The double standard

[Vrede too]

More important than your question is this simple question that you won't answer.

Why is it that liars and simpletons, when confronted with their own wrongdoings, immediately start screaming, "but they did it too, they did it too".

Sure, both parties have people who have done things wrong, but never, never in my lifetime has there been anything close to what your handlers have been perpetrating on the American people over the past 20 years.

Now run away

Even more important than your question is this simple question:

Why is it that liars and simpletons, when confronted with their own wrongdoings, immediately start screaming, "but they did it too, they did it too" while lying through their teeth about what they supposedly did?

[PeacefulPartier]

Standard A: A Democrat is recorded admitting (and brags about) using taxpayer funds to extort an ally into firing a government employee that was investigating a man and company associated with his son. Not even worthy of an investigation. There is no evidence.

Standard B: A Republican is rumored to have asked a foreign leader for help. Impeach now!

Someone please explain the logic behind these two standards...without attacking me personally. I know that is an impossible task for some. But let's give it a shot, please.

More important than your question is this simple question that you won't answer.

Why is it that liars and simpletons, when confronted with their own wrongdoings, immediately start screaming, "but they did it too, they did it too".

Sure, both parties have people who have done things wrong, but never, never in my lifetime has there been anything close to what your handlers have been perpetrating on the American people over the past 20 years.

Now run away

The fake bravado isn't as intimidating as you think it is.

In order for your question to be valid, the two scenarios would have to be more similar. As it stands right now, all the left has is speculation vs an actual confession from Biden.Biden is the one threatening reporters for not asking the right questions. Trump immediately released the relevant parts of the conversation. If they can declassify the whole conversation, the chances it'll be something untoward are very slim. Trump clearly doesn't think he did anything wrong. Biden, though, seems put off by this whole issue. His attempt at intimidating that young reporter seems to indicate he's a little worried about where the questions are going.

[neoplacebo]

[GoCubsGo]

Standard A: A Democrat is recorded admitting (and brags about) using taxpayer funds to extort an ally into firing a government employee that was investigating a man and company associated with his son. Not even worthy of an investigation. There is no evidence.

Standard B: A Republican is rumored to have asked a foreign leader for help. Impeach now!

Someone please explain the logic behind these two standards...without attacking me personally. I know that is an impossible task for some. But let's give it a shot, please.

More important than your question is this simple question that you won't answer.

Why is it that liars and simpletons, when confronted with their own wrongdoings, immediately start screaming, "but they did it too, they did it too".

Sure, both parties have people who have done things wrong, but never, never in my lifetime has there been anything close to what your handlers have been perpetrating on the American people over the past 20 years.

Now run away

The fake bravado isn't as intimidating as you think it is.

In order for your question to be valid, the two scenarios would have to be more similar. As it stands right now, all the left has is speculation vs an actual confession from Biden.Biden is the one threatening reporters for not asking the right questions. Trump immediately released the relevant parts of the conversation. If they can declassify the whole conversation, the chances it'll be something untoward are very slim. Trump clearly doesn't think he did anything wrong. Biden, though, seems put off by this whole issue. His attempt at intimidating that young reporter seems to indicate he's a little worried about where the questions are going.

Yeah, because a robber has to say "I'm robbing you" for there to be a crime.

[Vrede too]

What a Trumpette moron (redundant, I know).

Biden's "confession" was to US policy and to the entire EU's wishes, period. NOTHING to do with his son or the company, pitiful liar. No one is surprised that you champion a prosecutor universally recognized as being corrupt. You also worship the most corrupt POTUS ever.

Dolt 45's call, proven by the memo and the transcript, is proof of solicitation of a foreign govt to meddle in our elections - slam dunk campaign felony and treason. Your America-hating denial is cowardly.

That said, I appreciate your admission that "the two scenarios" are NOT "similar" and thus the entire premise of your "double standard" thread was a lying and/or idiotic failure. I agree.

[billy.pilgrim]

Standard A: A Democrat is recorded admitting (and brags about) using taxpayer funds to extort an ally into firing a government employee that was investigating a man and company associated with his son. Not even worthy of an investigation. There is no evidence.

