I get this stuff from my life experience. The point is, Trump doesn’t drink. It takes tremendous strength of character to stand firm against the common herd. Isn’t that a mark of a leader?
TimB: “Thanks Bob. It’s good to know you have found a useful function.”
You are welcome. Keeping Dems safe is its own reward and its easier than herding cats.
@Sree No, it doesn’t take tremendous strength to stand up against something the herd does nor does it make on a leader. Also, life experience doesn’t teach you everything. It could just mean that the dotard is a loner. He’s not a loner, but you can’t just assume such things makes one a leader.
@Bob I’m not watching the SOTU. I always turn the channel or turn the TV when the dotard speaks because I stand his voice or even stand to look at him. So I’ve very rarely heard a word he’s said and that which I have heard is nothing but lies. So there’s no reason to watch and listen to his SOTU address because it will be nothing but lies. Politicfact and other fact checking sources have shown this, which I cannot understand for the life of me why anyone would continue to even listen to him. So no I’m not going to waste my time listening to his lies. I find it curious why anyone listens to him when all he does is lie with every sentence.
Sometimes people have to be loud to be heard or they get ignored. So your statements aren’t accurate. I thought the House managers did a very good job and proved their point but the Repugs don’t care to listen. It’s like the dotard’s cronies and minions have some sort of virus or at least been brainwashed, definitely bribed in the case of his cronies to deny everything. It’s the Repug’s stupidity and criminal mentality that caused me to stop listening. Anytime someone puts their fingers in their ears and loudly says, like the Repugs are doing, “NOT TRUE! NOT TRUE! I CAN’T HEAR YOU!” then you know something has happened that isn’t good and they don’t want to discuss it. We need witnesses to testify and as of right now the Repugs are saying, “No! We can’t talk about what just happened and no one was there is allowed to talk about it. We don’t care that there has been a crime.” If they aren’t hiding anything then why not allow the witnesses? They are covering up the dotard’s crimes or they’d allow witnesses. It’s nothing but a cover up by the Repugs and if the trial isn’t allowed to actually happen, then we no longer have a democracy in this alleged Republic. We have a criminal dictatorship and things will only get worse and the brainwashed dotard supporters will have no one to blame but themselves.
I don’t watch tractor pulling. I watch educational stuff and SciFi and even British TV, but not air polluting tractor pulls.
Truth is in the eyes of the beholder, Mriana.That's beauty Sree. It's a wonderful world where people can choose what they consider beautiful. But when truth is no longer truth, that simple right can be taken away.
The term “Republican Truth” is a silly oxymoron. But I can translate it. It refers today to “Trumpublican Lies”.
I will probably glance at the SOTU, just to see what particular drift and thrust the lies will take for the remainder of his never-ending campaign for the 2020 election.
I imagine he will portray himself as a perpetual victim of another of attempted coups by the Dems, in which he will soon be the Victor once again, when the pretend Impeachment “trial” is officially closed out on the morrow. He will be in full hyperbolic mode on how he has made “the best economy EVER”. Beyond that I am not sure what thrust his lies will take. But it doesn’t matter, if he figures out how to rig the 2020 election (by breaking any law/s that he wishes, since he is now ABOVE THE LAW).
Anyway, the Impeachment “trial that never was” will be officially over on Wednesday. T rump is now our Dictator of the United States (DOTUS).
I am not sure that the great American experiment can overcome this. Definitely not, if T rump steals the next election. And why would we think that he won’t?
The Trumpublican Senate has deemed him able to do anything, break any law, as long as it is in his own self-interest, which is, by his own definition, good for the country. And they did this grand expansion of Power to the Executive Branch, without even hearing any witnesses. Actually not hearing any witnesses was just their addition to obstruction of evidence which was an article of Impeachment. Not only did they not even censure T rump for obstruction, they took part in helping him obstruct.
Watch Bill Maher’s most recent “new rules” video. The pee tape is at the end.
You are too shy Tim
I don’t even like Bill Maher, nor do I think Democrats need to lie, they need to get militant about demanding truth, and honesty, and openly confronting and examining the mentality and immorality of Republican leaders face to face.
