TexasCHLforum.com

philbo wrote: ↑Thu Jun 07, 2018 1:26 pm
I'm no fan of trump and his unending assault on the institutions of this country. His constant stream of unfounded lies both large and small (Spygate is the latest example) that go unchallenged are exasperating. Watching the apologists for this behavior is more disheartening, especially from people who wouldn't have tolerated a moment of it from any liberal. If the norm is now that only positive things can be mentioned, or anything critical is met with emotional attacks of a personal nature, or worse with a roar of deafening silence indicating acceptance, then what hypocrisy to lash out when the democrats do the same thing. If one could be labeled a snowflake for such behavior in support of an obama or hillary, then I guess we have discovered that conservative snowflakes do exist.

There are articles in the latest Time Magazine related to Trump's lies and his undermining the judicial and other governmental systems. In one article, nonpartisan PolitiFact noted that Trump's statements are almost 69% false. mostly false, or "pants on fire". In another article, Clapper and Hayden are trying to explain and alert us to the country's new "norms".

Worth a read.

dale blanker wrote: ↑Thu Jun 07, 2018 6:55 pm
There are articles in the latest Time Magazine related to Trump's lies and his undermining the judicial and other governmental systems. In one article, nonpartisan PolitiFact noted that Trump's statements are almost 69% false. mostly false, or "pants on fire".

Only 69%? Wow. Best president we've had in years!

https://www.click2houston.com/news/whit ... c2-inquiry

Trump’s Texan’s watching the hurricane from their boats requiring rescue from the Coast Guard explained.

philbo,

Is your silence = to yes?

dale blanker wrote: ↑Thu Jun 07, 2018 6:55 pm

philbo wrote: ↑Thu Jun 07, 2018 1:26 pm
I'm no fan of trump and his unending assault on the institutions of this country. His constant stream of unfounded lies both large and small (Spygate is the latest example) that go unchallenged are exasperating. Watching the apologists for this behavior is more disheartening, especially from people who wouldn't have tolerated a moment of it from any liberal. If the norm is now that only positive things can be mentioned, or anything critical is met with emotional attacks of a personal nature, or worse with a roar of deafening silence indicating acceptance, then what hypocrisy to lash out when the democrats do the same thing. If one could be labeled a snowflake for such behavior in support of an obama or hillary, then I guess we have discovered that conservative snowflakes do exist.

There are articles in the latest Time Magazine related to Trump's lies and his undermining the judicial and other governmental systems. In one article, nonpartisan PolitiFact noted that Trump's statements are almost 69% false. mostly false, or "pants on fire". In another article, Clapper and Hayden are trying to explain and alert us to the country's new "norms".

Worth a read.

In one article, nonpartisan PolitiFact noted that Trump's statements are almost 69% false.

Nonpartisan they say.......

Abraham wrote: ↑Thu Jun 07, 2018 2:17 pmIf all could be done over - would you think hillary would make a better President?

Is your silence = to yes?

Caution, your impatience is showing. Silence is merely an indication that this is not foremost on my mind today.

At best your question is one meant to deflect from my actual point, or worse, a sophomoric attempt to paint everything in the simplest of us versus them. clinton's election has no connection to trumps current behavior and should not serve as an excuse for such. The irony of this question is that it is posed from the same person started the thread "Can We All Have Differences of Opinion?"
viewtopic.php?f=83&t=92598

The more relevant question I believe is one you should ask yourself:
- if clinton were president and had the temerity to suggest that she could not commit obstruction of justice, would you remain silent and accept that as true?
- if she advanced the notion that she could pardon herself for any crime in office, would you remain silent and accept that as true?
- if she sought to ease restrictions on a company that admitted violating sanctions on Iran and North Korea so that jobs in a foreign country would not be lost, would you remain silent?
- if she repeatedly told lies on a daily basis (but this is redundant), would you remain silent? Did you remain silent?

OR, are you like the crowd attending the graduation in Kentucky who loudly cheers when you think a statement is linked to trump, and boos when you learn the same exact quote words originated with obama?
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/pol ... 667758002/

Are you consistent in your application of criticism, or do you more resemble the liberal snowflakes whose position flips depending on the speaker?

Ruark wrote: ↑Thu Jun 07, 2018 7:04 pm

dale blanker wrote: ↑Thu Jun 07, 2018 6:55 pm
There are articles in the latest Time Magazine related to Trump's lies and his undermining the judicial and other governmental systems. In one article, nonpartisan PolitiFact noted that Trump's statements are almost 69% false. mostly false, or "pants on fire".

