I know nothing about this since it's never happened in modern American history, but if you see what the Trump administration is doing:

a) preparing sweeping diplomatic severings with China
b) Mulling strikes on Iran
c) Visiting an Israeli- West Bank settlement
d) considering new trade sanctions on the EU, Japan, Mexico, and South Africa
e) installing lackeys in the State Department, Pentagon, and CIA

This is all clearly and transparently a direct brazen attempt to sabotage the next administration on every possible front, and in the process creating damage on diplomatic, economic fronts and even creating new unnecessary tensions which could pose a risk of life to Americans overseas and at home, plus the jobs possibly lost from any rash trade spats.

Could this all not be considered at least in a court as acts of treason?

Probably not, but the amount of lasting damage Trump will have done to the US (and the World) in just 4 years is staggering.

The frenzied attack on the electoral system, the very basis of American democracy, is also likely to leave scars for a while.

Francoflier wrote:

Probably not, but the amount of lasting damage Trump will have done to the US (and the World) in just 4 years is staggering.

The frenzied attack on the electoral system, the very basis of American democracy, is also likely to leave scars for a while.

I recognize the individual decisions are very likely to be considered prerogatives of the executive branch. But the totality of the decisions, their timing, and the totality of those decisions and their timing added on top of their attacks on the system itself, I wonder could they not be considered as a "whole" and evidence of a behavior that puts individual retribution or gain first, at the expense of the nation and the people of the United States? I am wondering if a case could be made when the situation is viewed as a whole that they have acted in a way that clearly was malicious and against serving the people.

I doubt it. While Trump's intent is clear for anyone with half a brain to see, proving that intent in court would be much harder. It could be argued that all of these acts are just a continuation of the policy and stance he has maintained throughout his presidency.

It's still absolutely sickening...

CometII wrote:

I know nothing about this since it's never happened in modern American history, but if you see what the Trump administration is doing:

a) preparing sweeping diplomatic severings with China
b) Mulling strikes on Iran
c) Visiting an Israeli- West Bank settlement
d) considering new trade sanctions on the EU, Japan, Mexico, and South Africa
e) installing lackeys in the State Department, Pentagon, and CIA

This is all clearly and transparently a direct brazen attempt to sabotage the next administration on every possible front, and in the process creating damage on diplomatic, economic fronts and even creating new unnecessary tensions which could pose a risk of life to Americans overseas and at home, plus the jobs possibly lost from any rash trade spats.

Could this all not be considered at least in a court as acts of treason?

Why would Trump's authority, still being a sitting government, doing government work and exercising government power, be criminal?

c933103 wrote:

Why would Trump's authority, still being a sitting government, doing government work and exercising government power, be criminal?

It is not "the sitting government" doing government work. It is the Trump Campaign doing campaign work.

Tugg

CometII wrote:

Could this all not be considered at least in a court as acts of treason?

Nope, treason requires the United States to have enemies, and your enemies are only countries you are in a declared war with. Since the USA isn´t in a declared war, and wasn´t in one for decades, it is currently impossible to committ treason.

best regards
Thomas

Tugger wrote:

c933103 wrote:

Why would Trump's authority, still being a sitting government, doing government work and exercising government power, be criminal?

It is not "the sitting government" doing government work. It is the Trump Campaign doing campaign work.

Tugg

I don't think you can unpresidentialize Trump before Biden take office just by individual opinion on nature of Trump's action

I'm not too worried about Trump going over the deep end just before Biden takes over. As his speech writers are working on Biden's Inaugural Address Biden's attorneys will be working on new Executive Orders that eliminate the goofy stuff that Trump dropped on the country and our friends. Biden can't call out International friends before he is sworn in to tell them to relax, but people working for him should have no problem going on TV to talk about the need to get rid of the goofy $hit from the Trump years.

It's going to be like changing a lot of really dirty diapers, but we can get through it.

