IF Biden wins, will the US come together, or continue the partisan warfare? (poll)

[Cecilie1200]

Ya know, I want to be magnanimous. I want to offer the olive branch...but really

Look what you people are saying

What you see here is no less hostile that what the right has seen for 4 years straight.

Longer than that, to tell the truth.

 

[Cecilie1200]

When does an embryo become human life?

When the mother says so.

If she wants it, "The Baby is due in September".

If she doesn't want it, "I have to take care of that thing on Tuesday".

Happy to clear that up for you.

What gives the mother the ability to determine when its a human? Does she have some scientific background that gives her that insight? Or is it just how she "feels"?

Thats not science. I mean, if that's your science, then someone else should be able to also determine when human life begins..like at conception.

Sounds kinda like the left wants to be able to have it both ways, maybe to shed guilt if they decide on abortion. "Ahh, it was just tissue, no big deal"

Tell you what, if its just "tissue" and not life, then I hope nobody on the left uses insurance to help keep that "thing" healthy. I mean, health insurance is for "people", not "things". My health insurance won't pay for a new TV for me, why should it pay for you have a "thing"?

Be a little realistic. The more democrat abortions the fewer democrats.

Nah, because children of lunatic leftists don't necessarily grow up to be lunatic leftists themselves.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

It is time, past time really, to start compiling a list of communists active in the US. Bring back McCarthy hearings.

Wow.

That was a pathetic time in our history when we abandoned any semblance of the idea of freedom whatsoever. You want to go back to that? The McCarthy hearings were something that would fit right in with Soviet Russia, not the USA and certainly counter to freedom in every possible meaning of the term.

The McCarthy hearings were certainly as American as they come. If we had them today we would be eliminating the communists active in government. Odd that you concern yourself with worrying about the Soviet Union when the Communists are already asking who supported Trump.

Odd that you think it is 'American' to persecute people for thought crime - just like the communists you despise.

I know, we should open gulags for those pesky political dissidents next.

You and every other communist democrat.

 

[healthmyths]

Should we bury the hatchet, or turn things up a partisan notch or two?

The propagandists on both sides will continue to herd the rubes toward the extremes.

Can you even picture Hannity trying to mend fences?

Or Rachel Madow, Wolfe Blitzer, or these people?

 

[kyzr]

1. The Hillary campaign used Russian disinformation to provide "dirt" on Trump, duh. Google it. (Trump was a non-story too)

She didn't use the dossier at all, silly. It was published on Jan 10, 2017.

These Reports Allege Trump Has Deep Ties To Russia

A dossier, compiled by a person who has claimed to be a former British intelligence official, alleges Russia has compromising information on Trump. The allegations are unverified, and the report contains errors.

www.buzzfeednews.com

And if you wanted this investigated for any reason, the Trump lead DoJ should have either mandated it as part of the Mueller investigation (they didn't) or done their own investigation because there was no need for a special prosecutor to be appointed for this matter. Although I do remember Trump promising to appoint a special prosecutor to look into Clinton. At the end of the day, the only fault that this didn't happen rests solely with Trump and his appointees.

2. Google how Comey setup Flynn for a perjury trap, that is common knowledge. Flynn plead guilty but then retracted it.

"Google it" is nonsense. A perjury trap is different than what you think. Start here:

1756. Perjury Cases -- Special Problems And Defenses -- Perjury Trap

www.justice.gov

A perjury trap is when information is illegally obtained. There was nothing illegal about the FBI agents asking Flynn a question they already knew the answer to. In fact, this happens in investigations all the time with law enforcement as a means to determine a person's willingness to lie, something that increases suspicion of the person.

3. Democrats in the House abused their power, no Republicans voted for a non-crime impeachment.

Nope. The founders knew that laws did not apply in the traditional sense to presidents. The language used in the constitution is extremely deliberate and if you consider yourself an originalist, you know that impeachment stating "high crimes" indicates a crime that can be only committed by a high official. Use of the office of president to further personal political gain falls under that category.

