https://dailycaller.com/2019/10/07/ilhan-omar-files-divorce-amid-affair-rumors/
Maybe she can marry another relative to get them a green card in the US.
I wouldn't normally post something like this about a politicians life outside of politics, but I want to fit in with all the liberals on this forum. So here it is.
She's sleeping around
shareWho the hell does she think she is? T-rump???
shareWho the hell does she think she is? Bill Clinton?
shareLast I checked Clinton is still married. Never been divorced. Ever.
Try again.
She's having an affair... a la Clinton.
shareOoooh, an affair.
So what are you insinuating? That she might be as promiscuous as Trump? loooolz! I don't think so.
[deleted]
Must have missed the sarcasm of doggie no? Either that or you missed mine.
Either way our points were aligned to highlight the absurdity of the double standard pointing to her affair in light of who the OP supports as President. It's not like she broke any laws like the President did violating campaign finance law by paying off his pornstar fling to stay silent.
So, are you against political officials having affairs or just against affairs in general? Are you against Donald Trump's affairs as well?
Simple questions. Go.
Didn't take long for the loony libs to make this about Trump. As usual.
share1. Not a lib.
2. Since when are you Trumpers against deflections?
3. You didn't answer my question.
I ask again: are you also against Donald Trump's infidelity?
It's a pretty simple question. I'm against both Omar and Trump's infidelity. See how easy that is?
So, you're against Trump's infidelity as well, correct?
I am against infidelity, but it does not attribute to everything about a person.
shareInteresting. If that's so, why are you making a point of mentioning the infidelity of Clinton and Omar but saying nothing at all about Trump?
If you don't attribute it to a person then why are you even bringing it up? Furthermore, why did you vehemently try to steer the mention of Trump away both when myself and another poster brought him up?
What was the intent behind this thread post in the first place if you don't attribute infidelity to the worth of a person?
Explain.
This isn't a thread about Trump. Read the OP. TDS!
shareYet, you guys make every Trump thread about Hillary, Obama, Biden, etc.
Why is it OK for you to do it but not for us?
Hm?
Hillary, Obama, Biden do similar things that Trump does, yet they get swept under the rug, Trump goes on trial. When you're comparing policies, its not to compare to those of Trump's predecessor, no?
shareClinton's extramarital affair led to impeachment by the republicans, even though Clinton tried to deny it.
T-rump's extramarital affairs - and his hush money payments - were denied by him, and republicans moved on. They wouldn't think of impeaching him for his affairs, hush money payments or his lies.
Who's situation got swept under the rug?
From what I've seen, you're most definitely a lib.
share[deleted]
LOL!
share1. Not a lib.
Do I hear an echo?
shareProbably. The acoustics in your skull must be outstanding.
sharePoor krl97a. I haven't given you any attention for several days. Several days of not doing a back-and-forth with you. How that must kill you. I kept wondering why you started randomly posting to me on several different threads, trying so desperately to get me to engage you.
Maybe one of the others around here will throw you a bone but I'm done. You can starve. :)
Poor dteam6 just typed more than a paragraph to feign disinterest. "Random"? Whenever I see you posturing as "not a lib" I might post that "terrorist" fact to knock you off the stage and expose you as a preening, totalitarian fraud. It's a useful public service and it amuses me.
shareAND a supporter of Bernie. One HAS to be a lib to support that old communist.
shareHah! With the kind of privilege she's been given by the Democraps, they'd let her marry an American vegetable if it meant letting her sorry Muslim behind stay in the U.S.
shareWhat is it with religious bigots like you? This country was founded on religious freedom, it's written into the 1st Amendment. You should try reading it.
shareLike all Trumpers, she thinks this is a "Christian nation" (which it is not).
Funny how many Trumpers try acting like we're a one-religion "Christian Nation" all the while defending the most un-Christian president we've ever had and supporting the most un-Christian acts ever committed: throwing kids in cages, building walls to keep needy people out, threatening death against dems, etc.
Also, I find it ironic how Trumpers make the very bigoted judgment that all Muslims in our country are bad when, last I checked, domestic mass shooting terrorism is our largest problem by FAR right now. It's also ironic because many Christians have (and many of them still do) perverted the texts of the bible to justify their bigotry just as Muslim terrorists do with the Koran.
