Trump's 22 SHOTS at HILLARY

[BubberMiley]

"Agree to disagree" is the last refuge of the Internet liar.

[Shady]

uhhh... and before the 2008 'Heller decision'... wasn't there a U.S. 2nd amendment in place? Did I miss something; is this a new U.S. 2nd amendment or the same one from 1791? If it's the same one, are you saying/implying that prior to 2008, it WASN'T the U.S. second amendment? Of course, you won't take up my challenge asking you to speak to exactly what Hillary Clinton has stated... compare that to what Trump has claimed she has stated/is for (your parroting)... and within those Clinton statements, support the Trump claims/your parroting. Of course you won't take that challenge! Instead you weasel out with this "we can agree to disagree". And no, we can't agree - you're wrong... and again, those 2 fact-checking references I provided say Trump (and you, by extension) are big fat liars/distortion arteeests!

.

Perhaps if you knew what the Heller desicion was about, you'd understand better.

[waldo]

Perhaps if you knew what the Heller desicion was about, you'd understand better.

you didn't answer my questions - why so? Again, if you declare (as you did) that, "the Heller decision IS the second amendment"... just what was the U.S. 2nd amendment before... before that "Heller ruling" - before 2008?

you keep nattering on about the waldo needing to understand better... you claim I just don't know! Yet, in your self-declared all-knowing prowess, you just won't, "take up my challenge asking you to speak to exactly what Hillary Clinton has stated... compare that to what Trump has claimed she has stated/is for (your parroting)... and within those Clinton statements, support the Trump claims/your parroting." And... you continue to ignore the 2 fact-checking references provided that suggest you don't know what you're parroting... that it's false/a distortion of Clinton's statement/position!

I just guess we'll need to agree to agree that your continued know-nothingness statements are a true testament to you, "not knowing and needing to understand better"!

.

[Shady]

you didn't answer my questions - why so? Again, if you declare (as you did) that, "the Heller decision IS the second amendment"... just what was the U.S. 2nd amendment before... before that "Heller ruling" - before 2008?

you keep nattering on about the waldo needing to understand better... you claim I just don't know! Yet, in your self-declared all-knowing prowess, you just won't, "take up my challenge asking you to speak to exactly what Hillary Clinton has stated... compare that to what Trump has claimed she has stated/is for (your parroting)... and within those Clinton statements, support the Trump claims/your parroting." And... you continue to ignore the 2 fact-checking references provided that suggest you don't know what you're parroting... that it's false/a distortion of Clinton's statement/position!

I just guess we'll need to agree to agree that your continued know-nothingness statements are a true testament to you, "not knowing and needing to understand better"!

.

The 2nd amendment before Heller was the 2nd amendment. The Heller decision was a challenge to that amendment. That's why it's impossible to support the 2nd amendment at the same time wanting to overturn Heller. I hope this helps!

[waldo]

The 2nd amendment before Heller was the 2nd amendment. The Heller decision was a challenge to that amendment. That's why it's impossible to support the 2nd amendment at the same time wanting to overturn Heller. I hope this helps!

no - it's not impossible at all! As you say, "Perhaps if YOU knew what the Heller decision was about, YOU'D understand better." Again, you just won't, "take up my challenge asking you to speak to exactly what Hillary Clinton has stated... compare that to what Trump has claimed she has stated/is for (your parroting)... and within those Clinton statements, support the Trump claims/you're parroting.

given your earlier bravado, for some reason you don't refer to the "Heller ruling" as abolishing the U.S. 2nd amendment... yet, with Clinton, her challenge to that ruling (which somehow you just won't touch), has you referring to that challenge as, "abolishing it"! Oh wait, are you now weasel-wording in this latest post of yours - is this you now backing off your earlier parroting of Trump's, "Clinton wants to abolish the U.S. 2nd amendment"? You now have much more tempered words such as "challenge" and "support". The waldo is encouraged that time has not been completely wasted on you!

