Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


EvC Forum Side Orders Coffee House The Trump Presidency

Summations Only

Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Trump Presidency
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1509
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009
Member Rating: 1.4


(1)
Message 2269 of 4573 (837266)
07-29-2018 6:03 PM
Reply to: Message 2249 by Percy
07-25-2018 12:15 PM


Re: .50 Cal Jesus Kills for your Sins
Excluding morals from religious belief seems exceedingly odd.
Not when those morals are often practiced by non-religious people. You described how your life (being married to only one woman, etc) proved that not all the non-religious are immoral, which is true.
This makes no sense. In a nation with separation of church and state, why would people in their role as Christians much care about the details of their government?
They don't worship government, they don't worship the earth. They like the 2nd amendment, the 4th, the 10th.
The church encourages sharing, a principle at the foundation of socialism.
The church encourages voluntary, individual sharing. Not collective, forced sharing. The difference is as big as night and day.
We have social security because we care about our older people and believe that we together as a society should contribute to their wellbeing. We have Medicare because we believe our older people have a right to healthcare that is unaffordable for most on a fixed income, and that therefore we as a society should contribute to it. We have Medicaid because we believe that those unable to afford their own healthcare still have a right to it, and that we as a society should contribute to it. A healthy and more well off society is a better society. When it's every man for himself then we are all poorer.
This is another debate - where to draw the line on the free stuff. Free healthcare means more carelessness in lifestyles, more and more burden on responsible people who foot the bill. "Redistribution of wealth" is a popular term, but not very descriptive. It's much more accurate to call it "redistribution of earnings". Because the wealthy find ways to shift the burden to those further down the economic ladder.
Sure I know what Strzok and Page said and did. What they said was to text messages back and forth that were comforting to them about a potential Trump presidency. What they did was their jobs.
Part of their job is to avoid political bias in doing their job.
When will you be offering this clarity about why Christians support Trump? After many words, so far there have been none.
There have been plenty.
NoNukes writes:
You are right. Having illegal's vote is not something Democrats espouse, but the idea that Democrats are looking for votes from illegals or from former illegals is a part of conspiracy theory pushed frequently by Republicans including at least one poster to these forums. I would not call it a lie; but it is ridiculous, paranoid, and inane. Fear of a brown planet.
Seems fairly innocuous and obvious. Where is the "whopper?"
That Democrats aren't thinking of getting illegals votes. I heard somewhere that sanctuary cities tend to work pretty hard to get them registered. And then he uses the term "conspiracy theory" - this from the party that's accusing Trump of colluding with Russia to become president of the U.S!! Hahahaha

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2249 by Percy, posted 07-25-2018 12:15 PM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2276 by Percy, posted 07-30-2018 1:34 PM marc9000 has not replied
 Message 2277 by NoNukes, posted 07-30-2018 5:44 PM marc9000 has replied

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1509
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009
Member Rating: 1.4


(1)
Message 2270 of 4573 (837267)
07-29-2018 6:09 PM
Reply to: Message 2253 by NoNukes
07-25-2018 4:20 PM


Re: .50 Cal Jesus Kills for your Sins
Standard marc9000 tactic. He did not hear it, so it must not have happened. But rather than check first, just post crap as if it were the truth.
I go by my experiences in determining what I believe. I know that the mainstream media sometimes quickly mention positives about Trump, but they go through them quickly, then go back to harping on the negatives. 91% negative, I checked on that.
When you post your Democrat talking points, do you check at Fox news, or the Washington Times, to see if they're true? (I already know the answer )

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2253 by NoNukes, posted 07-25-2018 4:20 PM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2271 by NoNukes, posted 07-29-2018 7:41 PM marc9000 has replied

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1509
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009
Member Rating: 1.4


Message 2272 of 4573 (837272)
07-29-2018 8:07 PM
Reply to: Message 2271 by NoNukes
07-29-2018 7:41 PM


