So no R’s here are willing to challenge and condemn DJT’s desire to suspend the US Constitution
that he may be able to regain the presidency?
You’ve had 3 days to do so.
I guess that’s the cowardice to be expected here.
Replies to: So no R’s here are willing to challenge and condemn DJT’s desire to suspend the US Constitution
I read his quote - not at all what he meant, just what MSM spun for the D's
(no message)
You mean you're going to interpret for him because, why?
(no message)
You already interpreted his words. So did MSM. Please use his original words, not yours.
(no message)
Hey numbskull - he wrote the post - it's pretty darn clear
"Do you throw the Presidential Election Results of 2020 OUT and declare the RIGHTFUL WINNER, or do you have a NEW ELECTION? A Massive Fraud of this type and magnitude allows for the termination of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution, Our great ‘Founders’ did not want, and would not condone, False & Fraudulent Elections!
Braindead, so you agree 2020 election is a Massive Fraud. If you want to accept a part
of his words you have to accept his whole words without breaking the term logic of original words.
If I was in a cult and was as stupid as you, then I'd agree to that. But I'm not. Though
stick to it. You might find out in reality, you're just a dupe.
Agree you were not stupid. You are stupid and always. No past tense about your stupidity.
(no message)
Interesting. Trump just condemned this view. Said he didn't mean that. Who would've thought?
Now Jim can never condemn setting aside the Constitution, now that Trump has done so.
Not so interesting is, you R's here didn't condemn his tweet. And Trump didn't condemn his own tweet
- he said he didn't mean to he just meant he wanted to right the wrong done to him.
But then, he did try to circumvent the constitution prior to 1/6 and on 1/6. So, what does his newest
claim mean?
That you didn't condemn or even challenge his tweet means, you accept the path of setting aside the
constitution for your goals.
Obviously you have a reading ability deficiency. It must be difficult.
(no message)
Trump didn't condemn anything - Unless you'd care to share the link.
(no message)
Interesting no D's here willing to condemn D Party/Social media collusion to block 1rst Amend rights
They simply accuse Trump of that which they did to him now.
Yep. They want a living, breathing Constitution, that will do what they want. So, they accuse Trump.
(no message)
Yeah, that makes zero sense.
(no message)
Are you only asking Republicans? If so, I suppose you can disregard my answer.
Do you condemn all attempts to circumvent of the Constitution, including the first and second amendments? I do. I will condemn members of both parties who do that. Really interested to hear whether you do, too. Hoping we have some common ground.
The good news is, such efforts are only systemic on one party, the Democrats, who has Twitter, NYT, WP, the FBI, etc. acting like propaganda arms of the DNC. Join me in championing the Constitution, and condemning all attempts to circumvent it, whether done by Biden or Trump.
That's just a batshit crazy post by you.
(no message)
We shouldn’t have to worry about Trump. Between January 6th and Mara Lago he’s
going to be criminally charged. At least that’s what I’ve read on here before. Desantis it is.
That's just deflection - he held the office of the president, his words mean something. That's
why this nation needs to condemn his tweet. You included.
But you won't because you're in the cult too.
Misquoted and misinterpreted as usual but I am for DeSantis.
(no message)
Definitely not misquoted - you're wrong and you always are wrong. He clearly
states the rules and laws including the constitution should be set aside for him to regain the presidency.
There is no mistake in the interpretation of his tweet.
Just your moronic defense of it.
No different than you Ds failing to condemn the silly or stupid stuff your side says/does
Seems like "the code" prohibits strong partisans from condemning one of their own, or praising the other side.
Oh please, save the bullshit!
(no message)
Yeah that makes sense
“A Massive Fraud of this type and magnitude allows for the termination of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution.”
Yeah, lots of Dems say stuff like that, I guess.
The both-sides-do-it defense is the tool of the moron.
He meant that Dem cheating allows for bypassing the rules. You know this. Classic cheater deflection
(no message)
I know. I speak English. “bypassing the rules” = overthrowing the rule of law.
(no message)
He meant that D's bypassed the rule of law by using social media black outs. You're deflecting.
Why haven't you commented on the Musk revelation blockbuster? Because you don't care how they do it. The ends justify the means for you. Liberalism Rule #3. And this purposeful twisting of Trump's meaning allows you to even apply the pressure meant to be on Dems back onto Trump. Despicable.
Of course, Trump has immediately denied the spin that he wants to end the Constitution, but your MSM doesn't report that either.
You should rewrite all of his tweets. Oh wait, you always do. What's new?
(no message)
I’m not deflecting anything. I’m quoting the former prez directly.
And i don’t comment on the Twitter crap because I pay no attention to the Twitter crap. It’s the kind of nothing burger that people are going to interpret according to their pre-existing beliefs.
All of the chat about the first amendment amuses me, though. As if the amendment is there to protect people spouting horse shit on Twitter.
Some Dems lied and said that the "10% for the Big Guy" was Russia Disinformation.
The Left won't condemn their own "intelligence" people who did that...or their own use of the FBI to convince Facebook and Twitter to suppress free speech in an attempt to set aside the 1st Amendment. You won't condemn yourself for doing it.
As for for me, all I can do is vote against Trump in the primary, and see what happens.
They will all vote for him, once he wins the nomination
(no message)
You guys could fix that by nominating a more reasonable candidate. Is it really that hard to do?
(no message)
That is because he is still better than any Democratic alternative. Even Tulsi Gabbard knows this.
(no message)
I'm voting for DeSantis. The wrinkled orange has outlived his usefulness.
I think he's still useful.
He's useful as a target. Let Trump take all the live rounds while Desantis continues to do good work and gain popularity. By the time the Dems figure out that DJT is a distraction, it will hopefully be too late for them to focus the slander machine on RD.
yeah, but, here's the real problem.
if trump doesn't get the nomination, he could run as an independent. the conservative vote will be split. the dems will run away with it.
we have to hope his ego won't interfere with good judgement and common sense.
I stated that very idea to LanceH a week ago. He still thinks Trump will win the nomination...
Running as an Independent is poison but his other act of desperation is to argue that the GOP needs to go and if he's not nominated, then the MAGA followers should protest by staying home.
This is gonna' get fugly.
I hate that more than I hate UConn women's basketball.
(no message)