Bush calls for unity in a crisis......Trump makes it about him

[22lcidw]

By that logic, OJ didn't kill anyone. The evidence was clearly there, the system just refused to step up and deal with it.

The difference being that Trump only appeared guilty to those with TDS. OJ appeared guilty to the overwhelmingly majority of people. Even those cheering when he got off were not cheering because they thought he was innocent, but because they thought it was poetic justice given the perceived discrimination against black people in the courts.

Just like a black jury ignored all evidence to find OJ not guilty, a Republican Senate ignored all evidence and found Trump not guilty

Its just that if Trump is guilty as you believe, that so many others in D.C. are also. But somehow they get away with their crimes. Hence why Trump was elected. Trump was after the fact. And murder is one thing, O.J. butchered those two people. That is another.

 

[basquebromance]

Democrats told us Trump would sell America out during the Senate impeachment trial, my friends

 

[DBA]

The difference being that Trump only appeared guilty to those with TDS. OJ appeared guilty to the overwhelmingly majority of people. Even those cheering when he got off were not cheering because they thought he was innocent, but because they thought it was poetic justice given the perceived discrimination against black people in the courts.

Um, the jury found OJ innocent. Frankly, I think he did it, but the misconduct of the LAPD in this case created reasonable doubt.

Trump, on the other hand, was caught pretty much red-handed trying to get the Ukraine to smear Biden for him.

Obviously I meant the overwhelming number of people in the country thought he was guilty, not the overwhelming majority on the jury.

There was very, very little evidence against Trump, which is why there was such a partisan divide. Only those with TDS, and this includes RINO Romney, thought there was enough there to convict. Even if there would have been a clear quid pro quo, it wouldn't have mattered in a legal sense, so the entire thing was nothing more than a propaganda tool.

 

[Faun]

The difference being that Trump only appeared guilty to those with TDS. OJ appeared guilty to the overwhelmingly majority of people. Even those cheering when he got off were not cheering because they thought he was innocent, but because they thought it was poetic justice given the perceived discrimination against black people in the courts.

Um, the jury found OJ innocent. Frankly, I think he did it, but the misconduct of the LAPD in this case created reasonable doubt.

Trump, on the other hand, was caught pretty much red-handed trying to get the Ukraine to smear Biden for him.

Obviously I meant the overwhelming number of people in the country thought he was guilty, not the overwhelming majority on the jury.

There was very, very little evidence against Trump, which is why there was such a partisan divide. Only those with TDS, and this includes RINO Romney, thought there was enough there to convict. Even if there would have been a clear quid pro quo, it wouldn't have mattered in a legal sense, so the entire thing was nothing more than a propaganda tool.

LOL

Yeah, very little evidence... except for that perfect phone call where he illegally solicited a foreign national to help him with his re-election campaign.

 

[DBA]

The difference being that Trump only appeared guilty to those with TDS. OJ appeared guilty to the overwhelmingly majority of people. Even those cheering when he got off were not cheering because they thought he was innocent, but because they thought it was poetic justice given the perceived discrimination against black people in the courts.

Um, the jury found OJ innocent. Frankly, I think he did it, but the misconduct of the LAPD in this case created reasonable doubt.

Trump, on the other hand, was caught pretty much red-handed trying to get the Ukraine to smear Biden for him.

Obviously I meant the overwhelming number of people in the country thought he was guilty, not the overwhelming majority on the jury.

There was very, very little evidence against Trump, which is why there was such a partisan divide. Only those with TDS, and this includes RINO Romney, thought there was enough there to convict. Even if there would have been a clear quid pro quo, it wouldn't have mattered in a legal sense, so the entire thing was nothing more than a propaganda tool.

LOL

Yeah, very little evidence... except for that perfect phone call where he illegally solicited a foreign national to help him with his re-election campaign.

The only problem was, he didn't do that. The Ukrainian didn't even know there were "strings" attached to the aid. How can you have a quid pro quo when the other party doesn't even know they are on the hook? Logic was never liberal's strong suit.

