You've been obvious marxists for a long time. Just calling a duck a duck now. No more sense beating around the bush. There will.be a war just like there has always been against people that choose freedom over control.
Hold up people. Watching this unintentionally hilarious Hannity blowjob of Donald Trump when Trump says he took a cognitive test.... and wants Biden to do so and release the results. Now this is something I can get behind. Lets have them BOTH take a cognitive test by an independent administrator and release the results publicly. PLEASE let this happen.
"they were very surprised, they said thats an unbelievable thing, rarely does anybody do what you just did"
Trumps quote on what the military doctors said of his cognitive test results. For some reason I dont think he lied about this one. Sounds like what they would say if he took the test, took a giant dump on it, then handed it in.
if he leaves quietly like Obama then I will eat all the crow in the world. His transition period will be nothing but fake news conspiracy theories, vague/ridiclous threats, claims of impending "big news" that may swing the election, and temper tantrums. I will be surprised if he doesnt "order" people not to comply with Biden's transition team via twatter. He has no other choice but reelection, he cant delay the grand jury in NY when he leaves office.
What does it mean to actively support very poorly chosen one? To wear the garb? To go to his rallies? I've been asking those questions for a while now. We all know the answers.
To that must be added some additional questions. What is the proper way to treat those who have aided and abetted him the past four years? What sort of judgment should be rendered regarding those who have been complicit? There will be a reckoning. As in France with collaborators after the War.
Speaking for myself, there are Republicans who I admire for their policy chops. Marco Rubio is an example. But he's gonna have to do some 'splaining before I consider giving him my vote. I'd like to know why he chose cowardly silence so many times. At least some sort of acknowledgment that there is something that needs explaining and discussion.
On March 21, 1973, President Richard Nixon and John Dean, the White House counsel, conferred in the Oval Office about ways to keep the Watergate scandal from consuming the Administration. The two men weighed the possibility of a pardon or commutation for E. Howard Hunt, one of the Watergate burglars. “Hunt’s now demanding clemency or he’s going to blow,” Dean said. “And, politically, it’d be impossible for, you know, you to do it.” Nixon agreed: “That’s right.” Dean continued, “I’m not sure that you’ll ever be able to deliver on clemency. It may be just too hot.” Neither Nixon nor Dean had especially refined senses of morality or legal ethics, but even they seemed to understand that a President could not use his pardon power to erase charges against someone who might offer testimony implicating Nixon himself in a crime. To do so, they recognized, would be too unseemly, too transparent, too egregiously corrupt. And, in fact, Nixon never gave a pardon, or commuted a sentence, of anyone implicated in the Watergate scandal.