Originally posted by Surtur
Why is this hard to get? Virtue signaling over someone putting country before party.Now we have people doing the opposite. I want an explanation for how this helps. There is no reason it should be difficult.
It's hard to get because it's a nonsensical argument.
You are trying to get an explanation for something that no one here actually said, and then you're trying to tie it to some Jeff Flake praise that isn't relevant.
Originally posted by BackFire
How does Jeff Flake relate to this? There is no connection between this and that.
It's rather simple, you idiot.
-Flake called out Trump on his bullshit
-The media reported on Trump's own words (the shithole comment) and that harmed the country, they're the bastards for reporting on the truth as it happened
See the issue now!?
Originally posted by BackFire
It's hard to get because it's a nonsensical argument.You are trying to get an explanation for something that no one here actually said, and then you're trying to tie it to some Jeff Flake praise that isn't relevant.
Holy shit, why is it hard to get? He was praised for putting country before party. Why is that worthy of praise, but people who do the opposite are not worth the opposite of praise?
Is putting country before party only good in selective situations? Like sticking it to Republicans?
Originally posted by BackFire
Who said they aren't worth the opposite of praise?You're acting like someone is arguing against you for not liking these people. No one is.
Rob is, at the very least, defending what was done. Defending actions that put party before country.
If he wasn't, I apologize to Rob. He can verify right now he wasn't doing that. Then we can put this to rest.
Originally posted by Surtur
Rob is, at the very least, defending what was done. Defending actions that put party before country.
The only thing I'm defending is that the media has the right (obligation?) to report things as they happened.
Your stance is that they shouldn't report on what Trump says/does when he puts foot-in-ass. That's some N. Korea shit right there, sport
Originally posted by Robtard
Incorrect again.The only thing I'm defending is that the media has the right (obligation?) to report things as they happened.
Your stance is that they shouldn't report on what Trump says/does when he puts foot-in-ass. That's some N. Korea shit right there, sport
Lol so more bullshit, what is the point? I was going after the weasels who ran to the media, not the media.
Originally posted by Blindside12It's irrelevant. Clinton was not taken to court because of Lewinsky, he was taken to court because a woman named Paula Jones accused him of harassment.
So you just admitted there is no proof. Why are you talking about this as fact then when you get called out?
19 women have already accused Trump of similar if not worse harassment. Why is he not being taken to court?
Originally posted by Firefly218
It's irrelevant. Clinton was not taken to court because of Lewinsky, he was taken to court because a woman named Paula Jones accused him of harassment.19 women have already accused Trump of similar if not worse harassment. Why is he not being taken to court?
Nice shift you have no proof again right? Take him to court for? Lol why haven't they taken him to court Fly?
Originally posted by Firefly218
It's irrelevant. Clinton was not taken to court because of Lewinsky, he was taken to court because a woman named Paula Jones accused him of harassment.19 women have already accused Trump of similar if not worse harassment. Why is he not being taken to court?
You're going back and forth. Stormy has not once claimed Trump harassed her or anything. So even if Trump was taken to court because (insert name) says he harassed her, how does that do anything? If they had any evidence other than the word of these women they would have shown it by now. So it is his word against their own.
Stormy has not alleged Trump harassed her or anything, she has nothing to do with what other women claim.