Why is Trump pardoning all these people?

[Beebs52]

My impression of blackhole’s work is that some of her patrons don’t have much say in the matter. Anyway, I’m proud of my work and the patients I see appreciate me. I suppose we could talk about what you once did, but I don’t really care.

What I did means nothing in this conversation. I don't have a god complex, just worked for local government. I hope we all don't have to deal with you in any capacity of care, what with your creepy attitude towards those with whom you disagree.
Your patients are captive audiences so their appraisals may be suspect.

I’ve said before why I am nasty to you and others here. One of your cohort wished my child dead. You sat on your hands when that happened.
Don't recall seeing that

I’ll never claim that I never resisted an argument or a chance to insult, but this thread is a good example of the ongoing problem here. I bring up examples of why Trump’s behavior is questionable, certainly concerning for an acting president. The responses are that I’m an asshole and a bad doctor. You have responded that those with whom you disagree are dregs
Okay, whitefailure hello?
mentioned how many pardons Trump had in his first term, and blackhole hello?
talked about Biden, but there was never an attempt to analyze or defend why these very questionable pardons are happening.

I take that to mean that there’s not really much of a counter argument. Which we knew already. But when someone says, I must be some sort of bad person, or terrible at my profession, I don’t really give a fuck, as you don’t know me, and that’s all being done to divert discussion away from any discussion of politics here. bullshit[
crazytown diversion
What if we just assumed, for sake of argument, that I am a piece of shit? I assumed the same about you months ago. Great. But what about Trump? Cause, oh, just months ago? What happened? Biden isn't? Neener neener I know what I am what are you? Bad arguments. Do better.

[Beebs52]

Net net is, you deride and dismiss those with whom you disagree politically.

[tlynn78]

My impression of blackhole’s work is that some of her patrons don’t have much say in the matter. Anyway, I’m proud of my work and the patients I see appreciate me. I suppose we could talk about what you once did, but I don’t really care.

What I did means nothing in this conversation. I don't have a god complex, just worked for local government. I hope we all don't have to deal with you in any capacity of care, what with your creepy attitude towards those with whom you disagree.
Your patients are captive audiences so their appraisals may be suspect.

I’ve said before why I am nasty to you and others here. One of your cohort wished my child dead. You sat on your hands when that happened.

I’ll never claim that I never resisted an argument or a chance to insult, but this thread is a good example of the ongoing problem here. I bring up examples of why Trump’s behavior is questionable, certainly concerning for an acting president. The responses are that I’m an asshole and a bad doctor. Okay, whitefailure mentioned how many pardons Trump had in his first term, and blackhole talked about Biden, but there was never an attempt to analyze or defend why these very questionable pardons are happening.

I take that to mean that there’s not really much of a counter argument. Which we knew already. But when someone says, I must be some sort of bad person, or terrible at my profession, I don’t really give a fuck, as you don’t know me, and that’s all being done to divert discussion away from any discussion of politics here. What if we just assumed, for sake of argument, that I am a piece of shit? I assumed the same about you months ago. Great. But what about Trump?

Sorry, boo,I haven't mentioned Biden in your "pardons" thread. But keep bleating. Poor you. Such a victim. Virtually every time you post, you exhibit precisely why no one takes you seriously enough to engage in reasonable discourse. For myself, I simply can't be bothered by morons who swallowed "Russia-gate" "very fine people" "Hunter's laptop is Russian disinformation" or "Biden is fit as a fiddle" any longer. Or those who think making up stupid names for those they disagree with like a pre-pubescent child is somehow showing you're anything approaching a reasonable adult.

[Weyoun]

What I did means nothing in this conversation. I don't have a god complex, just worked for local government. I hope we all don't have to deal with you in any capacity of care, what with your creepy attitude towards those with whom you disagree.
Your patients are captive audiences so their appraisals may be suspect.

I’ve said before why I am nasty to you and others here. One of your cohort wished my child dead. You sat on your hands when that happened.