Standard B: A Republican is rumored to have asked a foreign leader for help. Impeach now!

Someone please explain the logic behind these two standards...without attacking me personally. I know that is an impossible task for some. But let's give it a shot, please.

More important than your question is this simple question that you won't answer.

Why is it that liars and simpletons, when confronted with their own wrongdoings, immediately start screaming, "but they did it too, they did it too".

Sure, both parties have people who have done things wrong, but never, never in my lifetime has there been anything close to what your handlers have been perpetrating on the American people over the past 20 years.

Now run away

The fake bravado isn't as intimidating as you think it is.

In order for your question to be valid, the two scenarios would have to be more similar. As it stands right now, all the left has is speculation vs an actual confession from Biden.Biden is the one threatening reporters for not asking the right questions. Trump immediately released the relevant parts of the conversation. If they can declassify the whole conversation, the chances it'll be something untoward are very slim. Trump clearly doesn't think he did anything wrong. Biden, though, seems put off by this whole issue. His attempt at intimidating that young reporter seems to indicate he's a little worried about where the questions are going.

Run away pp, run away

It was a simple question and still you failed

[PeacefulPartier]

Standard A: A Democrat is recorded admitting (and brags about) using taxpayer funds to extort an ally into firing a government employee that was investigating a man and company associated with his son. Not even worthy of an investigation. There is no evidence.

Standard B: A Republican is rumored to have asked a foreign leader for help. Impeach now!

Someone please explain the logic behind these two standards...without attacking me personally. I know that is an impossible task for some. But let's give it a shot, please.

More important than your question is this simple question that you won't answer.

Why is it that liars and simpletons, when confronted with their own wrongdoings, immediately start screaming, "but they did it too, they did it too".

Sure, both parties have people who have done things wrong, but never, never in my lifetime has there been anything close to what your handlers have been perpetrating on the American people over the past 20 years.

Now run away

The fake bravado isn't as intimidating as you think it is.

In order for your question to be valid, the two scenarios would have to be more similar. As it stands right now, all the left has is speculation vs an actual confession from Biden.Biden is the one threatening reporters for not asking the right questions. Trump immediately released the relevant parts of the conversation. If they can declassify the whole conversation, the chances it'll be something untoward are very slim. Trump clearly doesn't think he did anything wrong. Biden, though, seems put off by this whole issue. His attempt at intimidating that young reporter seems to indicate he's a little worried about where the questions are going.

Yeah, because a robber has to say "I'm robbing you" for there to be a crime.

Not exactly. This is more like the accused saying he's innocent and providing proof of that innocence. You do believe in innocent until proven guilty, don't you?

[PeacefulPartier]

Standard A: A Democrat is recorded admitting (and brags about) using taxpayer funds to extort an ally into firing a government employee that was investigating a man and company associated with his son. Not even worthy of an investigation. There is no evidence.

Standard B: A Republican is rumored to have asked a foreign leader for help. Impeach now!

Someone please explain the logic behind these two standards...without attacking me personally. I know that is an impossible task for some. But let's give it a shot, please.

More important than your question is this simple question that you won't answer.

Why is it that liars and simpletons, when confronted with their own wrongdoings, immediately start screaming, "but they did it too, they did it too".

Sure, both parties have people who have done things wrong, but never, never in my lifetime has there been anything close to what your handlers have been perpetrating on the American people over the past 20 years.

Now run away

The fake bravado isn't as intimidating as you think it is.

In order for your question to be valid, the two scenarios would have to be more similar. As it stands right now, all the left has is speculation vs an actual confession from Biden.Biden is the one threatening reporters for not asking the right questions. Trump immediately released the relevant parts of the conversation. If they can declassify the whole conversation, the chances it'll be something untoward are very slim. Trump clearly doesn't think he did anything wrong. Biden, though, seems put off by this whole issue. His attempt at intimidating that young reporter seems to indicate he's a little worried about where the questions are going.