She's the poster child for everything wrong with the Republican Party of the 21st century.
shareI hope she finds true love someday.
shareNot likely but she will have endless chapters to add to all her books she puts out.
shareThere was a time when I could listen to the arguments of William F Buckley and George Will and understand their POV even if I disagreed with them. After Trump, ALL the people who argue for Republican positions are making impossibly stupid, thinly veiled racist, illogical arguments! Why didn't Buckley and Will complain about 'Fake News' or the 'Liberal Media' or the 'Deep State'? Because they didn't need to invent boggeymen they relied on the strength of their ideas! Trump has NO IDEAS beyond race baiting, calling names and lying. He said the reason he would run as a Republican is because "They are stupid and will believe every thing you tell them"!!! Trump is a lousy person with many flaw, but he is keen judge of character!
shareWhat a crock of shit. If you knew anything about Buckley or even Will you'd know they spent much of their careers eviscerating liberal media bias and incompetence. That pervasive, entrenched bias was the reason Buckley founded National Review. His career was defined by conscious insurgency.
One huge mistake Democrats have been making is behaving as if Trump and his personality are all that matter, dismissing the real reason he won, which is that he spoke to legitimate, substantive issues that Heartland and swing voters care deeply about. That's why attacking him personally for four years hasn't dislodged his support. By focusing on trivial concerns ("Did you see what Trump tweeted!" "Sharpie!" "Stormy Daniels!") or this treasonous impeachment coup attempt, you're dismissing those valid concerns and those people, except to the extent that you insult them as a bunch of bigoted idiots as you just did in your post, lol. Do so at your own political peril.
If Democrats do succeed in removing Trump from office, or maybe just assassinating him as multiple famous liberals have called for, that won't end the story happily for you with all problems solved. If that does result in the civil war recently speculated about, which it very well might, it won't be because of people's personal loyalty to Trump, but rather because they believe their last, best hope of saving America will have been extinguished, and by illicit means to boot. At that point the goal would be to throw all the rules out the window, as the left has already done, and try to save a portion of the real America so that it doesn't completely vanish from the earth.
But sure....tone, elegant argument construction, and all that hypocritical hogwash from morons screaming "racist" and literally rioting against free speech.
"What a crock of shit."
Exhibit A. Yes Buckley and Will rallied against perceived media bias, but they did not need to resort to YOUR language to do it. They used logic and reason to do it. Today the Right is actually admitting they can't even do that!
"he spoke to legitimate, substantive issues that Heartland and swing voters care deeply about."
Let's assume for argument sake that you are 100% right. There is no deep seated and racist reasons behind the ideas of Trump supporters. Why can't you lot argue based on THOSE legitimate and substantial issues. I recall the Tea Party opposition to Obama was based on Fiscal concerns and Government intrusion. "Don't Tread on me" has become " Please tread on the other guy" Where are those concerns now? Where is the concern about an intrusive and over spending government? You have failed to make the argument you JUST said were legitimate heartland concerns. Why is Trump's rallying cries draped in racist and xenophobic language if the REAL concerns are 'substantive issues'?
"because they believe their last, best hope of saving America will have been extinguished, and by illicit means to boot."
I might agree with you there. Sooner or later, the Trump followers will realize that whatever real "hope" they have for America is NOT shared by Trump. Sure he sounds right but this man has never done anything for anyone else his entire life! He is completely selfish! You refuse to acknowledge his moral decadence and financial dishonesty. Deep down I believe many of you already know this, you are simply on for the ride. At some point, the ride will end and guess what? those hopes will remain unfulfilled. What's worse is that your side would have mortgaged ANY right it had to have it's point of view heard.
The bargain of this democracy is that you fight fairly, follow the constitutional boundaries, and take turns with our different visions. When one person decide to cheat; not follow the rules and wants to keep control forever, it is not good for ANYONE.
Exhibit A. Yes Buckley and Will rallied against perceived media bias, but they did not need to resort to YOUR language to do it. They used logic and reason to do it.
What's worse is that your side would have mortgaged ANY right it had to have it's point of view heard.
The bargain of this democracy is that you fight fairly, follow the constitutional boundaries, and take turns with our different visions. When one person decide to cheat; not follow the rules and wants to keep control forever, it is not good for ANYONE.
krl97a,
You have to decide whether you want to have a discussion ( like Buckley and Will would) or you want to have a shouting match. I have not refrained from cursing you because I am scared, stupid or don't know curse words. I have done so because I have CLASS and will not be dragged into a shouting match.