I’ll never claim that I never resisted an argument or a chance to insult, but this thread is a good example of the ongoing problem here. I bring up examples of why Trump’s behavior is questionable, certainly concerning for an acting president. The responses are that I’m an asshole and a bad doctor. Okay, whitefailure mentioned how many pardons Trump had in his first term, and blackhole talked about Biden, but there was never an attempt to analyze or defend why these very questionable pardons are happening.

I take that to mean that there’s not really much of a counter argument. Which we knew already. But when someone says, I must be some sort of bad person, or terrible at my profession, I don’t really give a fuck, as you don’t know me, and that’s all being done to divert discussion away from any discussion of politics here. What if we just assumed, for sake of argument, that I am a piece of shit? I assumed the same about you months ago. Great. But what about Trump?

Sorry, boo,I haven't mentioned Biden in your "pardons" thread. But keep bleating. Poor you. Such a victim. Virtually every time you post, you exhibit precisely why no one takes you seriously enough to engage in reasonable discourse. For myself, I simply can't be bothered by morons who swallowed "Russia-gate" "very fine people" "Hunter's laptop is Russian disinformation" or "Biden is fit as a fiddle" any longer. Or those who think making up stupid names for those they disagree with like a pre-pubescent child is somehow showing you're anything approaching a reasonable adult.

Oh Lord. Some of that stuff you mentioned happened in 2017.

I did notice, when I started posting here, that at the time, you were already pretty vicious yet also pretty vacuous towards SSS, Bob, and others.

Sounds like you got tapped out early on these political arguments if you’re still carrying water for Charlottesville Nazis. It certainly doesn’t defend your deadweight comments here, but that helps me understand them more.

[tlynn78]

I’ve said before why I am nasty to you and others here. One of your cohort wished my child dead. You sat on your hands when that happened.

I’ll never claim that I never resisted an argument or a chance to insult, but this thread is a good example of the ongoing problem here. I bring up examples of why Trump’s behavior is questionable, certainly concerning for an acting president. The responses are that I’m an asshole and a bad doctor. Okay, whitefailure mentioned how many pardons Trump had in his first term, and blackhole talked about Biden, but there was never an attempt to analyze or defend why these very questionable pardons are happening.

I take that to mean that there’s not really much of a counter argument. Which we knew already. But when someone says, I must be some sort of bad person, or terrible at my profession, I don’t really give a fuck, as you don’t know me, and that’s all being done to divert discussion away from any discussion of politics here. What if we just assumed, for sake of argument, that I am a piece of shit? I assumed the same about you months ago. Great. But what about Trump?

Sorry, boo,I haven't mentioned Biden in your "pardons" thread. But keep bleating. Poor you. Such a victim. Virtually every time you post, you exhibit precisely why no one takes you seriously enough to engage in reasonable discourse. For myself, I simply can't be bothered by morons who swallowed "Russia-gate" "very fine people" "Hunter's laptop is Russian disinformation" or "Biden is fit as a fiddle" any longer. Or those who think making up stupid names for those they disagree with like a pre-pubescent child is somehow showing you're anything approaching a reasonable adult.

Oh Lord. Some of that stuff you mentioned happened in 2017.

I did notice, when I started posting here, that at the time, you were already pretty vicious yet also pretty vacuous towards SSS, Bob, and others.

Sounds like you got tapped out early on these political arguments if you’re still carrying water for Charlottesville Nazis. It certainly doesn’t defend your deadweight comments here, but that helps me understand them more.

SSS, who relentlessly scours out racism wherever he imagines it, except when he let's his slip? And our above average lawyer who believes he "didn't swear to uphold any laws" because he's not a prosecutor? The fact some of what I mentioned happened in 2017, and y'all still doubling down in 2025 kind of proves my point.

[silverscreenselect]

The fact some of what I mentioned happened in 2017, and y'all still doubling down in 2025 kind of proves my point.

I would let Charlottesville go if someone would produce one bit of evidence that I was wrong. Instead, you, flock, and the rest of the MAGA-ites fall back on Trump's claims, "bolstered" by other right-wing commentators saying the same thing in a bit more lucid tones.

