are missing a few days of conversation. I did read your last comment to me so I'll paraphrase what I believe was your point and my reply to those.

-You were claiming that both sides feel voting rules have changed arbitrarily.

To that, I'll say, that if true, only one side would be right. I'm sorry but you can't "both side" this.

Firstly. Arbitrary means based on random choice or personal whim, rather than any reason or system.
The changes in mail-in voting were anything but. They happened as a direct response to a global health crisis. And they didn't just happen in the Democratic-led States either. And those challenges didn't happen in any of those states that voted to expand it but had Republicans win. This speaks to whether or not it's a good-faith argument in my opinion.

Secondly, and more importantly, I would argue. There's a key difference between finding ways to get or keep more people voting, then finding ways that make voting harder. The former is something that should be a key goal of anyone who respects a representative Democracy. It wouldn't even need a global health crisis to be justified. The latter should only happen if there's a clear justification for it.

As you admitted you can not give such a justification.

-Your second point was that regardless of this election cycle, both sides need to compromise to agree to rule changes before the next election cycle.

To that, I'll say this. As it is now Democrats need about 4 to 5 percent more votes to win the presidency. The Senate is split evenly, but Republican Senators represent about 45 million people less than their Democratic counterparts. House races are Gerrymandered heavily in Republican favor. And the Supreme court has more Republican nominated justices than Democratic ones and not all of those justices got there in what any observer would call a fair process. What room for compromise do you feel the Democrats have or for that matter own to Republicans? Especially considering the rhetoric and mendacity on display in that party?

 

[emilynghiem]

Dear BULLDOG
Normally I find the rightwing has more grounds to argue the leftwing politicizes agenda based on emotionally driven propaganda.

One area I agree that the rightwing take advantage of distrust to ignore basic science and medicine is with the masks that proportionally reduce risks of more severe reactions and hospitalizations by minimalizing the amount of viral load exposure.

All the plain science, and why medical staff use full hazmat gear and safety protocol gets thrown out the window just because fabric masks at maximum 20% filtration don't eliminate infection. But they reduce the degree of viral load exposure. That is not mentioned.
Nor the high cost and damage of long term covid even if the survival rate is high

This shows me the mutual biases are not based on reason, but some weird social or spiritual dynamic skewing public perception on both sides.

The liberal left has an equal blindspot when it comes to HCQ being used to reduce severe reactions and hospitalizations, again because it didn't prevent infections but reduced the more dangerous risks.

So both sides have equal rights and reasons to distrust the other as ignoring, skewing and censoring reports.

Unfortunately, the distrust of the left by the right has backfired and even caused them to reject science that is on their side.

Pandemonium.

All I can do is stick to what I have found to be valid on boty sides. And encourage people to stick to these points we can confirm across the spectrum.

Attacking people personally or by groups makes them more defensive and hostile to whatever you are trying to correct.

Now more than ever, we need to stick with medical solutions we can agree to support. And steer clear of left right partisan blame that distracts at dangerous levels we cannot afford.

We are used to bullying for political leverage and sport.

We don't really have that luxury to screw around bullying back and forth in the media anymore.

You impress me as a sincere constructive critic and thinker.

I hope more people like you and me can focus on positive connections and corrections, and get away from the old patterns of bullying back and forth for dominance.

If we can connect on even one or two points we can agree on, those can become more important than the 99 other areas we disagree.

With elections and contested voting rules and reports, I find all parties agree to support their own rules and govt agenda. And all parties protest paying or wasting taxes to fund other party policies they oppose. If we can agree that our differences deserve separate funding by taxpayer choice, that realization can save us from.dividing and destroying our nation over beliefs and biased preferences we admit we do not agree to change by being forced by other people or groups through govt.

We don't have to agree with opponents' beliefs, logic or weird motivations for their biases to protect ourselves and each from imposing such beliefs through govt.

I truly hope and pray more of us can make the commitment to stop haranguing and harassing each other over our different biases and beliefs, let each fund and follow their own, and give everyone equal respect and choice in deciding which policies to fund with our taxes.

We do not have to agree to have a United States. That is the beauty of America and the diversity we have as a country. Take care and best wishes with your political outreach and advocacy. May we all help each other to be more effective in influencing constructive reform and positive change for the better thanks to what we have shared and gained here on USMB. More power to you!