The Common Misconception About ‘High Crimes and Misdemeanors’

The constitutional standard for impeachment is different from what’s at play in a regular criminal trial.

www.theatlantic.com

4. Provide credible links proving your assertions, not just your "opinion".

Fair enough.

1. The FBI used the dossier to justify the illegal FBI spying on Trump

The news media’s Steele dossier scandal is even worse than you thought

2. Comey bragged that he setup Flynn while the WH was disorganized. There was no other reason to send agents there, and the agents' notes prove it was a setup.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/

3. The fact that no Republican House members supported the impeachment proves that the legal phone call did not reach the threshold for impeachment, anymore than Biden's extortion video to protect Hunter's $83,000 a month scam. The Trump impeachment was a partisan smear, nothing more.

1. Clinton isn’t the FBI. What exactly is the investigation for if she never used it but someone whom she has no control of did?

2. All Flynn had to do was tell the truth. How could that be a setup?

3. The legal threshold for an impeachment is a majority vote in the House. There is no legal threshold that it be supported by Republicans. You’re making things up.

1. You're off track on this issue. My point is that the Mueller Hoax was to investigate Russian interference into the 2016 election, and that morphed into Russian collusion by Trump. No Trump collusion was found, but the investigation didn't even look into the obvious collusion by the Hillary campaign, and that the bogus dossier was illegally used by the FBI. Mueller was just another partisan hoax by radical democrat lawyers, nothing more.
2. I disagree with the FBI setting up perjury traps as their notes prove they did.
3. OK, if impeachment only needs a majority vote in the House, impeachment has no value, since the senate ignores it. It should be a crime serious enough to garner bi-partisan support or its just a waste of valuable legislative time. I'd rather have congress solving serious problems.

1. Post a credible link to your assertion that Mueller was to investigate Russian interference.

2. One, as my credible link showed, it wasn’t a perjury trap. Two, whether you like it or not, it is not legal to lie to the FBI.

3. Impeachment has a value. It is one of the only ways to oversee the executive.

1. There are many links that prove my point, just google the Mueller Investigation

Mueller special counsel investigation - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

2. The FBI interview of Flynn was a perjury trap, plain and simple

Michael Flynn's lawyers seize on note showing how FBI official approached key interview in White House

Michael Flynn's attorneys made public on Wednesday a handwritten note from Bill Priestap, the then-counterintelligence director at the FBI, that mused how agents should approach a critical interview with President Donald Trump's first national security adviser in the White House in January 2017...

www.cnn.com

3. Partisan impeachments are a waste of time. They need bi-partisan support to be effective, especially in the senate where 67 votes are needed.

1. The link provided disproves your. Read the memo signed by Rosenstein. Paragraph b, line 1. Read it and tell me what you see. I’d explain it to you but I really think you need to read it yourself.

2. I’ve given you a credible link about what a perjury trap is. It shows that Flynn’s interview is not a perjury trap. Why ask for links if you’re going to ignore them?

3. Oversight is not a waste of time.

1. You asked for proof that Mueller was to investigate Russian interference, the first line says:
The Special Counsel investigation was an investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections...
Can't find any Rosenstein memo. What should I see?

2. When the FBI says "in writing" that they are after a perjury trap, you need to believe them. Your "evidence" is not as credible as the FBI's own notes.

3. Finally agree, oversight means the punishment fits the crime, censure was more appropriate than impeachment.

1. The Rosenstein memo was in your link you provided. It’s generally speaking a good idea to read the links you provide because it’s awfully embarrassing when they prove you wrong. What are you looking for? The Rosenstein memo specifically says to look for any links between Trump and Russian interference in the election.