I asked flock, years ago, to point me to a single "very fine" person who was at Charlottesville. That should have been very simple in an age when everyone except me has a cellphone with a camera and is more than willing to snap selfies of everything they do every single day and post those selfies on Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, or similar places. (I assume you can post that stuff on Truth Social as well.) You know, something like: "Here's grandma and me in front of the statue of Robert E. Lee in Charlottesville. We're really excited about peacefully protesting tomorrow about the horrible way they're treating General Lee."

No. One. Ever. Has.

Because they can't. And I appreciate that flock, who is more than willing to scour volumes of Excel spreadsheets in search of "proof" that the Georgia election was stolen, might not either want to or know how to do such research. But there are other MAGA-ites who can ferret out every bit of possible dirt on a Democrat who have those capabilities. But they haven't. Because they can't.

You, flock, Trump, and every other right-wing voice could happily pass along to each other on Twitter or Truth Social the "fact" that the sun revolves around the earth. Just like you pass around equally unscientific and untrue nonsense about diseases and vaccines. But eight years or 800 years of ping-ponging the same nonsense around in your sealed echo chambers doesn't make it true.

The fact some of what I mentioned happened in 2017, and y'all still doubling down in 2025 kind of proves my point.

[flockofseagulls104]

I would let Charlottesville go if someone would produce one bit of evidence that I was wrong. Instead, you, flock, and the rest of the MAGA-ites fall back on Trump's claims, "bolstered" by other right-wing commentators saying the same thing in a bit more lucid tones.

I asked flock, years ago, to point me to a single "very fine" person who was at Charlottesville. That should have been very simple in an age when everyone except me has a cellphone with a camera and is more than willing to snap selfies of everything they do every single day and post those selfies on Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, or similar places. (I assume you can post that stuff on Truth Social as well.) You know, something like: "Here's grandma and me in front of the statue of Robert E. Lee in Charlottesville. We're really excited about peacefully protesting tomorrow about the horrible way they're treating General Lee."

I gave this to you at that time, and like everything else you don't agree with, you did a knee jerk attack at the source so that you could disregard the evidence that source gave you. Ironically, that happens all the time, not just with you, but with many things I believe and some things I KNOW are true.

You know as well as I do that I don't have the time, the ability or the motivation to go through all the legacy media bullshit that was plastered on the internet to find an example of gramma at Charlottesville. Especially when you, if we assume you are a rational human being, would know deep down in your brain that there were people there not involved in the violent protests. EVEN IF THAT PROVED ANYTHING!

Trump did not praise neo nazis. Not then and not ever. He categorically and unquestionably condemned them. And you fuckin know it. At long last quit lying to yourself.

OK, here you go.

You see these videos of the events? At least ONE of these videos was taken by someone who was there that was not participating in the events, JUST RECORDING THEM. And I'm sure at least one of them would be described by family and friends as a 'very fine person'. There is an answer to your mental conundrum, as if it proves anything. Give me evidence that I am wrong, SSS. Find the identity of all the people who took these recordings and show me evidence they are NOT fine people. Should be easy to find them and research their character in this day and age, right? Oh, I am asking you for something stupid and worthless? That is what you asked, as well.

[tlynn78]

At long last quit lying to yourself.

They can't, as that would be admitting how utterly gullible they are.

[silverscreenselect]

1) Addressing flock, so the fact that someone at one point was taking videos of the protest means that they were somehow "very fine people" who supported the protest. Who do you think took all the film at Nazi rallies in the 1930s?

2) Here's what Robert Tracinski, a conservative writer who lived in Charlottesville, had to say about the rally:

What if there really was another group of protesters there that day, and that’s who Trump was referring to? Well, there’s the problem. No such group exists. This mythical second group of protesters is like the “second shooter” in conspiracy theories about the Kennedy assassination. I’ve found people who insist to me that such a group was there because the “Charlottesville Hoax” mythology requires it to exist—but I haven’t found a single shred of actual confirmation. It’s almost as if they have adopted a false memory.