Run away pp, run away

It was a simple question and still you failed

Run away from what exactly? Fake bravado, name calling or the straw-man arguments?

[billy.pilgrim]

Standard A: A Democrat is recorded admitting (and brags about) using taxpayer funds to extort an ally into firing a government employee that was investigating a man and company associated with his son. Not even worthy of an investigation. There is no evidence.

Standard B: A Republican is rumored to have asked a foreign leader for help. Impeach now!

Someone please explain the logic behind these two standards...without attacking me personally. I know that is an impossible task for some. But let's give it a shot, please.

More important than your question is this simple question that you won't answer.

Why is it that liars and simpletons, when confronted with their own wrongdoings, immediately start screaming, "but they did it too, they did it too".

Sure, both parties have people who have done things wrong, but never, never in my lifetime has there been anything close to what your handlers have been perpetrating on the American people over the past 20 years.

Now run away

The fake bravado isn't as intimidating as you think it is.

In order for your question to be valid, the two scenarios would have to be more similar. As it stands right now, all the left has is speculation vs an actual confession from Biden.Biden is the one threatening reporters for not asking the right questions. Trump immediately released the relevant parts of the conversation. If they can declassify the whole conversation, the chances it'll be something untoward are very slim. Trump clearly doesn't think he did anything wrong. Biden, though, seems put off by this whole issue. His attempt at intimidating that young reporter seems to indicate he's a little worried about where the questions are going.

Run away pp, run away

It was a simple question and still you failed

Run away from what exactly? Fake bravado, name calling or the straw-man arguments?

It never fails, ask a con a simple question and watch him run.

No name calling needed, no strawman arguments other than yours and I'm not sure why you are calling my simple question to you "fake bravado"

Keep on running

[PeacefulPartier]

More important than your question is this simple question that you won't answer.

Why is it that liars and simpletons, when confronted with their own wrongdoings, immediately start screaming, "but they did it too, they did it too".

Sure, both parties have people who have done things wrong, but never, never in my lifetime has there been anything close to what your handlers have been perpetrating on the American people over the past 20 years.

Now run away

The fake bravado isn't as intimidating as you think it is.

In order for your question to be valid, the two scenarios would have to be more similar. As it stands right now, all the left has is speculation vs an actual confession from Biden.Biden is the one threatening reporters for not asking the right questions. Trump immediately released the relevant parts of the conversation. If they can declassify the whole conversation, the chances it'll be something untoward are very slim. Trump clearly doesn't think he did anything wrong. Biden, though, seems put off by this whole issue. His attempt at intimidating that young reporter seems to indicate he's a little worried about where the questions are going.

Run away pp, run away

It was a simple question and still you failed

Run away from what exactly? Fake bravado, name calling or the straw-man arguments?

It never fails, ask a con a simple question and watch him run.

No name calling needed, no strawman arguments other than yours and I'm not sure why you are calling my simple question to you "fake bravado"

Keep on running

LMAO..."no straw-man arguments" in the middle of the straw-man argument. I'm not running from anything. I have nothing to run from. Not one person has posted anything of value for me to run from. Especially you.

[GoCubsGo]

Not exactly. This is more like the accused saying he's innocent and providing proof of that innocence. You do believe in innocent until proven guilty, don't you?

Except that's not what happened.

[neoplacebo]

How about this double standard? During the Republican nomination contest a couple years ago, Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, Lindsey Graham, and Mitt Romney spoke very badly of trump; Ted even got booed at the GOP convention for disparaging trump. But now all those same guys except for an honorable mention for Romney, who seems to have found some vestige of his honor and ethics, defend trump virtually no matter what he does. I find it quite remarkable that grown men like these could change their opinions on ethics and morals and honesty so completely, especially since I myself have had the same political views I have now for several decades. I cannot imagine changing my views just for the sake of winning one election. I have never been a Republican or a Democrat, I have always hated Nixon and still do. I have always thought baby Bush was a dumbass and still do. I always admired Eisenhower and still do.

