HisArpy
Loose canon extraordinair
- Joined
- Jul 30, 2016
- Posts
- 43,411
The fact that you aren't intelligent enough to read a relatively simple and straight forward post without garbling the meaning isn't my problem, it's yours.
And what I posted has nothing to do with who I approve of nor does it any way say "democrats are good" (how you came up with that bit of nonsense is completely beyond me).
It is about A_J trying to create a false equivalency, as you morons do with Trump by saying all politicians lie so it doesn't matter if it's one or 10,000 it's still a lie which is complete bullshit.
If A_J thinks that the Clintons are as bad he should post proof. That shouldn't be such a foreign concept to someone claiming to be a lawyer.
The reality of the Clinton's misdeeds are known enough to the point that no one need garner "proof" of the sort you're claiming to need for a MB discussion.
You claim "orange man bad" because Trump's company filed for bankruptcy. Yet you offer no proof that such a thing is "bad". Shouldn't YOU have to provide the proof you demand of others?
Meanwhile, you also claim (without actually saying so because that puts you on the record) that the Clinton's are good because, why again?
Or maybe you are trying to say that Bernie is a good guy because it was "Mirs Sanders" who ran the college financial scam.
Or Biden is better than Trump because the fact that he interfered in an investigation into his son in the Ukraine isn't "as bad" as Trump's bankruptcy filing or tax data information. Meanwhile back in China...
Or that Warren is better because she didn't lie because she really is 1/1024 Native American.
When the narrative is "my guy is better than your guy" then you should at least have a guy who actually IS better. Because otherwise, what you're really arguing is "my guy is better than your guy because he's not as much of a crook as your guy is".
Which isn't high praise in anyone's book let alone a rational argument.