That’s what originally set me off about this Trump claim. I live in the Charlottesville area, and I know very fine people who oppose the removal of the monuments based on high-minded notions about preserving history. I’m one of them. So I know that we weren’t there that night. Only the white nationalists were there. If you’re counting, we’ve already busted two parts of the “Charlottesville Hoax” myth. Trump was not talking generally about people on both sides of the statue controversy, he was talking about a specific group—and there was no specific group other than the white nationalists present at the events Trump was referring to.

But what really gives the game away is when Trump insists that the “very fine people” who were there to protest “had a permit.” There was only one protest permit issued that weekend, and it was well documented because there was a court battle over it. That wasn’t for the Friday night’s tiki-torch Nuremberg, which was unannounced, but for the “Unite the Right” rally on Saturday. So were there “fine people on both sides” of the permitted rally? Let’s take a look at which parts of the “right” this rally was supposed to unite. One source describes them as “the alt-right, neo-Confederates, neo-fascists, white nationalists, neo-Nazis, Klansmen, and various militias”—in other words, different variations on the theme of white nationalism. If you think that’s an unfair summary, check out the poster for the event and notice that the headline speaker was prominent white nationalist Richard Spencer.

https://www.thebulwark.com/p/the-charlo ... acket.news

3) This article quotes Tracinski and goes further. In referring to Michelle Piercy:

"It appeared the Times had found what no one else has, before or since: One of Trump’s “very fine people.” She practically repeated the line herself.

Fortunately, the paper was not the only team to reach Piercy. Media Equalizer, a pro-Trump website, also got a hold of the Kansan, and included this crucial, if unintentional, corrective to the Times piece: "Michelle Piercy, who travelled to Charlottesville to participate as a neutral peacekeeper for American Warrior Revolution … knew there was going to be violence, but went anyway. “We were made aware that the situation could be dangerous, and we were prepared.” Piercy says."

According to a lawsuit filed against armed groups after the riot, American Warrior Revolution is a “paramilitary group … active in the militia movement.” It brought 37 members, “many of them armed with semiautomatic weapons” to the rally.

In her interview with the pro-Trump site, neither Piercy nor the writer mentions the Lee statue. Rather, she says, the group was there to act as “peacekeepers”: protecting the Nazis’ right to free speech while “trying to … talk to Antifa and Black Lives Matter and let them know that the way they were protesting is the wrong way to go about it.”

That’s keeping with what researchers have found about such paramilitary groups. As Casey Michel wrote that week for Politico Magazine: Despite the militias’ public statements of neutrality, evidence has mounted … that the militias have gravitated decisively toward one side … Their presence as a private security force for an increasingly public coalition of white nationalist factions—Ku Klux Klan followers, neo-Nazis and “alt-right” supporters—has transformed a movement that has already demonstrated a willingness to threaten violence.

According to the lawsuit, AWR’s leader boasted that they “had the justification to use deadly force that day, and mow people fucking down!” The group has been permanently enjoined from returning to Charlottesville “as a part of a unit of two or more persons acting in concert when armed.” It is important to note that the militia was not part of the rally’s white-supremacist lineup. Piercy herself told the Equalizer that she did not support “white supremacy, Naziism, or alt-right causes.” But they certainly weren’t the skinny-jeansed pro-statue picketers in the PragerU cartoon either.

The article was accompanied by a picture of an American Warrior Revolution tee shirt for sale that features the logo: "Keep rioting... I'm reloading." I realize my excerpt may be a bit hard to follow with numerous quotes within quotes. But you can check out the original article.

https://theracket.news/p/how-the-new-yo ... ottesville

To sum up, the woman quoted in Tlynn's video was part of a right-wing paramilitary group that has now been permanently enjoined by gathering in Charlottesville again and whose leader boasted he had the "justification to use deadly force that day, and mow people fucking down!"

Maybe flock and tlynn think these are "very fine people." I don't.

