The First Black Republican Presidential Nominee Will Be.....

[Grumblenuts]

I wish that the point of discussion was wether antifa is the moral equivalent of neo-nazis

Hmm, are anti-fascists the moral equivalent of fascists?.. Hmm.. There are so many great people on both sides.. great people..

 

[Faun]

But regardless, of how many there were or not there, he was talking about them,

The other side, half, most? Whatever,.. regardless he was alluding to "them."

He explicitly stated he was referring to the people that were "not nazis", and the media reported that he said the exact opposite.

Exactly how many of those people there were, is kind of irrelevant.


Hell, if he was wrong, and incredibly, there were nothing but white supremacists and neo-nazis there, he still was not referring to them, but to people he mistaken thought were there.


This should be shockingly good news to any lib...


If they actually believe the shit they say,


but ever lib I have ever talked to about it, gets mad.

LOL

That's what Impeached Trump said at a later date when damage control was needed to fix his initial statement which didn't call out any of the racists on the right. Instead, he equated the racists with those who were there to counter the racists.

So, why do you libs lie about that so much then?


I mean, it is one thing to claim it was just "damage control". It is a very different thing to lie about what he said.

I'd be happy to discuss his initial statement and what you call "damage control" and whether or not Antifa is equal with neo-nazis,


but first, why do you think that the lib media, instead of attacking him for using "damage control" just choose to lie instead,


and what does it say about liberals, that they pretend to believe the lie, even when shown the transcripts?

Because he said what he said. He literally equated the racists with the anti-racists as though they're morally equivalent. When called out on it, he came out to make a second statement to correct his first. He bungled that one too and then came out to make a third statement to correct his second. Then he bungled that one too.

His shifting positions emboldened the racists who were at the rally who tweeted about Impeached Trump's support for them.

He did not say that neo-nazis were fine people.

You are the first liberal that has admitted that to me.

THAT is the point to be discussed on this issue.


I wish that the point of discussion was wether antifa is the moral equivalent of neo-nazis, but that is not what every other libs claims he said.


They choose to lie instead.


Kudos to you for your honesty, btw.

He said there were very fine people on both sides -- but one side was a racist rally. The other side was to counter the racists.

Impeached Trump's comments embolden the racists.

 

[Grumblenuts]

..dead people.. living people.. all so very fine!..

 

[Correll]

I wish that the point of discussion was wether antifa is the moral equivalent of neo-nazis

Hmm, are anti-fascists the moral equivalent of fascists?.. Hmm.. There are so many great people on both sides.. great people..

You take everything everyone says about themselves at face value regardless of the evidence of their actions?

Let me try.


Grumble. I am not racist.


Now, what is your response?

 

[Correll]

But regardless, of how many there were or not there, he was talking about them,

The other side, half, most? Whatever,.. regardless he was alluding to "them."

He explicitly stated he was referring to the people that were "not nazis", and the media reported that he said the exact opposite.

Exactly how many of those people there were, is kind of irrelevant.


Hell, if he was wrong, and incredibly, there were nothing but white supremacists and neo-nazis there, he still was not referring to them, but to people he mistaken thought were there.


This should be shockingly good news to any lib...


If they actually believe the shit they say,


but ever lib I have ever talked to about it, gets mad.

LOL

That's what Impeached Trump said at a later date when damage control was needed to fix his initial statement which didn't call out any of the racists on the right. Instead, he equated the racists with those who were there to counter the racists.

So, why do you libs lie about that so much then?


I mean, it is one thing to claim it was just "damage control". It is a very different thing to lie about what he said.

I'd be happy to discuss his initial statement and what you call "damage control" and whether or not Antifa is equal with neo-nazis,


but first, why do you think that the lib media, instead of attacking him for using "damage control" just choose to lie instead,


and what does it say about liberals, that they pretend to believe the lie, even when shown the transcripts?

Because he said what he said. He literally equated the racists with the anti-racists as though they're morally equivalent. When called out on it, he came out to make a second statement to correct his first. He bungled that one too and then came out to make a third statement to correct his second. Then he bungled that one too.

His shifting positions emboldened the racists who were at the rally who tweeted about Impeached Trump's support for them.

He did not say that neo-nazis were fine people.

You are the first liberal that has admitted that to me.

THAT is the point to be discussed on this issue.


I wish that the point of discussion was wether antifa is the moral equivalent of neo-nazis, but that is not what every other libs claims he said.


They choose to lie instead.