2. They never said “in writing” they were going for a perjury trap. You still don’t know what a perjury trap is.

3. Agree to disagree

1. Rosenstein's original memo proves I'm right

https://www.justice.gov/opa/press-release/file/967231/download

"By virtue of the authority vested in me as Acting Attorney General, including 28 U.S.C.§§ 509, 510, and 515, in order to discharge my responsibility to provide supervision andmanagement of the Department of Justice, and to ensure a full and thorough investigation of the R ussian government's efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election, I hereby order as follows: "

2. FBI notes prove a perjury trap was the objective of the Flynn interview.

Michael Flynn's lawyers seize on note showing how FBI official approached key interview in White House

Michael Flynn's attorneys made public on Wednesday a handwritten note from Bill Priestap, the then-counterintelligence director at the FBI, that mused how agents should approach a critical interview with President Donald Trump's first national security adviser in the White House in January 2017...

www.cnn.com

"What's our goal? Truth/Admission or to get him to lie, so we can prosecute him or get him fired?" Priestap wrote. "If we get him to admit to breaking the Logan Act, give facts to DOJ & have them decide. Or, if he initially lies, then we present him [redacted] & he admits it, document for DOJ, & let them decide how to address it."

1. You should keep reading. The part that proves you wrong is below. The part you quoted does not.

2. And that’s not what a perjury trap is. Thanks for trying.

1. The part I referenced proves I'm right. If not, copy/paste the part you like here:_______
2. An FBI setup, no matter what you call it.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Biden, like Obama, will reach out to the GOP MOC in an attempt to get the work done.

He understands policy and history. That makes him better prepared than Trump could ever be.

Will McConnell play ball?

Biden, like Obama, will tell gullible idiots like you that he's "reaching out" when he's actually saying, "Do it my way or else", and you'll eagerly run around making a fool of yourself, telling people who AREN'T gullible idiots how "bipartisan" and "conciliatory" he's being. And they'll laugh at you and make fun of you, just like always.

Biden barely understands where and who he is, unless his wife is there mouthing the words at him from off-screen.

I devoutly hope McConnell not only doesn't play ball, but tells Grandpa Badfinger to shove it up his wrinkled ass. You evil, scum-sucking leftists have nothing we want, and I'm perfectly fine with gridlocking right where we are for the next four years while you scream and tantrum about how your stolen "victory" is turning to shit in your hands.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

When does an embryo become human life?

When the mother says so.

If she wants it, "The Baby is due in September".

If she doesn't want it, "I have to take care of that thing on Tuesday".

Happy to clear that up for you.

What gives the mother the ability to determine when its a human? Does she have some scientific background that gives her that insight? Or is it just how she "feels"?

Thats not science. I mean, if that's your science, then someone else should be able to also determine when human life begins..like at conception.

Sounds kinda like the left wants to be able to have it both ways, maybe to shed guilt if they decide on abortion. "Ahh, it was just tissue, no big deal"

Tell you what, if its just "tissue" and not life, then I hope nobody on the left uses insurance to help keep that "thing" healthy. I mean, health insurance is for "people", not "things". My health insurance won't pay for a new TV for me, why should it pay for you have a "thing"?

Be a little realistic. The more democrat abortions the fewer democrats.

Nah, because children of lunatic leftists don't necessarily grow up to be lunatic leftists themselves.

Mostly yes they do. That's how we got generational welfare and a prison project to house fathers and sons together.

 

[Cecilie1200]

It is time, past time really, to start compiling a list of communists active in the US. Bring back McCarthy hearings.

Wow.

That was a pathetic time in our history when we abandoned any semblance of the idea of freedom whatsoever. You want to go back to that? The McCarthy hearings were something that would fit right in with Soviet Russia, not the USA and certainly counter to freedom in every possible meaning of the term.

The McCarthy hearings were certainly as American as they come. If we had them today we would be eliminating the communists active in government. Odd that you concern yourself with worrying about the Soviet Union when the Communists are already asking who supported Trump.

Odd that you think it is 'American' to persecute people for thought crime - just like the communists you despise.

