Gaetz withdraws.
And so it starts....
shareEnough about his sex life already.
shareThere will be plenty more if anything comes out... fortunately, though, he won't embarrass the US by being in public office.
shareBut I thought he pulled out in time?
What's the problem?
No problem ... now that he has. Just rather embarrassing for Defendant Donald and puts his judgment in question again.
shareWhere's Andy or fourlemons when I need them.
shareUnfortunately it is not just Gaetz. RFK has been forced to say just recently that he has 'no knowledge' when accused of groping a babysitter - but then added that he has "so many skeletons in my closet that if they could all vote, I could run for king of the world." That must be reassuring for Republicans to hear.
shareSwoosh isn't just a marketing slogan.
share"Just rather embarrassing for Defendant Donald and puts his judgment in question again."
What desprate nonsense. Not like Biden and Harris have great track records of better judgement. They make Donald look like a stoic.
What desprate (sic) nonsense.
Wanting to appoint a possible sex trafficker to high legal office was good judgment? At the end even Gaetz felt obliged to jump ship lol Now we just have the vaccine denier in charge of health who admits to plenty of "skeletons in the closet" share
"puts his judgment in question again"
https://moviechat.org/bd0000082/Politics/5e46c20af1326a35b50c0852/Who-would-you-fire-if-you-ran-a-business
Second verse, same as the first.
Say what you want about Trump, he gets his way more often than not, for better or for worse.
I think it was stupid to sent Vance to lobby senators to support Gaetz - There's only one senator younger than Vance, he's only been there 4 years... and it didn't work... I don't think these GOP senators would support Gaetz based on Gaetz's track record even WITHOUT the sex scandals... now we have J.D. on the record pushing for this 30-something creep "partying" with 18-year-old girls? (18 is legal but still cringy.) That's a FAIL by any measure.
he gets his way more often than not, for better or for worse.
Sometimes though, as we saw with his first term he made promises he did not keep. Such a repealing the Affordable Care Act. More here:
https://prospect.org/politics/trumps-40-biggest-broken-promises/ share
As an aside... who in his right mind names his baby girl "Ginger Luckey?" I'm sure she's the nicest person in the world, but why put that baggage on your kid?
With a last name like "Luckey" you need an old-school name like Barbara or Ethel...
Was the runner-up name "Lucille?"
When my wife was expecting our first daughter, one of the names was "Elize." (We were both big fans of The Cure and Elize in particular) I run it by my creepy brother and he immediately says "Elize the sleeze." Only time my brother ever helped me in any way shape or form...
Ahem, Bill Clinton. We're getting really tired of pointing out liberal hypocrisy. It's become a full time job.
shareThe thread about current events, not ancient history. But if we are swopping ancient histories then what about Nixon and W G Bush...
shareYour comment was about embarrassing people in office.
Ancient stories? You fucking people keep calling Trump a rapist because of that bullshit allegation from 30yrs ago. Another court case that won't survive appeal.
We already know the Bushes are pieces of shit.
You fucking people
Oh dear.
keep calling Trump a rapist
https://19thnews.org/2023/10/donald-trump-associates-sexual-misconduct-allegations/
Perhaps you mean all those fucking women objecting to a man who loves to 'grab pussy'?
Another court case that won't survive appeal.
Now that Defendent Donald is back, one expects that he will either pardon himself or lots of court cases (eg the current 'hush money' one) will just go away, if that is what you mean share
You guys love to use the "grabbing pussy" debacle. Two guys talking shit, between themselves. Could be any two dudes, any where.
Funny how every time a republican or nominee is in the spotlight, democrats have no problem digging up women to say they did something. Only to find it proven false.
Defendant, only because of a bullshit political witch hunt. The 34 felony counts have already been eviscerated by the appeals court. They're all a sham but you ignorant fucks believe in it because you've been duped into hating Trump.
You guys love to use the "grabbing pussy" debacle. Two guys talking shit, between themselves. Could be any two dudes, any where.
Not with this dude, dude.
democrats have no problem digging up women to say they did something. Only to find it proven false.
Didn't read the link I provided with all the cases listed then, eh?
you ignorant fucks
Oh dear. share
No, I make it a habit not to click on links provided by liars.
Oh dear? Clutching your pearls? Sorry but I don't hold back on you shits. Tired of playing nice with people who lie and deceive.
No, I make it a habit not to click on links provided by people who I disagree with
There, corrected it for you.
Clutching your pearls? Sorry but I don't hold back on you shits. Tired of playing nice with people who lie and deceive.
Ad hominems are not arguments,
And you still haven't provided any sources of your own and unfortunately have not stated your medical background. I wonder why?
Oh dear indeed. share
Yeah, I know you dummies lean heavily on the opinions of so-called experts because you can't think for yourself.
It's not ad hominem. You really are a dumbass and it's exceedingly difficult to have a debate with stupid people.
Yeah ...lean heavily on the opinions of so-called experts because you can't think for yourself.
You still haven't provided any sources of your own.
It's not ad hominem. You really are a dumbass ... you dummies
You are attacking me and not what I say. QED. share
This is a conversation, an exchange of ideas between two people. Not an exchange of dueling links. If you can't have an actual conversation, fuck off.
No, I'm making an observation. You are a dumbass.
No, I'm making an observation. You are a dumbass.
And my observation is that an ad hominem is still not an argument. And that you still haven't provided any sources of your own.
If you can't have an actual conversation, fuck off.
You took the words right out of my mouth. share
Quick lesson. If I call you a name because I disagree but do not have a counter argument, that is ad hominem. If I call you a dumbass because you're too intellectually stunted to have a debate with, that is an observation. If you cannot grasp the difference, you prove my point better than I ever could.
I am willing to have an argument with YOU but I'm not going to argue against points made by some third party who wrote an article published on the internet.
This is the primary disconnect that leftists seem to have. It's also a form of plagiarism. Learn to think for yourself, if it's not too late.
If I call you a name because I disagree but do not have a counter argument, that is ad hominem. If I call you a dumbass because you're too intellectually stunted to have a debate with, that is an observation.
Attacking the person and not what they say is an ad hominem defined as something"directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining." . But I appreciate your need for semantics here.
I'm not going to argue against points made by some third party who wrote an article published on the internet. Learn to think for yourself, if it's not too late.
This assumes that one is always sufficient authority enough to make definitive statements. In our recent exchange over the efficacy of face masks however, it was apparent that you weren't. Thinking for myself about this, my conclusion is that your technique isn't working very well. share