Law Mayor Adams indicted?

Of course you do. It must be so difficult for you up there on your pedestal.
You know, it would be really for you to just be a man before being a Republican. You can still have your same views on philosophy and policy and generally vote Republican without feeling the need to defend corruption. It's easy for me to say that liberal policy produces good results, but if a Democratic politician turns out to be a sleaze (as Adams appears to be), they should face the consequences.
 
I guess Trump wasn’t playing when he said other democrats would be coming out in support of him.


Lamor Whitehead was a close friend of Adams at one point. Look it up. A crook associating with another crook.

It doesn't have anything to do with Adams talking about the immigration crisis. The crook is trying to find a way out of the mess he created. Please don't fall for it.
 
When rightists are busted doing bad shit, they get a lot of defenders. When liberals and leftists are, they are universally condemned.
You might be right, but I don't see it.

Democrats got mighty quiet when Bob Menendez got caught. I didn't see much indignation.
 
You might be right, but I don't see it.

Democrats got mighty quiet when Bob Menendez got caught. I didn't see much indignation.
Did you see anyone defend Menendez, call it a witch hunt, attempt to distract with whataboutism, etc.? I haven't seen anyone do any of that. The reason there's not much of a discussion is because everyone agrees (except a handful of rightists who try to tie his prosecution to some CT).
 
Did you see anyone defend Menendez, call it a witch hunt, attempt to distract with whataboutism, etc.? I haven't seen anyone do any of that. The reason there's not much of a discussion is because everyone agrees (except a handful of rightists who try to tie his prosecution to some CT).
You said "universally condemned". I said "got quiet". Am I wrong?
 
You said "universally condemned". I said "got quiet". Am I wrong?
Read my whole post. If no one is defending him, the conversation tends to peter out. You can search my history for example. Pretty sure we've known Menendez was a piece of shit for a decade and only a few rightists have defended him.
 
Read my whole post. If no one is defending him, the conversation tends to peter out. You can search my history for example. Pretty sure we've known Menendez was a piece of shit for a decade and only a few rightists have defended him.
I did read your whole post, but you didn't answer my question.
 
I did read your whole post, but you didn't answer my question.
The answer is implied, but if you're being a dick, yeah. There wasn't a long thread because no one defended him, but he was condemned.

Not sure what you get out of denying the fact that there is a large and obvious difference in how this stuff is treated by the two major coalitions.
 
The answer is implied, but if you're being a dick, yeah. There wasn't a long thread because no one defended him, but he was condemned.

Not sure what you get out of denying the fact that there is a large and obvious difference in how this stuff is treated by the two major coalitions.
Ok. Now I'm a dick because I said you didn't answer my question.

"It was implied." No, it wasn't. You said "universally condemned". I said "got quiet". Am I wrong?

Wow. Aren't you the one whining about personal insults?
 
Back
Top