I know, we should open gulags for those pesky political dissidents next.

It wouldn't be odd if you actually knew what you were talking about, rather than confidently spouting off on "everyone knows" talking points.

 

[BluesLegend]

Since Republicans are aggressively opposed to the Democrats tax increases, open borders, climate change BS, and other socialist nonsense there will be NO coming together with Democrats.

 

[Cecilie1200]

When does an embryo become human life?

When the mother says so.

If she wants it, "The Baby is due in September".

If she doesn't want it, "I have to take care of that thing on Tuesday".

Happy to clear that up for you.

What gives the mother the ability to determine when its a human? Does she have some scientific background that gives her that insight? Or is it just how she "feels"?

Thats not science. I mean, if that's your science, then someone else should be able to also determine when human life begins..like at conception.

Sounds kinda like the left wants to be able to have it both ways, maybe to shed guilt if they decide on abortion. "Ahh, it was just tissue, no big deal"

Tell you what, if its just "tissue" and not life, then I hope nobody on the left uses insurance to help keep that "thing" healthy. I mean, health insurance is for "people", not "things". My health insurance won't pay for a new TV for me, why should it pay for you have a "thing"?

Be a little realistic. The more democrat abortions the fewer democrats.

Nah, because children of lunatic leftists don't necessarily grow up to be lunatic leftists themselves.

Mostly yes they do. That's how we got generational welfare and a prison project to house fathers and sons together.

I didn't bother to read past your first word, because it proves my point and makes the rest of the post irrelevant.

Leftist fools turn up in Republican families, and conservatives turn up in families of brain-dead leftists. And trying to be cavalier about abortion for the sake of politics is repugnant.

 

[jackflash]

Besides, Trump WILL NOT CONCEDE!!
And rightfully so.

Prez Trump will not settle for a decision as he wants an outright KO. It's starting to look bad for the statist left despite Giuliani dropping the ball with that first witness.

 

[Cecilie1200]

1. In 2016 Trump won, and became president.
2. The democrats and the MSM never accepted Trump's win.
3. The democrats did everything in their power, including an abuse of power to impeach Trump.
4. Maxine Waters and other democrats even went as far as to threaten Trump's people with harassment at restaurants and their homes.
5. Democrats never gave Trump the respect he earned, even to the point of Nancy tearing up her copy of the State of the Union speech.
6. Democrats started this partisan warfare, and they should reap what they sow.

Now Biden and the democrats, and probably even the RINOs want to play nice, can't we all get along?
We're one people, we are all US citizens, its just that some of us are more equal than others.

Should we bury the hatchet, or turn things up a partisan notch or two?

Your sequence of events is way off and your poll is outdated.

Now that Joe Biden is the next president whether the country pull together or not depends largely on the RWNJ media.

I have very slight hopes there.

Slight would be to many.

You'll get to feel it now.

Try to govern with us constantly in your face and holding investigations.

Fuck you lefties.

It's going to be on for four years.

Well, one hopes. I always worry that the Republicans will go back to not having a complete set of testicles among them, and worrying more about "polite, collegial gentility" than they do about winning anything.

 

[colfax_m]

1. The part I referenced proves I'm right. If not, copy/paste the part you like here:_______
2. An FBI setup, no matter what you call it.

1. Although we referenced the other memo, let me shift a little bit to something more relevant. The actual memo that lays out his mandate is here:

https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000171-ebc4-d2fd-a9f5-efe5ebf00000

This was kept secret so that they wouldn't reveal specifics about the investigation to the public. As you can see, Mueller was constrained by Rosenstein. His mandate was quite specific.

2. Flynn did not have to lie. No one made him. He chose to do so for his own reasons. He was not coerced, cajoled or induced. They asked a question. Flynn lied. Period. End of story.

 

[kyzr]

1. The part I referenced proves I'm right. If not, copy/paste the part you like here:_______
2. An FBI setup, no matter what you call it.