 

[Faun]

The difference being that Trump only appeared guilty to those with TDS. OJ appeared guilty to the overwhelmingly majority of people. Even those cheering when he got off were not cheering because they thought he was innocent, but because they thought it was poetic justice given the perceived discrimination against black people in the courts.

Um, the jury found OJ innocent. Frankly, I think he did it, but the misconduct of the LAPD in this case created reasonable doubt.

Trump, on the other hand, was caught pretty much red-handed trying to get the Ukraine to smear Biden for him.

Obviously I meant the overwhelming number of people in the country thought he was guilty, not the overwhelming majority on the jury.

There was very, very little evidence against Trump, which is why there was such a partisan divide. Only those with TDS, and this includes RINO Romney, thought there was enough there to convict. Even if there would have been a clear quid pro quo, it wouldn't have mattered in a legal sense, so the entire thing was nothing more than a propaganda tool.

LOL

Yeah, very little evidence... except for that perfect phone call where he illegally solicited a foreign national to help him with his re-election campaign.

The only problem was, he didn't do that. The Ukrainian didn't even know there were "strings" attached to the aid. How can you have a quid pro quo when the other party doesn't even know they are on the hook? Logic was never liberal's strong suit.

Umm... the law doesn't state the other party has to be aware of the solicitation. Just asking a foreign national to help with the campaign is a violation of the law.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The difference being that Trump only appeared guilty to those with TDS. OJ appeared guilty to the overwhelmingly majority of people. Even those cheering when he got off were not cheering because they thought he was innocent, but because they thought it was poetic justice given the perceived discrimination against black people in the courts.

Um, the jury found OJ innocent. Frankly, I think he did it, but the misconduct of the LAPD in this case created reasonable doubt.

Trump, on the other hand, was caught pretty much red-handed trying to get the Ukraine to smear Biden for him.

Obviously I meant the overwhelming number of people in the country thought he was guilty, not the overwhelming majority on the jury.

There was very, very little evidence against Trump, which is why there was such a partisan divide. Only those with TDS, and this includes RINO Romney, thought there was enough there to convict. Even if there would have been a clear quid pro quo, it wouldn't have mattered in a legal sense, so the entire thing was nothing more than a propaganda tool.

LOL

Yeah, very little evidence... except for that perfect phone call where he illegally solicited a foreign national to help him with his re-election campaign.

The only problem was, he didn't do that. The Ukrainian didn't even know there were "strings" attached to the aid. How can you have a quid pro quo when the other party doesn't even know they are on the hook? Logic was never liberal's strong suit.

Umm... the law doesn't state the other party has to be aware of the solicitation. Just asking a foreign national to help with the campaign is a violation of the law.

Just asking a foreign national to help with the campaign is a violation of the law.

And that's why Hillary and the DNC were charged for the fake dossier.

 

[DBA]

The difference being that Trump only appeared guilty to those with TDS. OJ appeared guilty to the overwhelmingly majority of people. Even those cheering when he got off were not cheering because they thought he was innocent, but because they thought it was poetic justice given the perceived discrimination against black people in the courts.

Um, the jury found OJ innocent. Frankly, I think he did it, but the misconduct of the LAPD in this case created reasonable doubt.

Trump, on the other hand, was caught pretty much red-handed trying to get the Ukraine to smear Biden for him.

Obviously I meant the overwhelming number of people in the country thought he was guilty, not the overwhelming majority on the jury.

There was very, very little evidence against Trump, which is why there was such a partisan divide. Only those with TDS, and this includes RINO Romney, thought there was enough there to convict. Even if there would have been a clear quid pro quo, it wouldn't have mattered in a legal sense, so the entire thing was nothing more than a propaganda tool.

LOL

Yeah, very little evidence... except for that perfect phone call where he illegally solicited a foreign national to help him with his re-election campaign.

The only problem was, he didn't do that. The Ukrainian didn't even know there were "strings" attached to the aid. How can you have a quid pro quo when the other party doesn't even know they are on the hook? Logic was never liberal's strong suit.