Re: .50 Cal Jesus Kills for your Sins
Making such claims should require doing at least some checking.
If this were a court of law, yes. But it's not. If I experience something first hand, I'm not afraid to claim it as fact. If I know it's true and someone reading doesn't believe me, I don't care.
I've played the game before, I list a source, and it's called wrong or biased. Demands are made for still more sources, more more more. It never ends, until now. I don't do that anymore.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2271 by NoNukes, posted 07-29-2018 7:41 PM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2273 by NoNukes, posted 07-29-2018 8:09 PM marc9000 has not replied

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1509
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009
Member Rating: 1.4


Message 2291 of 4573 (837458)
08-01-2018 9:14 PM
Reply to: Message 2277 by NoNukes
07-30-2018 5:44 PM


Re: .50 Cal Jesus Kills for your Sins
marc9000 writes:
I heard somewhere that sanctuary cities tend to work pretty hard to get them registered.
You heard? Got a shred of evidence?
Non-citizens will start voting soon in San Francisco – Orange County Register
quote:
In San Francisco, there will be safeguards preventing non-citizens from doing what Trump strongly opposes: They won’t be allowed to vote legally in elections for anything but school officials. To ensure that doesn’t happen, ballots going to non-citizens will not list any federal, state or other local offices. And yet, there are few safeguards to prevent non-citizens from registering as regular voters.
and
quote:
Here’s what the California secretary of state’s website says about identification needed to register: The voter registration application asks for your driver license or California identification card number, or you can use the last four numbers on your Social Security card. If you do not have a driver license, California identification card or Social Security card, you may leave that space blank. Your county elections official will assign a number to you that will be used to identify you as a voter.
quote:
In short, no one really needs to prove citizenship to vote for any office, in San Francisco or anywhere else in California.
In short, I hope every leftist keeps claiming that there is no desire for illegals to vote, and that the mainstream media isn't biased. And we'll see how the elections go this November.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2277 by NoNukes, posted 07-30-2018 5:44 PM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2293 by NoNukes, posted 08-02-2018 1:26 AM marc9000 has not replied
 Message 2295 by Percy, posted 08-02-2018 8:51 AM marc9000 has not replied
 Message 2304 by Taq, posted 08-02-2018 3:52 PM marc9000 has replied
 Message 2305 by ringo, posted 08-02-2018 4:17 PM marc9000 has replied

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1509
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009
Member Rating: 1.4


Message 2351 of 4573 (837554)
08-05-2018 4:47 PM
Reply to: Message 2306 by Percy
08-03-2018 7:09 AM


Re: Is the Trump lying getting worse?
Yesterday in Washington National Security Adviser John Bolton said Trump was driving his security team to repel Russian attacks on our elections:
At the same time Trump was at a campaign rally in Pennsylvania calling Russian election meddling a hoax:
So which is it? Are we taking Russian election meddling seriously, or do we consider that it ever happened a hoax?
Somebody's lying.
There are 2 divisions of Russian meddling accusations. One is true, the other false. No one, (Trump or Bolton) are lying.
https://www.cnbc.com/...ian-meddling-aimed-to-divide-us.html
The "divide America" one is true. Since the arrival of the www, Russia meddles in just about everything. the "Russia interfered in the 2016 presidential election costing Hillary the presidency" is the false one, the hoax.
I saw a pretty well made vid on Facebook a week or two ago that detailed how a whole network of Russians infiltrate U.S. social media with the sole intent to sow discord and cause division in U.S. citizenry. Russian students are required to learn the English language in their schools, and the ones with an interest in pretending to be an American can be practically impossible to tell from a real U.S. citizen. They're going to post just like liberal socialists because that's exactly what they are. I've little doubt that some of them are right here on EvC.
P.S. NoNukes, I didn't mark where the vid was that I saw, but the above link describes what it was about. I'm sure that will be good enough for you. (Unless you're a Russian)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2306 by Percy, posted 08-03-2018 7:09 AM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2355 by Percy, posted 08-05-2018 7:05 PM marc9000 has not replied

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1509
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009
Member Rating: 1.4