As for this supposed double standard with regard to Biden and the Ukraine business, it was not just Biden pushing for the removal of the Ukrainian prosecutor; virtually the entire EU was pushing for this as well. If Biden or his son did anything illegal they should be prosecuted for it. But no charges have been brought; only spurious conspiracy type allegations with no basis in fact. There is no double standard there. Biden nor his son never operated a scam university or a scam charity, neither of them tell lies on a daily basis, and neither of them devote virtually all their time to efforts to polarize the citizens of this country against each other.

There is not a double standard in the trump era; there is no standard at all. It's like Mitt said a couple years ago; "Donald Trump is a fake, a phony, a con man." He was right.

[Vrede too]

Except that's not what happened.

POSPOTUS provided proof of his guilt, but PP is too smitten, nttawwt, and wussy to admit it.

[PeacefulPartier]

Not exactly. This is more like the accused saying he's innocent and providing proof of that innocence. You do believe in innocent until proven guilty, don't you?

Except that's not what happened.

Prove me wrong.

[PeacefulPartier]

How about this double standard? During the Republican nomination contest a couple years ago, Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, Lindsey Graham, and Mitt Romney spoke very badly of trump; Ted even got booed at the GOP convention for disparaging trump. But now all those same guys except for an honorable mention for Romney, who seems to have found some vestige of his honor and ethics, defend trump virtually no matter what he does. I find it quite remarkable that grown men like these could change their opinions on ethics and morals and honesty so completely, especially since I myself have had the same political views I have now for several decades. I cannot imagine changing my views just for the sake of winning one election. I have never been a Republican or a Democrat, I have always hated Nixon and still do. I have always thought baby Bush was a dumbass and still do. I always admired Eisenhower and still do.

As for this supposed double standard with regard to Biden and the Ukraine business, it was not just Biden pushing for the removal of the Ukrainian prosecutor; virtually the entire EU was pushing for this as well. If Biden or his son did anything illegal they should be prosecuted for it. But no charges have been brought; only spurious conspiracy type allegations with no basis in fact. There is no double standard there. Biden nor his son never operated a scam university or a scam charity, neither of them tell lies on a daily basis, and neither of them devote virtually all their time to efforts to polarize the citizens of this country against each other.

There is not a double standard in the trump era; there is no standard at all. It's like Mitt said a couple years ago; "Donald Trump is a fake, a phony, a con man." He was right.

Every single primary has that exact same scenario. Is Bernie a hypocrite for supporting Clinton? Will any of the 20 something Dems be hypocrites for supporting their eventual nominee? Of course Republicans took shots at the outsider in their primary. How else would they separate themselves? But, as in every single election ever, they came together after the primary, with the exception of the former Gov of Mass. He's special. Well, he supported Trump when he needed to win an election. But now he's back to being special again.

[neoplacebo]

I want to address the myth of "innocent until proven guilty." Unless you can afford a high dollar counselor, if you're charged with a serious crime in this country, you go to jail until your trial. Your trial may not occur for a year or more. Meanwhile, you're in jail, you can't work, can't pay your mortgage or car payment or anything else. So while you're sitting there in jail for a year or more being "innocent," you lose your job and your house and your car, maybe your wife or husband as well. And then a year later or two you go to trial for the crime you've been accused of but mother of sweating jesus, it turns out that someone else has confessed to the crime you've been accused of. The charges are dropped and you're free to go. But where will you go? How will you get there? Your house now belongs to someone else or else is vacant until the bank finds someone else to sell it to, and your car is long gone and now belongs to someone else. On top of that, your credit is also ruined because you were "innocent until proven guilty." I hate to break it to you, grasshopper, but if you get charged with a serious crime in this country and are not wealthy, you are guilty until proven innocent. Dozens of people have been released from prisons in this country after serving years or even decades in prison for crimes they did not commit. Tell that innocent until proven guilty bullshit to them.

[GoCubsGo]

Not exactly. This is more like the accused saying he's innocent and providing proof of that innocence. You do believe in innocent until proven guilty, don't you?