Umm... the law doesn't state the other party has to be aware of the solicitation. Just asking a foreign national to help with the campaign is a violation of the law.

But he didn't ask a foreign national to help with the campaign. He said they should look into the Hunter Biden situation, which is not directly related to the campaign. Also, he never said or implied this was a condition they must meet to get aid. No problem whatsoever. No way it would EVER hold up in any reasonable court, only in the partisan House.

 

[Desperado]

George Bush made a call for the nation to come together in a time of crisis.
Trump mocked him and said....where was your call for unit while I was being impeached?

Trump rips George W. Bush after he calls for unity amid coronavirus outbreak

In a three-minute video shared on Twitter on Saturday, Bush urged Americans to remember "how small our differences are in the face of this shared threat."

"In the final analysis, we are not partisan combatants. We are human beings, equally vulnerable and equally wonderful in the sight of god," Bush said. "We rise or fall together, and we are determined to rise."

Both Father Bush and Son Bush is a were Globalist and wanted not only the US but the World to come together. Fuck them and their 1000 point of light

 

[Desperado]

The difference being that Trump only appeared guilty to those with TDS. OJ appeared guilty to the overwhelmingly majority of people. Even those cheering when he got off were not cheering because they thought he was innocent, but because they thought it was poetic justice given the perceived discrimination against black people in the courts.

Um, the jury found OJ innocent. Frankly, I think he did it, but the misconduct of the LAPD in this case created reasonable doubt.

Trump, on the other hand, was caught pretty much red-handed trying to get the Ukraine to smear Biden for him.

Obviously I meant the overwhelming number of people in the country thought he was guilty, not the overwhelming majority on the jury.

There was very, very little evidence against Trump, which is why there was such a partisan divide. Only those with TDS, and this includes RINO Romney, thought there was enough there to convict. Even if there would have been a clear quid pro quo, it wouldn't have mattered in a legal sense, so the entire thing was nothing more than a propaganda tool.

LOL

Yeah, very little evidence... except for that perfect phone call where he illegally solicited a foreign national to help him with his re-election campaign.

The only problem was, he didn't do that. The Ukrainian didn't even know there were "strings" attached to the aid. How can you have a quid pro quo when the other party doesn't even know they are on the hook? Logic was never liberal's strong suit.

Umm... the law doesn't state the other party has to be aware of the solicitation. Just asking a foreign national to help with the campaign is a violation of the law.

But he didn't ask a foreign national to help with the campaign. He said they should look into the Hunter Biden situation, which is not directly related to the campaign. Also, he never said or implied this was a condition they must meet to get aid. No problem whatsoever. No way it would EVER hold up in any reasonable court, only in the partisan House.

At the time Joe Biden was not even an announced Candidate, so that argument does not hold water

 

[Faun]

The difference being that Trump only appeared guilty to those with TDS. OJ appeared guilty to the overwhelmingly majority of people. Even those cheering when he got off were not cheering because they thought he was innocent, but because they thought it was poetic justice given the perceived discrimination against black people in the courts.

Um, the jury found OJ innocent. Frankly, I think he did it, but the misconduct of the LAPD in this case created reasonable doubt.

Trump, on the other hand, was caught pretty much red-handed trying to get the Ukraine to smear Biden for him.

Obviously I meant the overwhelming number of people in the country thought he was guilty, not the overwhelming majority on the jury.

There was very, very little evidence against Trump, which is why there was such a partisan divide. Only those with TDS, and this includes RINO Romney, thought there was enough there to convict. Even if there would have been a clear quid pro quo, it wouldn't have mattered in a legal sense, so the entire thing was nothing more than a propaganda tool.

LOL

Yeah, very little evidence... except for that perfect phone call where he illegally solicited a foreign national to help him with his re-election campaign.

The only problem was, he didn't do that. The Ukrainian didn't even know there were "strings" attached to the aid. How can you have a quid pro quo when the other party doesn't even know they are on the hook? Logic was never liberal's strong suit.

Umm... the law doesn't state the other party has to be aware of the solicitation. Just asking a foreign national to help with the campaign is a violation of the law.