Kudos to you for your honesty, btw.

He said there were very fine people on both sides -- but one side was a racist rally. The other side was to counter the racists.

So, to be clear, you are walking back your earlier admission?

TO be expected. Sad, but, whatever.


Unite the Right rally. Because the organizers worked hard to get a host of different factions there in hopes of "uniting" them. under their banner. Obviously.


YOu are now pretending that everyone that showed up was the same.


When we have been discussing for quite some time, that that is not the case.


YOur partisan spin, is dismissed as an desperate attempt to distract from your dishonest tactics.

 

[Correll]

..dead people.. living people.. all so very fine!..

He explicitly condemned the murderer and the violence.


If you are so certain of your position, why are you constantly lying?

 

[Faun]

But regardless, of how many there were or not there, he was talking about them,

The other side, half, most? Whatever,.. regardless he was alluding to "them."

He explicitly stated he was referring to the people that were "not nazis", and the media reported that he said the exact opposite.

Exactly how many of those people there were, is kind of irrelevant.


Hell, if he was wrong, and incredibly, there were nothing but white supremacists and neo-nazis there, he still was not referring to them, but to people he mistaken thought were there.


This should be shockingly good news to any lib...


If they actually believe the shit they say,


but ever lib I have ever talked to about it, gets mad.

LOL

That's what Impeached Trump said at a later date when damage control was needed to fix his initial statement which didn't call out any of the racists on the right. Instead, he equated the racists with those who were there to counter the racists.

So, why do you libs lie about that so much then?


I mean, it is one thing to claim it was just "damage control". It is a very different thing to lie about what he said.

I'd be happy to discuss his initial statement and what you call "damage control" and whether or not Antifa is equal with neo-nazis,


but first, why do you think that the lib media, instead of attacking him for using "damage control" just choose to lie instead,


and what does it say about liberals, that they pretend to believe the lie, even when shown the transcripts?

Because he said what he said. He literally equated the racists with the anti-racists as though they're morally equivalent. When called out on it, he came out to make a second statement to correct his first. He bungled that one too and then came out to make a third statement to correct his second. Then he bungled that one too.

His shifting positions emboldened the racists who were at the rally who tweeted about Impeached Trump's support for them.

He did not say that neo-nazis were fine people.

You are the first liberal that has admitted that to me.

THAT is the point to be discussed on this issue.


I wish that the point of discussion was wether antifa is the moral equivalent of neo-nazis, but that is not what every other libs claims he said.


They choose to lie instead.


Kudos to you for your honesty, btw.

He said there were very fine people on both sides -- but one side was a racist rally. The other side was to counter the racists.

So, to be clear, you are walking back your earlier admission?

TO be expected. Sad, but, whatever.


Unite the Right rally. Because the organizers worked hard to get a host of different factions there in hopes of "uniting" them. under their banner. Obviously.


YOu are now pretending that everyone that showed up was the same.


When we have been discussing for quite some time, that that is not the case.


YOur partisan spin, is dismissed as an desperate attempt to distract from your dishonest tactics.

I walked back nothing as my position has never wavered.

 

[Grumblenuts]

Grumble. I am not racist.

Now, what is your response?

Correll, I am Martian.. and couldn't care less how you respond to that.

 

[Grumblenuts]

I wish that the point of discussion was wether antifa is the moral equivalent of neo-nazis

Hmm, are anti-fascists the moral equivalent of fascists?.. Hmm.. There are so many great people on both sides.. great people..

You take everything everyone says about themselves at face value regardless of the evidence of their actions?

Evidence? Who died? Who killed them?

 

[Correll]

But regardless, of how many there were or not there, he was talking about them,

The other side, half, most? Whatever,.. regardless he was alluding to "them."

He explicitly stated he was referring to the people that were "not nazis", and the media reported that he said the exact opposite.

Exactly how many of those people there were, is kind of irrelevant.


Hell, if he was wrong, and incredibly, there were nothing but white supremacists and neo-nazis there, he still was not referring to them, but to people he mistaken thought were there.


This should be shockingly good news to any lib...


If they actually believe the shit they say,


but ever lib I have ever talked to about it, gets mad.

LOL

That's what Impeached Trump said at a later date when damage control was needed to fix his initial statement which didn't call out any of the racists on the right. Instead, he equated the racists with those who were there to counter the racists.

So, why do you libs lie about that so much then?


I mean, it is one thing to claim it was just "damage control". It is a very different thing to lie about what he said.

