If the Enquirer story proves to be false will you feel stupid having used it as a weapon?

[Avatar4321]

"If the Enquirer story proves to be false will you feel stupid having used it as a weapon?"

Of course it’s false, but that has nothing to do with the truth.

Indeed, it illustrates how willing conservatives are to attack their own with lies and personal attacks as they are democrats.

At least conservatives are consistent in using lies and personal attacks as political weapons.

How do you know it is false?

When have Democrats not used lies and personal attacks as political weapons?

"If the Enquirer story proves to be false will you feel stupid having used it as a weapon?"

Of course it’s false, but that has nothing to do with the truth.

Indeed, it illustrates how willing conservatives are to attack their own with lies and personal attacks as they are democrats.

At least conservatives are consistent in using lies and personal attacks as political weapons.

How do you know it is false?

When have Democrats not used lies and personal attacks as political weapons?

Easy he thought about it. Something the right used to do

 

[Kondor3]

We seem to forget who fired the first shot.

It was Cruz.

Through his Super-PAC.

Ye reap what ye sow.

Actually no, Trump fired many shots way before, and now Cruz and his supporters are firing back...

Against Heidi Cruz?

Trump fired the first shot?

Didn't trump go after Cruz' wife, only after a Super-Pac, backing Cruz, did a slam-dunk on Trump's wife.

Doesn't that slam-dunk constitute 'firing the first shot' - in the context of wife-bashing?

Trump went after Cruz mother when Trump called Cruz a Canadian Anchor baby...

From there it has gotten more retarded and it need to stop!

Trump calls cruz a canadian anchor baby - Bing

I believe insulting someone mother is far worst than insulting someone wife...

Translation: "Well, yeah, you got me there. In the context of wives, Cruz DID fire the first shot."

Your Honor... the Defense rests.

 

[Bruce_T_Laney]

We seem to forget who fired the first shot.

It was Cruz.

Through his Super-PAC.

Ye reap what ye sow.

Actually no, Trump fired many shots way before, and now Cruz and his supporters are firing back...

Against Heidi Cruz?

Trump fired the first shot?

Didn't trump go after Cruz' wife, only after a Super-Pac, backing Cruz, did a slam-dunk on Trump's wife.

Doesn't that slam-dunk constitute 'firing the first shot' - in the context of wife-bashing?

Trump went after Cruz mother when Trump called Cruz a Canadian Anchor baby...

From there it has gotten more retarded and it need to stop!

Trump calls cruz a canadian anchor baby - Bing

I believe insulting someone mother is far worst than insulting someone wife...

Translation: "Well, yeah, you got me there. In the context of wives, Cruz DID fire the first shot."

Your Honor... the Defense rests.

Translation:

" I'm too fucking retarded to understand that there is no context in the slander that is going on, and I support Trump comment and believe Cruz is a Canadian Anchor Baby "

------

The reality is Trump has been flinging insults against Cruz for months and once a Super Pac tosses one at Trump wife you and him get upset...

Well then he should have never insulted Cruz mother and I do not care if it is a wife or mother the fact remains your boy Trump is the punk bitch in this bitch slap fight seeing he was the one that fired first by insulting Cruz mother...

Now with that and seeing Trump mother was from Scotland would it be alright for Cruz to claim that Trump was a anchor baby for his mother citizenship?

 

[ptbw forever]

"If the Enquirer story proves to be false will you feel stupid having used it as a weapon?"

Of course it’s false, but that has nothing to do with the truth.

Indeed, it illustrates how willing conservatives are to attack their own with lies and personal attacks as they are democrats.

At least conservatives are consistent in using lies and personal attacks as political weapons.

How do you know it is false?

When have Democrats not used lies and personal attacks as political weapons?

"If the Enquirer story proves to be false will you feel stupid having used it as a weapon?"

Of course it’s false, but that has nothing to do with the truth.

Indeed, it illustrates how willing conservatives are to attack their own with lies and personal attacks as they are democrats.

At least conservatives are consistent in using lies and personal attacks as political weapons.

How do you know it is false?

When have Democrats not used lies and personal attacks as political weapons?