Ken777 wrote:

Biden can't call out International friends before he is sworn in to tell them to relax

as long as that call doesn´t rise to actual policy discussions he absolutely positively can. Fortunately the GOP and MAGA Cult have made it acceptable to even talk policy in direct opposition to US government policy for even people on the transition team.

best regards
Thomas

c933103 wrote:

Tugger wrote:

c933103 wrote:

Why would Trump's authority, still being a sitting government, doing government work and exercising government power, be criminal?

It is not "the sitting government" doing government work. It is the Trump Campaign doing campaign work.

Tugg

I don't think you can unpresidentialize Trump before Biden take office just by individual opinion on nature of Trump's action

I think you do not understand "the individual" is not the exact same as "the president". The office of the president is occupied by the individual elected. And as we have learned through Trump rape accusations, it is he the individual that is under scrutiny and not "the President". This can also be shown via the fact that in a couple months "the individual" Trump will still be under indictment and in court(s), while the President will be Biden (we'll have to wait to see what the Republican's and MAGA's dream up to drag Biden into court....)

Tugg

Tugger wrote:

c933103 wrote:

Tugger wrote:

It is not "the sitting government" doing government work. It is the Trump Campaign doing campaign work.

Tugg

I don't think you can unpresidentialize Trump before Biden take office just by individual opinion on nature of Trump's action

I think you do not understand "the individual" is not the exact same as "the president". The office of the president is occupied by the individual elected. And as we have learned through Trump rape accusations, it is he the individual that is under scrutiny and not "the President". This can also be shown via the fact that in a couple months "the individual" Trump will still be under indictment and in court(s), while the President will be Biden (we'll have to wait to see what the Republican's and MAGA's dream up to drag Biden into court....)

Tugg

If having allegation of one have conducted rape would disqualify one from being president then shouldn't most US former presidents be on the same list?

c933103 wrote:

Tugger wrote:

c933103 wrote:

I don't think you can unpresidentialize Trump before Biden take office just by individual opinion on nature of Trump's action

I think you do not understand "the individual" is not the exact same as "the president". The office of the president is occupied by the individual elected. And as we have learned through Trump rape accusations, it is he the individual that is under scrutiny and not "the President". This can also be shown via the fact that in a couple months "the individual" Trump will still be under indictment and in court(s), while the President will be Biden (we'll have to wait to see what the Republican's and MAGA's dream up to drag Biden into court....)

Tugg

If having allegation of one have conducted rape would disqualify one from being president then shouldn't most US former presidents be on the same list?

got tapes of them admitting to be serial sex abusers too? And it absolutely should disqualify from getting republican votes .... sanctity of marriage and what not.

best regards
Thomas

tommy1808 wrote:

c933103 wrote:

Tugger wrote:

I think you do not understand "the individual" is not the exact same as "the president". The office of the president is occupied by the individual elected. And as we have learned through Trump rape accusations, it is he the individual that is under scrutiny and not "the President". This can also be shown via the fact that in a couple months "the individual" Trump will still be under indictment and in court(s), while the President will be Biden (we'll have to wait to see what the Republican's and MAGA's dream up to drag Biden into court....)

Tugg

If having allegation of one have conducted rape would disqualify one from being president then shouldn't most US former presidents be on the same list?

got tapes of them admitting to be serial sex abusers too? And it absolutely should disqualify from getting republican votes .... sanctity of marriage and what not.

best regards
Thomas

Well, I am not sure how Republican devide who they vote for but most of them seems to have voted for Trump regardless

c933103 wrote:

Tugger wrote:

c933103 wrote:

I don't think you can unpresidentialize Trump before Biden take office just by individual opinion on nature of Trump's action

I think you do not understand "the individual" is not the exact same as "the president". The office of the president is occupied by the individual elected. And as we have learned through Trump rape accusations, it is he the individual that is under scrutiny and not "the President". This can also be shown via the fact that in a couple months "the individual" Trump will still be under indictment and in court(s), while the President will be Biden (we'll have to wait to see what the Republican's and MAGA's dream up to drag Biden into court....)