I'd be happy to discuss his initial statement and what you call "damage control" and whether or not Antifa is equal with neo-nazis,


but first, why do you think that the lib media, instead of attacking him for using "damage control" just choose to lie instead,


and what does it say about liberals, that they pretend to believe the lie, even when shown the transcripts?

Because he said what he said. He literally equated the racists with the anti-racists as though they're morally equivalent. When called out on it, he came out to make a second statement to correct his first. He bungled that one too and then came out to make a third statement to correct his second. Then he bungled that one too.

His shifting positions emboldened the racists who were at the rally who tweeted about Impeached Trump's support for them.

He did not say that neo-nazis were fine people.

You are the first liberal that has admitted that to me.

THAT is the point to be discussed on this issue.


I wish that the point of discussion was wether antifa is the moral equivalent of neo-nazis, but that is not what every other libs claims he said.


They choose to lie instead.


Kudos to you for your honesty, btw.

He said there were very fine people on both sides -- but one side was a racist rally. The other side was to counter the racists.

So, to be clear, you are walking back your earlier admission?

TO be expected. Sad, but, whatever.


Unite the Right rally. Because the organizers worked hard to get a host of different factions there in hopes of "uniting" them. under their banner. Obviously.


YOu are now pretending that everyone that showed up was the same.


When we have been discussing for quite some time, that that is not the case.


YOur partisan spin, is dismissed as an desperate attempt to distract from your dishonest tactics.

I walked back nothing as my position has never wavered.

You admitted that he did not call the nazis "very fine people" though you claimed that his condemnation was "damage control".

Any of this sounding familiar or has it been too long for your lib brain to remember?

 

[Correll]

Grumble. I am not racist.

Now, what is your response?

Correll, I am Martian.. and couldn't care less how you respond to that.

Got it. so you understand the concept of not just believing what people say about themselves.


So, why you just accept that "anti-fascist" is all there is to know about Antifa?

 

[Correll]

I wish that the point of discussion was wether antifa is the moral equivalent of neo-nazis

Hmm, are anti-fascists the moral equivalent of fascists?.. Hmm.. There are so many great people on both sides.. great people..

You take everything everyone says about themselves at face value regardless of the evidence of their actions?

Evidence? Who died? Who killed them?

THe evidence of their actions. Evidence does not imply murder. Put the crack pipe down.

 

[Faun]

But regardless, of how many there were or not there, he was talking about them,

The other side, half, most? Whatever,.. regardless he was alluding to "them."

He explicitly stated he was referring to the people that were "not nazis", and the media reported that he said the exact opposite.

Exactly how many of those people there were, is kind of irrelevant.


Hell, if he was wrong, and incredibly, there were nothing but white supremacists and neo-nazis there, he still was not referring to them, but to people he mistaken thought were there.


This should be shockingly good news to any lib...


If they actually believe the shit they say,


but ever lib I have ever talked to about it, gets mad.

LOL

That's what Impeached Trump said at a later date when damage control was needed to fix his initial statement which didn't call out any of the racists on the right. Instead, he equated the racists with those who were there to counter the racists.

So, why do you libs lie about that so much then?


I mean, it is one thing to claim it was just "damage control". It is a very different thing to lie about what he said.

I'd be happy to discuss his initial statement and what you call "damage control" and whether or not Antifa is equal with neo-nazis,


but first, why do you think that the lib media, instead of attacking him for using "damage control" just choose to lie instead,


and what does it say about liberals, that they pretend to believe the lie, even when shown the transcripts?

Because he said what he said. He literally equated the racists with the anti-racists as though they're morally equivalent. When called out on it, he came out to make a second statement to correct his first. He bungled that one too and then came out to make a third statement to correct his second. Then he bungled that one too.

His shifting positions emboldened the racists who were at the rally who tweeted about Impeached Trump's support for them.

He did not say that neo-nazis were fine people.

You are the first liberal that has admitted that to me.

THAT is the point to be discussed on this issue.


I wish that the point of discussion was wether antifa is the moral equivalent of neo-nazis, but that is not what every other libs claims he said.


They choose to lie instead.


Kudos to you for your honesty, btw.

He said there were very fine people on both sides -- but one side was a racist rally. The other side was to counter the racists.

So, to be clear, you are walking back your earlier admission?

TO be expected. Sad, but, whatever.


Unite the Right rally. Because the organizers worked hard to get a host of different factions there in hopes of "uniting" them. under their banner. Obviously.


