I can't seem to have any intelligent conversation with the Trump supporters I know. It's impossible to discuss something we know is being done without a mind numbing degree of, "what Hillary did was worse" "Dems do it more", "Dems are worse".

Had Hillary been elected I don't think anyone doubts that impeachment would have been on the table from day one. Okay fine.

So if Trump does something that is impeachable he needs to be impeached, not defended because dems are worse, and what Hillary did was worse.

If a dem would have been impeached for anything you can name, the republican has to be held to the same standard, not given a free pass for all of the supposed dem sins.

Right now the GOP is running interference for Trump's administration. Refusing to follow evidence where it leads is obstruction. Refusing to make people that are testifying answer questions is obstruction.

Are you doing drugs? Dems recently had two guys step down for harassment in a week, remember Franken and Coben? Farenthold, about as creepy a little troll as you could imagine was outed as having used government funds to settle a harassment case, he is still in office, says he won't run again, he is planning a run figuring the pressure will be off.

Dems run their own out on a rail for doing far less than the several republicans who are hunkered down riding it out with claims that they won't run again when they need to resign.

Where did that "10 democrats doing the same thing" BS come from? What pictures?
Proves you are a h**er? H**er of what, women abusing pieces of crap?

Why do you even post something like this?

Are you defending an abuser who can't get a full security clearance due to his spousal abuse? What, you think it's okay because according to you there are more democrats doing it than republicans?

Here's a memo for you, we caught this one with the goods, he's gone, you catch dems and they will be gone just as fast, guaranteed. They do it too is an i***tic defense for allowing scum to be in office and it needs to stop.

Wait until those who support him see their stock portfolios trashed.

A couple of years ago there was a case that people had an easy time agreeing on concerning a Muslim truck driver who refused to drive a truck carrying alcohol because alcohol was against his religious beliefs. He won a $90,000 settlement because the employer was violating his religious beliefs

I was able to make a lot of arguments about how incorrect this thing was from a lot of perspectives. Now we hear about people's right to "practice" their religion on the job. I'm sorry but religious beliefs can't be practiced if they affect someone else's beliefs.

1. It's against the guy's religion to drink alcohol not to simply carry it in a truck if that's your job. Nobody was violating his right to believe what he wants.
2. If something that the job entails is against your religious beliefs that is fine, you are allowed in this country to quit if the job description violates your beliefs, nobody forces you to do something you don't believe in.
3. What is an employer supposed to do if the job he has hired someone to do is against a person't religious beliefs? They are forced to hire someone who doesn't have a problem with wh**ever they are carrying.
4. This country allows everyone to believe wh**ever they want to, it is not okay in this country for an employer or boss to find out that someone is a Muslim and fire them because he h**es Muslims. It would be safer to say that the boss who h**es Muslims would be better off looking for another job if he couldn't handle having them work for him, that's his right. The reverse is true that the Muslim who is against alcohol is free to quit and find another job.

There is a unified agreement with the majority of what I've said here, except maybe the part about a boss quitting if he has a problem with an employee's religious beliefs.

Each and every one of these premises applies to a christian who believes in god and the bible thinking their beliefs are allowed to apply them to other people. Kim Davis can believe wh**ever she wants about gays, but if gay marriage is legal in her state and it is her job to issue marriage certificates she can either do her job or quit because she has a religious moral objection to doing her job.

And that twists a right winger in knots to equally apply religious beliefs and rights fairly to any religion in a job place. The rule of law you think applies to christians will apply to Muslims, Jehovah's Witness, any religion. Keeping religious beliefs out of government in terms of laws is for our protection against religions we do not agree with. That includes how it pertains to people who don't believe in god at all. At least 50% or more of any work place consists of people who are not religious, and practicing religion does not mean forcing people to adhere to yours in any way.

This is a dialog that needs to take place, because solutions come from understanding both sides of an issue.

