WestCanMan

For sure the US is imploding right now, urged on by the Dems and MSM. It's true enough, there's nothing wrong with believing it. It's just a matter of recognizing what makes the country great and preserving it. Omar and AOC aren't 30-yr vets and they're the worst politicians in DC, so I don't really agree with you on that point. Also, the POTUS is a 1-man show with the power of the executive order: the power of a senator (1 of 100) or a congressman (1 of about 300) is nothing by comparison. In theory it's great, but we don't live in an area where unlimited people can just march on in and find shelter. Homelessness = death here. Do you see how there has to be a limit on the number of people who can waltz on in? Do you see how the poorest people here are sorely affected by mass immigration? A flood of refugees doesn't compete with Trudeau or Morneau for housing for at least a generation or more. They compete with low-income Canadians (ie the Liberal base, luckily for the turd his voters are dumb enough not to notice what they're doing to themselves when they vote). Assimilation now? You have an odd mix of ultra-liberal (illogical) & ultra-conservative (un-Canadian) immigration policies floating around in your head. The liberal government is working at cloistering some groups to help them maintain their completely separate societies.

LMAO, bolding this and enlarging the font when you said all of those stupid things is like boosting a FB post where you have snot all over your face. Did you think the cover photo for the Blair Witch Project was a glam shot? Do you even know what a hypocrite is? Do you see any conservatives bailing out the rioters, and saying things like "The protests will not let up. The protests SHOULD NOT let up! We will bail out the rioters first thing in the morning so that they can go and protest peacefully again (wink wink) the next day!" If you see any conservatives saying those things then you can use your fancy word, until then it's not applicable. Do you notice how the MSM claimed that Sicknick was beaten to death with a fire extinguisher, and now we know that he didn't have any blunt force trauma to his body at all? He phoned his brother after he was home safe, and said he was ok, then he died of a stroke. "Beaten to death with a fire extinguisher...." The only person murdered was the unarmed girl who was crawling through a window (threateningly?).

Can you translate this to English for me? I honestly have no clue what you're trying to say.

It seems as though you're still completely ignorant of almost everything, you don't really need to watch any more tv or read any more articles. How is this incriminating, exactly? Do you remember when Antifa and BLM were attacking/rioting outside of a federal building for 100 days, including an attack where they cemented a door shut and tried to light the building on fire, and the mayor and governor refused to call the National Guard? Why the advanced timeline in this instance? Why is it measured in minutes instead of months? There were all kinds of riots in all kinds of cities where mayors and governors knew that businesses were going to be looted or burned, people and police would be assaulted and likely killed, and they refused to call the National Guard for months on end. AOC [paraphrasing]: "I was so afraid. I was terrified. I almost got killed". Uhhhh, yeah bitch. Americans felt that way for years and you did nothing. A lot of them actually did get killed or lost their home or their business. Why is it that you deserve protection while you're intentionally not protecting citizens, and you're busy talking about defunding their police? The people who wanted so badly to defund police for everyone else are busy asking "WHY WEREN'T THERE MORE POLICE HERE TO PROTECT US????!!!!?!?!?!?!?!?!" The correct answer is "Suck it down losers, this is the exact scenario that YOU FORCED other Americans to deal with for years." 1) The attack should never have happened, but 2) the scope of it is blown way out of proportion, and 3) I have no sympathy at all for the people who incited violence on their political opponents/police/their citizens for years, but are now acting like it was completely unacceptable when the violence came to their doorstep. AOC is this guy:

It is extremely disgusting, and only truly disgusting people would vote for him. IMO the age of consent should be on a sliding scale. I can see how a 16 yr old might consent to sex with a 17 yr old, or 17 & 19, but not 16 and 21, or 17 and 56. It's just way too gross. And this isn't just a case of age.... he was also her employer. The grey line of whether or not the power imbalance was too great for there to be actual consent was completely obliterated by a combination of his government position, his status as her employer, the vast difference in their ages, and the fact that she was a minor. The fact that Joe Morrissey got elected after what he did is a black eye on democracy.

No, FYI Kamala Harris was a fervent supporter of the rioting and she actually did contribute to a bail fund for them. Maybe she didn't say the exact quote that put there, but she did far worse. She financially supported the rioters, looters and arsonists.

It starts off with some idiot talking about the fact that Trump didn't mention the fact that the national guard was sent out. Waaah! Who's stupid enough to watch more than 12 seconds of that worthless tripe?

Kamala C Harris is a fictional person whose actions and viewpoints are a carbon copy of the First Ho, but she's more honest about it.

I shoulda just called this thread: "What group of people could possibly be so amoral that they would elect a convicted pedophile?"

I'm talking about people who were dumb enough to elect someone AFTER they were put in jail for being a pedo. It's impossible to know who committed what crimes before they go to jail for them, but it's weird to vote for a known pedo.

That's primarily based on the opinion of the average Joe who watches a bit of MSM coverage and doesn't know his ass from a hole in the ground. Anyone with any brains at all knows that this is just another Dem farce.