YOu are now pretending that everyone that showed up was the same.


When we have been discussing for quite some time, that that is not the case.


YOur partisan spin, is dismissed as an desperate attempt to distract from your dishonest tactics.

I walked back nothing as my position has never wavered.

You admitted that he did not call the nazis "very fine people" though you claimed that his condemnation was "damage control".

Any of this sounding familiar or has it been too long for your lib brain to remember?

LOLOL

The word "nazi" isn't even in that post of mine. As always, you're hallucinating again.

 

[Correll]

But regardless, of how many there were or not there, he was talking about them,

The other side, half, most? Whatever,.. regardless he was alluding to "them."

He explicitly stated he was referring to the people that were "not nazis", and the media reported that he said the exact opposite.

Exactly how many of those people there were, is kind of irrelevant.


Hell, if he was wrong, and incredibly, there were nothing but white supremacists and neo-nazis there, he still was not referring to them, but to people he mistaken thought were there.


This should be shockingly good news to any lib...


If they actually believe the shit they say,


but ever lib I have ever talked to about it, gets mad.

LOL

That's what Impeached Trump said at a later date when damage control was needed to fix his initial statement which didn't call out any of the racists on the right. Instead, he equated the racists with those who were there to counter the racists.

So, why do you libs lie about that so much then?


I mean, it is one thing to claim it was just "damage control". It is a very different thing to lie about what he said.

I'd be happy to discuss his initial statement and what you call "damage control" and whether or not Antifa is equal with neo-nazis,


but first, why do you think that the lib media, instead of attacking him for using "damage control" just choose to lie instead,


and what does it say about liberals, that they pretend to believe the lie, even when shown the transcripts?

Because he said what he said. He literally equated the racists with the anti-racists as though they're morally equivalent. When called out on it, he came out to make a second statement to correct his first. He bungled that one too and then came out to make a third statement to correct his second. Then he bungled that one too.

His shifting positions emboldened the racists who were at the rally who tweeted about Impeached Trump's support for them.

He did not say that neo-nazis were fine people.

You are the first liberal that has admitted that to me.

THAT is the point to be discussed on this issue.


I wish that the point of discussion was wether antifa is the moral equivalent of neo-nazis, but that is not what every other libs claims he said.


They choose to lie instead.


Kudos to you for your honesty, btw.

He said there were very fine people on both sides -- but one side was a racist rally. The other side was to counter the racists.

So, to be clear, you are walking back your earlier admission?

TO be expected. Sad, but, whatever.


Unite the Right rally. Because the organizers worked hard to get a host of different factions there in hopes of "uniting" them. under their banner. Obviously.


YOu are now pretending that everyone that showed up was the same.


When we have been discussing for quite some time, that that is not the case.


YOur partisan spin, is dismissed as an desperate attempt to distract from your dishonest tactics.

I walked back nothing as my position has never wavered.

You admitted that he did not call the nazis "very fine people" though you claimed that his condemnation was "damage control".

Any of this sounding familiar or has it been too long for your lib brain to remember?

LOLOL

The word "nazi" isn't even in that post of mine. As always, you're hallucinating again.

The transcript is clear. Anyone that claims that he said neo-nazis are "very fine people" is lying.

 

[Faun]

But regardless, of how many there were or not there, he was talking about them,

The other side, half, most? Whatever,.. regardless he was alluding to "them."

He explicitly stated he was referring to the people that were "not nazis", and the media reported that he said the exact opposite.

Exactly how many of those people there were, is kind of irrelevant.


Hell, if he was wrong, and incredibly, there were nothing but white supremacists and neo-nazis there, he still was not referring to them, but to people he mistaken thought were there.


This should be shockingly good news to any lib...


If they actually believe the shit they say,


but ever lib I have ever talked to about it, gets mad.

LOL

That's what Impeached Trump said at a later date when damage control was needed to fix his initial statement which didn't call out any of the racists on the right. Instead, he equated the racists with those who were there to counter the racists.

So, why do you libs lie about that so much then?


I mean, it is one thing to claim it was just "damage control". It is a very different thing to lie about what he said.

I'd be happy to discuss his initial statement and what you call "damage control" and whether or not Antifa is equal with neo-nazis,


but first, why do you think that the lib media, instead of attacking him for using "damage control" just choose to lie instead,


and what does it say about liberals, that they pretend to believe the lie, even when shown the transcripts?