Re:
It's well known that determining what is a fact, and what is not a fact, is not a priority for the right.

I've been really busy this week and it seems we are missing a few days of conversation. I did read your last comment to me so I'll paraphrase what I believe was your point and my reply to those.

-You were claiming that both sides feel voting rules have changed arbitrarily.

To that, I'll say, that if true, only one side would be right. I'm sorry but you can't "both side" this.

Firstly. Arbitrary means based on random choice or personal whim, rather than any reason or system.
The changes in mail-in voting were anything but. They happened as a direct response to a global health crisis. And they didn't just happen in the Democratic-led States either. And those challenges didn't happen in any of those states that voted to expand it but had Republicans win. This speaks to whether or not it's a good-faith argument in my opinion.

Secondly, and more importantly, I would argue. There's a key difference between finding ways to get or keep more people voting, then finding ways that make voting harder. The former is something that should be a key goal of anyone who respects a representative Democracy. It wouldn't even need a global health crisis to be justified. The latter should only happen if there's a clear justification for it.

As you admitted you can not give such a justification.

-Your second point was that regardless of this election cycle, both sides need to compromise to agree to rule changes before the next election cycle.

To that, I'll say this. As it is now Democrats need about 4 to 5 percent more votes to win the presidency. The Senate is split evenly, but Republican Senators represent about 45 million people less than their Democratic counterparts. House races are Gerrymandered heavily in Republican favor. And the Supreme court has more Republican nominated justices than Democratic ones and not all of those justices got there in what any observer would call a fair process. What room for compromise do you feel the Democrats have or for that matter own to Republicans? Especially considering the rhetoric and mendacity on display in that party?

Dear forkup
I did searches on this thread and another one where I tagged you,
I searched for arbitrary and arbitrarily and neither comes up.
Can you please copy the Msg # that you are paraphrasing?

I think you are referring to both sides being "FAITH BASED" which
refers to the liberals depending on accepting unnotarized mailin ballots
"on faith" that these are valid when there is no notarization to prove this
at the same courtroom/legal standards of notarized absentee ballots;
and the conservatives that are contesting the election based on
"faith that there was too much room for fraud, and that if all the ballots
had been notarized and/or the rules were voted on by State Legislatures
then Trump would have won" are also relying on arguments not proven yet.

Otherwise I will take my best shot at answering all the points
you bring up regardless what that post contained or meant or didn't.

1. First, the conservative objectors were arguing that the States that
didn't VOTE on the changes through their STATE LEGISLATORS were
changing the rules through other offices or officials, some appointed
and/or not elected, where there was no guarantee this represented
the CITIZENS of that State.

This is why the rightwing opponents argued the rule changes were not done
in keeping with national laws.

The conservatives of each state would have supported NOTARIZED absentee
ballots, not UNNOTARIZED mailin ballots had such changes been voted on.

Thus, this also risked favoring the political supporters of UNNOTARIZED mailin ballots, largely liberal,
while Conservative citizens and representatives
favor NOTARIZED absentee ballots not mailins. Conservative citizens and representatives
also tend to favor STATE govt following Constitutional process and limits, while
Liberals tend to take a more lax approach to "Constitutional limits or separation of jurisdiction"
and tend to support "statist" beliefs in using government to unilaterally make decisions as long as
those offices or officials were duly elected, where that is justification to issue "mandates"
unless and until courts order otherwise if this is found to be unconstitutional "after the fact."

2. As for justification for changing or redoing the election process:

If I said anything about not having proof or grounds
it is referring to the issue of "fraudulent votes" and proving the
mailin ballots were "fraudulent" where I said that isn't necessary to argue or prove.

Instead of relying on that, and faith based arguments going in circles,
the grounds that objectors DO have to argue against the election process
is the fact that we didn't resolve conflicts over the rules regarding
* NOTARIZATION required for mailin ballots as with absentee ballots
* State LEGISLATURES VOTING on election rule changes as specified in the national election laws

Both of the above conditions would be necessary to have
people, states and parties AGREE on the rules for the election process
instead of a partisan bias where
the liberal/Democrat voters and officials favored the UNNOTARIZED ballots and rules changes outside the Legislature voting,
and the conservative/Republican voters and officials requiring the NOTARIZED ballots and rules changes to be voted on by Legislatures.

