When their best defense is....

[Jarod]

When their best defense of Rump is that Hillary (who they hate for being”unethical”) did it also, you know the end is coming.

[Sirthinksalot]

Are you trying to make any actual point with this thread?

[Legion]

Are you trying to make any actual point with this thread?

He cannot justify his double standard, so he's desperate. You see, he failed to object when DEMOCRATS received huge payments from Russians, but had been bleating about Michael Cohen allegedly getting smaller payments from Russians.

No he has no moral high ground to mount his high horse from.

[Jarod]

Are you trying to make any actual point with this thread?

Yes, the point is that you have nothing to defend Rump with except to compare him to someone you think is too unethical to be president.

[Sirthinksalot]

Yes, the point is that you have nothing to defend Rump with except to compare him to someone you think is too unethical to be president.

Actually, I can defend Trump by saying IDGAF about his personal life. I care how he governs and all you libtards want to focus on everything but that. So STFU and find something relevant to bitch about.

[Jarod]

Actually, I can defend Trump by saying IDGAF about his personal life. I care how he governs and all you libtards want to focus on everything but that. So STFU and find something relevant to bitch about.

It’s not about his personal life, it’s about taking bribes.

[Sirthinksalot]

It’s not about his personal life, it’s about taking bribes.

Pardon me, there was nothing specific in your OP, so I had to make assumptions. Taking bribes? Seriously? SMH

[Jarod]

Pardon me, there was nothing specific in your OP, so I had to make assumptions. Taking bribes? Seriously? SMH

Actually it’s about almost anything that comes out about Rump, “but...but... Hillary!”

Why do you think Russian Oligarchs put money into Cohen’s secret slush account?

[Leonthecat]

When all they have left is "But Hillary...!", the end can't be far away for this fake presidency.

[SmarterthanYou]

When their best defense of Rump is that Hillary (who they hate for being”unethical”) did it also, you know the end is coming.

the point you fail to acknowledge, intentional or not, is that by not demanding prosecution of hillary for her crimes, you endorsed an activity that would otherwise be illegal. so now that you've endorsed criminal activity because of the letter after their name, you get it from the other side as well. good job.

[Mr.Badguy]

the point you fail to acknowledge, intentional or not, is that by not demanding prosecution of hillary fo nor her crimes, you endorsed an activity that would otherwise be illegal. so now that you've endorsed criminal activity because of the letter after their name, you get it from the other side as well. good job.

Seems to me like with all the Republican led investigations into Hillary, THEY could have demanded prosecution. Problem is, none of them found any wrongdoing.

[SmarterthanYou]

Seems to me like with all the Republican led investigations into Hillary, THEY could have demanded prosecution. Problem is, none of them found any wrongdoing.

did you accept comeys speech about her email server? if you did, then you explicitly endorsed criminal conduct of politicians and accepted the governments use of wordspeak to ignore it.

[Callinectes]

Yes, the point is that you have nothing to defend Rump with except to compare him to someone you think is too unethical to be president.

Not a matter of ethics. I voted for G.H.W. Bush because he had been the head of the CIA, and therefore "ethically flexible", as I like to refer to it. A trait I thought would be useful against the world leaders he faced at the time(many of whom were downright "ethically bankrupt", as I like to refer to it). In the various positions she held, the Wicked Witch of Westchester could have used her powers for good, yet I can't think of one positive accomplishment she can claim. You want us to stop waving the anti-hillary flag? Fine. Charge Trump with something serious, have him testify with immunity, trot out the Attorney General(NOT the fucking director of the FBI) to say that he acted carelessly and that no prosecutor would ever prosecute the case. You get your damned inquisitors to do that, and I'd consider leaving hrc out of it. You guys are all about fairness and equality, right?

[Jarod]

the point you fail to acknowledge, intentional or not, is that by not demanding prosecution of hillary for her crimes, you endorsed an activity that would otherwise be illegal. so now that you've endorsed criminal activity because of the letter after their name, you get it from the other side as well. good job.

I disagree that the two things are even similar. What Hillary did was open and honest, it was done in a legal way. The effect, as you are cute, might have been the same, but it was done illegally. What Trump has done was done secretly, and an attempt to hide thanks, and illegally.

I guess he was trying to keep it hidden, because he had railed against Hillary for doing the same thing. In order to keep it hidden he had to do it illegally. When they do things illegally action should be taken against them. When you run for president acting like you are holier than your opponent, then it comes out that you were the same, I would expect those who supported you to turn.

[Jarod]

did you accept comeys speech about her email server? if you did, then you explicitly endorsed criminal conduct of politicians and accepted the governments use of wordspeak to ignore it.

Comey’s, speech made perfect legal sense. The conservatives that I spoke to you afterwards simply completely failed to acknowledge the element of intent. They hear someone who knows much more about About a topic that them, and because it wasn’t the answer they wanted choose to pretend it wasn’t true.

It’s a phenomenon in this country, maybe the whole world, known as the “Internet expert”.