1. Although we referenced the other memo, let me shift a little bit to something more relevant. The actual memo that lays out his mandate is here:

https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000171-ebc4-d2fd-a9f5-efe5ebf00000

This was kept secret so that they wouldn't reveal specifics about the investigation to the public. As you can see, Mueller was constrained by Rosenstein. His mandate was quite specific.

2. Flynn did not have to lie. No one made him. He chose to do so for his own reasons. He was not coerced, cajoled or induced. They asked a question. Flynn lied. Period. End of story.

1. Why would Rosenstein only look at one candidate and not the other? Partisan bullshit. The original memo specified "Russian interference", they knew about FusionGPS and their connection to Russians, but just wanted to smear Trump.
2. Flynn didn't lie, the interviewer notes said so, but Comey wanted Flynn's ass. More total bullshit. Don't make me list all the times democrats lie under oath and nothing happens.

Flynn says new FBI notes show misconduct led to criminal charge

Flynn says new evidence shows the FBI agents who interviewed him didn’t think he was lying, but helped cook up a criminal case against him anyway

www.detroitnews.com

 

[Cecilie1200]

I don’t think Biden’s term alone will bring the country together but I do think his term could be the start of it in some ways.

Really? Based on what? What exactly has Biden EVER said or done - or anyone from his inner circle, for that matter - that you imagine could represent common ground with Republicans/conservatives? How, precisely, do you expect "Biden's term alone" to be at all unifying?

I said that it could be the start, not that his term alone would be unifying. With the slim majority that the democrats have in the house and the slim majority that the republicans have in the senate his administration will have to compromise and govern in a more moderate way for anything to be accomplished in the next two years. If that happens then you could see some potential cooperation which could lead to more moderate voices being heard instead of the extremes on both sides. Of course for that to happen the far left minority within the Democratic Party will have to temper their demands and also the far right minority that will not want to give up their dedication to Trump will need to do the same or else both groups will become the pariahs of their parties and be replaced in two years by even more moderate voices that are tired of the extreme partisanship.

The reason why I say Biden's term could help lead to this is because he is much less divisive than Trump and so even if he isn't well liked he probably wouldn't be nearly as inflammatory and divisive as another four years of Trump would have been in my personal opinion. In the last four years Trump has rarely, if ever, talked about unity. Biden already did that and he hasn't even taken office yet. It's a start.

That's an awful lot of typing to answer the questions you wish I was asking, rather than the ones I asked.

And that whole "Biden is less divisive than Trump" canard? It wasn't Trump and his inner circle who spent months ignoring and making excuses for rioters and looters, so if you want to tell me how "Trump tweets mean things!" is more divisive than that, please have at it. I can use a good laugh.

Biden has nothing to offer conservatives. He has never once pretended that he has anything to offer us, or WANTS to have anything to offer us, beyond telling us how we should learn to think and act the way he tells us to. The only "unity" Biden and the Democrats are ever interested in is the "unity" of slaves quietly accepting their chains and allowing their overlords to rule uncontested.

And by the way, if this is the first time in the last four years that you've talked about "now's the time for unity and healing", then YOU are the one who has divided and wounded the country, not Trump.

In short, my answer is a quote from Hillary Clinton: "You cannot be civil with a political party that wants to destroy what you stand for, what you care about."

 

[BS Filter]

Joe Biden just said that wearing a mask will help stop the spread of covid. Love that guy, what a thoughtful smart President he is going to be.

 

[westwall]

1. In 2016 Trump won, and became president.
2. The democrats and the MSM never accepted Trump's win.
3. The democrats did everything in their power, including an abuse of power to impeach Trump.
4. Maxine Waters and other democrats even went as far as to threaten Trump's people with harassment at restaurants and their homes.
5. Democrats never gave Trump the respect he earned, even to the point of Nancy tearing up her copy of the State of the Union speech.
6. Democrats started this partisan warfare, and they should reap what they sow.