There are already legal reasons, because of both this election cycle:
A. the contested issues over notarization of mail in ballots
B. the contested changes that weren't voted on by State Legislatures
and elections in general that have been long contested:
C. discriminating against equal participation in the CAMPAIGN and ELECTION PROCESS
by other parties besides just Democrats and Republicans
D. discriminating in the REPRESENTATION process by
the majority rule system of "winner taking all" electoral votes instead of
proportionally representing people of the minority populations
denied equal representation because of their affiliation.

The Green Party, Libertarian and other independent candidates
have been fighting these battles, but been outnumbered and overruled.

The issue of justification is also different from the issue of MOTIVATION.

There was already this issue of "discrimination by creed" by
C. denying equal access and participation in the campaign and election process, and
D. denying equal representation to people of minority parties.

This election was different in that more than 70 million voters ended up with
added grievances A and B, in addition to the ongoing grievances
Green and Libertarian candidates and voters HAVE BEEN PROTESTING ALREADY.

The justification for reforming the system was already there, but overruled for political convenience.
Until now, there weren't as many people willing to redress those grievances.
Now there could be more MOTIVATION to take those issues and reforms seriously,
which is different from JUSTIFICATION as in documents discrimination and
denial of legal, civil and Constitutional protections as the Greens and Libertarians have long argued.


If you want to include the Greens and Libertarians,
the Libertarians I consulted also favor the Notarized ballots and
wanted to count only legal ballots that could be proven to be from valid eligible voters.

The Greens I consulted would also push for greater reforms
including an Election Commission and Proportional Representation
so that people of minority parties have equal protections of representation as people affiliated with any other parties.

I figured by the time we organize the support it takes to reform and improve the election system,
with the same efforts and resources that takes, we could also change and correct a lot of the
other ongoing problems and conflicts at the same time.

The justification was already there, but the personal motivation wasn't mutual.
It takes so much effort to accommodate change, that people avoid it unless and until it becomes necessary.

As long as people could justify not bothering to change or correct the system
because it was easier to fight politically by "bullying each other to override opponents", then nothing changed.

After the Democrats and Liberals got stuck with an administration that didn't represent them,
and now the Republicans and Conservatives argue their interests and voting population got
disenfranchised by the changes to the election process,
the ongoing problems with "two party majority rule politics" might push people on
all sides to seek common solutions instead of bullying back and forth and continuing this
wasteful destructive way of forcing policies by domination and coercion.

The Greens actually promote NONCOERCION and consensus based process of decision making.
The Libertarians also believe in individual liberty and not abusing govt to impose or mandate beliefs and social agenda.

These parties already had cases and arguments that the other parties abusing govt were Discriminating against them by Creed.

If there are 70 million more people willing to support these parties in redressing their longstanding grievances,
that isn't new justification.

That is just more people taking the issue seriously now that they understand how damaging
it has been to Greens and Libertarians to continue using this system instead of reforming it already.

 

[Rambunctious]

From the network that hires Nazis.....

 

[PoliticalChic]

OK......make that double-dog-dare-ya'.

I admit it's a trap, 'cause if you do agree with this, you will have slapped the label Nazi, Fascist, Bolshevik, on your party.......exactly as I have said each and every day.

Here ya' go:

"CNN's Jake Tapper floats banning Republicans from shows over 'Big Lie': 'Why should I put any of them on TV?'​

"...insisting that the "Big Lie" that the election was "stolen"..."


"The lie about the election on its own is anti-democracy and it is sowing seeds of ignorance in the populous and, obviously, it has the potential to incite violence, but beyond that is if you're willing to lie about that, what are you not willing to lie about?" Tapper asked. "That's where we are when it comes to the House Republican leadership McCarthy and [Rep. Steve] Scalise and where we are with too many leaders of the Republican Party. They're not willing to tell their voters the truth! What does that say about them?"

CNN's Jake Tapper floats banning Republicans from shows over 'Big Lie': 'Why should I put any of them on TV?'