Easy he thought about it. Something the right used to do

I am not saying the story is true, I am just saying it can't be dismissed as false outright.

 

[Avatar4321]

"If the Enquirer story proves to be false will you feel stupid having used it as a weapon?"

Of course it’s false, but that has nothing to do with the truth.

Indeed, it illustrates how willing conservatives are to attack their own with lies and personal attacks as they are democrats.

At least conservatives are consistent in using lies and personal attacks as political weapons.

How do you know it is false?

When have Democrats not used lies and personal attacks as political weapons?

And here we see the difference between conservatives and liberals.

Liberals correctly presume innocence, assume allegations are false and without merit until such time as proven to be true based on facts and objective, documented evidence.

Conservatives, on the other hand and for the most part, presume guilt, assume allegations are true, placing the burden of proof on those accused – hence the reprehensible right.

Mark Foley disproves that. Leftists to this day claim he was a pedophile despite no evidence that he did anything inappropriate with prepubecent children.

George W Bush proves it as well. You still claim he is guilty of lots of things with no evidence. Heck there is a thread trying to claim he is guilty of the housing collapse when we know barney frank and other democrats blocked his attempts at reform to prevent it.

So please don't pretend your innocent.

 

[candycorn]

I was willing to give "Lyin Ted" the benefit of the doubt at first. But he started the whole shebang when he (via a Super PAC) went after Melania for being a stunningly beautiful woman. And please spare me the bullshit about Super PACs not coordinating with candidates - It takes a special kind of stupid to buy that line of shit.

Not surprisingly, after the "hookers and mistresses story"story went viral "Lyin Ted" blamed Trump. Even though everyone knows it came from Rubio.

So, at this point, he's lost all benefit with me. He's an unctuous, sanctimonious, self righteous ass.

You know, you used to care about facts until you started drinking the kool aid. You don't want to hear the truth? Boo fricking hoo.

It takes a special kind of stupid to believe the its Rubios fault argument. Especially when you guys don't even believe it. You want to know why?

RUBIO ISNT IN THE RACE ANYMORE. He has absolutely no reason to run it it. See, he isn't concerned with retaliation like the billionaire tyrant is. And he wouldn't need to retaliate against Cruz anyway.

Moreover you guys keep claiming this is in retaliation for melania pics. Did you ever stop to consider this question?

WHY WOULD RUBIO RETALIATE AGAINST CRUZ FOR MELANIA PICS????

Seriously its either rubios fault or this is retaliation for melania. You can't consistently argue both. So subconsciously you know somewhere that what your arguing is pure nonsense.

And lets not forget that the nation enquirer is endorsing trump and is run by his friend Mr pecker. You want us to believe that Cruz is responsibly for an ad from a non affiliated anti trump Pac, and yet Rubio is responsible for a hit piece in the trump friendly enquirer. That comes out right when Donald is losing in polls in Wisconsin and his fraud case is making news.

We are supposed to believe that bull?

Stop drinking the kool aid and come to yourself. You are better than this.

No he isnt

 

[Avatar4321]

We seem to forget who fired the first shot.

It was Cruz.

Through his Super-PAC.

Ye reap what ye sow.

If a guy down the street does something mean to me I have the right to attack my unaffiliated business rival in the most nasty way?

 

[Faun]

"If the Enquirer story proves to be false will you feel stupid having used it as a weapon?"

Of course it’s false, but that has nothing to do with the truth.

Indeed, it illustrates how willing conservatives are to attack their own with lies and personal attacks as they are democrats.

At least conservatives are consistent in using lies and personal attacks as political weapons.

How do you know it is false?

When have Democrats not used lies and personal attacks as political weapons?

And here we see the difference between conservatives and liberals.

Liberals correctly presume innocence, assume allegations are false and without merit until such time as proven to be true based on facts and objective, documented evidence.

Conservatives, on the other hand and for the most part, presume guilt, assume allegations are true, placing the burden of proof on those accused – hence the reprehensible right.

Mark Foley disproves that. Leftists to this day claim he was a pedophile despite no evidence that he did anything inappropriate with prepubecent children.

