The coming Trump Neofascist crackdown if he wins...

He’s still alive so it’s possible.

 

apparently none of you “know it all” liberals can explain his comment in context without relying on MSNBC talking points.

“It’s bad because Hitler said it” isn’t very intellectual now, is it….and it doesn’t even attempt to touch the questions I raised.

Some people on this message board are intelligent, independent thinkers. (On both sides). But too often, people just post partisan talking points they saw on TV or heard on a podcast. When someone challenges them on it you realize how empty their post really was. They can’t back up anything they claim. That’s when they post stuff like “everyone knows…” or “it’s well settled…” or “there is no doubt…”

It’s just nonsense.

 

Lol! Another rabid spittle spewing TDS orgy on Too Hot...

= another day.

My shocked face:

 

So what are your thoughts on Trump declaring his fellow Americans to be ‘vermin’ and promising to ‘root them out?’

 

Not impressed. Setting aside 'deplorables' and 'smelly walmart ppl', '...cling to their bibles n guns', and "if they bring a knife we bring a gun" type of rhetoric...

....Axns > words.

Trump was in office for 4 years and never weaponized the DOJ, but instead has been targetted by the deep state and other political foes for 7 years, and continues to be...

I'm waaaayyyy more concerned--nay--DISTURBED--by the @#%^$# who actually deploy criminal justice apparatii agsinst political adversaries to manipulate the system, than I am by meantweets barking angry.

 

For all those with this line of thinking, what do you think our justice system should do — in the confidential national security documents case — with someone who has every opportunity to comply with the law, but not only refused, lied about and instructed it?! Is it really your thought that everyone should just keep saying, pretty please stop lying and hiding and recklessly storing our documents?

And in the NY fraud case — a civil case, you’re certainly aware that the justice department has literally ZERO involvement. And what is NY supposed to do when a fraudster routinely uses his corporate entities to defraud institutional lenders, leaving them grossly exposed to being under-reserved, amongst other things, not to mention the fraudster abusing the privilege of conducting business? Is it your thought we should just say, “thank you for your lies, may I have another?”

And of course, you must think it’s just a witch hunt for women to sue Trump for liability arising from sexual abuse. Those PRIVATELY BROUGHT claims shouldn’t be allowed, because Trump is a politician?

And while we’re at is, I suppose that “witch hunt” was politically disgusting when Trump was caught stealing and defrauding a charity intended to benefit our Veterans, thus stripping Trump of the ability to have (phony) charities. Is it your contention we should just look the other way, se he is a because he is a politician?

Do you really feel people should not be held accountable?!?!

The fact that Trump has SO MANY demonstrably awful acts doesn’t mean that prosecuting him and seeking to hold him liable for those acts is a witch hunt or political attack. It’s the polar opposite. Nobody is above the law, and everyone needs to be accountable for their actions.

And as a final point, Trump screaming he is innocent (even though he and his companies have been found liable and guilty already in a number of occasions) DOESN’T MEAN HE IS INNOCENT. Trump does not have the boundaries of truth like most of us.

 

logophobic is no way to live your life bro.


get some tacos for lunch today. That makes everything better.

 

Trump was only figuring out how to wield power his first term. Second term would be a disaster of epic proportions. And the first one was already. Trump will absolutely weaponize everything in his power a second term. He tried his first term, including using Guilani as a mule in Ukraine, who was targeted by Russian agents. Those agents have now been arrested in Ukraine for espionage.

 

here’s an idea, maybe they should do what they’ve done in all of the other similar cases. Just follow your own precedent. Is that too much to ask?

0h wait, that wouldn’t work here. The district attorney actually ran on a campaign promise to get Trump.

So, apparently, for the first time in the history of New York, the state is civilly prosecuting somebody for allegedly inflating their assets in a loan application, which was completely paid back many many years ago.

But Politics have nothing to do with this. It’s just outrageous that anyone would act this way.

 

Vermin reaction to Trump:

 

Yes, the AG ran a campaign to stop corruption, and ensure no man is above the law. And the AG is sticking to her campaign pledge. And she is proving her claims. And despite that she is PROVING HER CLAIMS that Trump grossly defrauded the State of New York, you expect a pass.

And let’s take the absurd assumption — despite all the factual evidence against Trump — that the NY case was purely political with no substance, you glossed over ALL THE OTHER CASES that I mentioned ( and I just mentioned a few examples, not all of the cases and findings against him).

In each of those cases, we should just forget the facts and give Trump a pass …. Because he is your party’s ruler?

 

Well congrats. You are now a Hitler apologist as well as a Trump apologist.

 

Damn it. I was worried about that.

 

Clinton's 'deplorables' comment was regrettable. Far nastier to a segment of the population that a presidential candidate should ever be.
Obama's 'cling to guns or religion' was not putting them down. He was explaining the hopeless feeling that people get in small towns when the jobs have left and when the executive branch has not done anything to help them. It's empathy or pity, not denigration.
But the important difference between those quotes and what Trump said is that neither Clinton nor Obama were threatening to use the presidency to retaliate against those people. And that is a huge difference.
I'm not aware of the "smell Walmart people" line. Who said it?

 

Apparently it was just something Matt Gaetz claimed Democrats believe.

 

I think by some of the standards on this message board, this makes you a Hitler apologist. It’s well established that Hillary Clinton is in fact a Hitler follower. And I heard on a podcast yesterday that Obama attended some Hitler rallies in Chicago when he was younger.

putting the above absurdity aside, I think your attempts to distinguish the Clinton and Obama comments is beyond weak.

 

Only one of this vermin’s quotes from 2018

During the campaign, James, a Democrat, said she intends to aggressively investigate Trump’s businesses and finances. On the night of her victory, she stood in front of supporters in Brooklyn and all but declared a war against Trump: “I will be shining a bright light into every dark corner of his real estate dealings, and every dealing, demanding truthfulness at every turn.”
​

This is why you lose this debate.

 

Demanding truthfulness. I see your point. That pretty much is de facto declaring war against Trump.

 

Ok. And your response to the point she’s proven her claims. And while we are at it, Still waiting for you to respond to all of the other cases. (Also, if it makes you feel better to claim victory of a debate where you avoided 90% of the subject, then good for you and congrats to your celebratory self-victory)

 

Not sure who might have said it first, but know one person that's used the phrase a lot.