Message 2352 of 4573 (837555)
08-05-2018 4:50 PM
Reply to: Message 2292 by Percy
08-01-2018 10:00 PM


Re: About the value-added of immigrants
For the third time in four years the US has won the International Mathematical Olympiad in which teams of high schoolers from countries around the world compete. Many of the team members are second and third generation immigrants.
Central and South American immigrants, or European and Asian? It would be important to distinguish between the two, when we're focusing on our southern border security.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2292 by Percy, posted 08-01-2018 10:00 PM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2356 by Percy, posted 08-05-2018 7:13 PM marc9000 has not replied

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1509
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009
Member Rating: 1.4


Message 2353 of 4573 (837557)
08-05-2018 4:53 PM
Reply to: Message 2304 by Taq
08-02-2018 3:52 PM


Re: .50 Cal Jesus Kills for your Sins
The purpose of voter ID laws is not to keep illegals from voting, but to keep American citizens from voting. Specifically, to keep minority citizens from voting.
So voter ID will freely allow illegals to vote, but won't let minority U.S. citizens to vote? I LOVE this place! Are you a Russian?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2304 by Taq, posted 08-02-2018 3:52 PM Taq has not replied

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1509
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009
Member Rating: 1.4


Message 2354 of 4573 (837558)
08-05-2018 4:57 PM
Reply to: Message 2305 by ringo
08-02-2018 4:17 PM


Re: .50 Cal Jesus Kills for your Sins
My question is: Why don't you want them to vote? Are you afraid of what they might vote for?
Yes! Free stuff for themselves.
Fair treatment, maybe? The kind of things your government is sworn to uphold?
Can't find "fair treatment" in the Constitution for anyone, including illegals of course. Where do you find it?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2305 by ringo, posted 08-02-2018 4:17 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2362 by ringo, posted 08-06-2018 12:18 PM marc9000 has not replied

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1509
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009
Member Rating: 1.4


(1)
Message 2468 of 4573 (839445)
09-08-2018 11:25 AM
Reply to: Message 2463 by Phat
09-02-2018 2:18 PM


Veteran journalist Marvin Kalb has written a forthcoming book called, "Enemy of the People." He warns that this kind of targeting of the press is familiar:
Hello Phat, I haven't read this book, but let me put fourth a few factual events from the past that I'd bet aren't contained in it.
Four times since June, Trump has referred to the press as the "enemy of the people" on Twitter. His press secretary on Thursday refused to say the press wasn't and instead ticked off a list of grievances and perceived slights.
I've seen the you-tube vid from Thursday, Jim Acosta was pressing Sanders to renounce the "enemy of the people" claim. She obviously keeps some things prepared to pull out and fire off when the situation demands it, understandably so. These reporters have hours, even days, to think up carefully crafted "gotcha" questions for her, and she has to answer them right off the top of her head, knowing that the press will then take several days or weeks to analyze, and of course, twist and distort anything they possibly can. If she'd have had more time to think about it, she possibly could have said the following; "Jim, if you're completely comfortable that the news media is absolutely never the enemy of the people, why are you worried about it? The saying "people don't get angry when lies are told about them - they get angry when the truth is told about them" has never been more relevant."
Peter Jennings, you probably remember him, an ABC news anchor from 1983 until shortly before his death from lung cancer in 2005. He smoked like chimney much of his life, and when he got lung cancer, he blamed the tobacco companies for it. While many of "the people" don't agree with that mindset, lets look at one of his quotes from 1994. (this was right after the Republican take-over of both houses of congress after 2 years of the Clinton administration)
quote:
Some thoughts on those angry voters. Ask parents of any two-year-old and they can tell you about those temper tantrums: the stomping feet, the rolling eyes, the screaming. It's clear that the anger controls the child and not the other way around. It's the job of the parent to teach the child to control the anger and channel it in a positive way. Imagine a nation full of uncontrolled two-year-old rage. The voters had a temper tantrum last week....Parenting and governing don't have to be dirty words: the nation can't be run by an angry two-year-old."
-- ABC World News Tonight anchor Peter Jennings in his daily ABC Radio commentary, November 14.
Best of Notable Quotables 1994 -- Media Research Center
He was calling those who voted in a way that he didn't agree with as having a "temper tantrum", those who simply wanted a change from the big government policies of Democrats who controlled the presidency and both houses of congress. Not only does that show zero respect for that political viewpoint, it can be argued that that statement shows that he had little respect for the U.S. election process. That's not really a surprise, because Jennings WASN'T A U.S. CITIZEN AT THAT TIME. He didn't become a citizen of the U.S. until 2003. So most of his reporting was done as a non-U.S. citizen, and there were, and clearly still are, no requirements of U.S. citizenship for any level of U.S. news reporters. I'd guess that little fact is probably nowhere to be found in Kalb's book.
Jennings received little, or no high level criticism for his "temper tantrum" comments above. Yet no one in the news media today seems to be labeling as temper tantrums what we're all seeing from todays news media. How about the interruptions in the Kavanaugh hearings? Would you consider those to be temper tantrums? How about Jim Acosta's whinings in the press room on an almost daily basis?
To apply Jennings above words to today, we don't have to "imagine" a news media full of uncontrolled 2 year old rage, we see it every day. Today's news media ratings among the general public are very low - criticism of the news media has been made into dirty words by today's left.
If it's negative news, Trump dubs it "fake" news.
And if it actually is fake news, the news media thinks the first amendment shields them from criticism. This is the first time they've had a president stand up to them, and they don't know exactly what to do yet, except have temper tantrums.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2463 by Phat, posted 09-02-2018 2:18 PM Phat has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2469 by Percy, posted 09-09-2018 10:15 AM marc9000 has replied
 Message 2473 by caffeine, posted 09-10-2018 12:44 PM marc9000 has replied