George W Bush proves it as well. You still claim he is guilty of lots of things with no evidence. Heck there is a thread trying to claim he is guilty of the housing collapse when we know barney frank and other democrats blocked his attempts at reform to prevent it.

So please don't pretend your innocent.

How the fuck did Democrats block the majority party Republicans from voting for reform? And don't bother posting the Barney video where he spoke out against reform. I know Frank was against it. But how did he (and other Democrats) block it? How did he prevent the House (where a simple majority is needed and one such bill actually did pass) from passing GSE reform? How did Democrats prevent majority party Republicans in the Senate from allowing any GSE reform bills to make it to the Senate floor for a full up/down vote?

 

[Billy000]

People seem too eager to believe unsubstantiated accusations. Some of you have started multiple threads on the subject, all without any proof. In fact so far, 2 of the women in question have denied the stories yet the threads continue.

We claim we want more out of our politicians but it seems to me they are just a reflection of us. Lowbrow & cut throat, willing to lie to serve a purpose.

The story could be bullshit, but to say it is because two of the women have denied it is hogwash. Obviously they would want to protect their reputations.

 

[candycorn]

"If the Enquirer story proves to be false will you feel stupid having used it as a weapon?"

Of course it’s false, but that has nothing to do with the truth.

Indeed, it illustrates how willing conservatives are to attack their own with lies and personal attacks as they are democrats.

At least conservatives are consistent in using lies and personal attacks as political weapons.

How do you know it is false?

When have Democrats not used lies and personal attacks as political weapons?

And here we see the difference between conservatives and liberals.

Liberals correctly presume innocence, assume allegations are false and without merit until such time as proven to be true based on facts and objective, documented evidence.

Conservatives, on the other hand and for the most part, presume guilt, assume allegations are true, placing the burden of proof on those accused – hence the reprehensible right.

Mark Foley disproves that. Leftists to this day claim he was a pedophile despite no evidence that he did anything inappropriate with prepubecent children.

George W Bush proves it as well. You still claim he is guilty of lots of things with no evidence. Heck there is a thread trying to claim he is guilty of the housing collapse when we know barney frank and other democrats blocked his attempts at reform to prevent it.

So please don't pretend your innocent.

By the same logic, the House has blocked most of Obama'$ initiatives, doesn't stop you guys from blaming him for everything

 

[Toro]

People seem too eager to believe unsubstantiated accusations. Some of you have started multiple threads on the subject, all without any proof. In fact so far, 2 of the women in question have denied the stories yet the threads continue.

We claim we want more out of our politicians but it seems to me they are just a reflection of us. Lowbrow & cut throat, willing to lie to serve a purpose.

Trump supporters are completely incapable of embarrassment.

So why would this be any different?

 

[Avatar4321]

"If the Enquirer story proves to be false will you feel stupid having used it as a weapon?"

Of course it’s false, but that has nothing to do with the truth.

Indeed, it illustrates how willing conservatives are to attack their own with lies and personal attacks as they are democrats.

At least conservatives are consistent in using lies and personal attacks as political weapons.

How do you know it is false?

When have Democrats not used lies and personal attacks as political weapons?

"If the Enquirer story proves to be false will you feel stupid having used it as a weapon?"

Of course it’s false, but that has nothing to do with the truth.

Indeed, it illustrates how willing conservatives are to attack their own with lies and personal attacks as they are democrats.

At least conservatives are consistent in using lies and personal attacks as political weapons.

How do you know it is false?

When have Democrats not used lies and personal attacks as political weapons?

Easy he thought about it. Something the right used to do

I am not saying the story is true, I am just saying it can't be dismissed as false outright.

When all parties involved deny it happened and no external evidence exists how can you not dismiss it outright?

 

[Avatar4321]

People seem too eager to believe unsubstantiated accusations. Some of you have started multiple threads on the subject, all without any proof. In fact so far, 2 of the women in question have denied the stories yet the threads continue.

We claim we want more out of our politicians but it seems to me they are just a reflection of us. Lowbrow & cut throat, willing to lie to serve a purpose.

