What Charges Will Be Made Against the Next Conservative Nominee?

[ThatOwlWoman]

I'll have you know I raised pygmies growing-up, and was Top Senior Showman at the Evergreen State Fair (Monroe, WA) in 4-H for 2000 and 2001.

Aren't goats like the best? Good for you, Goat God!



[disclaimer: cleanest pic I could find when google-image searching for 'goat god')

[ThatOwlWoman]

I never knew from goats till we moved up to the country in 1998. It was rural, like really rural. We were surrounded by cows, corn, horses, farms, fields, gardens, trees, paradise. Loved it. Our nearest neighbors farmed and had dairy cows too. Down the road our other neighbors had horses, one cow, and goats. The goats and horses lived together in their paddock/corral, fenced-in place, and barn. Plus they had fields to graze in. They all hung together. Sometimes, you'd drive by and see a goat perched on a horse's back. Horse, he didn't care. Once in a while I'd have some extra garden produce and stop by and hand some over the fence. Good times, miss that place.

[Leonthecat]

Ah, damn, I forgot beastiality!

[Mason Michaels]

There's someone more disturbed than Mrs. Ford...‘

Why do you Assume Mrs Ford is disturbed?

[USFREEDOM911]

Why do you Assume Mrs Ford is disturbed?

WHAT!!!!

You mean someone should have proof, before they make an accusation!!

[Old Trapper]

Under the law, there is no "supporting this group over that group." Now, if we weren't a republic, but were instead a totalitarian or authoritarian state, then you might have a point.

"Under the law"? Do you mean like in Roe v Wade where a new privacy right was created? Or in Kelo where suddenly corporations could take land for their own use, not the "public good" as the Constitution demands? Or in Citizens United where suddenly a corporation was declared to have "personhood?? Each time the Courts rule, be it local, or SCOTUS, a "law" is formed as determined by that Court. We call it a "ruling" yet it has the effect of law, and can only be changed by a higher Court, or the legislature.

As for Trump, I only doubt that he has committed crimes as president/candidate. I still think he raped his first wife, scammed the TU students, ripped-off the taxpayers of NJ, committed housing discrimination, engaged in sexual harassment, rode the Lolita Express, etc.

And the emoluments clause? How about obstruction of justice with his threats regarding ongoing investigations? Then there is the preventing of Latino's from entering the country to apply for asylum. And the list continues to grow.

[Old Trapper]

WHAT!!!!

You mean someone should have proof, before they make an accusation!!

It wasn't required when they went after Obama, and Hillary.

[USFREEDOM911]

It wasn't required when they went after Obama, and Hillary.

Where they being appointed to the SC??

[Jack]

I would like fewer surprises next go-around.

1. Are you giving up on Kavanaugh?
2. Personally, I think this is political theater.
3. I think the real goal is to fire up the Democrat base for the November elections.

[Old Trapper]

Where they being appointed to the SC??

Huh????? Stupid response. They were the President, and the Secretary of State. Then too, why would even an idiot like you accept an allegation with no proof. Well, in your case if it is a liberal Democrat no proof is necessary.

[Old Trapper]

1. Are you giving up on Kavanaugh?
2. Personally, I think this is political theater.
3. I think the real goal is to fire up the Democrat base for the November elections.

Isn't that what all Trump rallies are about with all of his lies?

[Minister of Truth]

"Under the law"? Do you mean like in Roe v Wade where a new privacy right was created? Or in Kelo where suddenly corporations could take land for their own use, not the "public good" as the Constitution demands? Or in Citizens United where suddenly a corporation was declared to have "personhood?? Each time the Courts rule, be it local, or SCOTUS, a "law" is formed as determined by that Court. We call it a "ruling" yet it has the effect of law, and can only be changed by a higher Court, or the legislature.



And the emoluments clause? How about obstruction of justice with his threats regarding ongoing investigations? Then there is the preventing of Latino's from entering the country to apply for asylum. And the list continues to grow.

Obviously, both parties do not respect the rule of law (going all the way back to Jackson and his appointees).

I'm not sure how the emoluments clause has been violated, or what evidence you have for obstruction. POTUS holds the hammer on matters of immigration and political asylum.

[Nordberg]

It wasn't required when they went after Obama, and Hillary.

It is worse than that. they kept finding her innocent and merely started another investigation. It was never about justice. Rep Mccarthy said it was about hurting her poll ratings and it worked. He was on some of the "investigations". he accidently told the truth in public, that the Reds used your tax money by the millions for their own political purposes.

[Eagle_Eye]

The next Trump nominated conservative will be deemed unacceptable to the left because.
1. He wet the bed as a child.
2. He was caught masterbating when he reached puberty.
3. He kissed girls in HS.
4. He used a cuss word when he was cut off on the freeway.
5. He believes in God.

There are many more.

[USFREEDOM911]

Huh????? Stupid response. They were the President, and the Secretary of State. Then too, why would even an idiot like you accept an allegation with no proof. Well, in your case if it is a liberal Democrat no proof is necessary.

Where they being appointed to the SC??