.

[Shady]

no - it's not impossible at all! As you say, "Perhaps if YOU knew what the Heller decision was about, YOU'D understand better." Again, you just won't, "take up my challenge asking you to speak to exactly what Hillary Clinton has stated... compare that to what Trump has claimed she has stated/is for (your parroting)... and within those Clinton statements, support the Trump claims/you're parroting.

given your earlier bravado, for some reason you don't refer to the "Heller ruling" as abolishing the U.S. 2nd amendment... yet, with Clinton, her challenge to that ruling (which somehow you just won't touch), has you referring to that challenge as, "abolishing it"! Oh wait, are you now weasel-wording in this latest post of yours - is this you now backing off your earlier parroting of Trump's, "Clinton wants to abolish the U.S. 2nd amendment"? You now have much more tempered words such as "challenge" and "support". The waldo is encouraged that time has not been completely wasted on you!

.

What's her problem with the Heller desicion?

[waldo]

What's her problem with the Heller desicion?

let's recap: you parrot the claims of Trump concerning Hillary Clinton, vis-a-vis that ruling. I present you 2 independent fact-checking organization's analysis that declares Trump's claims false/a distortion. I proceed to repeatedly challenge you to speak directly to Clinton's statements, to Trumps (false) claims concerning those statements, and to support your parroting of Trump's (false) claims vis-a-vis Clinton's statements. You repeatedly refuse to do so; instead, you repeatedly state, "I don't know... I need to better understand". And we cycle through this nonsense of yours several times... but you never, not once, not ever, speak directly to what Clinton has stated and why she's not in favour of the ruling. I speak of nuance - and yes, if you have the argument for it, you can be against the ruling and still be accepting to the U.S. 2nd amendment and what it means to responsible U.S. gun owners... not the gunners that live&breathe the NRA talking points on anything/everything... or the U.S. wannabe types who parrot the likes of the man-baby Trump!

and now... now... you want me to do your leg-work for you! In keeping with this thread topic... again, "take up my challenge asking you to speak to exactly what Hillary Clinton has stated... compare that to what Trump has claimed she has stated/is for (your parroting)... and within those Clinton statements, support the Trump claims/you're parroting."

.

[Shady]

That's what I thought buddy, you ain't got nothing. She wants Heller overturned. If you've got any additional info, please provide it.

[waldo]

That's what I thought buddy, you ain't got nothing. She wants Heller overturned. If you've got any additional info, please provide it.

yes!!! I'm clearly the one here who has ignored the repeated brazillion challenges put to him. Be well in your parroting of the man-baby Trump's false/misinformation statements and claims - you know, like stated in those 2 fact-checking analysis you refuse to even acknowledge. Well done, uhhh... buddy, you ain't got nothing... but parroting and gunner talking points - and you're not even an American!

.

[Shady]

yes!!! I'm clearly the one here who has ignored the repeated brazillion challenges put to him. Be well in your parroting of the man-baby Trump's false/misinformation statements and claims - you know, like stated in those 2 fact-checking analysis you refuse to even acknowledge. Well done, uhhh... buddy, you ain't got nothing... but parroting and gunner talking points - and you're not even an American!

.

Please provide her issue with the Heller decision. If not, we have nothing more to discuss.

[waldo]

Please provide her issue with the Heller decision. If not, we have nothing more to discuss.

please take up my brazillion times challenge put to you... please address the independent fact-checking organizations (2) analysis you refuse to acknowledge... please support your parroting of Trump's false/misinforming statements and claims concerning Clinton and that ruling; again: "take up my challenge asking you to speak to exactly what Hillary Clinton has stated... compare that to what Trump has claimed she has stated/is for (your parroting)... and within those Clinton statements, support the Trump claims you're parroting."

if not, we have nothing more to discuss... wait... we haven't discussed anything - cause you refuse to engage!

.