Politics Hillary Clinton says Tulsi Gabbard is a 'Russian asset' groomed to ensure Trump reelection

[SlyPokerDog]

Ah! Everyone knows I am to the right of Attila.

No, actually you're not. You claim that I'm not a conservative because I don't support Trump.

Yet you've previously stated that you never supported Nixon.

So if not supporting a republican president means you're no longer a conservative than you haven't been one for many decades.

 

[CupWizier]

you need to marinate them much longer or you'll wear your teeth down to nubs!

This handy little tool does a good job of tenderizing meat. I think it would work awesome on our mods.

 

[MarAzul]

Attack the post, not the poster.

Exactly!
When some one pulls a post out of their arse, it is the post that stinks!
Not the poster.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

Exactly!
When some one pulls a post out of their arse, it is the post that stinks!
Not the poster.

Your fixations on people's asses is disturbing.

And kinky.

 

[CupWizier]

Attack the post, not the poster.

Attack the post, not the poster.

Attack the post, not the poster.

Attack the post, not the poster.

Attack the post, not the poster.

Attack the post, not the poster.

Attack the post, not the poster.

Attack the post, not the poster.

Attack the post, not the poster.

Looks like a 2 week vacation is in order for my buddy marazul. Him and maris can text back and forth to each other during that time.

 

[MarAzul]

No, actually you're not. You claim that I'm not a conservative because I don't support Trump.
>>> No, not nearly enough reason. You know the list is long.
Yet you've previously stated that you never supported Nixon.
>>> Absolutely true.

So if not supporting a republican president means you're no longer a conservative than you haven't been one for many decades.

>>> Could not stomach GH Bush either. GW was no prize winner either. Could not support McCain either.

I sort of think of myself as a Constitutional Libertarian, pretty much in the minority. In agreement with the Republicans far more often than the Dems.
But still, major differences. Three huge ones are;

I hate the US engaging in Nation building or pushing democracy with occupation. A Dem/Rino failing.

I can not agree with the hard Right to Life position, even though the alternatives is disgusting. However Roe/Wade was a stupid SCOTus ruling. A Rep failing.

While not a Christian, I do recognize that this Nation was founded in general as a nation with Judaeo/Christian principles. Where the establishment clause in the 1st amendment specifically prohibits Congress from establishing any religion in the original intent, not intended at all limit a damn thing else like statues, symbols, or what ever else people use in following. A Dem/Atheist failing.

 

[MarAzul]

Your fixations on people's asses is disturbing.

And kinky.

Yeah, well concentrate, you can do it. From where else would you expect them to pull bullshit? Perhaps arse?

 

[MarAzul]

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

barfo

That's correct. +1

 

[SlyPokerDog]

Yeah, well concentrate, you can do it. From where else would you expect them to pull bullshit? Perhaps arse?

Currently, I'm pulling the bullshit from your posts.

I have no interest in your ass.

 

[MarAzul]

Currently, I'm bulling the bullshit from your posts.

I have no interest in your ass.

I suppose that will please your minion. But not more than me.
Carry on!

 

[yankeesince59]

No, actually you're not. You claim that I'm not a conservative because I don't support Trump.

Yet you've previously stated that you never supported Nixon.

So if not supporting a republican president means you're no longer a conservative than you haven't been one for many decades.

^^^THANK YOU !

I get the same misguided rationale from some people simply because I cannot stand Trump and his maniacal BS...ergo, according to some people, by default, I must be a liberal...and I'm anything but.

 

[CupWizier]

Exactly!
When some one pulls a post out of their arse, it is the post that stinks!
Not the poster.

Don't blame the post, blame the poster as the post can't put itself in the forum. Only the poster can.

 

[Lanny]

you need to marinate them much longer or you'll wear your teeth down to nubs!

W. C. Fields? Seems like something he'd say.

 

[Lanny]

Don't blame the post, blame the poster as the post can't put itself in the forum. Only the poster can.

Not really fair to blame the poster. We really should try to blame the post and not the poster.

 

[Lanny]

You sound a lot like your Führer.

I don't see the post you are referring to.

 

[yankeesince59]

I don't see the post you are referring to.

It's clearly posted on the previous page.

 

[calvin natt]

Gabbard lovers will like this

 

[TorturedBlazerFan]

Gabbard lovers will like this

Not sure why she should get any more access than anyone else not invited... I dont really get why so many republicans are losing it over this (or Tulsi), theres a ton that goes on DC the public doesnt know thats just reality. The inquiry process is made up of R’s and D’s its not like one party is doing it (because then I’d have an issue with it).

 

[calvin natt]

looking like shes running third party. Why? Cant win - literally impossible? But takes votes away? Who would possibly be a fan of that?

 

[Hoopguru]

looking like shes running third party. Why? Cant win - literally impossible? But takes votes away? Who would possibly be a fan of that?