Trump supporters are completely incapable of embarrassment.

So why would this be any different?

Good point. If being a trump supporter I and of itself isn't embarrassing enough why would we expect this to differ?

 

[Arizona Willie]

People seem too eager to believe unsubstantiated accusations. Some of you have started multiple threads on the subject, all without any proof. In fact so far, 2 of the women in question have denied the stories yet the threads continue.

We claim we want more out of our politicians but it seems to me they are just a reflection of us. Lowbrow & cut throat, willing to lie to serve a purpose.

========
If the Enquirer story isn't true it's no worse than the Raging Righties accusing the Clintons of every crime in the book including murder with no evidence whatsoever and NEVER finding any evidence. The Raging Righties spent millions of dollars suing and taking the Clintons to court and never succeeded in proving anything but a blowjob.

 

[Faun]

"If the Enquirer story proves to be false will you feel stupid having used it as a weapon?"

Of course it’s false, but that has nothing to do with the truth.

Indeed, it illustrates how willing conservatives are to attack their own with lies and personal attacks as they are democrats.

At least conservatives are consistent in using lies and personal attacks as political weapons.

How do you know it is false?

When have Democrats not used lies and personal attacks as political weapons?

And here we see the difference between conservatives and liberals.

Liberals correctly presume innocence, assume allegations are false and without merit until such time as proven to be true based on facts and objective, documented evidence.

Conservatives, on the other hand and for the most part, presume guilt, assume allegations are true, placing the burden of proof on those accused – hence the reprehensible right.

Mark Foley disproves that. Leftists to this day claim he was a pedophile despite no evidence that he did anything inappropriate with prepubecent children.

George W Bush proves it as well. You still claim he is guilty of lots of things with no evidence. Heck there is a thread trying to claim he is guilty of the housing collapse when we know barney frank and other democrats blocked his attempts at reform to prevent it.

So please don't pretend your innocent.

How the fuck did Democrats block the majority party Republicans from voting for reform? And don't bother posting the Barney video where he spoke out against reform. I know Frank was against it. But how did he (and other Democrats) block it? How did he prevent the House (where a simple majority is needed and one such bill actually did pass) from passing GSE reform? How did Democrats prevent majority party Republicans in the Senate from allowing any GSE reform bills to make it to the Senate floor for a full up/down vote?

<no answer>

 

[MrShangles]

Why wouldn't anyone believe what is printed in the National Enquirer?

What next? Breitbart?

The national Enquirer .
The magazine that brought you classic stories like " boy in refrigerator eats own foot" and "my vampire baby".

Vampire baby could be Cruzes child, he has that Eddie Munster look


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Kondor3]

We seem to forget who fired the first shot.

It was Cruz.

Through his Super-PAC.

Ye reap what ye sow.

If a guy down the street does something mean to me I have the right to attack my unaffiliated business rival in the most nasty way?

Q: "Why did you fire upon my position with overwhelming force?"

A: "Because that is the way to win."

Don't want nuthin'? Don't start nuthin'. Simple.

 

[Avatar4321]

We seem to forget who fired the first shot.

It was Cruz.

Through his Super-PAC.

Ye reap what ye sow.

If a guy down the street does something mean to me I have the right to attack my unaffiliated business rival in the most nasty way?

Q: "Why did you fire upon my position with overwhelming force?"

A: "Because that is the way to win."

Don't want nuthin'? Don't start nuthin'. Simple.

So what your saying is now we can make up crap about trump because he unilaterally started fighting dirty?

Sorry doesn't work that way. Nothing justifies being a bully and making crap up. That doesn't make you a winner. It makes you an @$$**#*.

Trump was wrong to go after Heidi and then have his friends release a false story. And karmas a b****

 

[SwimExpert]

We claim we want more out of our politicians but it seems to me they are just a reflection of us. Lowbrow & cut throat, willing to lie to serve a purpose.

It's the modern day entitlement mentality. People want certain things, but they expect to be able to have them without the associated costs and consequences.

 

[NYcarbineer]

The story will never be proven false. That's the evil beauty of it.