Tugg

If having allegation of one have conducted rape would disqualify one from being president then shouldn't most US former presidents be on the same list?

I am not sure where this question comes from. I am not speaking of that at all, only the fact that there is a difference between the person, the individual who is president and "The President". You comment about "unpresidentializing" Trump and I am saying the actions the Trump campaign, which Trump the individual is part of, is separate from the Presidency, and the court cases and current Trump campaign actions are not part of the Presidency. They are not official governmental actions.

Tugg

I wonder if we will have a meeting that involves a Coup attempt, and will the FBI be recording it?


https://twitter.com/jonathanoosting/sta ... 4107447298

casinterest wrote:

I wonder if we will have a meeting that involves a Coup attempt, and will the FBI be recording it?


https://twitter.com/jonathanoosting/sta ... 4107447298

I think a lot of our allies are holding their breath waiting to see of the MAGA coup takes. Many world leaders have congratulated Biden on winning. Many of our allies will be thrilled to deal with an adult again if the coup attempt fails and Biden is actually sworn in as the real president.

seb146 wrote:

casinterest wrote:

I wonder if we will have a meeting that involves a Coup attempt, and will the FBI be recording it?


https://twitter.com/jonathanoosting/sta ... 4107447298

I think a lot of our allies are holding their breath waiting to see of the MAGA coup takes. Many world leaders have congratulated Biden on winning. Many of our allies will be thrilled to deal with an adult again if the coup attempt fails and Biden is actually sworn in as the real president.

It will be interesting to see what occurs going into the weekend.

Tugger wrote:

c933103 wrote:

Tugger wrote:

I think you do not understand "the individual" is not the exact same as "the president". The office of the president is occupied by the individual elected. And as we have learned through Trump rape accusations, it is he the individual that is under scrutiny and not "the President". This can also be shown via the fact that in a couple months "the individual" Trump will still be under indictment and in court(s), while the President will be Biden (we'll have to wait to see what the Republican's and MAGA's dream up to drag Biden into court....)

Tugg

If having allegation of one have conducted rape would disqualify one from being president then shouldn't most US former presidents be on the same list?

I am not sure where this question comes from. I am not speaking of that at all, only the fact that there is a difference between the person, the individual who is president and "The President". You comment about "unpresidentializing" Trump and I am saying the actions the Trump campaign, which Trump the individual is part of, is separate from the Presidency, and the court cases and current Trump campaign actions are not part of the Presidency. They are not official governmental actions.

Tugg

Actions being listed in opening post of this thread are being done using the power of him being a oresident, according to my understanding

c933103 wrote:

Tugger wrote:

c933103 wrote:

If having allegation of one have conducted rape would disqualify one from being president then shouldn't most US former presidents be on the same list?

I am not sure where this question comes from. I am not speaking of that at all, only the fact that there is a difference between the person, the individual who is president and "The President". You comment about "unpresidentializing" Trump and I am saying the actions the Trump campaign, which Trump the individual is part of, is separate from the Presidency, and the court cases and current Trump campaign actions are not part of the Presidency. They are not official governmental actions.

Tugg

Actions being listed in opening post of this thread are being done using the power of him being a oresident, according to my understanding

And that is my point : Your understanding is not correct.

Tugg

Mary Trump, Donald Trump niece has diagnosis him as being mentally ill. Before he loss, she said if he lost, he would do everything in his power to break every possible thing he can. That's exactly what he's doing.

All he knows how to do is cause chaos and divide America. My concern is to his supports, that can't see what he's up to.

