Well, really? Let's check with the sworn testimony of the Republicans' own hand-picked expert witness, Mr. Jonathan Turley, who despite his non top-tier law school status, is nonetheless revered by many on this forum: D'oh! You hate to see it!
But the problem is the damage is already done..... When will these idiots learn... 'Never argue with an idiot, they will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.' T_Man
kids should be left out of politics. so should gold star mothers and POWs, but that didnt stop trump and i didnt see any of his supporters condemning him when he attacked them. you guys dont care about any of this so dont pretend like youre really offended...nobody buys it.
The Baron thing is bizarre. It was a lame barb, but it wasn't a barb at the child, wasn't an insult to the child, etc.
Maybe Kaplan should have responded with a picture of flotus's "I don't care" jacket,. Or a picture of her and the president grinning while holding an orphaned child from the El Paso mass shooting. I guess she didn't care about innocent children being used for political purposes then.
All you have to do with anything they say is TRUMP and be done with any of these arguments. Nothing anything Democrats have done will come remotely close to what Trump have done already.
My fear is that Pelosi's play by going forward with Articles of Impeachment...wins Trump 2020. This won't go anywhere in the Senate and will fire up Trump's base even more.
They are already fired up. Not impeaching would also fire them up because Trump will say it was a witch-hunt and that if it had been real the Democrats would have moved forward with impeachment but because they had nothing they did not. Electing a Democrat and Democrats for congress will only result in more which-hunts. For the record, the Republican KY governor used the impeachment of Trump as a reason to vote for him in the election. The Republican still lost in Kentucky. Trump's base is in a permanent state of anger and being fired up. What I believe is that placing the clear evidence of Trump's corruption and illegal activity in the open for everyone to see, it will fire up the Democratic base which isn't always fired up or as likely to vote.
Althouse on Barrongate: https://althouse.blogspot.com/2019/12/in-complicated-emotional-manipulation.html summary: My legalistic defense of Karlan would be that she targeted not the child, but the father, who had the arrogance to give his child a name that corresponds to a title bestowed by British royalty. I see many problems with this defense. 1. In first place, I put feminism: Karlan assumes that the man gave the child his name and that erases the woman. 2. The boy's name is Barron, not Baron. (The zinger was so viral that dumb old Reuters, so eager to be a part of the contagion, misspelled the boy's name.) 3. A man who is king wouldn't have a baron for a son. His son would be a prince. If Trump's motivation were to aspire to the status of king, he'd have named his son Prince. He didn't. (And it's too late in American culture to mock the name Prince.) 4. Baron is damned low in the ranking of titles. And — from the Wikipedia article "Baron" — "The word baron comes from the Old French baron, from a Late Latin barō "man; servant, soldier, mercenary"... The scholar Isidore of Seville in the 7th century thought the word was from Greek βᾰρῠ́ς 'heavy' (because of the 'heavy work' done by mercenaries)... Cornutus in the first century already reports a word barones which he took to be of Gaulish origin. He glosses it as meaning servos militum and explains it as meaning 'stupid', by reference to classical Latin bārō 'simpleton, dunce'... but the Oxford English Dictionary takes this to be 'a figment.'" 5. Independently of all that, "Baron" is a traditional name: Let me finish up here by saying that I agree that the outrage is fake, but just about everything in the discussion of Trump is fake, and the pro-Trump side should fight hard. Karlan intended a hurtful slam, a winged zinger that would have the whole world laughing contemptuously. Watch that clip again. She believes she's got something. But it was too good of a line. Everyone noticed. And now, it's almost the only thing that was noticed in all that tangle of law/"law" that the professors strewed before us yesterday. So it was a big fail for the anti-Trump lawprofs. The look of it from a distance was that they hate Trump and they were called by politicians who hate Trump to express hate for Trump.
Let me tell the truth for a moment... not one single Trumper cares about what was said about Barron in the hearing and knows the analogy was directed at Trump and had nothing to do with Barrons actions or anything about him at all personally. The Trump cultists know this next 10 months will be a battle of disinformation and distraction to help get their cleric re-elected. Anything... and I mean anything given to them will be blown into a gigantic outrage to distract and to try to level the playing field. Dems should just ignore them. It’s disingenuous. Nobody cares to attack Trumps son. He’s got a privileged life financially but a life I still wouldn’t wish on my worse enemies. I honestly feel bad for him at this point. If he turns into another Don Jr. or Eric Trump when he’s older then we can talk.
This. Trump’s base was going to vote for him regardless. Too early to tell how independents will view this since more information is still coming out.
All that analysis and no mention of how Trump would masquerade as his own publicist, John Baron. Seems a lot more relevant than the meaning of the Hebrew formulation. What a weird ass thing to say. Is she asking me to believe that Catholics don't hate people? Or they are somehow unique in having an admonition not to hate? A simple no would have sufficed, instead of using the cross as a human shield.
You didn't go where I thought you would. I thought that you were going to go after the guy (Conservative journalist) who said "Do you hate the president?". Methinks there is a whole lot of projection in that question. What would Jesus do? Maybe some Christians see hate as a sin and make an honest attempt to avoid it? You have to admit that there are some strains of Christians that appear to embrace hate.