Except that's not what happened.

Prove me wrong.

I believe the information you're looking for is readily available on the internet. You should check it out sometime.
The word is it's here to stay.

[neoplacebo]

How about this double standard? During the Republican nomination contest a couple years ago, Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, Lindsey Graham, and Mitt Romney spoke very badly of trump; Ted even got booed at the GOP convention for disparaging trump. But now all those same guys except for an honorable mention for Romney, who seems to have found some vestige of his honor and ethics, defend trump virtually no matter what he does. I find it quite remarkable that grown men like these could change their opinions on ethics and morals and honesty so completely, especially since I myself have had the same political views I have now for several decades. I cannot imagine changing my views just for the sake of winning one election. I have never been a Republican or a Democrat, I have always hated Nixon and still do. I have always thought baby Bush was a dumbass and still do. I always admired Eisenhower and still do.

As for this supposed double standard with regard to Biden and the Ukraine business, it was not just Biden pushing for the removal of the Ukrainian prosecutor; virtually the entire EU was pushing for this as well. If Biden or his son did anything illegal they should be prosecuted for it. But no charges have been brought; only spurious conspiracy type allegations with no basis in fact. There is no double standard there. Biden nor his son never operated a scam university or a scam charity, neither of them tell lies on a daily basis, and neither of them devote virtually all their time to efforts to polarize the citizens of this country against each other.

There is not a double standard in the trump era; there is no standard at all. It's like Mitt said a couple years ago; "Donald Trump is a fake, a phony, a con man." He was right.

Every single primary has that exact same scenario. Is Bernie a hypocrite for supporting Clinton? Will any of the 20 something Dems be hypocrites for supporting their eventual nominee? Of course Republicans took shots at the outsider in their primary. How else would they separate themselves? But, as in every single election ever, they came together after the primary, with the exception of the former Gov of Mass. He's special. Well, he supported Trump when he needed to win an election. But now he's back to being special again.

Nah, it's not exactly the same; not even close. Nobody has been such a juvenile name calling petty moron like trump has been. His latest tweet up there right now says "I am draining the swamp." Fucking hilarious. He is a pathological liar and I believe he's actually quite insane. He says things that are demonstrably false, like how he says billions of dollars are coming into the US Treasury from China because of his tariffs. And a lot of people actually believe this. No Democrat has ever been so far removed from reality and truth. Of course the eventual party nominee ultimately gets the support of the rest of the party; that's just how the system works. Never have there been the divisions with Dems like there have been with trump and the GOP. Never have Democrats in numbers decided to not run for re election because of the way the incumbent president of their party acts like a petulant child. No, it's not the same. If you can't see that, you are refusing to face reality.

[Vrede too]

Ummm, the memo and transcript - your own "proof of that (Trump) innocence" - prove you wrong. If you are so cowardly as to lie about them, or so stupid as to not know this, there's no onus on us to provide new proof and nothing left for us to do but mock and pity you.

Poor baby, your adoration of 45SHOLE has you so twisted up that you're defending soliciting foreign interference in our elections, something you NEVER would have done for your entire life until 3 years ago. Patriotism, democracy, responsibility and ethics did not change in the last 3 years, you did.

Now, if you wish to add to the hilarity by elaborating on how the memo and transcript are "proof of that innocence", go for it. I can't wait. Or, deflect and cower, we're getting used to it.

[O Really]

I want to address the myth of "innocent until proven guilty." ...

Yeah, me too. "Innocent until proven guilty" has only one valid meaning. In court, the burden of proof of a charge is up to the state. That is, it is the state's responsibility to proven the defendant guilty, not the defendant's responsibility to prove his/her innocence. Thus, as a legal construct, the defendant is considered "innocent until proven guilty." Outside that limited application, and other administrative-type procedures that adopt court-like standards, it has no validity. Actually, even in court, it only applies to who has to prove what, because the prosecutors certainly don't consider the defendant innocent. Neither do the cops that caught him. They are all quite convinced s/he is guilty or they wouldn't have brought them to trial.