Because he said what he said. He literally equated the racists with the anti-racists as though they're morally equivalent. When called out on it, he came out to make a second statement to correct his first. He bungled that one too and then came out to make a third statement to correct his second. Then he bungled that one too.

His shifting positions emboldened the racists who were at the rally who tweeted about Impeached Trump's support for them.

He did not say that neo-nazis were fine people.

You are the first liberal that has admitted that to me.

THAT is the point to be discussed on this issue.


I wish that the point of discussion was wether antifa is the moral equivalent of neo-nazis, but that is not what every other libs claims he said.


They choose to lie instead.


Kudos to you for your honesty, btw.

He said there were very fine people on both sides -- but one side was a racist rally. The other side was to counter the racists.

So, to be clear, you are walking back your earlier admission?

TO be expected. Sad, but, whatever.


Unite the Right rally. Because the organizers worked hard to get a host of different factions there in hopes of "uniting" them. under their banner. Obviously.


YOu are now pretending that everyone that showed up was the same.


When we have been discussing for quite some time, that that is not the case.


YOur partisan spin, is dismissed as an desperate attempt to distract from your dishonest tactics.

I walked back nothing as my position has never wavered.

You admitted that he did not call the nazis "very fine people" though you claimed that his condemnation was "damage control".

Any of this sounding familiar or has it been too long for your lib brain to remember?

LOLOL

The word "nazi" isn't even in that post of mine. As always, you're hallucinating again.

The transcript is clear. Anyone that claims that he said neo-nazis are "very fine people" is lying.

One day 1, he equated the racists with the counter-racists, one of whom was killed by a racist. I believe it was on day 3 he came right out and said there were very fine people on the right. And that was the group of racists.

 

[Correll]

But regardless, of how many there were or not there, he was talking about them,

The other side, half, most? Whatever,.. regardless he was alluding to "them."

He explicitly stated he was referring to the people that were "not nazis", and the media reported that he said the exact opposite.

Exactly how many of those people there were, is kind of irrelevant.


Hell, if he was wrong, and incredibly, there were nothing but white supremacists and neo-nazis there, he still was not referring to them, but to people he mistaken thought were there.


This should be shockingly good news to any lib...


If they actually believe the shit they say,


but ever lib I have ever talked to about it, gets mad.

LOL

That's what Impeached Trump said at a later date when damage control was needed to fix his initial statement which didn't call out any of the racists on the right. Instead, he equated the racists with those who were there to counter the racists.

So, why do you libs lie about that so much then?


I mean, it is one thing to claim it was just "damage control". It is a very different thing to lie about what he said.

I'd be happy to discuss his initial statement and what you call "damage control" and whether or not Antifa is equal with neo-nazis,


but first, why do you think that the lib media, instead of attacking him for using "damage control" just choose to lie instead,


and what does it say about liberals, that they pretend to believe the lie, even when shown the transcripts?

Because he said what he said. He literally equated the racists with the anti-racists as though they're morally equivalent. When called out on it, he came out to make a second statement to correct his first. He bungled that one too and then came out to make a third statement to correct his second. Then he bungled that one too.

His shifting positions emboldened the racists who were at the rally who tweeted about Impeached Trump's support for them.

He did not say that neo-nazis were fine people.

You are the first liberal that has admitted that to me.

THAT is the point to be discussed on this issue.


I wish that the point of discussion was wether antifa is the moral equivalent of neo-nazis, but that is not what every other libs claims he said.


They choose to lie instead.


Kudos to you for your honesty, btw.

He said there were very fine people on both sides -- but one side was a racist rally. The other side was to counter the racists.

So, to be clear, you are walking back your earlier admission?

TO be expected. Sad, but, whatever.


Unite the Right rally. Because the organizers worked hard to get a host of different factions there in hopes of "uniting" them. under their banner. Obviously.


YOu are now pretending that everyone that showed up was the same.


When we have been discussing for quite some time, that that is not the case.


YOur partisan spin, is dismissed as an desperate attempt to distract from your dishonest tactics.

I walked back nothing as my position has never wavered.

You admitted that he did not call the nazis "very fine people" though you claimed that his condemnation was "damage control".

Any of this sounding familiar or has it been too long for your lib brain to remember?

LOLOL

The word "nazi" isn't even in that post of mine. As always, you're hallucinating again.

The transcript is clear. Anyone that claims that he said neo-nazis are "very fine people" is lying.

