jakee

Another random meltdown. Aside from continuing to brazenly use the G7 to promote his own business for his own financial gain, one of his favourite rhetorical devices makes a bizarre appearance. "Some people say" Miami International is the biggest airport in the world It's not even top 10 in the country! Ok, it's a great demonstration that whenever you hear him say "some say" you know he's lying... but why on earth would you even try lying about that?

What do you mean, if? You're not naive enough to think he didn't, are you? Why aren't you condemning it now?

What, because I don't actively accept your made up claim, with zero evidence to prove it, that Joe Biden pulled strings to get his son a position with a Ukrainian energy company? Right, so in addition to all the illegal shit we know Trump has pulled, all the bang in the open nepotism that infects the core of his administration, what could I just make up about Trump that you'd happily post in support of just because you're 'not naive'? Did you know Trump supported Kavanaugh for the SC just because he'd already bribed him millions to rule in his favour? Do you want to post right now about how disgusted you are at that behaviour from Trump? I mean, you're not naive are you? By the way, I notice that you again haven't addressed any salient points of fact, or offered any reason or evidence. Well, at least you had the good grace not to deny that you're lying.

The absurdity of that statement is breathtaking. You don't get to prove you're middle of the road by saying what if what if what if Democrats were as bad as he is. That's how you prove you're too biased to accept the reality of the situation.

Yes you would, because you're a biased right wing hypocrite. No-one here would be ok with that - which is frankly irrelevant because it never would have happened. The Clintons and the Obamas were politicians who know how ethics work. They never would have indulged in the rampant nepotism of the Trump administration. No President has ever induged in the rampant nepotism of the Trump administration. Remember, this is a guy who nominated his personal pilot to be chief of the FAA simply because he was a pilot who was his friend. There has never been anything like this, and the more you defend and excuse it by saying what about, what about, what about with these made up scenarios that never did and never would exist, the more you demonstrate how much of a partisan hypocrite you are.

Why not? What has he done wrong?

There are none so blind...

The same things. Great. Thank you so much for being so informative and making that extra effort to have a serious discussion. It's really appreciated, we can all now move forward with total clarity about exactly what we're talking about. Clearly, you are a person to be taken seriously, who has really considered the details instead of bulldozing onwards with nothing but blind partisan bias.

Why am I being a hypocrite? You're claiming Biden manipulated Ukraine for personal gain in the same way (or worse) than Trump. That's a lie that is significantly to Trump's benefit. You're claiming Obama was in on it for reasons that had nothing to do with national interest. That's a lie that is significantly to Trump's benefit. You're claiming Obama manipulated the office of the President for personal gain in the same ways that Trump is doing. That's a lie that is significantly to Trump's benefit - and you know it's a lie because you can't even provide the slightest detail about how you think he did it. You just assume, because you can't bear to think that Trump could possibly be any worse than a Democrat. Which is, I think you get the point. If you don't think that counts as defending Trump, you're so far down the Republican rabbit hole you can't even remember what non-biased daylight looks like. Regardless of what you say.

Lol. Why are you being such a massive hypocrite?

How did Obamacare personally benefit Obama in a way remotely comparable to Trump attempting to extort party political favours from a foreign government?

So why are you claiming Trump wasn’t acting against the national interest? Why are you claiming Trump hasn’t done anything Obama wouldn’t have done? You absolutely are defending the guy. “I am asking questions to point out the hypocrisy I see rampant everywhere.” You're not seeing the hypocrisy, you’re assuming hypocrisy. And ironically, you’re assuming that because of your own hypocrisy. “How MUCH effort would be put into impeachment by the Democrats, or the left leaning populace IF it were Obama instead of Trump?” Who knows? What we do know is that we didn’t have to find out, because Obama didn’t do it. Trump is doing it. Why are you incapable of recognising that?

What is he doing that they did?

What did Obama ever do to make you think he wasn't a real statesman, and that he didn't care about the responsibilities of the Presidency? That's a serious question. Why do you think Obama didn't give a fuck about international relations? Rampant corruption is one of the biggest destabilising influences in any country, particularly one that's already involved in a border war. Viktor Shokin was involved in, protected and enabled rampant corruption throughout the country. What's the point of giving a billion dollars if you think there's a good chance that the recipient's chief law enforcer is going to help people steal it? Why do you think that's not a motive for Obama? Again, what did he ever actually do that makes you think he didn't care? What makes you think he was like Donald Trump? Has Trump been so successful in poisoning the national discourse that you now assume no politician has ever done anything that wasn't motivated by self interest? We can point to all of Trump's blatant abuses of office for self enrichment. That's not in question. Why do you think Obama would only ever have done anything in Ukraine for his own personal interest? Be specific.

The people who are employed to be experts in the region do. They really, really do. Why do you disagree? And even if it didn't, even if the political game playing for personal gain had a neutral effect on the country, does that make it ok to abuse the power of office for personal gain? He didn't. If Obama was like Trump I genuinely believe he'd never have even been elected. It's like when Ivanka was using G7 meetings for personal self promotion and said no-one would have a problem if Hillary had let Chelsea do it - that's precisely the point. Hillary would never have let Chelsea do it. No-one but the Trumps have ever done it. Would you? I think it's highly ironic that you're claiming bias while demonstrating your own. You'd be apoplectic if you thought Obama had done anything close to this, but because it's Trump you don't give a shit.

He bragged that he forced the firing of an official in charge of investigations. So? No, that's incorrect. Absoutely not true. One simple question - do you understand the difference between pursuing a policy that is in the national interest, and pursuing a policy that undermines the national interest for the personal benefit of an elected official?

As a general rule, going in is something that has to be weighed up very carefully, however once you are in, leaving has to be done with even more care. Basically, you broke it you bought it. And when it comes to anything to do with ISIS, god damn did we ever break it.

Sorry, how did evolution get involved in this?

I think at this point the only defense against this being an impeachable situation is that the President is a God-Emperor who can do whatever he wants regardless of the law. And to be honest, that's probably what they'll fall back on!

Well yeah - the fact that it means your point of Christianity having 'survived' 2000 years of persecution is utter bollocks, given that most of the persecution comes from bigotted Christians. When it's violent, horrible Christian vs violent, horrible Christian then Christianity is guranteed to survive no matter who wins. There's nothing special about that.

2000 years of persecution? On what planet? Constantine converted around 300 AD, in case you missed it. The resulting Christian governments covering pretty much the whole of Europe have spent most of the subsequent 1700 years persecuting absolutely everyone else. Most especially those of different denominations. For Christ's sake, if you're going to claim that Christianity has been persecuted for 2000 years then do you want to know who to blame for the vast majority of that persecution? Christians. Bigotted, violent Christians who failed in ethnically cleansing their way to the utopias they wanted.

Right, but we have a Prime Minister, not a President. It's not a seperate branch of government with the Executive power of the Pres, there is comparitively very little of any importance that the PM can do without the consent of Parliament.

True! The one consolation is that Boris never won a national election, he became PM through the back door.

Says the person who believes a 2,000 year old text is the absolute final truth. How deficient does that make you?

Pretty much exactly what everyone else thinks about the hyperbolic hysteria of your posts, I’d say. Equating people who happen to be atheists with the political dogma of Stalinism? Come on man, give it a rest. No need for that kind of blatant trolling.