Is Trump Suited to be President?

[gfejunkie]

Originally Posted by assfucker

It's ok, you don't have to hide your racism anymore. It's protected speech. Say what you really feel.

Nothing racist about it. All dimretards are turd polishers no matter what race they are.

Equal opportunity polishers.

[centexguy]

Originally Posted by assfucker

It's ok, you don't have to hide your racism anymore. It's protected speech. Say what you really feel.

Yawn. That ad hominem attack is getting old. At least show some creativity for your hatred of people who don't hate Trump as much as you do.

[gfejunkie]

Originally Posted by centexguy

Yawn. That ad hominem attack is getting old. At least show some creativity for your hatred of people who don't hate Trump as much as you do.

Creativity is not their strong suit.

Lying is.

[assfucker]

No ad hominem. I just don't get why you guys are such pussies. Just admit you're racist. I admire people like Richard Spencer for having the decency to wear their true colors unlike the rest of you cowards.

[assfucker]

Also, if you want to avoid ad hominems, perhaps put forth an argument with some real substance rather than calling people dimretards and turd polishers. I'll shred any position a Trumpet has to pieces.

[Austin Ellen]

I Trump - nobody is perfect - if they were they would be nailed to the cross right beside Jesus Christ. I agree with pussycat - I support Donald Trump.

[assfucker]

Trump would be good next to Jesus. He was crucified with thieves after all.

[Austin Ellen]

Awwww, but at the end of the day - they were proven wrong.

Originally Posted by assfucker

Trump would be good next to Jesus. He was crucified with thieves after all.

[centexguy]

Originally Posted by assfucker

No ad hominem. I just don't get why you guys are such pussies. Just admit you're racist. I admire people like Richard Spencer for having the decency to wear their true colors unlike the rest of you cowards.

You admire Spencer because he's a clown like you.

[assfucker]

Originally Posted by centexguy

You admire Spencer because he's a clown like you.

Yawn. Isn't that your line?

[pussycat]

Originally Posted by Why_Yes_I_Do

Well... There was the drug running. Oh and the money laundering. Almost forgot, invalidating a landslide election to retain power and control. Not to mention the greater evil of bitting the hand that was feeding him, i.e. the CIA. In short he was a scumbucket of the highest order. Curiously enough, with the possible exception of the drug running, he rather sounds like the Clintons. Those pigs are criminal as f*ck.

I'm not a fan of the Bushes. But GHB must have been an absolute failure as a 'covert' CIA asset, seeing where he was actually the Directory of the CIA. Either way, I'm glad TRUMP ended both the Bush and the Clinton dynasties in one fell swoop.

Invading a whole country over money laundering, drug conspiracy and rigging elections? If that were a reason we would have invaded Mexico, Guatamala, Honduras, El Salvador, Belize, Nigeria, Liberia, Columbia, Venezuela, Peru, Bolivia, Haiti, Senegal, and maybe a dozen more.

That's no reason to invade a country. None of those things are acts of war.

[Why_Yes_I_Do]

Plus the cardinal sin of biting the hand that fed him, i.a. the CIA.

Now... you might have a point if you were saying something along the lines of; What the heck were we doing installing a tin pot dictator in the first place then subsequently engineering his replacement - given that we are NOT Russia. Eh Comrade?-)

Originally Posted by pussycat

Invading a whole country over money laundering, drug conspiracy and rigging elections? If that were a reason we would have invaded Mexico, Guatamala, Honduras, El Salvador, Belize, Nigeria, Liberia, Columbia, Venezuela, Peru, Bolivia, Haiti, Senegal, and maybe a dozen more.

That's no reason to invade a country. None of those things are acts of war.

[pussycat]

Originally Posted by Why_Yes_I_Do

Plus the cardinal sin of biting the hand that fed him, i.a. the CIA.

Now... you might have a point if you were saying something along the lines of; What the heck were we doing installing a tin pot dictator in the first place then subsequently engineering his replacement - given that we are NOT Russia. Eh Comrade?-)

He was on the CIA payroll like a lot of scumbags there until 1977 when he was cut off by Jimmy Carter. Then when Reagan came in in 1981 he was reinstated. G.H.Bush was responsible for his ascendancy and then was the one who took him down. Regime change is not that unusual, but to invade a whole country to do it shows sloppiness, an absence of Covert Action tradecraft, and a general disdain for human life. G.H. Bush and his son did those things in Panama and Iraq because they are low life scumbags playing around in regime change without having the finesse to do it correctly and because they have a disdain for human life.

[Why_Yes_I_Do]

Sure, maybe his head should have 'spontaneously' exploded one day while he was in his palace garden, from a 50 caliber round, courtesy of a US sniper, some mile or so away. Don't know if I would say they didn't maybe try either. I dunno. At the end of the day, he had to go. Same for Saddam.

Maybe you should watch the movie "The Fires of Kuwait'. After seeing it, I was kinda ticked off the GH didn't press on to take Saddam out in the first round. Clearly Saddam was nothing but bad, bad, bad. Definitely not a humanitarian. Ask his trail of dead bodies.

Either way, the now decomposed story line of 'Russian Collusion', aka Russian meddling, in our elections was at best peanuts compared to some of the meddling we've done, courtesy of our own gvt. elsewhere in the world. That is my point, with which you may or may not agree.

Originally Posted by pussycat

He was on the CIA payroll like a lot of scumbags there until 1977 when he was cut off by Jimmy Carter. Then when Reagan came in in 1981 he was reinstated. G.H.Bush was responsible for his ascendancy and then was the one who took him down. Regime change is not that unusual, but to invade a whole country to do it shows sloppiness, an absence of Covert Action tradecraft, and a general disdain for human life. G.H. Bush and his son did those things in Panama and Iraq because they are low life scumbags playing around in regime change without having the finesse to do it correctly and because they have a disdain for human life.

[pussycat]

Originally Posted by Why_Yes_I_Do

Sure, maybe his head should have 'spontaneously' exploded one day while he was in his palace garden, from a 50 caliber round, courtesy of a US sniper, some mile or so away. Don't know if I would say they didn't maybe try either. I dunno. At the end of the day, he had to go. Same for Saddam.

Maybe you should watch the movie "The Fires of Kuwait'. After seeing it, I was kinda ticked off the GH didn't press on to take Saddam out in the first round. Clearly Saddam was nothing but bad, bad, bad. Definitely not a humanitarian. Ask his trail of dead bodies.

Either way, the now decomposed story line of 'Russian Collusion', aka Russian meddling, in our elections was at best peanuts compared to some of the meddling we've done, courtesy of our own gvt. elsewhere in the world. That is my point, with which you may or may not agree.

Go to Youtube and see Dick Cheney in 1992 saying that toppling Saddam would lead to the destruction of all of Iraq and civil war there. He was the only thing holding the place together. And when we finally drove him off that's exactly what happened. If you think destroying a whole country and killing thousands of children, sparking a civil war in which girls are taken as sex slaves and millions are beheaded and burned alive, well then you and Cheney are on the same Demonic page of "hell on earth" fun and games.

But I'm old fashioned, and a Christian, so I have to pass on that kind of fun.