No rumours dude. A pic of his nude, underage girlfriend was sent to one of his friends from his phone. He said that he got hacked. He also said that he wasn't having sex with his underage gf but she was alone with him at his house when they were 'dating'. You have to completely take that guy at his word, and believe that the most unlikely of things occurred. Forget about that. This is not a "rumour". What I posted about Trudeau, I left as a "rumour", I never said that there was any merit to it at all. Do you understand the context in which I brought up the rumour? Not in a manner to say that we should all pay a lot of attention to this, or to say this is likely true, it was to say: "Do you understand the difference between voting for Trudeau in 2015 and 2019, and then finding out that he was a pedophile in 2021, and voting for Trudeau in 2023 after you already know that he is a pedophile?" To me that's a huge distinction. Voting for someone after you know that they're a vile criminal vs voting for someone based on his election platform. Seems pretty obvious to me.

Distributing child pornography is pretty bad. Being in your late 50s and having sex with a minor is pretty disgusting. Saying (usually 13 and younger) doesn't mean "only 13 and under". If you think it's less than completely sick and disgusting for a fully grown man to bang 14 year olds then it's no wonder we can't agree on anything. It's a leftist thing.

"He said he didn't bang her, so it's official!!!!!!!", LMAO! I guess that the Kavanaugh hearing should have been over after 3 minutes. Ditto for Russian collusion. This is a case of "we can't prove this, but we're not stupid, so plead guilty to that and we'll call it a day". He still went to jail, for what exactly? He pleaded guilty to a crime that's one inch away from a felony, but it's still not a felony, and that's a big deal.

The Dems are famous for making fake allegations, I put no stock in that whatsoever. Smollett, Ford, Jean Caroll, etc. It's an embarrassment to even quote those people. And FYI, I didn't bring up the Trudeau example to imply that he was guilty of anything either MH. I brought it up to illustrate how different it is to vote for someone who may at some point in the future be credibly accused of statutory rape, and voting for an actual, confessed rapist.

You can see how long ago those photos were taken, right? Epstein was barred from Mar-A-Lago over 20 years ago. Did Epstein even own that island back then? Bill Clinton was involved much more intimately, much more recently. This rush to connect Trump with Epstein when Bill Clinton is tied so much closer is like trying to pin the minister of propaganda title for the Nazis on Neville Chamberlain instead of Goebbels. The article about Giuliani is a total joke. Just because a guy was accused of something a long time ago doesn't disqualify them as a witness. It's ridiculous of you to even bring that up.

There are a lot of huge differences here: 1) This 'statutory rape' was between a 22 yr old and a 16 year old. Still not kosher, but not nearly the same thing as a 56 year old member of the government having sex with his 17 yr old employee. 2) When Thurmond was elected no one knew about the 'rape', and he was elected by Dems anyways. There are rumours that Trudeau may have (statutory) raped a student when he was teaching in Vancouver, so it could be that millions of Canadians voted for a pedophile without even knowing it. Do you feel like unknowingly voting for a pedophile (if the rumours become public knowledge) is the same thing as voting for a convicted criminal? Would you vote for Trudeau again if they find him guilty of that?

1) What part of that sentence doesn't make any sense? 2) I didn't see that part in his bio, is it just an allegation? 3) Strom was elected several times as a Dem before he went Republican, so he was basically running based on his record as a politician when he ran, and he also would have had a lot of support from the Dem voting pool to win that election. Interesting factoid: The Civil Rights Act had more popularity among Republicans than Demonrats in BOTH the HOUSE & SENATE, despite the fact that it was officially a Dem bill. It's the only bill in the history of the US that had more support from the opposite side of the aisle than from the party that presented the bill.

I don't see any pedo allegations swirling around that guy, let alone convictions. He was a boob-grabber, which is apparently one step below 'presidential'.

Ooh Bubber, say my name! SAY MY NAME!!!!!

You still need to find an example of a Republican who was elected after he was convicted of pedophilia. There are a lot of really gross politicians, Hastert (hopefully, but not likely) being the worst of all, but no one could run for office as a Republican after they were busted for pedophilia. Dem voters are not very picky now, are they?

It's not hypocrisy unless I was to defend Republicans who elected a pedophile as well. Bubber named a GOPer who was busted for pedophilia, but the guy wasn't elected after he was found guilty. That's what the thread is actually about.

Hastert = maggot extraordinaire, but he wasn't re-elected as a pedophile. The point here is that the Dems elected a guy EVEN THOUGH he's a pedophile. Larry Craig? That's kinda like a scene from Borat or Bruno. He tried to blow an undercover cop in a bathroom lol. I could see how a lot of Republicans might hate the guy but I'd still vote for him.

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/joe-morrissey-receptionist/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Morrissey Hackers I tell you! Russian hackers, who like to interfere in US elections lol. He was born in 1957, she was born in about 1996. Right now he's 64 and she's 25. What's that whole thing about the power imbalance between an employee (who's still a minor) and her boss? I had to use google to find out how much of a scumbag this guy was. Turns out that being contumacious isn't that big of a deal, the word's probably still useful in the bedroom or a rap song though. Definitely a Dem. I think that last bolded part was actually his campaign slogan.

Susan Rosenberg was a cop-killer and a terrorist. It's no surprise that the group she is funding selectively edits videos to fear/hate monger against police, they chant about frying pigs like bacon, they assault police officers, and the assassinations of police officers has become popular since her BLM has gained national popularity. Maybe there are just a few truly evil people in BLM, but they're the leaders.