So you’re saying today’s Trump supporters were Democrats back in 1999? Weird.
I have a couple of questions for you:
Did Clinton commit perjury?
Did Hillary Clinton attack his accusers?
What has Trump done as President that is remotely close to that incident?
1 Like
No, I didn’t say that. I’ll make it plain. The people your ilk disparage as partisan today are no more partisan than the Dems were then.
We are going to have to get Trump under oath before we can start that kind of a comparison… Perhaps Justice Kavanaugh will help…
Really? What good did putting Clinton under oath do?
How is Kavanaugh going to help?
Absolutely, and I have 0 problem with him being held accountable for that.
Define “attack.”
There’s no answer to this question that will not lead to us hitting the 10k mark, closing the thread, or that hasn’t been discussed already. I personally don’t find inauguration day to be some sort of baptism. And I think will do whatever it takes to never testify under oath regarding anything he has ever done as president.
He wasn’t held accountable for it. Because partisan.
Is “is”.
So nothing, you just need it to be so.
I’ve never claimed anything to the contrary. But that’s the difference-I don’t treat a president differently because of the letter after his name. I don’t hold them to a different moral standard because of the letter after their names.
The “people my ilk disparage as partisan today” forgive Trump all his trespasses before and after he became president. The pharisees of the old testament continually grant medieval indulgences to the nobles.
1 Like
Yes you do. You may be “party free” but you are not bias free.
Not relevant to the fact that I said I have no problem with him being held accountable-that doesn’t mean he was, it means I wouldn’t have had a problem had be been. Read the words I typed, not the meaning you want them to hold.
Classic fallback! Love it!
If Trump had a D after his name, I think the current house and senate would have given him plenty of opportunities to lie under oath…but just like the Dems in the senate (+10 Rs) didn’t hold Clinton accountable in 1999, the Rs in congress today never had any intention putting Trump’s feet to the fire and holding him to the same moral/integrity standards to which they hold/held Slick Willy.
That’s what it really is all about, isn’t it? All his trespasses before he won?
And your ilk doesn’t forgive trespasses of your winners? You must be joking.
So what trespasses after he won? Because that’s my question and Clinton’s problem.
Thanks for telling me what I do and do not believe! Major help!
But yes, I do hold them to the same standard. Because you can’t doesn’t mean others can’t.
I’ve never claimed to be without bias…but that doesn’t mean I can’t hold politicians to the same standard.
That’s when he committed perjury… You remember, Ken Starr, Clinton v. Jones, etc. Right?
Easy claim after the fact.
Classic truth. He said it and you’re playing the same game. You know exactly what the definition of attack is in this context.
Nor will they next time. So how about laying off the ■■■■■■■■■■■■■” and “pharisees” until you can get the dirt off your own hands?
Think please.
And yet Mr. Strzok, you don’t.
And yet you don’t.
Clinton perjured himself during testimony COMPELLED by the Clinton v. Jones case. Those are absolutely established facts… Now, when Trump testifies, under oath, in one of the myriad cases coming his way, you can make the comparison. Until then, it’s a pretty weak argument…
1 Like
LOL!
10free 
2 Likes