If I can't get you past your vulgarity, cliched 'talking points' and unnecessary colorful imagery I can't hope to get you to REASON, which is PRECISELY MY POINT about the RIGHT. This is ALL you have left today! You are intellectually bankrupt! Chief proponent is Trump. You can make ALL the points you want without trying to tie me to some extremes you feel might invalidate my words. You simply need to read, understand and refute them!
Now surprise me!
I've refuted your disingenuous claptrap about Buckley by posting his colorful quote, so you should discard that lame tactic since adhering to it makes you look worse with every reply.
All you've done here is falsely scream "racism!" and launch other ad hominem attacks against Trump and conservatives. While I'm flattered that you at least glanced at my old thread enough to copy a bit of its language, you did nothing to dispute the substance there showing that the left is intellectually bankrupt, nor did you address the substance in my post above at all.
I chose immigration/border security as an example and outlined an argument justifying it being treated as the major issue it is by Trump supporters.
Here's your response (sans the off topic ad hominem garbage): *crickets*
If you're done then have a nice day.
I was CLEAR that if you wanted me to respond to what you think are legitimate arguments on your side, you MUST drop ALL your 'unnecessary colorful language'. After several responses from you it seems you failed. You tried, but fell short, sorry. You obviously don't want to hear my responses or if you do, you just can't read and follow simple instructions. When either of the two is the case my efforts to educate you will be wasted. So carry on swearing and believing whatever it is you choose.
Once again you have made my point. The Right is left to lying, shouting and swearing. Buckley, Will and Reagan are turning in their graves.
Good day!
I just made a substantive argument on immigration and border security and you completely dodged it, instead wasting several posts hypocritically screeching out BS ad hominem attacks and exposing your general ignorance. Now you're fleeing the thread without ever having addressed substance.
Thank you for illustrating what I said about the left's intellectual bankruptcy.
Omar is alleged to have been involved with 38-year-old Tim Mynett. FEC records previously confirmed that Omar’s campaign reimbursed $21,547 in travel expenses over the past few months for E. Street Group, where Mynett works as a partner.
I guess you're not familiar with the definition of 'alleged'.
shareI'll go with "reportedly". Now tell me more about Trump being a Russian spy, Trump proposing the Statue of Liberty's plaque be rewritten, Schiff announcing his lie about what Trump said was a "parody" before he said it, and Tucker Carlson getting fired, you lying buffoon, LOL.
sharelol. All you do is gaslight and strawman. You're the worst debater I've ever seen.
shareWeak. Amazingly you aren't quite the worst I've seen, but you're pitiful (you provided zero evidence, as always) and you get crushed every time.
shareThank you though for taking the time to dig up those links where I exposed you for being a John Solomon dupe and clowned you for falling for propaganda that took me five minutes of due diligence to see through. That was good fun.
shareLOL! More lying from you as anyone who clicks on those links can see, which is why you didn't quote or link to anything.
shareI don't need to quote or link when you took the time to do it for me.
Oh, and you admitted you're too stupid to know how to bypass paywalls. That was classic too.
I linked to you getting caught factually lying and me easily proving it with quotes. Your only response is "errrm....gaslighting!" because you're a moron who sucks at debate.
Why would I care about bypassing paywalls, especially to read a rag like the Washington Post? It's rich that you go to the trouble of doing so, LOL. WashPo probably doesn't appreciate it though.
lolz. Because you were crying about the fact you couldn't get past their paywall. I think it's hilarious you're now sour grapes and you STILL haven't figured out how to bypass paywalls.
shareLOL. You're crying because you got spanked in the debates and you've been reduced to babbling diversionary crap about "paywalls" and "Solomon".
sharelulz. I'm actually showing you gratitude by telling you of my appreciation for digging up that link where I exposed you for being a Solomon dupe.
shareIs that the one where I linked to the documents themselves and ABC news supporting Solomon's claims, LOL?