[tlynn78]

1) Addressing flock, so the fact that someone at one point was taking videos of the protest means that they were somehow "very fine people" who supported the protest. Who do you think took all the film at Nazi rallies in the 1930s?

2) Here's what Robert Tracinski, a conservative writer who lived in Charlottesville, had to say about the rally:

What if there really was another group of protesters there that day, and that’s who Trump was referring to? Well, there’s the problem. No such group exists. This mythical second group of protesters is like the “second shooter” in conspiracy theories about the Kennedy assassination. I’ve found people who insist to me that such a group was there because the “Charlottesville Hoax” mythology requires it to exist—but I haven’t found a single shred of actual confirmation. It’s almost as if they have adopted a false memory.

That’s what originally set me off about this Trump claim. I live in the Charlottesville area, and I know very fine people who oppose the removal of the monuments based on high-minded notions about preserving history. I’m one of them. So I know that we weren’t there that night. Only the white nationalists were there. If you’re counting, we’ve already busted two parts of the “Charlottesville Hoax” myth. Trump was not talking generally about people on both sides of the statue controversy, he was talking about a specific group—and there was no specific group other than the white nationalists present at the events Trump was referring to.

But what really gives the game away is when Trump insists that the “very fine people” who were there to protest “had a permit.” There was only one protest permit issued that weekend, and it was well documented because there was a court battle over it. That wasn’t for the Friday night’s tiki-torch Nuremberg, which was unannounced, but for the “Unite the Right” rally on Saturday. So were there “fine people on both sides” of the permitted rally? Let’s take a look at which parts of the “right” this rally was supposed to unite. One source describes them as “the alt-right, neo-Confederates, neo-fascists, white nationalists, neo-Nazis, Klansmen, and various militias”—in other words, different variations on the theme of white nationalism. If you think that’s an unfair summary, check out the poster for the event and notice that the headline speaker was prominent white nationalist Richard Spencer.

https://www.thebulwark.com/p/the-charlo ... acket.news

3) This article quotes Tracinski and goes further. In referring to Michelle Piercy:

"It appeared the Times had found what no one else has, before or since: One of Trump’s “very fine people.” She practically repeated the line herself.

Fortunately, the paper was not the only team to reach Piercy. Media Equalizer, a pro-Trump website, also got a hold of the Kansan, and included this crucial, if unintentional, corrective to the Times piece: "Michelle Piercy, who travelled to Charlottesville to participate as a neutral peacekeeper for American Warrior Revolution … knew there was going to be violence, but went anyway. “We were made aware that the situation could be dangerous, and we were prepared.” Piercy says."

According to a lawsuit filed against armed groups after the riot, American Warrior Revolution is a “paramilitary group … active in the militia movement.” It brought 37 members, “many of them armed with semiautomatic weapons” to the rally.

In her interview with the pro-Trump site, neither Piercy nor the writer mentions the Lee statue. Rather, she says, the group was there to act as “peacekeepers”: protecting the Nazis’ right to free speech while “trying to … talk to Antifa and Black Lives Matter and let them know that the way they were protesting is the wrong way to go about it.”

That’s keeping with what researchers have found about such paramilitary groups. As Casey Michel wrote that week for Politico Magazine: Despite the militias’ public statements of neutrality, evidence has mounted … that the militias have gravitated decisively toward one side … Their presence as a private security force for an increasingly public coalition of white nationalist factions—Ku Klux Klan followers, neo-Nazis and “alt-right” supporters—has transformed a movement that has already demonstrated a willingness to threaten violence.

According to the lawsuit, AWR’s leader boasted that they “had the justification to use deadly force that day, and mow people fucking down!” The group has been permanently enjoined from returning to Charlottesville “as a part of a unit of two or more persons acting in concert when armed.” It is important to note that the militia was not part of the rally’s white-supremacist lineup. Piercy herself told the Equalizer that she did not support “white supremacy, Naziism, or alt-right causes.” But they certainly weren’t the skinny-jeansed pro-statue picketers in the PragerU cartoon either.