Just asking a foreign national to help with the campaign is a violation of the law.

And that's why Hillary and the DNC were charged for the fake dossier.

No, they weren't charged because they solicited help from an American-based firm, not from a foreign national.

Now you know. But will you learn?

 

[Faun]

The difference being that Trump only appeared guilty to those with TDS. OJ appeared guilty to the overwhelmingly majority of people. Even those cheering when he got off were not cheering because they thought he was innocent, but because they thought it was poetic justice given the perceived discrimination against black people in the courts.

Um, the jury found OJ innocent. Frankly, I think he did it, but the misconduct of the LAPD in this case created reasonable doubt.

Trump, on the other hand, was caught pretty much red-handed trying to get the Ukraine to smear Biden for him.

Obviously I meant the overwhelming number of people in the country thought he was guilty, not the overwhelming majority on the jury.

There was very, very little evidence against Trump, which is why there was such a partisan divide. Only those with TDS, and this includes RINO Romney, thought there was enough there to convict. Even if there would have been a clear quid pro quo, it wouldn't have mattered in a legal sense, so the entire thing was nothing more than a propaganda tool.

LOL

Yeah, very little evidence... except for that perfect phone call where he illegally solicited a foreign national to help him with his re-election campaign.

The only problem was, he didn't do that. The Ukrainian didn't even know there were "strings" attached to the aid. How can you have a quid pro quo when the other party doesn't even know they are on the hook? Logic was never liberal's strong suit.

Umm... the law doesn't state the other party has to be aware of the solicitation. Just asking a foreign national to help with the campaign is a violation of the law.

But he didn't ask a foreign national to help with the campaign. He said they should look into the Hunter Biden situation, which is not directly related to the campaign. Also, he never said or implied this was a condition they must meet to get aid. No problem whatsoever. No way it would EVER hold up in any reasonable court, only in the partisan House.

How sad. That you have to lie reveals the vacuity of your position. Of course Impeached Trump asked a foreign national to look into Joe Biden.

"Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it..."

... when did Hunter Biden "stop the prosecution?"

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The difference being that Trump only appeared guilty to those with TDS. OJ appeared guilty to the overwhelmingly majority of people. Even those cheering when he got off were not cheering because they thought he was innocent, but because they thought it was poetic justice given the perceived discrimination against black people in the courts.

Um, the jury found OJ innocent. Frankly, I think he did it, but the misconduct of the LAPD in this case created reasonable doubt.

Trump, on the other hand, was caught pretty much red-handed trying to get the Ukraine to smear Biden for him.

Obviously I meant the overwhelming number of people in the country thought he was guilty, not the overwhelming majority on the jury.

There was very, very little evidence against Trump, which is why there was such a partisan divide. Only those with TDS, and this includes RINO Romney, thought there was enough there to convict. Even if there would have been a clear quid pro quo, it wouldn't have mattered in a legal sense, so the entire thing was nothing more than a propaganda tool.

LOL

Yeah, very little evidence... except for that perfect phone call where he illegally solicited a foreign national to help him with his re-election campaign.

The only problem was, he didn't do that. The Ukrainian didn't even know there were "strings" attached to the aid. How can you have a quid pro quo when the other party doesn't even know they are on the hook? Logic was never liberal's strong suit.

Umm... the law doesn't state the other party has to be aware of the solicitation. Just asking a foreign national to help with the campaign is a violation of the law.

Just asking a foreign national to help with the campaign is a violation of the law.

And that's why Hillary and the DNC were charged for the fake dossier.

No, they weren't charged because they solicited help from an American-based firm, not from a foreign national.

Now you know. But will you learn?

Some foreigners are more equal than others, eh?

 

[Faun]

At the time Joe Biden was not even an announced Candidate, so that argument does not hold water

^^^ More lies from the lyin' right.

04/29/2019 = Biden announces candidacy
07/25/2019 = Impeached Trump solicits a foreign leader to investigate Biden

So tell me, lyin' rightie... which of those dates do you think came first...?