I was actively involved in what I would describe as a hard right conservative site dedicated to predator hunting. I have been a h****r all my life, I own property that I can shoot on, I actively shoot coyotes and have found when I keep their numbers down neighbors lose far less sheep and goats than when there are too many. I have great quality firearms, have competed in pistol, benchrest, skeet, and trap. I sold things I was no longer using to other members at great prices and bought from members as well.

Where I'm going is that I interacted with people about technical issues with guns as I have extensive gunsmithing tuneup sk**ls, asked questions about coyote hunting sk**ls when I didn't have any, and interacted in the political section. I agree with many things and could post topics that got full and wide agreement, but was capable of setting records straight when the ignorant rhetoric flew.

No amount of respect gets guys through virtually any disagreement with the harder right rhetorical positions. I was a well liked and misguided libtard, otherwise known as a fucktard among other things. I have little tolerance for ignorance. I have what I'd call a serious sense of humor. It cracks me up when guys who are poorly informed get caught up in two sides of an argument that results in them getting angry when asked to explain (because their head hurts when they try).

I'm not a troll, I'm not a paid operative, I'm not the devil because I have a silver tongue and make compelling arguments, and most of all trying to set records straight is in to term trying to disrupt a site. I think adults who want to discuss politics should be able to look at facts and reality.
For instance, and I'm sorry of this hurts some fee fees, the economy was in excellent shape when Trump took office, the stock market had been hitting new record highs for some time. As long as things keep going in the same direction they will continue to do so, nothing earth shaking there. Jobs were being added at a certain rate and had been for a long time, nothing noteworthy about them continuing to do the same thing, sorry.

On the other hand jumping into a stable economy and changing everything about it risks making mistakes that can be disastrous, and it's time that will tell.

I was a day trader in the stock market prior to 2007/2008, I have a fairly deep knowledge of market trends and economics. I consulted with businesses that were going to fail if they didn't make some dramatic changes and improvements to their systems. I understand taxes and profit margins, everything I did demanded that I have a deep understanding of cause and effect. I was involved in a California state senate oversight project designed to reign in waste and fraud, I know a bit more about that than most. And something that deeply pisses me off is both pentagon waste and fraud as well as government waste. I absolutely know how hundreds of billions can be saved, and find it disturbing when people who support the government that is responsible for the worst of the abuse can't understand how to reign in the culprits at the heart of the problem.

Oh, and I want to point out that I don't do any better on a left wing site like KOS, they swing hard left just like right wingers do, any moderate view on the politically correct angles on their crusades will get you attacked and timed out. It is hard to express legitimate t***hs if they don't fit their hard pure positions.

So anyway, I never call names, or even respond to abusive response attacks in kind. If I ask for details from someone who probably can't provide them because they don't exist, as far as I'm concerned an attack and name calling proves my point, that the person doesn't know what they are talking about. I hope that simply pointing out that something someone is saying can't be substantiated is not reason for being kicked off this site. I am wrong at times, and welcome being corrected with intelligent insights and facts, when that happens I correct my views as a result, I do not continue to spew rhetoric that I have been corrected on.

I have used the same moniker throughout over ten years on dozens of sites, I have nothing to hide from positions reflected in any other place. My philosophy is "lighten up, there's no shame in being ignorant, only refusing to recognise it and stupidly maintaining positions you know nothing about". Liberals laugh about ignorance, the ignorant gets pissed when they get caught looking ignorant.

Did you really just repeat a quote when you don't have a clue what it is? LMAO

Eight years of Obama, I'm pretty sure the right h**ed Obama, he never got credit for anything, Lol. And more to the point there is no number or statistic that shows Trump records are anything but things going in the exact same way they were going when he took office. The stock market was already in ever climbing record territory, unemployment was at a low, jobs growth had been positive for a record number of consecutive months that is his whole two terms short of the first month or two.