You're confused. That was higher on the page. The specific posts I just linked to on the other thread were of you claiming (with no evidence) I didn't know about Rosenstein's "collusion" memo, which I debunked by quoting and linking to old posts of me discussing Rosenstein's "collusion" memo (lol), and you claiming (with no quotes) that scholar Haidt only found the PC regime on a few Ivy League and west coast schools, which I responded to by quoting Haidt in his book talking about that dangerous regime existing across many universities, moving to other parts of society, and spreading to universities "throughout the English speaking world."
Always good times owning you.
You're gaslighting again.
You were hilariously trying to claim that Mueller's boss was Democrats and Adam Schiff and I had to school you that it was Rosenstein that gave him the directive to investigate collusion. You were absolutely clueless and once again proved you had no idea how government works.
Reminds me of the very first question I ever posed to you when I asked how you can justify Trump stonewalling congressional oversight and you ranted on about how Trump had spent two years cooperating with Democratic oversight when Democrats had only just taken over the House. You keep proving over and over again you're an ignoramus, and when called out you lie and say you knew all along. When I don't bother reading your replies it's because you've already demonstrated you lost the argument by having to resort to gaslighting.
But like I said, I appreciate you linking to that page where I called you out on the laundry list of times I schooled you. I'm infinitely amused you take the effort to dig up links that only serve to clown yourself.
You might find it fun to get slapped down and humiliated by me when you gaslight. But I find owning you gets old, so I just stop reading your tiresome lies. You're doing the same thing right now so I'll signoff now on your cue. Thanks sucker.
LOL! And that takes care of that troll!
Thanks eyeDEF!
LOL! So you were pissed enough to vomit several paragraphs of whiny, delusional lies...but you couldn't be bothered to support any of your claims with a single quote of what I actually said the way I repeatedly do when exposing your ignorance and BS. Then you sign off by announcing you're fleeing the debate, without addressing the specifics I just laid out (and linked to on the other thread) exposing your lies (including on Rosenstein/"collusion"). Yep, right on cue alright.
By contrast you can't produce a single lie I've told. No wonder you feel humiliated and want to run away.
Kicking your ass like this is always fun.
I'll go with "reportedly", too. Pass the big black Sharpie to me when you're through.
(BTW, I didn't say it was T-rump who proposed the Statue of Liberty's plaque be rewritten - but if you want to change that with the Black Sharpie, go ahead.)
Can you prove any Trump official proposed that? Or any of the other sample of your lies I mentioned? I note that you didn't comment on the others, LOL.
sharelulz. Your MO is to always accuse people you're debating of lies that you completely make up, and when they don't respond to your gaslighting you declare victory. All you're doing is demonstrating how delusional you are.
shareI completely made this up, LOL?
https://moviechat.org/bd0000082/Politics/5d8f75af267d366a7ae50212/Rep-Adam-Schiff-makes-up-quotes-and-attributes-them-to-Pres-Trump?reply=5d90beba168d9820cc9f70db
See, I post evidence and you don't because I can back up my claims while you just spew lies. On the bright side you're still my favorite punching bag, eyedef. ;)
lulz. Actually it's quite the opposite. You provide links where anyone objectively reading through the thread would recognize your constant gaslighting and lying, that's why your links don't bother me. You suck at debate and resort to lying and gaslighting when you get schooled on the facts. You're just so deluded you're not even self aware enough to realize it.
shareNope, any honest person can see that's the opposite of the truth, which is why you completely dodged the specific example I just posted above, LOL.
You really do suck at this.
You're the guy who professes his undying love for John Solomon propaganda, what would you know of truth?
shareAnyone reading this can see that you're literally repeating a sophomoric lie rather than addressing the specific example of doggie getting busted lying that I highlighted and linked to above to meet your challenge after you falsely accused me of falsely accusing him. What a stupid clown you are, LOL.
shareI didn't need to comment on the others. You took out the Sharpie and changed your answer to 'reportedly' - I did the same. LOL!
shareReported by whom? Doh! Doggie didn't think that far ahead....
shareTo paraphrase a quote T-rump (and not "Top Gun") :
'It was reported by many, many people. Some say 100,000 though just today before coming on this forum, I heard 50 million. So many, many people are reporting this.'
So you've got no source. Got it. And thanks for proving me right.
Doggiedaddy gets owned again.
[deleted]
Nope. My real name is Melania T-rump.
shareThe only thing you have in common with Melania is that neither of you has testicles.
share