One day 1, he equated the racists with the counter-racists, one of whom was killed by a racist. I believe it was on day 3 he came right out and said there were very fine people on the right. And that was the group of racists.

1. Some of the counter protesters were violent thugs. Why would you want that to be ignored?

2. He explicitly stated that he was not referring to the white supremacists when he made that comment. Why are you lying?

 

[Faun]

But regardless, of how many there were or not there, he was talking about them,

The other side, half, most? Whatever,.. regardless he was alluding to "them."

He explicitly stated he was referring to the people that were "not nazis", and the media reported that he said the exact opposite.

Exactly how many of those people there were, is kind of irrelevant.


Hell, if he was wrong, and incredibly, there were nothing but white supremacists and neo-nazis there, he still was not referring to them, but to people he mistaken thought were there.


This should be shockingly good news to any lib...


If they actually believe the shit they say,


but ever lib I have ever talked to about it, gets mad.

LOL

That's what Impeached Trump said at a later date when damage control was needed to fix his initial statement which didn't call out any of the racists on the right. Instead, he equated the racists with those who were there to counter the racists.

So, why do you libs lie about that so much then?


I mean, it is one thing to claim it was just "damage control". It is a very different thing to lie about what he said.

I'd be happy to discuss his initial statement and what you call "damage control" and whether or not Antifa is equal with neo-nazis,


but first, why do you think that the lib media, instead of attacking him for using "damage control" just choose to lie instead,


and what does it say about liberals, that they pretend to believe the lie, even when shown the transcripts?

Because he said what he said. He literally equated the racists with the anti-racists as though they're morally equivalent. When called out on it, he came out to make a second statement to correct his first. He bungled that one too and then came out to make a third statement to correct his second. Then he bungled that one too.

His shifting positions emboldened the racists who were at the rally who tweeted about Impeached Trump's support for them.

He did not say that neo-nazis were fine people.

You are the first liberal that has admitted that to me.

THAT is the point to be discussed on this issue.


I wish that the point of discussion was wether antifa is the moral equivalent of neo-nazis, but that is not what every other libs claims he said.


They choose to lie instead.


Kudos to you for your honesty, btw.

He said there were very fine people on both sides -- but one side was a racist rally. The other side was to counter the racists.

So, to be clear, you are walking back your earlier admission?

TO be expected. Sad, but, whatever.


Unite the Right rally. Because the organizers worked hard to get a host of different factions there in hopes of "uniting" them. under their banner. Obviously.


YOu are now pretending that everyone that showed up was the same.


When we have been discussing for quite some time, that that is not the case.


YOur partisan spin, is dismissed as an desperate attempt to distract from your dishonest tactics.

I walked back nothing as my position has never wavered.

You admitted that he did not call the nazis "very fine people" though you claimed that his condemnation was "damage control".

Any of this sounding familiar or has it been too long for your lib brain to remember?

LOLOL

The word "nazi" isn't even in that post of mine. As always, you're hallucinating again.

The transcript is clear. Anyone that claims that he said neo-nazis are "very fine people" is lying.

One day 1, he equated the racists with the counter-racists, one of whom was killed by a racist. I believe it was on day 3 he came right out and said there were very fine people on the right. And that was the group of racists.

1. Some of the counter protesters were violent thugs. Why would you want that to be ignored?

2. He explicitly stated that he was not referring to the white supremacists when he made that comment. Why are you lying?

Because the right was comprised of racists.

 

[Grumblenuts]

But regardless, of how many there were or not there, he was talking about them,

The other side, half, most? Whatever,.. regardless he was alluding to "them."

He explicitly stated he was referring to the people that were "not nazis", and the media reported that he said the exact opposite.

Exactly how many of those people there were, is kind of irrelevant.


Hell, if he was wrong, and incredibly, there were nothing but white supremacists and neo-nazis there, he still was not referring to them, but to people he mistaken thought were there.


This should be shockingly good news to any lib...


If they actually believe the shit they say,


but ever lib I have ever talked to about it, gets mad.

LOL

That's what Impeached Trump said at a later date when damage control was needed to fix his initial statement which didn't call out any of the racists on the right. Instead, he equated the racists with those who were there to counter the racists.

So, why do you libs lie about that so much then?


I mean, it is one thing to claim it was just "damage control". It is a very different thing to lie about what he said.