Now Biden and the democrats, and probably even the RINOs want to play nice, can't we all get along?
We're one people, we are all US citizens, its just that some of us are more equal than others.

Should we bury the hatchet, or turn things up a partisan notch or two?

From what I am hearing this is going to end with corruption charges for the Democrats conspiring to steal the election. Or all out war.

I went to the gun show in Gardnerville on Saturday and the people are preparing for outright war.

It's going to get very ugly I fear.

 

[BS Filter]

1. In 2016 Trump won, and became president.
2. The democrats and the MSM never accepted Trump's win.
3. The democrats did everything in their power, including an abuse of power to impeach Trump.
4. Maxine Waters and other democrats even went as far as to threaten Trump's people with harassment at restaurants and their homes.
5. Democrats never gave Trump the respect he earned, even to the point of Nancy tearing up her copy of the State of the Union speech.
6. Democrats started this partisan warfare, and they should reap what they sow.

Now Biden and the democrats, and probably even the RINOs want to play nice, can't we all get along?
We're one people, we are all US citizens, its just that some of us are more equal than others.

Should we bury the hatchet, or turn things up a partisan notch or two?

From what I am hearing this is going to end with corruption charges for the Democrats conspiring to steal the election. Or all out war.

I went to the gun show in Gardnerville on Saturday and the people are preparing for outright war.

It's going to get very ugly I fear.

I sure hope so. I have some new guns to try out.

 

[colfax_m]

1. Why would Rosenstein only look at one candidate and not the other? Partisan bullshit. The original memo specified "Russian interference", they knew about FusionGPS and their connection to Russians, but just wanted to smear Trump.
2. Flynn didn't lie, the interviewer notes said so, but Comey wanted Flynn's ass. More total bullshit. Don't make me list all the times democrats lie under oath and nothing happens.

1. Ask Rosenstein. He was, after all, appointed by Trump, so hard to blame Democrats for his behavior. The original memo did not specify all Russian interference but clearly delineated who and what they were to investigate. There was nothing preventing Rosenstein or anyone else from investigating FusionGPS, and I suspect the reason being is because there's nothing to investigate. As we discussed, the Steele Dossier could hardly be considered election interference because it was not disclosed until after the election.

2. Flynn definitely lied. The interviewer notes don't say whether they think he lied or not. They say what he said, and what he said was a lie. It is not up to the FBI agents to determine if Flynn lied. It's for prosecutors.

 

[kyzr]

1. Why would Rosenstein only look at one candidate and not the other? Partisan bullshit. The original memo specified "Russian interference", they knew about FusionGPS and their connection to Russians, but just wanted to smear Trump.
2. Flynn didn't lie, the interviewer notes said so, but Comey wanted Flynn's ass. More total bullshit. Don't make me list all the times democrats lie under oath and nothing happens.

1. Ask Rosenstein. He was, after all, appointed by Trump, so hard to blame Democrats for his behavior. The original memo did not specify all Russian interference but clearly delineated who and what they were to investigate. There was nothing preventing Rosenstein or anyone else from investigating FusionGPS, and I suspect the reason being is because there's nothing to investigate. As we discussed, the Steele Dossier could hardly be considered election interference because it was not disclosed until after the election.

2. Flynn definitely lied. The interviewer notes don't say whether they think he lied or not. They say what he said, and what he said was a lie. It is not up to the FBI agents to determine if Flynn lied. It's for prosecutors.

1. What was the purpose of the Mueller Investigation? Hint: to smear Trump, there was no collusion except by Clinton/DNC.
2. What was the purpose of interviewing Flynn? Hint: to smear Trump and take Flynn off the board.

There were no real national security or criminal issues based on legitimate evidence, no "crime" other than ticky-tack process crimes. Remember Biden even suggested prosecuting Flynn using the "Logan Act"?
These were political smears by Obama appointees and/or the deep state who plain hate Trump.