Tugger wrote:

c933103 wrote:

Tugger wrote:

I am not sure where this question comes from. I am not speaking of that at all, only the fact that there is a difference between the person, the individual who is president and "The President". You comment about "unpresidentializing" Trump and I am saying the actions the Trump campaign, which Trump the individual is part of, is separate from the Presidency, and the court cases and current Trump campaign actions are not part of the Presidency. They are not official governmental actions.

Tugg

Actions being listed in opening post of this thread are being done using the power of him being a oresident, according to my understanding

And that is my point : Your understanding is not correct.

Tugg

How?

What I don't get is that ~48% of ballots were for Trump, yet online the vast majority seem to think he's an absolute looney or, at best, just a childish muppet. Do those 48% of people not use the internet, or is their devotion to GOP so instilled that they see no reason to debate anything, as they are already right (as in not wrong, not not left).?

Virtual737 wrote:

What I don't get is that ~48% of ballots were for Trump, yet online the vast majority seem to think he's an absolute looney or, at best, just a childish muppet. Do those 48% of people not use the internet, or is their devotion to GOP so instilled that they see no reason to debate anything, as they are already right (as in not wrong, not not left).?

They just either use different set of internet service, or use the same internet service but with different circles due to algorithm figuring out individual preference, than you. This is called echo chamber.

c933103 wrote:

Virtual737 wrote:

What I don't get is that ~48% of ballots were for Trump, yet online the vast majority seem to think he's an absolute looney or, at best, just a childish muppet. Do those 48% of people not use the internet, or is their devotion to GOP so instilled that they see no reason to debate anything, as they are already right (as in not wrong, not not left).?

They just either use different set of internet service, or use the same internet service but with different circles due to algorithm figuring out individual preference, than you. This is called echo chamber.

There's a separate Rep & Dem version of a.net?

Virtual737 wrote:

c933103 wrote:

Virtual737 wrote:

What I don't get is that ~48% of ballots were for Trump, yet online the vast majority seem to think he's an absolute looney or, at best, just a childish muppet. Do those 48% of people not use the internet, or is their devotion to GOP so instilled that they see no reason to debate anything, as they are already right (as in not wrong, not not left).?

They just either use different set of internet service, or use the same internet service but with different circles due to algorithm figuring out individual preference, than you. This is called echo chamber.

There's a separate Rep & Dem version of a.net?

Specific in term of anet, since it is an aviation forum, most users of the board are people with more international contact and experience with culture+people of different places, so it will naturally be more left leaning in general.

c933103 wrote:

Specific in term of anet, since it is an aviation forum, most users of the board are people with more international contact and experience with culture+people of different places, so it will naturally be more left leaning in general.

I guess that makes sense, although it's a shame that people who have a broader appreciation of the world should be labelled as anything other than central. Leave the left and the right to any extreme view that falls outside of it.

Virtual737 wrote:

c933103 wrote:

Specific in term of anet, since it is an aviation forum, most users of the board are people with more international contact and experience with culture+people of different places, so it will naturally be more left leaning in general.

I guess that makes sense, although it's a shame that people who have a broader appreciation of the world should be labelled as anything other than central. Leave the left and the right to any extreme view that falls outside of it.

Local vs Global have been in itself a huge topic in the international politics for the past half century or even more.

I understand what everyone has said and deep down I know that as well. But I just thought, perhaps not exactly treason, but some other expression, there could be some legal action if a body of evidence could be built that demonstrates that Trumps actions post-election are an attempt to disturb the democratic process as much as possible both on policy nationally and internationally, and on the protocols and traditions themselves. Surely to purposely act against our democracy and thus against your own country by using instruments of power could be made into a case by a crafty lawyer or two?

CometII wrote:

I understand what everyone has said and deep down I know that as well. But I just thought, perhaps not exactly treason, but some other expression, there could be some legal action if a body of evidence could be built that demonstrates that Trumps actions post-election are an attempt to disturb the democratic process as much as possible both on policy nationally and internationally, and on the protocols and traditions themselves. Surely to purposely act against our democracy and thus against your own country by using instruments of power could be made into a case by a crafty lawyer or two?