I'd be happy to discuss his initial statement and what you call "damage control" and whether or not Antifa is equal with neo-nazis,


but first, why do you think that the lib media, instead of attacking him for using "damage control" just choose to lie instead,


and what does it say about liberals, that they pretend to believe the lie, even when shown the transcripts?

Because he said what he said. He literally equated the racists with the anti-racists as though they're morally equivalent. When called out on it, he came out to make a second statement to correct his first. He bungled that one too and then came out to make a third statement to correct his second. Then he bungled that one too.

His shifting positions emboldened the racists who were at the rally who tweeted about Impeached Trump's support for them.

He did not say that neo-nazis were fine people.

You are the first liberal that has admitted that to me.

THAT is the point to be discussed on this issue.


I wish that the point of discussion was wether antifa is the moral equivalent of neo-nazis, but that is not what every other libs claims he said.


They choose to lie instead.


Kudos to you for your honesty, btw.

He said there were very fine people on both sides -- but one side was a racist rally. The other side was to counter the racists.

So, to be clear, you are walking back your earlier admission?

TO be expected. Sad, but, whatever.


Unite the Right rally. Because the organizers worked hard to get a host of different factions there in hopes of "uniting" them. under their banner. Obviously.


YOu are now pretending that everyone that showed up was the same.


When we have been discussing for quite some time, that that is not the case.


YOur partisan spin, is dismissed as an desperate attempt to distract from your dishonest tactics.

I walked back nothing as my position has never wavered.

You admitted that he did not call the nazis "very fine people" though you claimed that his condemnation was "damage control".

Any of this sounding familiar or has it been too long for your lib brain to remember?

LOLOL

The word "nazi" isn't even in that post of mine. As always, you're hallucinating again.

The transcript is clear. Anyone that claims that he said neo-nazis are "very fine people" is lying.

One day 1, he equated the racists with the counter-racists, one of whom was killed by a racist. I believe it was on day 3 he came right out and said there were very fine people on the right. And that was the group of racists.

In Context: Trump’s ‘very fine people on both sides’ remarks

On Aug. 15, 2017, President Donald Trump held a press conference to discuss an executive order he had signed on infrastr

www.politifact.com

It was at this press conference that Trump said that "you also had people that were very fine people, on both sides."

 

[Correll]

But regardless, of how many there were or not there, he was talking about them,

The other side, half, most? Whatever,.. regardless he was alluding to "them."

He explicitly stated he was referring to the people that were "not nazis", and the media reported that he said the exact opposite.

Exactly how many of those people there were, is kind of irrelevant.


Hell, if he was wrong, and incredibly, there were nothing but white supremacists and neo-nazis there, he still was not referring to them, but to people he mistaken thought were there.


This should be shockingly good news to any lib...


If they actually believe the shit they say,


but ever lib I have ever talked to about it, gets mad.

LOL

That's what Impeached Trump said at a later date when damage control was needed to fix his initial statement which didn't call out any of the racists on the right. Instead, he equated the racists with those who were there to counter the racists.

So, why do you libs lie about that so much then?


I mean, it is one thing to claim it was just "damage control". It is a very different thing to lie about what he said.

I'd be happy to discuss his initial statement and what you call "damage control" and whether or not Antifa is equal with neo-nazis,


but first, why do you think that the lib media, instead of attacking him for using "damage control" just choose to lie instead,


and what does it say about liberals, that they pretend to believe the lie, even when shown the transcripts?

Because he said what he said. He literally equated the racists with the anti-racists as though they're morally equivalent. When called out on it, he came out to make a second statement to correct his first. He bungled that one too and then came out to make a third statement to correct his second. Then he bungled that one too.

His shifting positions emboldened the racists who were at the rally who tweeted about Impeached Trump's support for them.

He did not say that neo-nazis were fine people.

You are the first liberal that has admitted that to me.

THAT is the point to be discussed on this issue.


I wish that the point of discussion was wether antifa is the moral equivalent of neo-nazis, but that is not what every other libs claims he said.


They choose to lie instead.


Kudos to you for your honesty, btw.

He said there were very fine people on both sides -- but one side was a racist rally. The other side was to counter the racists.

So, to be clear, you are walking back your earlier admission?

TO be expected. Sad, but, whatever.


Unite the Right rally. Because the organizers worked hard to get a host of different factions there in hopes of "uniting" them. under their banner. Obviously.


YOu are now pretending that everyone that showed up was the same.


When we have been discussing for quite some time, that that is not the case.


YOur partisan spin, is dismissed as an desperate attempt to distract from your dishonest tactics.