The article was accompanied by a picture of an American Warrior Revolution tee shirt for sale that features the logo: "Keep rioting... I'm reloading." I realize my excerpt may be a bit hard to follow with numerous quotes within quotes. But you can check out the original article.

https://theracket.news/p/how-the-new-yo ... ottesville

To sum up, the woman quoted in Tlynn's video was part of a right-wing paramilitary group that has now been permanently enjoined by gathering in Charlottesville again and whose leader boasted he had the "justification to use deadly force that day, and mow people fucking down!"

Maybe flock and tlynn think these are "very fine people." I don't.

My video? Dude.

[Weyoun]

I lived in Charlottesville for many years and I know people who were there when all that stuff was happening.

I’ve said previously here that I thought removing the statue was a mistake, because most folks didn’t even know it was there and it attracted that nonsense (thank God the town didn’t have a Cracker Barrel).

Anyway, the locals thought the protestors were creepy white nationalists. HTH

[silverscreenselect]

My video? Dude.

Mea culpa. I should have realized that you never respond to any of our posts with more than three words.

[flockofseagulls104]

1) Addressing flock, so the fact that someone at one point was taking videos of the protest means that they were somehow "very fine people" who supported the protest. Who do you think took all the film at Nazi rallies in the 1930s?

So you are saying that everyone who was there and recorded the events of that day were people like those that filmed the nazi rallies? I won't ask 'Are you insane?' I will submit that as proof that you ARE insane. Again. Show me proof of what you just stated with a straight face or admit that whatever point you are trying to make is foolish and baseless. The fact is that Trump never supported the neo nazis and did not do it at Charlottesville. He condemned their ilk then as he always has and always will. It is a purely made-up and manufactured narrative, whether gramma was recorded at the violent rally or not.

As for the rest of your rant: These people are as insane as you. Even if, since that 'conservative' wasn't there, no one else was (bullshit), the overall narrative you and the other loonies are trying to support with your moronic logic is that Trump supported the neo nazis by calling them 'very fine people', which he most decidedly DID NOT DO. He did not do that whether gramma was at the protest or whether she wasn't. He condemned them in unequivocal terms. HE DID NOT PRAISE NEO NAZIS OR WHITE SUPREMACISTS AS 'VERY FINE PEOPLE' whether the people who filmed the events were nazi rally filmers or not. HE CONDEMNED THEM. He stated his praise for 'very fine people' did not include the nazis or supremacists. 'THEY SHOULD BE CONDEMNED'. He stated that firmly and for everyone in the world to see.

What part of that do you not understand? We got 4 years of an incoherent president that is just as insane as you because of this heinous narrative. He was told to say he decided to run because of Charlottesville. (Another lie, but it sounded good to fools like you).

I said I wouldn't do this, but I am so sick and tired of bullshit like this. Go stick it up your ass.

[silverscreenselect]

He stated his praise for 'very fine people' did not include the nazis or supremacists.

Here's the problem, which I've stated many times.

There were no "very fine people" at the rally. The very fine people like Robert Tracinski and the conservatives Weyoun knew who opposed the removal of the statues didn't show up because they knew exactly what was going to happen. I don't know what sort of psychic powers you have that allowed you to infer that those videos were taken by right-wing protestors who were merely there to record what happened, as opposed to counter protestors who wanted a documentary record of just what took place. You would think that "peaceful" protestors who opposed the removal of the statues would have taken videos of similar groups, much the same as the counterprotestors took videos of counterprotestors singing and holding up signs. But that didn't happen.

Trump and the others who have bought into his nonsense, like you and Tgirl, have tried to give the impression that there were two groups of peaceful protestors and that a few neo-Nazi bad apples showed up to try to rile things up. That didn't happen.

What part of that do you not understand?

[flockofseagulls104]

He stated his praise for 'very fine people' did not include the nazis or supremacists.

Here's the problem, which I've stated many times.

