Originally Posted by Pete F.
Originally Posted by detbuch
Since you couldn't back up your lie that Trump said Nazis are fine people, you posted a video of white nationalist Richard Spencer. I don't know if that was somehow supposed to prove Trump said that Nazis are fine people, but all that I got out of it is that Spencer thought so, or something like that.
Just why does he like Floridaman?
This is what you do. You suggest rather than prove. You ask a suggestive question--implying, by asking, that the answer is "just" (only) that Trump thinks Nazis are fine people.
That is a stupid suggestion. There is no, one reason for Spencer's likes or dislikes. And it really doesn't matter, in terms of what Trump did or didn't say. If Spencer likes Trump, that does not mean, ergo, that Trump likes him or thinks he is a fine person--although you try your sneaky darnedest to suggest that it must be so.
The fact is, regardless of what you imply, suggest, conjecture, lie, Trump did not say that Nazis are fine people. He has said the opposite. And it is not a fine thing you do by repeating the lie that he said Nazis are fine people.
Then you couldn't show that Trump actually denied science, so you posted a video that was supposed to show that Trump believed climate change was a Chinese plot. But when I pointed out the video was not about such a plot, you now divert into something else which is over an hour of conjecture about Trump being a useful idiot for Putin. I suffered through it and recognize his ability to craft a plausible narrative of what might be, similar to the narratives that led to the Mueller investigation, but nothing came from that.
I shudder to think of what I may have to read or watch if you respond to this.
Obstruction combined with a willing AG got him there. Who has now said that any investigation of presidential candidates has to be cleared by himself.
ust think how confusing it is to keep up with Floridaman's big lies.
I understand that it does confuse you.
Just yesterday Floridaman said "Had I not fired James Comey, it’s possible I wouldn’t even be standing here right now"
That doesn't confuse me.
But he never obstructs anything.
Who said he never obstructs anything? There are times when wrong must be "obstructed."
Obstruction, in law, must meet legal standards. It was not illegal for Trump to fire Comey. Further, if that firing prevented Comey from somehow obstructing Trump, the firing was not only not an illegal "obstruction" of Justice, it was an obstruction of injustice.
Here, again, you are trying to paint a picture by suggestion.
Throughout his campaign, while he lied and said he had nothing in Russia, he was pursuing deals with Russia.
He might well have been lying. Depends on what he meant by having "nothing."
Putin knows far more about Floridaman and his finances than the American people.
|