Some case could probably be made. We do not have unlimited free speech in this country. We can not yell "FIRE!" in a crowded theater. Free speech has limits. Knowing this and knowing the kidnapping and assassination of Michigan's governor by MAGA followers is another great example. With all the pending cases against him, though, I doubt anything will come if a treason or violence sparking case against him. It would have to go through the federal courts and all of those are packed with right wing extremist judges seated specifically to legislate from the bench to protect their leader from things like this.

CometII wrote:

I know nothing about this since it's never happened in modern American history, but if you see what the Trump administration is doing:
a) preparing sweeping diplomatic severings with China
b) Mulling strikes on Iran
c) Visiting an Israeli- West Bank settlement
d) considering new trade sanctions on the EU, Japan, Mexico, and South Africa
e) installing lackeys in the State Department, Pentagon, and CIA
This is all clearly and transparently a direct brazen attempt to sabotage the next administration on every possible front, and in the process creating damage on diplomatic, economic fronts and even creating new unnecessary tensions which could pose a risk of life to Americans overseas and at home, plus the jobs possibly lost from any rash trade spats.
Could this all not be considered at least in a court as acts of treason?

Considering how much his past mis-dealings and underhanded operations are now coming back to haunt him, I doubt his subversion of propriety and dignity in the White House, during these waning days, is the biggest of his concerns.

CometII wrote:

I know nothing about this since it's never happened in modern American history, but if you see what the Trump administration is doing:

a) preparing sweeping diplomatic severings with China
b) Mulling strikes on Iran
c) Visiting an Israeli- West Bank settlement
d) considering new trade sanctions on the EU, Japan, Mexico, and South Africa
e) installing lackeys in the State Department, Pentagon, and CIA

This is all clearly and transparently a direct brazen attempt to sabotage the next administration on every possible front, and in the process creating damage on diplomatic, economic fronts and even creating new unnecessary tensions which could pose a risk of life to Americans overseas and at home, plus the jobs possibly lost from any rash trade spats.

Could this all not be considered at least in a court as acts of treason?

Criminal - certainly not. Maybe a few of the dismissals of career civil service positions may be eventually ruled improper and the people reinstated.

Treason - No Way. That requires a direct action by the individual. Even if Trump appointed Putin to Acting DOD Secretary, it would not be Treason on Trump's part. And only on Putin's part if he violated US law.

---------------------------------------------

Dirty politics - Yes, that is how amateurs play the game.

Biden and his people are experienced professional level players of this game. They know how to do it quietly without a lot of fanfare and hand wringing. Be sure they have a list of changes, and all of those people will be bought in and questioned closely if their loyalty is the the Constitution, the American People and the current President. Any that go the other way, will be Assistant Secretary in Charge of Broom Closets if they are in a career civil service, out the door if they are political appointments.

It is traditional for political appointment positions - ALL those people submit a letter of resignation, to depart at the "pleasure" of the new President. They can't just all walk out the door at Noon on Jan 20. Some of the remaining career people will not have statutory authority to continue day to day operations.

This is another example of Donald Trump's inability to understand large organizations. He is a small business man and has learned nothing in four years about management and delegation.

{Yes, his small business is supposedly worth billions. But he only manages / operates a small overview company. He could not run a hotel or golf course without bankrupting it in a few months. He is smart enough to know he can't do that, hires good people and as long as they get the job done, he leaves them alone.}

Virtual737 wrote:

c933103 wrote:

Virtual737 wrote:

What I don't get is that ~48% of ballots were for Trump, yet online the vast majority seem to think he's an absolute looney or, at best, just a childish muppet. Do those 48% of people not use the internet, or is their devotion to GOP so instilled that they see no reason to debate anything, as they are already right (as in not wrong, not not left).?

They just either use different set of internet service, or use the same internet service but with different circles due to algorithm figuring out individual preference, than you. This is called echo chamber.