 

[Faun]

The difference being that Trump only appeared guilty to those with TDS. OJ appeared guilty to the overwhelmingly majority of people. Even those cheering when he got off were not cheering because they thought he was innocent, but because they thought it was poetic justice given the perceived discrimination against black people in the courts.

Um, the jury found OJ innocent. Frankly, I think he did it, but the misconduct of the LAPD in this case created reasonable doubt.

Trump, on the other hand, was caught pretty much red-handed trying to get the Ukraine to smear Biden for him.

Obviously I meant the overwhelming number of people in the country thought he was guilty, not the overwhelming majority on the jury.

There was very, very little evidence against Trump, which is why there was such a partisan divide. Only those with TDS, and this includes RINO Romney, thought there was enough there to convict. Even if there would have been a clear quid pro quo, it wouldn't have mattered in a legal sense, so the entire thing was nothing more than a propaganda tool.

LOL

Yeah, very little evidence... except for that perfect phone call where he illegally solicited a foreign national to help him with his re-election campaign.

The only problem was, he didn't do that. The Ukrainian didn't even know there were "strings" attached to the aid. How can you have a quid pro quo when the other party doesn't even know they are on the hook? Logic was never liberal's strong suit.

Umm... the law doesn't state the other party has to be aware of the solicitation. Just asking a foreign national to help with the campaign is a violation of the law.

Just asking a foreign national to help with the campaign is a violation of the law.

And that's why Hillary and the DNC were charged for the fake dossier.

No, they weren't charged because they solicited help from an American-based firm, not from a foreign national.

Now you know. But will you learn?

Some foreigners are more equal than others, eh?

Regrettably, you didn't learn.

Fusion GPS, the research firm hired by Hillary, the DNC, and the Free Beacon, is not a foreign corporation.

 

[Faun]

George Bush made a call for the nation to come together in a time of crisis.
Trump mocked him and said....where was your call for unit while I was being impeached?

Trump rips George W. Bush after he calls for unity amid coronavirus outbreak

In a three-minute video shared on Twitter on Saturday, Bush urged Americans to remember "how small our differences are in the face of this shared threat."

"In the final analysis, we are not partisan combatants. We are human beings, equally vulnerable and equally wonderful in the sight of god," Bush said. "We rise or fall together, and we are determined to rise."

Both Father Bush and Son Bush is a were Globalist and wanted not only the US but the World to come together. Fuck them and their 1000 point of light

You voted for them, didn't ya?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The difference being that Trump only appeared guilty to those with TDS. OJ appeared guilty to the overwhelmingly majority of people. Even those cheering when he got off were not cheering because they thought he was innocent, but because they thought it was poetic justice given the perceived discrimination against black people in the courts.

Um, the jury found OJ innocent. Frankly, I think he did it, but the misconduct of the LAPD in this case created reasonable doubt.

Trump, on the other hand, was caught pretty much red-handed trying to get the Ukraine to smear Biden for him.

Obviously I meant the overwhelming number of people in the country thought he was guilty, not the overwhelming majority on the jury.

There was very, very little evidence against Trump, which is why there was such a partisan divide. Only those with TDS, and this includes RINO Romney, thought there was enough there to convict. Even if there would have been a clear quid pro quo, it wouldn't have mattered in a legal sense, so the entire thing was nothing more than a propaganda tool.

LOL

Yeah, very little evidence... except for that perfect phone call where he illegally solicited a foreign national to help him with his re-election campaign.

The only problem was, he didn't do that. The Ukrainian didn't even know there were "strings" attached to the aid. How can you have a quid pro quo when the other party doesn't even know they are on the hook? Logic was never liberal's strong suit.

Umm... the law doesn't state the other party has to be aware of the solicitation. Just asking a foreign national to help with the campaign is a violation of the law.

Just asking a foreign national to help with the campaign is a violation of the law.

And that's why Hillary and the DNC were charged for the fake dossier.

No, they weren't charged because they solicited help from an American-based firm, not from a foreign national.