I walked back nothing as my position has never wavered.

You admitted that he did not call the nazis "very fine people" though you claimed that his condemnation was "damage control".

Any of this sounding familiar or has it been too long for your lib brain to remember?

LOLOL

The word "nazi" isn't even in that post of mine. As always, you're hallucinating again.

The transcript is clear. Anyone that claims that he said neo-nazis are "very fine people" is lying.

One day 1, he equated the racists with the counter-racists, one of whom was killed by a racist. I believe it was on day 3 he came right out and said there were very fine people on the right. And that was the group of racists.

1. Some of the counter protesters were violent thugs. Why would you want that to be ignored?

2. He explicitly stated that he was not referring to the white supremacists when he made that comment. Why are you lying?

Because the right was comprised of racists.

Why do you keep saying "racist" when the normal claim is that he said it of "neo nazis"?

Is it because you know it is a lie, and you are trying to avoid admitting it by playing some "conflating" game?


It is that, isn't it?

 

[Faun]

But regardless, of how many there were or not there, he was talking about them,

The other side, half, most? Whatever,.. regardless he was alluding to "them."

He explicitly stated he was referring to the people that were "not nazis", and the media reported that he said the exact opposite.

Exactly how many of those people there were, is kind of irrelevant.


Hell, if he was wrong, and incredibly, there were nothing but white supremacists and neo-nazis there, he still was not referring to them, but to people he mistaken thought were there.


This should be shockingly good news to any lib...


If they actually believe the shit they say,


but ever lib I have ever talked to about it, gets mad.

LOL

That's what Impeached Trump said at a later date when damage control was needed to fix his initial statement which didn't call out any of the racists on the right. Instead, he equated the racists with those who were there to counter the racists.

So, why do you libs lie about that so much then?


I mean, it is one thing to claim it was just "damage control". It is a very different thing to lie about what he said.

I'd be happy to discuss his initial statement and what you call "damage control" and whether or not Antifa is equal with neo-nazis,


but first, why do you think that the lib media, instead of attacking him for using "damage control" just choose to lie instead,


and what does it say about liberals, that they pretend to believe the lie, even when shown the transcripts?

Because he said what he said. He literally equated the racists with the anti-racists as though they're morally equivalent. When called out on it, he came out to make a second statement to correct his first. He bungled that one too and then came out to make a third statement to correct his second. Then he bungled that one too.

His shifting positions emboldened the racists who were at the rally who tweeted about Impeached Trump's support for them.

He did not say that neo-nazis were fine people.

You are the first liberal that has admitted that to me.

THAT is the point to be discussed on this issue.


I wish that the point of discussion was wether antifa is the moral equivalent of neo-nazis, but that is not what every other libs claims he said.


They choose to lie instead.


Kudos to you for your honesty, btw.

He said there were very fine people on both sides -- but one side was a racist rally. The other side was to counter the racists.

So, to be clear, you are walking back your earlier admission?

TO be expected. Sad, but, whatever.


Unite the Right rally. Because the organizers worked hard to get a host of different factions there in hopes of "uniting" them. under their banner. Obviously.


YOu are now pretending that everyone that showed up was the same.


When we have been discussing for quite some time, that that is not the case.


YOur partisan spin, is dismissed as an desperate attempt to distract from your dishonest tactics.

I walked back nothing as my position has never wavered.

You admitted that he did not call the nazis "very fine people" though you claimed that his condemnation was "damage control".

Any of this sounding familiar or has it been too long for your lib brain to remember?

LOLOL

The word "nazi" isn't even in that post of mine. As always, you're hallucinating again.

The transcript is clear. Anyone that claims that he said neo-nazis are "very fine people" is lying.

One day 1, he equated the racists with the counter-racists, one of whom was killed by a racist. I believe it was on day 3 he came right out and said there were very fine people on the right. And that was the group of racists.

1. Some of the counter protesters were violent thugs. Why would you want that to be ignored?

2. He explicitly stated that he was not referring to the white supremacists when he made that comment. Why are you lying?

Because the right was comprised of racists.

Why do you keep saying "racist" when the normal claim is that he said it of "neo nazis"?

Is it because you know it is a lie, and you are trying to avoid admitting it by playing some "conflating" game?


It is that, isn't it?

Nope, it's because there were multiple facets of racists, including neonazis, who congregated for their Unite the Right rally. I didn't want to hurt any racist's feelings by exclude them.