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1509
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009
Member Rating: 1.4


Message 2470 of 4573 (839526)
09-09-2018 8:28 PM
Reply to: Message 2469 by Percy
09-09-2018 10:15 AM


marc9000 writes:
Yet no one in the news media today seems to be labeling as temper tantrums what we're all seeing from todays news media. How about the interruptions in the Kavanaugh hearings?
What press interruptions of the Kavanaugh hearings?
I was referring to the lack of labeling of all of todays leftist temper tantrums. There were none that I know of by the press at the Kavanaugh hearings, those were done by Democrat senators and paid protesters. Yet they were very similar in nature to the anger put fourth by the press in the press briefing room on a daily basis. I didn't post here this time to try to convince any of you that today's angry outbursts by the press / Democrat senators / paid protesters etc are better labeled as temper tantrums than the actions of voters who decided to vote Republican in 1994, because I know my attempts at that would be futile.
But I will go a little further to attempt to enlighten you on one thing that seems to be a false assumption by those on the left in general, that the news media being an "enemy of the people" isn't a view of only Trump and a small handful of his mind-numbed followers, that there is some evidence involved.
As a non U.S. citizen, Jennings wouldn't have been allowed to vote in U.S. elections. (well, back then anyway, he probably could today) Yet with his handsome studly good looks and smooth, charming demeanor, he clearly had the ability to influence countless thousands of votes. Many rational thinking constitutionalists can easily find that troubling. I wonder how many past and current members of the editorial boards at the NY Times or Washington Post are not U.S. citizens? That they would even consider hiring non-citizens for any level of U.S. news reporting is something that a lot of people wouldn't agree with. I personally don't think there should be a law against it - I believe that, in time, the free markets will correct it. Fox News and Newsmax were founded in the 1990's largely because of the arrogance of reporters like Jennings. He got by with the statement I quoted of him above a lot easier in 1994 than...Jim Acosta, for example, would today.
Judge Kavanaugh is no more radical than any other conservative justice, past or present, any informed person knows that. He would have been an understandable choice for any Republican president. Yet the paid protestors at his hearing are far more numerous and disruptive than ever before. If individuals like George Soros are involved in hiring them, what's to stop him from also dangling a lot of money in front of the news media, offering a really big prize to the first one who initiates a Trump removal from office? I suspect it's happened. It might even be legal, but it's not ethical. Not in the best interests of the people.
Obama even broke with the tradition of past, mature presidents, and had a temper tantrum, 20 months out of office. Doesn't seem like the news media has referred to past, mature presidents, or tradition, concerning his outburst
Fake news is a fake allegation invented by the right to avoid responding meaningfully to fact-based reporting.
Yes you and I have already covered fake news earlier in this thread, I have no more to say about your denial of the obvious.
.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2469 by Percy, posted 09-09-2018 10:15 AM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2471 by Coragyps, posted 09-09-2018 9:38 PM marc9000 has replied
 Message 2472 by Percy, posted 09-10-2018 12:03 PM marc9000 has replied