Obama inherited record deficits ($1.3 Trillion), record unemployment (11%), a tanked stock market (americans had lost at least $14 Trillion), record foreclosures and home values in the gutter. The administration had lost somewhere around 25 million jobs, in fact the last month of Bush's administration another 700,000 were lost.

Trump can't really do anything that does anything but keep what was happening keeping on. The rhetoric during the e******n, and it is my hope that people who support Trump can understand the error of this reality, is that policies that were already improving jobs, the stock market, home values, all the things that matter to the economy, are harder to maintain than just keep going.

You can't come in making dramatic changes that improve what is already doing well without risking the opposite reaction. You let your uninformed treasury guy raise interest rates in the belief that things are so strong that the economy can withstand increases you better be aware that it can trigger a whirlpool that affects the whole economy. Higher interest rates on loans do what? They change the amount people can borrow, this makes home prices drop because the people who were buying them can no longer afford them. Businesses start increasing prices to reflect increased costs of their financing.
Stock prices start coming down, which can trigger an exodus with a market already very nervous about record prices, record stock prices are prone to adjustments. 2007/2008 was an adjustment that tanked the market and caused a lot of working class people to lose their retirement funds. Gas prices go up as oil prices go down, people curb their driving everywhere they can, which causes gas prices to go up more. Businesses that rely on gas such as airlines and trucking companies are forced to raise prices to pay for gasoline. Restaurants go out of business because people paying more for gas don't eat out as much. My wife's veterinary business was hit by 40% when gas was at it's highest during the Bush admin.

Trump and his administration are blundering around in an incredibly sensitive economy that was doing incredibly well considering where it was when Obama took office. They are making senseless greed based policy moves that do nothing but increase the deficit and debt, that will at the very least cost taxpayers trillions, and at the worst will trigger massive upheavals in the stock market and economy.

I'm pretty sure you can't supply anything relevant to where Hillary was responsible for those deaths. I'm pretty sure that in the first place I never saw where the Secretary of State has any responsibility for the actions that take place at an embassy. There are CIA people, Marines, and other security entities involved in the places where a difference could be made. When the CIA outpost was asked to send men to help, they originally refused because the CO wouldn't leave his post under manned. Now had Democrats been in charge of Congress they could have been easily blamed for refusing to fund the $380 million that was requested to increase embassy security. But seeing as how that doesn't play well that republicans were the ones that refused that funding it didn't get much outrage from the right. Oh, and by the way, this wasn't the first time embassy officials have died from clearer negligence than this. Bush told a month ahead of a car bombing at an embassy that something was up. He neglected to do anything, and almost 200 people died when the event intelligence had been talking about actually happened. The president was exonerated of responsibility even though he had been advised to take actions he had neglected to do. Obama never would have gotten away with that considering what the GOP tried to make out of Hillary's non responsibility. My guess is that there is no way byron can explain why this was Hillary's responsibility in any way. I have a lot of hard right hunting and fishing friends, and it does nothing but piss people off when they make statements like this and then are asked to provide details about what they are talking about.

Meanwhile we have a Russia investigation that people should want to know what went on. We let B******i go on for years when no evidence could be found, B******i led to the email scandal as far as classified information. Have you caught how many people in this current admin are using the same exact kind of private server? Kushner can't get his Top Secret security clearance, yet he gets the most sensitive types of information? Nunes pressures the FBI into getting sensitive classified documents related to the DOJ/FBI's investigation and runs them right to the white house, which is a violation of security because the intelligence committee has an obligation to keep that information secret from those being investigated.

And the Nunes memo (two versions). How would that have played if dems wrote an irrelevant memo, got approval to send it over to the president for approval or redaction of the parts that were classified, and the top dems forged a modified document that went to the president, one that nobody had seen or authorized. I'm pretty sure that democrat would be prosecuted for fraud in a manner that reflected sabotage. There is so much about this that is not okay, but changing that document and submitting a modified version??? Daayum

Hillary and B******i/email scandals are over with, let's worry about what's going on currently, because that crap has nothing to do with the things we need to pay attention to now. It's a bit embarrassing to still be talking about B******i and email servers when we have a bigger scandal, and Trump people doing the same email server things that Hillary did.