No need to add more lies to the mix.
But the video was fun, I’ll give him that.
I wouldn’t put it past the DOTUS to steal the next election or have someone steal it for him again, just as he had the last one stolen so he’d be placed in office.
What if more than 70% of the nation steals the next election for Trump? Would it be more outrageous than the last election?
Sree said ; What if more than 70% of the nation steals the next election for Trump? Would it be more outrageous than the last election?Where did you get that statistic from?
This is my projection. I am trying to get a sense of Mriana’s reasoning.
70% cannot steal an election. If 70% vote for said person, be it a Dem, Repug, or even Green party (Yes, there are more than two or three parties in the U.S.) it is called a majority
or the popular vote and the person they voted for ideally wins the election. However, while Hillary won the popular vote, the Electoral College (paid off probably, but Russia did meddle in our last election) decided to vote for the dotard, instead of listening to the people or popular vote, thereby placing the dotard in office against the majority’s desire. So there is no way 70% of the nation can steal an election, but the E.C. can do what they want, even accept payoffs, even though that’s not legal and/or be influenced by a foreign government, which also is not legal. Basically, the people are at the mercy of the E.C. when it comes to an election.
If T rump brutally raped and beheaded Oprah on live TV, and also broadcast it, repeatedly, on Times Square, all media, etc., then the vote Against T rump could reach 70% (maybe it could reach that high.).
Rape Oprah? How on earth can you imagine that considering your expressed distaste for that prehistoric woman?
Prehistoric? How do you get that about Oprah?
So many things wrong with that comment Sree. 1st, rape is primarily an act of aggression. The appearance of the victim is secondary. I know your hero T rump, uses women’s appearance as a defense for his sexual abuse of them. He has some of the same predispositions as a psychopathic rapist, i.e., he cares about himself above all others, in all ways. i.e., he enjoys insulting women according to their physical appearance. i.e, he is a scumbag. But I imagine his extreme narcissism precludes him from abusing women who do not fit his established sense of whether a woman meets the minimum criteria of attractiveness to deserve his abuse.
Secondly, Oprah is a modern homo sapien. She does not have Lucy’s sloping forehead or her beard. She doesn’t really look anything like Lucy. But quite racist of you to say so.
Anyway my point was that T rump can publicly do any most horrid crime that anyone can imagine, and one would still be hard pressed to find 70% of Americans to vote against him. I think that most of his Trumpian betas are just too far heads up his a-hole. Btw, do you get WiFi inside there?
I agree, TimB, I thought that was very racist of him to say too. Oprah looks very much like a human being to me.
This is a lost post recovery from Bob, back on February 1st
Mriana: ” truth does not work that way …”You are right of course. The truth, the one and only truth, is what has happened. History has had only one course.
But Sree is right too. The truth as seen from different points of viewing will always appear at least a little different. The greater the separation between the points of view the greater the difference in interpretation.
I find it disappointing that liberals, not especially on this site but in general, while claiming a policy of advocating for a free exchange of ideas more often than not actually try to shut out or shout down those ideas they see as opposing their own. I expect we will see that at the State of the Union address. And of course we will see organized protests. Does no one else find it curious that apparently spontaneous protests are filled with large really professional looking commercially printed signs?
One thing I’ve learned is that if music has to be loud to be good, it isn’t (good). A parallel is that the louder an argument is made the more likely it is to be wrong; the presenter tries to compensate for a lack of reason and/or logic with an increase in volume. I saw that as the House managers made their presentation; way too much repetition came off as pounding the table.
I finally quit listening to the arguments and began paying attention to Schiff’s diction and cadence. He is a very good speaker and would make a really good story teller. He was the best of the House managers. Cipollone is also a very good and convincing speaker and the best on the President’s team. Both of these men have what I perceived as a no distinct accent. I suspect this has a lot to do with their success in their chosen fields. I see a parallel in how the media, especially the business news media, often chooses people with a British accent for reporters and anchors.
Anyway, it’s done. I guess now we can get back to watching tractor pulling.