CNN anchor Jake Tapper suggested on Tuesday that he would ban Republicans from appearing on his programs amid the House leadership clash with Rep. Liz Cheney, R-Wy.

www.foxnews.com

How about this......wanna agree with this????????

"I think it’s become clear that fairness is overrated ... the idea that we should always give two sides equal weight and merit does not reflect the world we find ourselves in," Holt said on Tuesday night while accepting an award at the 45th Murrow Symposium. "That the sun sets in the west is a fact. Any contrary view does not deserve our time or attention," Holt continued. "Decisions to not give unsupported arguments equal time are not a dereliction of journalistic responsibility or some kind of agenda, in fact, it’s just the opposite." NBC's Lester Holt says we don’t need to hear both sides to define truth: ‘Fairness is overrated’

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

Lester Holt gets a nice little leftist journalist prize for his logic free trap that says all conservatives are liars
and I won't give them a forum to defend themselves because we already know they are liars.
And it isn't a journalistic dereliction to shut down half of any discussion because only one side,
the correct side, deserves to be heard.

Therefore it is declared so by the Lester Holts of the world and to give any contrary views any air
at all would be the real abuse of privilege by any respectable journalist.

This is how you get colleges that shut down free speech because they have no duty to present all sides of
an issue as only their views deserve to be heard.

 

[otto105]

OK......make that double-dog-dare-ya'.

I admit it's a trap, 'cause if you do agree with this, you will have slapped the label Nazi, Fascist, Bolshevik, on your party.......exactly as I have said each and every day.

Here ya' go:

"CNN's Jake Tapper floats banning Republicans from shows over 'Big Lie': 'Why should I put any of them on TV?'​

"...insisting that the "Big Lie" that the election was "stolen"..."


"The lie about the election on its own is anti-democracy and it is sowing seeds of ignorance in the populous and, obviously, it has the potential to incite violence, but beyond that is if you're willing to lie about that, what are you not willing to lie about?" Tapper asked. "That's where we are when it comes to the House Republican leadership McCarthy and [Rep. Steve] Scalise and where we are with too many leaders of the Republican Party. They're not willing to tell their voters the truth! What does that say about them?"

CNN's Jake Tapper floats banning Republicans from shows over 'Big Lie': 'Why should I put any of them on TV?'

CNN anchor Jake Tapper suggested on Tuesday that he would ban Republicans from appearing on his programs amid the House leadership clash with Rep. Liz Cheney, R-Wy.

www.foxnews.com

How about this......wanna agree with this????????

"I think it’s become clear that fairness is overrated ... the idea that we should always give two sides equal weight and merit does not reflect the world we find ourselves in," Holt said on Tuesday night while accepting an award at the 45th Murrow Symposium. "That the sun sets in the west is a fact. Any contrary view does not deserve our time or attention," Holt continued. "Decisions to not give unsupported arguments equal time are not a dereliction of journalistic responsibility or some kind of agenda, in fact, it’s just the opposite." NBC's Lester Holt says we don’t need to hear both sides to define truth: ‘Fairness is overrated’

View attachment 503195

Nice, ruskie.

 

[IM2]

Silly season never ends for polichic.

 

[hadit]

Imagine an "I dare" thread directed at Republicans by MarcATL. That would be considered a "troll" thread and shut down in 3 minutes flat.

MODs, get up off your backs and on your feet and do your damn jobs.

Sounds like whining to me.

 

[hadit]

OK......make that double-dog-dare-ya'.

I admit it's a trap, 'cause if you do agree with this, you will have slapped the label Nazi, Fascist, Bolshevik, on your party.......exactly as I have said each and every day.

Here ya' go:

"CNN's Jake Tapper floats banning Republicans from shows over 'Big Lie': 'Why should I put any of them on TV?'​

"...insisting that the "Big Lie" that the election was "stolen"..."


"The lie about the election on its own is anti-democracy and it is sowing seeds of ignorance in the populous and, obviously, it has the potential to incite violence, but beyond that is if you're willing to lie about that, what are you not willing to lie about?" Tapper asked. "That's where we are when it comes to the House Republican leadership McCarthy and [Rep. Steve] Scalise and where we are with too many leaders of the Republican Party. They're not willing to tell their voters the truth! What does that say about them?"