There were no "very fine people" at the rally. The very fine people like Robert Tracinski and the conservatives Weyoun knew who opposed the removal of the statues didn't show up because they knew exactly what was going to happen. I don't know what sort of psychic powers you have that allowed you to infer that those videos were taken by right-wing protestors who were merely there to record what happened, as opposed to counter protestors who wanted a documentary record of just what took place. You would think that "peaceful" protestors who opposed the removal of the statues would have taken videos of similar groups, much the same as the counterprotestors took videos of counterprotestors singing and holding up signs. But that didn't happen.

Trump and the others who have bought into his nonsense, like you and Tgirl, have tried to give the impression that there were two groups of peaceful protestors and that a few neo-Nazi bad apples showed up to try to rile things up. That didn't happen.

What part of that do you not understand?

The part of what you are desperately trying to argue that has anything to do with supporting the false notion that Trump is a nazi.

Let's say you are right for the sake of argument and there was no one there protesting the removal of the statue, SSS. And let's say, Trump was misinformed about this. HOW THE FUCK DOES THAT MAKE HIM A NAZI WHEN HE STATED UNEQUIVOCALLY THAT HE CONDEMNED THE NAZIS AND WHITE SUPREMACISTS? ANSWER THAT QUESTION, SSS!

Does your false statement about the rows of stars on the flag on WWTBAM prove that you are a member of antifa? That is the moronic logic you are trying to employ here. I think you are smart enough to know that, but you must have a mental condition that won't allow you to. That's all I can think of to explain why you are clinging to this crap.

[flockofseagulls104]

As you correctly stated, SSS, we had this Charlottesville debate several years ago. Somehow, you have the idea that you 'won' that debate and can use it to bolster your argument for something else. You did not win that argument. I stated the same points I have just had to go through once again, because your mind seems to only work episodically.

No. One. Ever. Has.

YES I DID. I refuted your argument as irrelevant.

In the future, remember this. You did not win this argument, so you cannot use it as a point to bolster some other false notion of yours.

[silverscreenselect]

Let's say you are right for the sake of argument and there was no one there protesting the removal of the statue, SSS. And let's say, Trump was misinformed about this. HOW THE FUCK DOES THAT MAKE HIM A NAZI WHEN HE STATED UNEQUIVOCALLY THAT HE CONDEMNED THE NAZIS AND WHITE SUPREMACISTS? ANSWER THAT QUESTION, SSS!

I never said Trump was a Nazi. I said that Trump was trying to set up a false equivalency between the two groups of protestors by saying there were very fine people in both groups. A heck of a lot of other right wingers, few if any of them Nazis and few if any of them at the rally, have been spreading that same false equivalency because it tries to put an innocent spin on what was a white supremacist rally. For the record, here's what Trump said:

But you also had people that were very fine people on both sides. You had people in that group – excuse me, excuse me. I saw the same pictures as you did. You had people in that group that were there to protest the taking down, of to them, a very, very important statue and the renaming of a park from Robert E. Lee to another name.

You're now backpedaling a bit and saying maybe Trump was mistaken. If so, neither he, you, or anyone else on the right who's been spreading this "very fine people on both sides" meme for eight years have ever backed down or admitted they might have been mistaken. Instead, you all have tried your best to leave the impression that you had two large groups of "very fine people" with a handful of neo-Nazis on hand to stir up trouble. That's not what happened. Period.

And I repeat: No one has ever introduced evidence of any "very fine people" in attendance at that rally. Period. You can choose to ignore that point all you want; it doesn't make it true.

[flockofseagulls104]

Let's say you are right for the sake of argument and there was no one there protesting the removal of the statue, SSS. And let's say, Trump was misinformed about this. HOW THE FUCK DOES THAT MAKE HIM A NAZI WHEN HE STATED UNEQUIVOCALLY THAT HE CONDEMNED THE NAZIS AND WHITE SUPREMACISTS? ANSWER THAT QUESTION, SSS!