Now you know. But will you learn?

Some foreigners are more equal than others, eh?

Regrettably, you didn't learn.

Fusion GPS, the research firm hired by Hillary, the DNC, and the Free Beacon, is not a foreign corporation.

Foreign help is illegal, unless you launder it.

Gotcha.

 

[Weatherman2020]

✔


.@PeteHegseth “Oh bye the way, I appreciate the message from former President Bush, but where was he during Impeachment calling for putting partisanship aside.” @foxandfriends He was nowhere to be found in speaking up against the greatest Hoax in American history!

Yep, Trump is right again. Where was he while Democrats fabricated lies to attempt a coup?

 

[EvilCat Breath]

The difference being that Trump only appeared guilty to those with TDS. OJ appeared guilty to the overwhelmingly majority of people. Even those cheering when he got off were not cheering because they thought he was innocent, but because they thought it was poetic justice given the perceived discrimination against black people in the courts.

Um, the jury found OJ innocent. Frankly, I think he did it, but the misconduct of the LAPD in this case created reasonable doubt.

Trump, on the other hand, was caught pretty much red-handed trying to get the Ukraine to smear Biden for him.

Obviously I meant the overwhelming number of people in the country thought he was guilty, not the overwhelming majority on the jury.

There was very, very little evidence against Trump, which is why there was such a partisan divide. Only those with TDS, and this includes RINO Romney, thought there was enough there to convict. Even if there would have been a clear quid pro quo, it wouldn't have mattered in a legal sense, so the entire thing was nothing more than a propaganda tool.

LOL

Yeah, very little evidence... except for that perfect phone call where he illegally solicited a foreign national to help him with his re-election campaign.

The only problem was, he didn't do that. The Ukrainian didn't even know there were "strings" attached to the aid. How can you have a quid pro quo when the other party doesn't even know they are on the hook? Logic was never liberal's strong suit.

Umm... the law doesn't state the other party has to be aware of the solicitation. Just asking a foreign national to help with the campaign is a violation of the law.

No one asked a foreign national to help with a campaign.

 

[Faun]

The difference being that Trump only appeared guilty to those with TDS. OJ appeared guilty to the overwhelmingly majority of people. Even those cheering when he got off were not cheering because they thought he was innocent, but because they thought it was poetic justice given the perceived discrimination against black people in the courts.

Um, the jury found OJ innocent. Frankly, I think he did it, but the misconduct of the LAPD in this case created reasonable doubt.

Trump, on the other hand, was caught pretty much red-handed trying to get the Ukraine to smear Biden for him.

Obviously I meant the overwhelming number of people in the country thought he was guilty, not the overwhelming majority on the jury.

There was very, very little evidence against Trump, which is why there was such a partisan divide. Only those with TDS, and this includes RINO Romney, thought there was enough there to convict. Even if there would have been a clear quid pro quo, it wouldn't have mattered in a legal sense, so the entire thing was nothing more than a propaganda tool.

LOL

Yeah, very little evidence... except for that perfect phone call where he illegally solicited a foreign national to help him with his re-election campaign.

The only problem was, he didn't do that. The Ukrainian didn't even know there were "strings" attached to the aid. How can you have a quid pro quo when the other party doesn't even know they are on the hook? Logic was never liberal's strong suit.

Umm... the law doesn't state the other party has to be aware of the solicitation. Just asking a foreign national to help with the campaign is a violation of the law.

Just asking a foreign national to help with the campaign is a violation of the law.

And that's why Hillary and the DNC were charged for the fake dossier.

No, they weren't charged because they solicited help from an American-based firm, not from a foreign national.

Now you know. But will you learn?

Some foreigners are more equal than others, eh?

Regrettably, you didn't learn.

Fusion GPS, the research firm hired by Hillary, the DNC, and the Free Beacon, is not a foreign corporation.

Foreign help is illegal, unless you launder it.

Gotcha.

Even that may not be legal. Of course, you'd have to prove Hillary or the DNC were involved with, or at least aware of, Fusion GPS's hiring of a foreign national.