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1509
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009
Member Rating: 1.4


(1)
Message 2481 of 4573 (839803)
09-16-2018 2:44 PM
Reply to: Message 2471 by Coragyps
09-09-2018 9:38 PM


When you find any actual evidence of paid left-wing protesters at one of these events, drag it out here for us to see.
quote:
At least some of the protesters who looted, rioted, burned buildings and overturned police cars in Ferguson, Missouri, last year were promised payment of up to $5,000 per month to join the protests.
https://www.newsmax.com/...d-protesters/2015/05/25/id/646587
That is about a different event, and it's from a conservative source that you might not believe, so here's one more from USA Today, hardly a conservative source, and it's about the Kavanaugh hearings.
quote:
Once we knew the hearings were going to happen, we started putting out a call through our networks, and regular folks who know the impact this will have on their lives started raising their hands and saying, 'I’m coming,'" Epps-Addison said. "We’ve had people carpooling and caravanning to get here."
Brett Kavanaugh hearing: Supreme Court hearing disruptions coordinated
"Putting out calls through networks" - all free and voluntary? Also;
quote:
Rachel O'Leary Carmona, chief operating officer of the Women's March, confirmed that her group had coordinated a plan to disrupt the hearings. That included offering lodging to traveling protesters and "jail and bail support" if necessary.
Lodging? Jail and bail support? How about bus rides? Maybe just a little walking around money? OH NO, that's not possible. They cut it off after lodging and bail. You believe that?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2471 by Coragyps, posted 09-09-2018 9:38 PM Coragyps has not replied

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1509
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009
Member Rating: 1.4


(1)
Message 2482 of 4573 (839804)
09-16-2018 3:27 PM
Reply to: Message 2472 by Percy
09-10-2018 12:03 PM