There's a separate Rep & Dem version of a.net?

Well there are a few Trumpistas still there, but not many, it became more and more difficult to defend him...

Plenty of them on youtube though, both making videos and commenting.

Aesma wrote:

Well there are a few Trumpistas still there, but not many, it became more and more difficult to defend him...

Plenty of them on youtube though, both making videos and commenting.

I find them equally hard to watch. They must practice their "outraged" face in the mirror just before recording.

As Neil DeGrasse Tyson would say (about flatearthers actually, not politics), this goes to prove that:

1.) Free speech in the US is alive and well.

2.) The education system in the US, perhaps not.

DLFREEBIRD wrote:

Mary Trump, Donald Trump niece has diagnosis him as being mentally ill.

I wasn't aware he was under her care!

Oh, he's not, and never was?

Then she's spouting off an uninformed opinion, one that every professional worth their salt will start with, "I've not examined the patient and they're not under my care, so it would be inappropriate for me to speculate on their condition..."

DLFREEBIRD wrote:

Before he loss, she said if he lost, he would do everything in his power to break every possible thing he can. That's exactly what he's doing.

All he knows how to do is cause chaos and divide America. My concern is to his supports, that can't see what he's up to.

Kind of hilarious EA neglects to include the rest of the quote. Probably because not even he can bring himself to argue any of that.

EA CO AS wrote:

[...]
Then she's spouting off an uninformed opinion, one that every professional [...]

Actually what you are speaking to is more off "unprofessional", she is more informed than you or most others as she does have real living experience with Trump and the family Trump.

Tugg

EA CO AS wrote:

DLFREEBIRD wrote:

Mary Trump, Donald Trump niece has diagnosis him as being mentally ill.

I wasn't aware he was under her care!

Oh, he's not, and never was?

Then she's spouting off an uninformed opinion, one that every professional worth their salt will start with, "I've not examined the patient and they're not under my care, so it would be inappropriate for me to speculate on their condition..."

how so? She has her Ph.D in Clinical Psychology She known him for 55 years as a family member. Her Uncle even scammed her out of her true inheritance. Besides she's right he's mentally incapable of leading, and he's showing the world that right now.

rfields5421 wrote:

[...]
Dirty politics - Yes, that is how amateurs play the game.

[...]
This is another example of Donald Trump's inability to understand large organizations. He is a small business man and has learned nothing in four years about management and delegation.

I tend to agree with a lot of your insights and analysis but in this case I am now thinking that to Trump this is all a a game and free one at that. I think it is all about money to him and this is costing him nothing, it is free money. Because he has his money and political elements provide the money and the tools/paths to do what he is doing without putting his own family money up. I now think he doesn't care and this is not real to him, it's just a game or a reality TV show. And he will just keep going as far as he can since it won't cost him any money and his family is set with money and this is just free for him. Why not push things as far as he can? Why not try to discredit the entire US election process? What does it cost him? He'll be fine. His family will be fine. Still wealthy after all this.

Tugg

Tugger wrote:

rfields5421 wrote:

[...]
Dirty politics - Yes, that is how amateurs play the game.

[...]
This is another example of Donald Trump's inability to understand large organizations. He is a small business man and has learned nothing in four years about management and delegation.

I tend to agree with a lot of your insights and analysis but in this case I am now thinking that to Trump this is all a a game and free one at that. I think it is all about money to him and this is costing him nothing, it is free money. Because he has his money and political elements provide the money and the tools/paths to do what he is doing without putting his own family money up. I now think he doesn't care and this is not real to him, it's just a game or a reality TV show. And he will just keep going as far as he can since it won't cost him any money and his family is set with money and this is just free for him. Why not push things as far as he can? Why not try to discredit the entire US election process? What does it cost him? He'll be fine. His family will be fine. Still wealthy after all this.

