Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
The article cited in the OP takes the tack that this good for Trump because of the attention it draws, but doesn't mention much of anything about illegal attacks.
The article cited in the OP takes the tack that this good for Trump because of the attention it draws, but doesn't mention much of anything about illegal attacks.
Who cares if it is 'good for Trump or not'? At hand is the issue of the abuse of power for a President / elected official using his or her power and position to attack a US citizen, who does not have that same ability to defend themselves, in an attempt to partisanly effect the outcome of an election. Again, abuse of power.
nope merely pointing out freedom of speech isn't exactly free and it has limitations. I should have figured you wouldn't get that, since you have no objectivity. you're just a libturd walking around using stupid daily.Don't see how your citation applies to the situation. Is Trump out there planting bmbs?but wait, one doesn't just get freedom of speech, there are limitations right? The whole can't yell bmb thingy?The president has freedom of speech to. He isn't doing anything but talking.Evidently Obama d(o)es because he is President and abusing his power to attack a US citizen.Thin skin? Who's got thinner than Trump?
Obama is not 'talking'. He is attacking a US citizen, and using his position and power to do so!The president has freedom of speech to. He isn't doing anything but talking.
As pointed out, instead of doing his job Harry Reid abused his power and position by partisanly attacking a US citizen in a successful attempt to effect a political election, later even admitting that he slandered and lied about Romney. His excuse / justification: 'It worked, didn't it?!'
Obama is abusing his power and position to partisanly attack a US citizen in an attempt to sway a political federal election. Sorry, but that goes beyond simply 'exercising one's freedom of speech'. That's an abuse of power.
Your limitation on the president would muzzle him. That isn't intended either.merely pointing out freedom of speech isn't exactly free and it has limitations. I should have figured you wouldn't get that, since you have no objectivity. you're just a libturd walking around using stupid daily.
he needs to watch the line he walks though correct?Your limitation on the president would muzzle him. That isn't intended either.merely pointing out freedom of speech isn't exactly free and it has limitations. I should have figured you wouldn't get that, since you have no objectivity. you're just a libturd walking around using stupid daily.