Right now I’m a Amy And Pete leaner.
Tulsi I applaud for standing up to Hillary as most liberal women wouldn’t.
I’m waiting for Amy to stand up also.
I’m not a Sanders or EW fan.

 

[barfo]

looking like shes running third party. Why? Cant win - literally impossible? But takes votes away? Who would possibly be a fan of that?

I think his name rhymes with Schlump.

barfo

 

[barfo]

Not sure why she should get any more access than anyone else not invited... I dont really get why so many republicans are losing it over this (or Tulsi), theres a ton that goes on DC the public doesnt know thats just reality. The inquiry process is made up of R’s and D’s its not like one party is doing it (because then I’d have an issue with it).

I understand why Republicans are making the bullshit access argument - they don't have any other defense. Aside from the dumbest among them, they surely know it's bullshit. But it is an attempt to defend their party aka Trump, and distract from the substance of the inquiry.

Tulsi is harder to figure. What does she gain by going on Hannity and repeating false Republican talking points?

Maybe she's planning on switching parties altogether? Maybe she figures with Trump being impeached, the R primary is the place to be?

barfo

 

[TorturedBlazerFan]

I understand why Republicans are making the bullshit access argument - they don't have any other defense. Aside from the dumbest among them, they surely know it's bullshit. But it is an attempt to defend their party aka Trump, and distract from the substance of the inquiry.

Tulsi is harder to figure. What does she gain by going on Hannity and repeating false Republican talking points?

Maybe she's planning on switching parties altogether? Maybe she figures with Trump being impeached, the R primary is the place to be?

barfo

That possibility did cross my mind. I don't think Trump will be impeached though.

 

[barfo]

That possibility did cross my mind. I don't think Trump will be impeached though.

Really? I think it's probably 90% that he'll be impeached. Removed from office, that's a much lower number.

barfo

 

[TorturedBlazerFan]

Really? I think it's probably 90% that he'll be impeached. Removed from office, that's a much lower number.

barfo

I kind of think there's about a 50% shot of impeachment and like a 0.1 percent shot at removing him from office. Then on the other side of that, I'm not actually sure if he was impeached if that keeps him from being elected again. From the little bit of reading I've done, it seems there are different opinions legally about that.

 

[barfo]

I kind of think there's about a 50% shot of impeachment and like a 0.1 percent shot at removing him from office. Then on the other side of that, I'm not actually sure if he was impeached if that keeps him from being elected again. From the little bit of reading I've done, it seems there are different opinions legally about that.

Interesting. Do you think Democrats are going to get cold feet about impeachment, or are you thinking that somehow evidence comes out that Trump didn't extort Ukraine after all?

If he gets impeached but not removed, I don't see what would keep him from running again.
If he gets removed, I don't know if he could legally run again, but if he did I doubt it would be as the Republican nominee.

barfo

 

[Hoopguru]

I like that corruption is being exposed and frankly I don’t care from where..
I like it when politicians eat their own and display uncover reality in politics.
I can’t imagine as time goes on there will continue to be Only Two parties and debates only involving the two parties.
Competition should improve the talent pool and keep things straight for us people.

 

[TorturedBlazerFan]

Interesting. Do you think Democrats are going to get cold feet about impeachment, or are you thinking that somehow evidence comes out that Trump didn't extort Ukraine after all?

If he gets impeached but not removed, I don't see what would keep him from running again.
If he gets removed, I don't know if he could legally run again, but if he did I doubt it would be as the Republican nominee.

barfo

I think it will be hard to prove one way or another that Trump had a quid pro quo with Ukraine, now maybe there will be some paper trail or something somewhere that comes up, but it seems to me that it'll amount to your word vs my word type of argument. Which is probably enough for most of us as we know who we would most likely believe, Trump might be dumb enough who knows to have hard evidence laying around somewhere, but if you line 50 people up and 25 say he did it and 25 say he didn't, not sure how that would actually work out.

I wouldn't be surprised if from this they found something else to get him on though, that is assuming this isn't all just political figures doing their thing...

 

[riverman]

W. C. Fields? Seems like something he'd say.

My jokes are probably pretty close to Evan Turners 3 pt shot percentage Lanny....that's why I keep practicing!

 

[TorturedBlazerFan]

I like that corruption is being exposed and frankly I don’t care from where..
I like it when politicians eat their own and display uncover reality in politics.
I can’t imagine as time goes on there will continue to be Only Two parties and debates only involving the two parties.
Competition should improve the talent pool and keep things straight for us people.

I think it's more likely that the two-party stuff gets stronger from this, not weaker. I think if anything the last half-decade or so has proven that there are enough people on the extremes, or close enough to those extremes that the parties can pander to those extremes and only really think about the middle or third parties for 6 months or so during the general election process.