Donald Trump suggests 2nd Amendment folks do something about Hillary

[J. Bernie Cunningham]

I comeback and sure enough the topic of the last post is suddenly.... Hilary's emails.

For fucks sake conservatives, do you not realize how this man is shitting all over the rebuplican party?

You had a large majority who didn't want Hilary and you gave them Donald fucking Trump as the alternative. You handed her this election on a loud orange platter.

 

[AnGrYcRoW]

This election is a culture war. Thise on the other side will do literally anything to deny what they view as "white male conservatism" a victory.

You've jumped the shark .

 

[AnGrYcRoW]

If democracy is used to take away the most fundamental right, then yes violence is justified. More importantly, who's the one initiating force in that circumstance?

This most fundamental right stuff sounds nutty as f#ck fyi

 

[OverCoronavirus Pressure]

Lol, yeah. The criminal who has never been caught doing anything. Funny thing.


The strongest right wing move is to lie, then keep on lying some more for decades and eventually people think it's true, because who would continue a lie that long.

By definition, she's not a criminal and people shouldn't be confused.
Listening to that shit is like listening to patients at the hospital complain that they're "in jail".
Hyperbole isn't the new language of sage political wisdom.

 

[thebluerider]

By definition, she's not a criminal and people shouldn't be confused.
Listening to that shit is like listening to patients at the hospital complain that they're "in jail".
Hyperbole isn't the new language of sage political wisdom.

do you think she lied under oath?

 

[OverCoronavirus Pressure]

do you think she lied under oath?

Give me a specific example and I'll say "maybe". The best people to determine that are those involved in any investigation; the folks who have seen the evidence and are properly able to evaluate it.
To my knowledge, it has never been determined that she did.

 

[thebluerider]

Give me a specific example and I'll say "maybe". The best people to determine that are those involved in any investigation; the folks who have seen the evidence and are properly able to evaluate it.
To my knowledge, it has never been determined that she did.

so regardless of the example, your answer is maybe? probably the wisest course of action with a pathological liar like Clinton.

 

[Metal Cultist]

How could people not see that Trump is a troll? Every day it gets more clear. He has no desire to win this election. Call him a narcicist clown, sure... but he isn't capable of being so unintentionally retarded. He's trying to lose at this point, but still maintain support among his base voters (strengthening his brand, increasing his net worth).

 

[PEB]

Yeah, it clearly suggested that "2nd Amendment folks" (i.e. gun-owners) could "do something about" Hillary if "she gets to pick her judges".

So he's either implying they could "do something about it" by shooting her, or the judges she nominates. The latter is the only vague part. He isn't precise about which liberals he is openly wishing for them to murder.

Of course, the open-ended nature of that suggestion doesn't rule out just murdering them all.

I was about to say the same thing. Trump is the classic boardroom bully. Many companies have them but keep their racist, hate filled humor in the boardroom. People don't understand why they call it the ultimate boys club.

Very few if any woman are allowed admittance due to the ugly nature of it. Only recently has many old line companies allowed woman in the boardroom.

They break under pressure from the Government pressure and woman's groups getting on them. The funny part most of the time they promote internally.

 

[Metal Cultist]

I comeback and sure enough the topic of the last post is suddenly.... Hilary's emails.

Hillary's emails are a legit topic, and the more we see from them, the more it's clear that the DNC's process is a sham. I love the mental gymnastics that democrats play attempting to justify supporting someone as reprehensible as Hillary Clinton. "But Trump is so much worse!!!" So?

 

[Metal Cultist]

I was about to say the same thing. Trump is the classic boardroom bully.

He's the classic troll. You'd think sherdoggers would figure this out, seeing as that there have been so many obvious trolls on this forum over the years.

 

[J. Bernie Cunningham]

Hillary's emails are a legit topic,

Not in a thread about Trump's remarks. That's why there are threads about her Emails. This isn't one of them. Bringing them up is trying to change the subject.

 

[Rational Poster]

when hillary testified to congress that there was no classified information on her server, was she telling the truth or not?

It's almost impossible to convict anyone on perjury unless you happen to record them after the fact that they lied on purpose or in an email or something.

Perjury only sticks if you can prove it was willful.

Whether it was willful or not, she'll just claim ignorance and get out of it.

Comey himself stated that pursuing perjury charges would be a waste of time.

 

[AnGrYcRoW]

They had to really serch for this one. No one is the GOP was shitty enough to guarentee a loss to clinton, so they brought in a ringer.

Lol thats gold

 

[OverCoronavirus Pressure]

so regardless of the example, your answer is maybe? probably the wisest course of action with a pathological liar like Clinton.

I'm as reasonable as it gets: show me evidence that she lied under oath and it's a done deal, I'll agree that she did.
Show me conjecture, and I'll call it conjecture.
I could speculate that Trump's shady deals and multiple lawsuits against him, as well as judgments, mean that he's a pathological liar and a criminal.

But pathology is a medical diagnosis I'm not educated to give, and judgements are best left to those who've seen the evidence and evaluated it in a trial setting.

 

[Metal Cultist]

Not in a thread about Trump's remarks. That's why there are threads about her Emails. This isn't one of them. Bringing them up is trying to change the subject.

It's a bit disingenuous to imply that topics don't stray into other related matters. It's political, that shit is going to happen. You're nitpicking.

 

[OverCoronavirus Pressure]

Lol thats gold

Yep, it's gold that at first it was Trump's brilliant strategery, and now he's a ringer brought in for an easy Clinton victory.

Fucking LOL

 

[OverCoronavirus Pressure]

It's a bit disingenuous to imply that topics don't stray into other related matters. It's political, that shit is going to happen. You're nitpicking.

He's not nitpicking by much; I wish the mods could do a better job of keeping the threads on-subject.
I'm just not sure it's possible. I've been a mod on other boards and especially with political discussion it's hard to keep things together.

 

[thebluerider]

It's almost impossible to convict anyone on perjury unless you happen to record them after the fact that they lied on purpose or in an email or something.

Perjury only sticks if you can prove it was willful.

Whether it was willful or not, she'll just claim ignorance and get out of it.

Comey himself stated that pursuing perjury charges would be a waste of time.

so when hillary clinton was secretary of state for 4 years, YOU (i'm asking YOU) believe that hillary clinton believes she never sent or received a classified email?

 

[thebluerider]

I'm as reasonable as it gets: show me evidence that she lied under oath and it's a done deal, I'll agree that she did.
Show me conjecture, and I'll call it conjecture.
I could speculate that Trump's shady deals and multiple lawsuits against him, as well as judgments, mean that he's a pathological liar and a criminal.

But pathology is a medical diagnosis I'm not educated to give, and judgements are best left to those who've seen the evidence and evaluated it in a trial setting.

i have to post the video of her benghazi testimony? are you not aware she claimed that there was no classified material on her home server, which Comey stated was not true? the videos exist. you know this, but won't answer the question for some reason.