New oligarch talking point: BUT BLUMPF IS WORSE!!!!
(i.imgur.com)
Comments (16)
sorted by:
Name Trump's conflicts of interest. Did he bring peace in the middle east just to protect his property there? If that counts, I hope he has all the conflicts of interest.
I wonder why the comparison to the Clinton Foundation is never made by these brainlets. That was an overt and long running (multiple decades) open solicitation of foreign donation money with the implicit promise of presidential access. I'm old enough to remember that Bill Clinton's campaign was backed heavily by Chinese money which was a curiosity at the time. The media only cared to report on it for about a weekend, then it was back to "Iraq Iraq Iraq". Hilary's solicitation of donations continued all through the Bush-43 and Obama years, under the promise that anyone giving large sums to her 'family charity' was buying access to the future Queen-President and favors would be returned.
Nothing Trump has ever done comes anywhere near that. They have a fantasy in their heads that Trump wanted to invest in Moscow real-estate? That's... such small ball compared to this, and it isn't even based on any observable facts, its just a belief. This is overt, proven, and far far worse on the face.
You do? Why would they talk about shit that makes their heroes look bad? Don't forget, these people do not evaluate facts on their merit. They look at facts and think about how these facts make them feel. And if they don't feel good these facts are to be erased from the public.
If they had so much evidence of Trump they would have brought it all forward in the impeachment nonsense. All I ever saw was a transcript of a conversation with a foreign country with no smoking guns in it. That's the best they could do with an entire House of Representatives, FBI, and mass media against him. What they have on Trump wouldn't even hold up in small claims court.
Although your comments on peace in the Middle East certainly sound like something the left would say.
D A R V O
A
R
V
O
Fire this man.
"It's okay when we do it."
Ironically speaking the truth because Trump hasn't done it.
Either something is okay or it isn't.
Defining whether something is allowed because an unrelated party did something you define as worse is unfathomably retarded and will justify literally anything because someone else is always worse.
such as?
You do know what job he's up for, right?
You know what position he was when the events happened, right?
I guess when he's anointed with the holy chrism his past sins will be cleansed, as surely as Donald Trump's were.
"Yeah, but have you SEEN the other guy?" ~ Democrats,
20162020