I never said Trump was a Nazi. I said that Trump was trying to set up a false equivalency between the two groups of protestors by saying there were very fine people in both groups. A heck of a lot of other right wingers, few if any of them Nazis and few if any of them at the rally, have been spreading that same false equivalency because it tries to put an innocent spin on what was a white supremacist rally. For the record, here's what Trump said:

But you also had people that were very fine people on both sides. You had people in that group – excuse me, excuse me. I saw the same pictures as you did. You had people in that group that were there to protest the taking down, of to them, a very, very important statue and the renaming of a park from Robert E. Lee to another name.

You're now backpedaling a bit and saying maybe Trump was mistaken. If so, neither he, you, or anyone else on the right who's been spreading this "very fine people on both sides" meme for eight years have ever backed down or admitted they might have been mistaken. Instead, you all have tried your best to leave the impression that you had two large groups of "very fine people" with a handful of neo-Nazis on hand to stir up trouble. That's not what happened. Period.

And I repeat: No one has ever introduced evidence of any "very fine people" in attendance at that rally. Period. You can choose to ignore that point all you want; it doesn't make it true.

You are really being a dunce. I give up. You have no fucking idea what you are talking about.

THE WHOLE FUCKING POINT OF THE CHARLOTTESVILLE NARRATIVE THAT BIDEN HOOKED ON TO WAS TO CALL TRUMP A NAZI OR WHITE SUPREMACIST!!!!! WHO THE FUCK CARES IF THERE WERE OR WERE NOT ANYONE THERE WHO WAS VERY FINE!!!!

YOU ARE THE ONE BACKTRACKING. NOW YOU'RE TELLING ME YOU NEVER SAID TRUMP WAS A NAZI? EITHER YOU OR ONE OF YOUR COMRADES IN ARMS HAS CALLED ME ONE. IT'S IN MY SIGNATURE. IF SO, YOU'RE THE ONLY FRICKIN' LEFTIST THAT NEVER SAID SO.
WHY THEN DID BIDEN DECIDE TO GET INTO THE PRESIDENTIAL RACE?

[silverscreenselect]

I give up. YouI have no fucking idea what you areI am talking about.

Fixed it for ya.

[tlynn78]

My video? Dude.

Mea culpa. I should have realized that you never respond to any of our posts with more than three words.

I don't pist videos. But double down on making shit up when facts don't align with your delusions.

[Weyoun]

My video? Dude.

Mea culpa. I should have realized that you never respond to any of our posts with more than three words.

I don't pist videos. But double down on making shit up when facts don't align with your delusions.

I believe a “pist video” is part of the alleged kompramat that Putin has on Trump.

[Weyoun]

Oh, by the way, whitefailure’s circumlocution regarding Charlottesville ignores that there’s actually been quite a noticeable increase in antisemitism in Trump’s party.

This includes Candace Owens alleging that Israel had Charlie Kirk murdered.

This includes Tucker Carlson minimizing the Holocaust, and stating that Churchill was the villain of World War II

This includes the sudden popularity of Nick Fuentes.

The irony is that some American Jews put all their chips in with Trump, thinking that he would let the state of Israel murder more Gazan kids than Biden was already allowing.

They were sold a bill of goods, like many of us are being sold. In the end, there is just too much crazy in this administration.

[Weyoun]

One update. Trump went on a rant this weekend against Henry Cuellar. Trump was under the impression that Cuellar would change parties after the pardon. So a quid pro quo. This would undermine blackhole’s “muh Joe Biden” theory for Trump’s pardoning spree.

[tlynn78]

My video? Dude.

Mea culpa. I should have realized that you never respond to any of our posts with more than three words.

I don't pist videos. But double down on making shit up when facts don't align with your delusions.

<edit> * post, for those too challenged to figure it out.

[Weyoun]

Mea culpa. I should have realized that you never respond to any of our posts with more than three words.

I don't pist videos. But double down on making shit up when facts don't align with your delusions.

<edit> * post, for those too challenged to figure it out.

A useful example. When you make a spelling mistake, I crack a joke about Trump. When I do so, you suggest I’m an alcoholic. But sure you’re the “adult” here.