CNN's Jake Tapper floats banning Republicans from shows over 'Big Lie': 'Why should I put any of them on TV?'

CNN anchor Jake Tapper suggested on Tuesday that he would ban Republicans from appearing on his programs amid the House leadership clash with Rep. Liz Cheney, R-Wy.

www.foxnews.com

How about this......wanna agree with this????????

"I think it’s become clear that fairness is overrated ... the idea that we should always give two sides equal weight and merit does not reflect the world we find ourselves in," Holt said on Tuesday night while accepting an award at the 45th Murrow Symposium. "That the sun sets in the west is a fact. Any contrary view does not deserve our time or attention," Holt continued. "Decisions to not give unsupported arguments equal time are not a dereliction of journalistic responsibility or some kind of agenda, in fact, it’s just the opposite." NBC's Lester Holt says we don’t need to hear both sides to define truth: ‘Fairness is overrated’

When CNN and their ilk openly ban people who:

1. Say the Holocaust didn't happen (or was a Jewish plot to gain world wide sympathy).
2. Say the World Trade Center was brought down by Mossad agents instead of radical Muslims (or some people did something).
3. Say that Israel has no right to exist.
4. Say that Jews run the world.
5. Cry at an empty parking lot, pretending it's crowded with imprisoned illegal aliens.
6. Say a 6% increase instead of a projected 8% increase is a draconian budget cut.
7. Say that they're afraid Guam will tip over because we have too many troops stationed there.

Then I might begin to believe that they really care about not spreading lies any more. Not going to happen because they will not ban democrats, but it would be nice to see them do it.

 

[PoliticalChic]

When CNN and their ilk openly ban people who:

1. Say the Holocaust didn't happen (or was a Jewish plot to gain world wide sympathy).
2. Say the World Trade Center was brought down by Mossad agents instead of radical Muslims (or some people did something).
3. Say that Israel has no right to exist.
4. Say that Jews run the world.
5. Cry at an empty parking lot, pretending it's crowded with imprisoned illegal aliens.
6. Say a 6% increase instead of a projected 8% increase is a draconian budget cut.
7. Say that they're afraid Guam will tip over because we have too many troops stationed there.

Then I might begin to believe that they really care about not spreading lies any more. Not going to happen becauseI will not ban democrats, but it would be nice to see them do it.

I like to consider myself a zionist....but I don't want either side banned.

And, really, don't we all know that "journalists" are simply Democrats with press passes?

 

[hadit]

I like to consider myself a zionist....but I don't want either side banned.

And, really, don't we all know that "journalists" are simply Democrats with press passes?

I don't want anyone banned either, but I simply cannot take CNN seriously when it's obvious they want to ban a political party, not lies and misinformation. If they want me to take them seriously when they say so, they need to go after all lying, not just Orange Man Bad. Clearly, since they are democrats with press passes, they won't do it.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I don't want anyone banned either, but I simply cannot take CNN seriously when it's obvious they want to ban a political party, not lies and misinformation. If they want me to take them seriously when they say so, they need to go after all lying, not just Orange Man Bad. Clearly, since they are democrats with press passes, they won't do it.

It's OK: you expose them.

I don't watch them. I haven't put on Fox since they stabbed Trump in the back during the election.



I believe folks have caught on:

 

[eddiew37]

It's OK: you expose them.

I don't watch them. I haven't put on Fox since they stabbed Trump in the back during the election.



I believe folks have caught on:

View attachment 544565

Bush was a liar and rump a liar and traitor And you supported them both Says a lot about you

 

[badger2]

Imagine an "I dare" thread directed at Republicans by MarcATL. That would be considered a "troll" thread and shut down in 3 minutes flat.

MODs, get up off your backs and on your feet and do your damn jobs.

It’s just that badger has a “hang-up” about the fascism that competes with other fascisms.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Bush was a liar and rump a liar and traitor And you supported them both Says a lot about you

No one lies with greater frequency nor significance than Democrats......that must be why your sort tries to blame the other side for their iniquity.

