Gabbard nominated as Director of National Intelligence

[Foxfyre]

So, he didn't do those things? The 34 felony convictions are lies spread by rumour mongers?

34 felony convictions for 'crimes' nobody else has EVER been charged with or convicted of and there is no victim to be found anywhere. Almost 100% certain to be overturned on appeal and it has been appealed. If a superior court doesn't throw it out, pretty much all legal scholars believe the Supreme Court will. Pure malicious weaponized government warfare in the opinion of ALL legal scholars who are not hard left or hard core anti-Trump.

And 34 felony convictions that nobody could find any cause to disqualify the man to run for President or to be inaugurated President.

But I was referring to the track record of the man which was amazing in his first term in office. And obviously a substantial majority of American voters agree with me on that. They did not like anything about what the current administration is selling them.

 

[F1fan]

34 felony convictions for 'crimes' nobody else has EVER been charged with or convicted of and there is no victim to be found anywhere.

False, Trump wasn't the first to commit election finance laws.

Almost 100% certain to be overturned on appeal and it has been appealed.

Based on what? Offer your expert legal analysis.

If a superior court doesn't throw it out, pretty much all legal scholars believe the Supreme Court will.

Which legal scholars? Based on what?

Pure malicious weaponized government warfare in the opinion of ALL legal scholars who are not hard left or hard core anti-Trump.

False, Trump broke laws, he knew it was illegal, he was caught, he was held accountable. He doesn't get special treatment.

And 34 felony convictions that nobody could find any cause to disqualify the man to run for President or to be inaugurated President.

The 14th amendment should have applied, but the SCOTUS interpreted it in favor of Trump. It was a questionable decision.

But I was referring to the track record of the man which was amazing in his first term in office.

Irrelevant, but also not true. He did very little. He played golf more often in his first three years than Obama did in 8 years. He tried to eliminate the ACA, but failed thanks to McCain. The replacement was so bad that even republicans didn't vote for it. He mismanaged the pandemic and was fired.

And obviously a substantial majority of American voters agree with me on that.

Based on what data? There was no rational basis for anyone to cast a vote for Trump. The man is disturbed, and his decisions since the election proves his judgment is extremely bad.

They did not like anything about what the current administration is selling them.

There was disinformation that the poorly informed and gullible bought into. It seems you are one of these.

 

[Revoltingest]

But I was referring to the track record of the man which was amazing in his first term in office.

We can both agree that it was amazing.
But we focus upon different things.

 

[Foxfyre]

False, Trump wasn't the first to commit election finance laws.

Based on what? Offer your expert legal analysis.

Which legal scholars? Based on what?

False, Trump broke laws, he knew it was illegal, he was caught, he was held accountable. He doesn't get special treatment.

The 14th amendment should have applied, but the SCOTUS interpreted it in favor of Trump. It was a questionable decision.

Irrelevant, but also not true. He did very little. He played golf more often in his first three years than Obama did in 8 years. He tried to eliminate the ACA, but failed thanks to McCain. The replacement was so bad that even republicans didn't vote for it. He mismanaged the pandemic and was fired.

Based on what data? There was no rational basis for anyone to cast a vote for Trump. The man is disturbed, and his decisions since the election proves his judgment is extremely bad.

There was disinformation that the poorly informed and gullible bought into. It seems you are one of these.

I'm sorry but I have a personal pet peeve about chopped up posts that destroy content and make it confusing to respond to and for others to read. Thanks for understanding. I will stand by my post as originally written and think Tulsi will most likely distinguish herself as effective as director of National Intelligence.

 

[Foxfyre]

We can both agree that it was amazing.
But we focus upon different things.

We probably do. But I prefer to focus on what actually makes a difference to America and Americans and that doesn't include gossip, innuendo, propaganda, irrelevant things. For instance, Trump intends to repeat all the good things he accomplished in his first term and improve on them. And with four years' experience under his belt he knows better now how to get it done. I think Tulsi as National Intelligence chief is likely a very good choice and could yield some very good things.

If J.D. Vance turns out to be an effective and competent apprentice President, we might have as much as 12 years of the MAGA vision that could accomplish the reforms needed

We cannot continue as we have been the last four years.

 

[stvdv]

34 felony convictions for 'crimes' nobody else has EVER been charged with or convicted of and there is no victim to be found anywhere

True

False

False, obviously

 

[Revoltingest]

We probably do. But I prefer to focus on what actually makes a difference to America and Americans and that doesn't include gossip, innuendo, propaganda, irrelevant things.

What a coincidence!
So do I.
My point is that "amazing" things can be good
or bad, depending upon one's personal values.

For instance, Trump intends to repeat all the good things he accomplished in his first term and improve on them.

Like poor border security? And the wall Mexico would pay for?
SCOTUS repealing abortion rights?
An economy suffering from paying people to not work?
Lack of progress ramping down hostilities with foreigners, eg, K Korea?
Setting aside the pandemic playbook that USA had when Covid 19 struck.

And with four years' experience under his belt he knows better now how to get it done. I think Tulsi as National Intelligence chief is likely a very good choice and could yield some very good things.

If J.D. Vance turns out to be an effective and competent apprentice President, we might have as much as 12 years of the MAGA vision that could accomplish the reforms needed

We cannot continue as we have been the last four years.