Why would the news media label their own reporting as temper tantrums?
I would expect them to avoid committing something, (to a much larger extent) that they accused their opponents of previously doing.
Yes, this is true, the proceedings were interrupted and impeded by Democratic senators and protesters. What makes you think the protesters were paid?
See my above reply to Coragpys. Would you not consider incentives that the Woman's March people offer to not be "pay"?
Do you have any videos of press anger being displayed during press briefings?
Not that I'm going to take the time to find, but there have been plenty of them. If you don't believe they've ever happened, okay.
Given that there were only three White House press briefings in the month of August, for example, how is it possible for this anger to be displayed (quoting you) "on a daily basis"?
Well they're called "daily press briefings", but I see they're not so daily. They weren't daily with Obama either, but they did happen much more frequently. Josh Earnest undoubtedly enjoyed the love-fests. I don't know why Trump allows them at all now, their purpose should be to inform the news media, and therefore the people, about what's actually going on. They're useless now, just attack shows.
No one is asserting that the belief that the press is the "enemy of the people" is unique to Trump and his cronies and followers. Dictators and authoritarian rulers have denounced, shut down and put the press under state control since there was a press and long before Trump.
But not in the U.S. Trump is not advocating shutting down, or state control of the press. He has a free speech right to call them on what they do.
Thomas Jefferson wrote, "Our liberty depends on the freedom of the press, and that cannot be limited without being lost," and when he referred to "our liberty" he meant everyone's liberty, not just those of a particular political party.
I don't think he'd be crazy about a press that is so politically one-sided that it advocates "erecting a multitude of new offices, and sent hither swarms of officers (EPA agents and global warming advocates)to harass our people, and eat out their substance." Or for advocating "suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever." Nothing is safe from the global warming hoax.
marc9000 writes:
Yet the paid protestors at his hearing are far more numerous and disruptive than ever before.
How much are you being paid to lie about this?
quote:
Within minutes of the start of Tuesday’s hearing, several protesters stood up in the back of the room and started yelling, interrupting Grassley’s opening remarks. Additional protests carried on throughout the day’s proceedings. (RELATED: Protesters Immediately Interrupt Second Day Of Kavanaugh Hearing)
While no one knows what will happen the rest of the week, Texas Republican Sen. John Cornyn summed up the first day by saying, this is the first confirmation hearing for a Supreme Court Justice that I’ve seen, basically, according to mob rule.
We Cut Down All The Kavanaugh Hearing Interruptions Into Just Three Minutes And Five Seconds Of Pure Annoying [Video] | The Daily Caller
So you can name a previous Supreme Court hearing that was more disrupted than this one? You're more informed than John Cornyn?
I'm unable to parse this as saying anything other than something absurd. You just said that someone rich could offer a prize to the first news outlet to initiate a Trump removal from office. How would a news outlet do that exactly?
Here's a hint, FAKE NEWS. 91% negative coverage of an administration that has presided over a 4% GDP growth.
How can you "have no more to say" when you never had anything to say in the first place?
I pointed out the ~Trump "crossed a lot of lines"~ fake news in an earlier message. 91% negative coverage - the bias in the news against Trump is a simple fact. I have no more to say about it, to someone who denies the obvious.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2472 by Percy, posted 09-10-2018 12:03 PM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2486 by Percy, posted 09-16-2018 5:07 PM marc9000 has not replied

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1509
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009
Member Rating: 1.4


Message 2483 of 4573 (839806)
09-16-2018 3:34 PM
Reply to: Message 2473 by caffeine
09-10-2018 12:44 PM


Why on earth would anyone care about the citizenship of a journalist?
Because it would increase the likelihood that a non-citizen might have an interest in reporting in such a way that is not in the country's best interest.
As I said, Jennings received very little prominent criticism for that comment. A hater of the U.S. from outside the U.S. can give ideas to U.S. citizens who also hate how the U.S. is structured, those U.S. citizens who are willing to sacrifice peace, law and order, to restructure the U.S. into something they fantasize would work better, like socialism.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2473 by caffeine, posted 09-10-2018 12:44 PM caffeine has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2484 by Phat, posted 09-16-2018 3:49 PM marc9000 has replied

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1509
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009
Member Rating: 1.4


Message 2485 of 4573 (839819)
09-16-2018 4:59 PM
Reply to: Message 2484 by Phat
09-16-2018 3:49 PM


Re: Reflection
Is there a global conspiracy against our bastion of freedom? Must socialism be evil? Must globalism be any worse than nationalism? Is it really us against the world?
More relevant questions might be; "Did a 70 year old billionaire become president only for selfish gain? Does Trump "not perceive reality"?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2484 by Phat, posted 09-16-2018 3:49 PM Phat has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2487 by ringo, posted 09-17-2018 12:15 PM marc9000 has not replied

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1509
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009
Member Rating: 1.4


Message 2516 of 4573 (840775)
10-04-2018 11:06 AM
Reply to: Message 2514 by Phat
10-02-2018 10:27 AM


Re: Trump Lies Again
Scary....who on earth would want this man as a Supreme Court Justice? I fear for our future...
What decision do you fear he would make that would threaten our future? What decision has he made during any of his past positions that you don't agree with?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2514 by Phat, posted 10-02-2018 10:27 AM Phat has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2517 by Percy, posted 10-04-2018 4:55 PM marc9000 has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024