Tugg

I don't think he's playing a game. He's trying to safe face, by saying there was voter fraud. It cost money, to do these recounts, about 3 million per state, which his re-election campaign will have to pay, unless the results are changed during the hand count.
he is now asking for donations. The maximum that can be given by a person or a company is 5k but, his campaign is already in debt, he has no money to pay for these recounts, or the legal fee's for his lawyers. Trumpism appears to be over, cause nobody donating to this loss cause.

But is it campaign fund money or Donald Trump's money?.

bennett123 wrote:

But is it campaign fund money or Donald Trump's money?.

It is the voters money, the campaign. Heck, the Trump Campaign filed for and received plenty of money for the 2016 which was supposedly paid for with his personal money.

In 2016, he spent about $66 million which may or may not have included the costs of using his personal jet for travel and his company owned properties as sites for campaign fund raising events. The other over a half-billion came from different people and political groups.

Source https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/graphics/2016-presidential-campaign-fundraising/

So it costs him nothing.

EA CO AS wrote:

DLFREEBIRD wrote:

Mary Trump, Donald Trump niece has diagnosis him as being mentally ill.

I wasn't aware he was under her care!

Oh, he's not, and never was?

Then she's spouting off an uninformed opinion, one that every professional worth their salt will start with, "I've not examined the patient and they're not under my care, so it would be inappropriate for me to speculate on their condition..."

a) she knows the Dude
b) professionals in that field are constantly required to give opinions about mental health without personal examination and/or cooperating patients.

The only reason there is no ton of mental health care professionals calling him a mentally ill person is the Goldwater rule. He is absolutely, positively mentally ill, a clear danger to himself and others, on top of whatever degenerative illness he has that has so publicly reduced him in the last four years.

Best regards
Thomas

tommy1808 wrote:

He is absolutely, positively mentally ill, a clear danger to himself and others, on top of whatever degenerative illness he has that has so publicly reduced him in the last four years.

Best regards
Thomas

I agree with all of the above in regard to Joe Biden.

EA CO AS wrote:

tommy1808 wrote:

He is absolutely, positively mentally ill, a clear danger to himself and others, on top of whatever degenerative illness he has that has so publicly reduced him in the last four years.

Best regards
Thomas

I agree with all of the above in regard to Joe Biden.

Which is fine. The important thing is that Biden will be a vastly better president as Trump has proven that he is a poor president and incapable of fulfilling the needs of the nation and electorate (which is why he is one of few incumbents to fail at being reelected).

Even though Trump is mentally handicapped, that's no excuse for his failure as president.

It's as simple as that. He was horrible.

Tugg

EA CO AS wrote:

I agree with all of the above in regard to Joe Biden.

I wasn't aware he was under your care!

Oh, he's not, and never was?

Then you are spouting off an uninformed opinion, one that every professional worth their salt will start with, "I've not examined the patient and they're not under my care, so it would be inappropriate for me to speculate on their condition..."

See what I did there?

petertenthije wrote:

EA CO AS wrote:

I agree with all of the above in regard to Joe Biden.

I wasn't aware he was under your care!
Oh, he's not, and never was?
Then you are spouting off an uninformed opinion, one that every professional worth their salt will start with, "I've not examined the patient and they're not under my care, so it would be inappropriate for me to speculate on their condition..."

. You, sir, have made my day!

And you have made the day of many more true Americans - and true Republicans - who are ready to end this "national nightmare".

petertenthije wrote:

EA CO AS wrote:

I agree with all of the above in regard to Joe Biden.

I wasn't aware he was under your care!

Oh, he's not, and never was?

Then you are spouting off an uninformed opinion, one that every professional worth their salt will start with, "I've not examined the patient and they're not under my care, so it would be inappropriate for me to speculate on their condition..."

See what I did there?

Hey, if by what appears to be the a.net standard that my point is irrelevant and a critique of Trump is valid, a similar critique of Biden must be valid as well.