Nothing Trump has prevaricated about amounts to a hill of beans compared to these examples:


1. Obama told illegal aliens to go and vote, saying "When you vote, you're a citizen yourself."



2. After promising that Iran would never get nuclear weapons, Obama guaranteed them nukes.

October 7 2008, in the second presidential debate: "We cannot allow Iran to get a nuclear weapon. It would be a game-changer in the region. Not only would it threaten Israel, our strongest ally in the region and one of our strongest allies in the world, but it would also create a possibility of nuclear weapons falling into the hands of terrorists. And so it's unacceptable. And I will do everything that's required to prevent it. And we will never take military options off the table"







The first is an attack on America, the second, on all of Western Civilization.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Bush was a liar and rump a liar
Nothing Trump has prevaricated about amounts to a hill of beans compared to these examples:


1. Obama told illegal aliens to go and vote, saying "When you vote, you're a citizen yourself."



2. After promising that Iran would never get nuclear weapons, Obama guaranteed them nukes.

October 7 2008, in the second presidential debate: "We cannot allow Iran to get a nuclear weapon. It would be a game-changer in the region. Not only would it threaten Israel, our strongest ally in the region and one of our strongest allies in the world, but it would also create a possibility of nuclear weapons falling into the hands of terrorists. And so it's unacceptable. And I will do everything that's required to prevent it. And we will never take military options off the table"







The first is an attack on America, the second, on all of Western Civilization.
And you supported them both Says a lot about you

Bush was a liar and rump a liar and traitor And you supported them both Says a lot about you

"...and traitor..."


Try to use words you can define.....unless that leaves you mute.

China, Russia, Iran...all our enemies.

And all bribed Democrats.



But Trump....


Anti-Russia Actions by Trump…things that have directly and indirectly effected Russia

1.Bombed Russian ally, Syria, hitting Russian facilities killing a number of Russian military

2.Pulled out of the Iran deal…a Russian signee

3.Pulled out of Paris Accords….a Russian signee

4.Sanctions against Russia…460 sanctions against individuals and entities

5.Expelled Russian diplomats

6.Gave Ukraine Javelin anti-tank missiles to use against Russian proxies…Obama sent mittens

7. Obama….more flexible, Hillary ‘reset button,’ wouldn’t give Poland defensive missiles, Uranium one deal….

8. At the NATO meeting, he warned Germany not to make huge energy deals enriching Russia….

9. Trump created an energy juggernaut in the United States….a body-blow to the Russian economy. Anyone pro-fracking is anti-Russia.

10. And, of course, you dunce, first and foremost.....

Russia is a dictatorship.
Nothing emanates from Moscow without Putin's imprimatur....
The 'information' in the infamous 'dossier' came from Russia.

Now.....if Putin wanted Trump to win.......would there have ever.......ever.....been a dossier?????


QED......the candidate of Vladimir Putin was Hillary Clinton and the Democrats.

11. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0mgQaFlo_p8

12. Biden administration to waive sanctions for head of Nord Stream 2 pipeline​

An ally of Russian President Vladimir Putin leads the company that is building the gas pipeline.

Biden administration to waive sanctions for head of Nord Stream 2 pipeline

An ally of Russian President Vladimir Putin leads the company that is building the gas pipeline.

www.politico.com

Now we know the reason for this:





"Hunter Biden received $3.5M wire transfer from Russian billionaire: Senate report

Hunter Biden received a $3.5 million wire transfer from Elena Baturina, the richest woman in Russia and the widow of Yury Luzhkov, the former mayor of Moscow, Senate Republicans revealed in their report on the younger Biden’s work in Ukraine.



Baturina is referenced in the 87-page report, which was released Wednesday, addressing her payment to Biden’s investment firm in early 2014.



“Baturina became Russia’s only female billionaire when her plastics company, Inteko, received a series of Moscow municipal contracts while her husband was mayor,” it said in providing background on the businesswoman."

Hunter Biden received $3.5M wire transfer from Russian billionaire: Senate report

Hunter Biden received a $3.5 million wire transfer from Elena Baturina, the richest woman in Russia and the widow of Yury Luzhkov, the former mayor of Moscow, Senate Republicans revealed in their r…

nypost.com

Selling-out America has become the cottage industry for Democrats.

Now....wanna say 'traitor' again????