Your appraisal of Trump's new hires is optimistic.

 

[stvdv]

We cannot continue as we have been the last four years.

Indeed, quite a few really sick things have been done in the past four years. More sick then I have seen in the past 2000 years

 

[Revoltingest]

Indeed, quite a few really sick things have been done in the past four years. More sick then I have seen in the past 2000 years

You must be really old.

 

[Twilight Hue]

5

So, he didn't do those things? The 34 felony convictions are lies spread by rumour mongers?

You must mean all the lawfare that was waged on Trump via a weaponized judicial system and charges that were actually misdemeanors, that were turned into 'felonies by intent.

I think the Appellate Court will make the right decisions. The fat lady hasn't sung yet.

 

[F1fan]

I'm sorry but I have a personal pet peeve about chopped up posts that destroy content and make it confusing to respond to and for others to read.

Sorry, but your sentences were problematic and made false statements. Your whole post is obliterated as a result either way.

Thanks for understanding. I will stand by my post as originally written and think Tulsi will most likely distinguish herself as effective as director of National Intelligence.

So you offer no rebuttal, and thus concede. That is the smart approach since you can't defend false statements, and you are still wrong as a result.

 

[F1fan]

True

Only in the sense that no one committed election finance crimes by paying off a porn star. But otherwise there have been election finance crimes by others.

 

[stvdv]

You must mean all the lawfare that was waged on Trump via a weaponized judicial system and charges that were actually misdemeanors, that were turned into 'felonies by intent.

True, and sad that the judicial system is not pure. But not surprisingly in Kali Yuga

More sad is that many on RF brush this fact away. Double standards, are not my thing

I think the Appellate Court will make the right decisions. The fat lady hasn't sung yet.

I love it when justice is done

BUT

American justice is crazy imo (excessive jail time for minor violence), and inconsistant.

If they charge Trump, they should charge Biden too, below is just 1 example

Biden touching young girls (±9 years), while they cringe, for all to see (quite a few YouTube to prove this), but Biden just continues, age 80, probably still not have learned the lesson of healthy boundaries; that's narcissistic at best

Biden’s "touching" of ±9 year olds can be worse than Trump's "grooping" 21/60? year olds, but both men need to stop acting disrespectful

They should first ask a lady "is it okay if I grab you...?". They should realize by then, what a fool they make of themselves. Though, 50% US women don't seem to mind that much, as they vote for him

Well, that's just my opinion

 

[Twilight Hue]

True, and sad that the judicial system is not pure. But not surprisingly in Kali Yuga

More sad is that many on RF brush this fact away. Double standards, are not my thing

I love it when justice is done

BUT

American justice is crazy imo (excessive jail time for minor violence), and inconsistant.

If they charge Trump, they should charge Biden too, below is just 1 example

Biden touching young girls (±9 years), while they cringe, for all to see (quite a few YouTube to prove this), but Biden just continues, age 80, probably still not have learned the lesson of healthy boundaries; that's narcissistic at best

Biden’s "touching" of ±9 year olds can be worse than Trump's "grooping" 21/60? year olds, but both men need to stop acting disrespectful

They should first ask a lady "is it okay if I grab you...?". They should realize by then, what a fool they make of themselves. Though, 50% US women don't seem to mind that much, as they vote for him

Well, that's just my opinion

Tell me if that hug of Hillary wasn't cheap subtile way of a boob grab.

 

[stvdv]

Only in the sense that no one committed election finance crimes by paying off a porn star. But otherwise there have been election finance crimes by others.

I meant "being charged by 34 so called crimes"

 

[Foxfyre]

Sorry, but your sentences were problematic and made false statements. Your whole post is obliterated as a result either way.

So you offer no rebuttal, and thus concede. That is the smart approach since you can't defend false statements, and you are still wrong as a result.

Standing by my original post would not be judged as any kind of concession by most honest people. But whatever makes you happy.

 

[stvdv]

Tell me if that hug of Hillary wasn't cheap subtile way of a boob grab.

Thank you for sharing, that indeed is the perfect youtube. How much more proof you need to know Biden has lots of creepy behavior?

RF has many members who are anti Trump
Childishly: they are also anti Trump-voters
Belittling and being disrespectful to them
How narrow minded can you be?

At least admit:
"Biden 'is' a too creepy President"

Great commentary "tap out didn't even work"
Even in fights it's criminal to disrespect 'tap out'

I don't get it, why other people don't teach Biden "STOP touching people, you act creepy"

That's textbook narcissistic behavior, totally neglecting clear signs of "STOP". Here in Holland they teach 4 years olds (great isn't it)
"Stop means stop ... hands off"

Did Biden skip class at age 4? Or too sleepy??

 

[stvdv]

What a terrible thing to say...on his birthday!

Happy Birthday Mister_T!!

Have a great birthday Nick! ;):thumbsup: @Mister_T

www.religiousforums.com

You are goooood

 

[F1fan]

I meant "being charged by 34 so called crimes"

Charged by a prosecutor. Tried in court. Found guilty by a jury. Would be sentenced, but who knows if the election results weren't what they are.

That's more than "so called".

Standing by my original post would not be judged as any kind of concession by most honest people. But whatever makes you happy.

You made false statements, and that was fatal for your argument. You made no rebuttal. That's a concession.