Only 69%? Wow. Best president we've had in years!

69%! So Much Winning!

Special counsel Mueller indicts Paul Manafort, Russian associate Konstantin Kilimnik, on obstruction charges. This is after prosecutors filed court papers Monday accusing Manafort and Kilimnik of attempting to sway the testimony of two potential witnesses who might offer evidence against Manafort. Authorities charge that the conduct of Manafort and Kilimnik amounts to witness tampering and have asked a judge to revise or revoke Manafort’s bail package.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/na ... 07e05b47ca

philbo wrote: ↑Fri Jun 08, 2018 4:44 pm Special counsel Mueller indicts Paul Manafort, Russian associate Konstantin Kilimnik, on obstruction charges. This is after prosecutors filed court papers Monday accusing Manafort and Kilimnik of attempting to sway the testimony of two potential witnesses who might offer evidence against Manafort. Authorities charge that the conduct of Manafort and Kilimnik amounts to witness tampering and have asked a judge to revise or revoke Manafort’s bail package.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/na ... 07e05b47ca

Yes, of course, we must convict Trump for the crimes committed by associates before the campaign, and after they left the campaign. OK, lets have an associate indictment/conviction party, and let's invite the Clintons'!

In the Whitewater scandal alone:

The Clintons were never charged with any crime. Fifteen other persons were convicted of more than 40 crimes, including Jim Guy Tucker, who was removed from office.

Jim Guy Tucker: Governor of Arkansas at the time, removed from office (fraud, 3 counts)
John Haley: attorney for Jim Guy Tucker (tax evasion)
William J. Marks, Sr.: Jim Guy Tucker's business partner (conspiracy)
Stephen Smith: former Governor Clinton aide (conspiracy to misapply funds). Bill Clinton pardoned.
Webster Hubbell: Clinton political supporter; U.S. Associate Attorney General; Rose Law Firm partner (embezzlement, fraud)
Jim McDougal: banker, Clinton political supporter: (18 felonies, varied)
Susan McDougal: Clinton political supporter (multiple frauds). Bill Clinton pardoned.
David Hale: banker, self-proclaimed Clinton political supporter: (conspiracy, fraud)
Neal Ainley: Perry County Bank president (embezzled bank funds for Clinton campaign)
Chris Wade: Whitewater real estate broker (multiple loan fraud). Bill Clinton pardoned.
Larry Kuca: Madison real estate agent (multiple loan fraud)
Robert W. Palmer: Madison appraiser (conspiracy). Bill Clinton pardoned.
John Latham: Madison Bank CEO (bank fraud)
Eugene Fitzhugh: Whitewater defendant (multiple bribery)
Charles Matthews: Whitewater defendant (bribery)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whitewater_controversy

I voted for Trump as punishment for left wingnuts. So far, so good.

Bill Clinton was paid $500,000 to give a speech in Russia.
Move along nothing to see here.

Wow Snopes says it’s not proven that Hillary did not approve sanctions against Russia because of the money.

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/hilla ... ns-speech/

I didn’t realize they took the money while she was Secretary of State. That doesn’t look dirty at all.

ninjabread wrote: ↑Fri Jun 08, 2018 5:45 pm I voted for Trump as punishment for left wingnuts. So far, so good.

Congratulations, your mission in life is complete!

I love President Trump and all he's accomplished.

I really like how he makes lefties go bonkers.

My dream come true.

Lefties here, go away, you'll feel much better.

Go attend some anti-1st A rally and get all worked up, but you better do it it in the city because country folk will stand up to you and then some...

Abraham wrote: ↑Sat Jun 09, 2018 3:22 pm I love President Trump and all he's accomplished.

I really like how he makes lefties go bonkers.

My dream come true.

Lefties here, go away, you'll feel much better.

Go attend some anti-1st A rally and get all worked up, but you better do it it in the city because country folk will stand up to you and then some...

so, I guess you chose to duck the questions? It's ok, but the point of the 1st Amendment to protect speech, even if it's unpopular. Not to threaten those who disagree with us. But, maybe some consistency from one thread to the next? "Can We All Have Differences of Opinion?"
viewtopic.php?f=83&t=92598

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2018/0 ... sidencies/

Trump’s approval rating higher than Obama and Regan at the same time in their administrations. This despite 90% negative news coverage and 100% negative jokes on TV.

Justify won the triple crown today. Justify is partially minority owned by the China Horse Club and a group with George Soros. Although only 25% owners Justify wore China’s National colors of Red with yellow stars.