So her's a question, and this shouldn't be that hard to answer. If Kushner, Ivanka, Gowdy, Nunes, or any other top level official were found to be doing the same exact misuse of private email servers to relay sensitive information that Hillary did, should they be prosecuted and put in jail, or because Hillary got away with it so should they? My point here is that anything you think was a crime when the other side does it needs to be prosecuted to the degree that you think it should whether someone got away with it or not. When you start using an equivalency system it's subject to false equivalency. Perhaps the evidence of wrongdoing would be much more clear in one case than the other, which would explain one being prosecuted and the other not. When you start letting a side get away with something because the other side's person did, you are in effect saying it doesn't matter anymore if someone breaks the law.

Franken was forced to resign, yet Farenthold did far worse and there's no heat on him to resign. In fact he used taxpayer funds to settle out.
I tend to stick to facts that can be easily supported, facts that people should know already. I am of the opinion that debates where people are allowed to discuss facts should never be cause for anger. In a debate there should be no problem intelligently supporting a position. If a person can't they need to take a real hard look at the facts that support their beliefs, if they can't actually find any maybe they should question their sources?

The most outrageous thing in your lifetime, Really? As is now being well covered in mainstream media, Page had been under FBI/CIA scrutiny for years for spy activities. It would have been pretty standard procedure to look at him considering his trips to Russia during the t***sition and after Trump took office. Page's area of expertise was sanctions, and meetings with Russians concerned the lifting of said sanctions. So the idea, the outrage of keeping an eye on a guy who was spying and supporting anti Russian sanction efforts.

Did you catch the part where the Steele Dossier was originally initiated and paid for before the primary by Republicans who wanted dirt on Trump, because the RNC wanted to discredit him? After the primary when he won they no longer wanted to discredit him. Whether these facts were used by republicans or democrats they are still the same facts.

Comey in fact was rather reviled for supposedly reopening a done investigation on Hillary's emails, violating the Hatch act which protects against partisan activities that might swing an e******n right before it takes place. On the other hand there was information by the FBI that Trump people had disturbing ties to Russia (facts we now know). In fact Trump tried to say that rather than him firing Comey to end the Russia investigation (which he also had openly admitted), he did it because Comey had acted in an unacceptably partisan manner when he released the Hillary email thing prior to the e******n, thereby hurting Hillary. You can't have it both ways, that Comey was both a right and left wing tool. The left thought Comey should have been prosecuted for Hatch act violations.

It's okay for law enforcement people to be biased as all hell, they can have their opinions about a president as long as they treat the facts like facts and go where the information leads. The FBI is not on Trump's team, they sit in the middle of teams and are expected to find the facts and deal with them accordingly.

And you want to know the reality of good law enforcement people? When they actually do h**e people from the other party, they are extra careful to make sure that their bias is not brought into the equation. If all the top people at the FBI were replaced with people on Trump's team, it wouldn't matter what the evidence was, it would never be used.

Do you even know what a t*********r bathroom is?

Target had them, nobody complained until the i***tic idea raised it's head that this was going to allow pervs to "watch" your kids, and all of a sudden the bathroom marked for men/women was evil. It's a bathroom either can go into, whereupon the door is locked so there is only one person in there at a time.

All of a sudden fools were beating up on Target for what they had been doing all along, and which nobody ever saw anything wrong with.
Many hospitals have them, it's far more cost and space effective to make one bathroom that either can go into, one at a time, not in some group oriented pervert fest as the right believes is the case. Not to mention it prevents having to wait for the men's bathroom to become available when the women's is not being used.

Just out of curiosity, where did you hear the word landslide used? Trump seems to think it was a landslide, but it actually ranks very low on the list of the e*******l count in e******ns.

Just setting the record straight with pesky facts.

T***p w*n't last out the year.