Trump on JRE

[Del.]

Kelly was chief of staff and in a position to possibly advise Trump. The acting chief of staff, especially an officer, will not publicly criticize the President.

A person with military experience will know that is true.

So he put protocol over the threat to democracy?

[Smit]

So tell me you know nothing about the military without telling me you know nothing about the military.

[Del.]

So tell me you know nothing about the military without telling me you know nothing about the military.

I understand your point. It doesn't hold water. If Trump was a threat it was his duty to come forward with it regardless of military code. After all it was to save the country from the threat of Trump he now claims. He also swore an oath to the constitution.

[RobertELee]

So tell me you know nothing about the military without telling me you know nothing about the military.

Whistleblowers are allowed to come forward without threat of retaliation

[Smit]

That's what he's doing. You don't seem to like it.

I can't help you. 

[mowens]

4 years after Trump's presidency and just before elections. Did it take him that long to work up the courage?

I believe, as a general rule, anything new said within 2 or 3 weeks of an election can be ignored.

[RobertELee]

That's what he's doing. You don't seem to like it.

I can't help you. 

They've had 5 years, now it's all of a sudden important...

Mayhaps the check finally cleared.

[Jeff]

4 years after Trump's presidency and just before elections. Did it take him that long to work up the courage?

I believe, as a general rule, anything new said within 2 or 3 weeks of an election can be ignored.

They haven't said anything new about Trump in 8 years. Hitler Hitler Hitler!

[Jim at Gentex]

***BREAKING*** Last week the dems tried keeping non-citizens on the voter rolls in Virginia, this week the Supreme Court upheld Virginias decision to purge the non-citizens. Hows that for constitutional?

btw...here's the AP headline on that:
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/supreme-court-s-conservative-justices-allow-virginia-to-resume-its-purge-of-voter-registrations/ar-AA1tcHTn?rc=1&ocid=winp1taskbar&cvid=bd2863a86c3d46e780dbe08154b11dbe&ei=28

Notice how the supposedly unbiased 'journalists' made sure they included the words 'conservative justices' rather than just saying "Supreme Court Allows..."

No spin there, eh? 

I understand your point. It doesn't hold water. If Trump was a threat it was his duty to come forward with it regardless of military code. After all it was to save the country from the threat of Trump he now claims. He also swore an oath to the constitution.

Trump was only a threat after Kelly got butthurt because his boss disagreed with him and they parted ways.
No more, no less.

[Jim at Gentex]

Also have to ask if anyone noticed that Kamala had a rally in Washington DC yesterday.

Think about that for a second.
She NEEDS to win in the battleground states, so where does she waste her time, energy, and money?

Washington DC, which is full-on NINETY TWO PERCENT DEMOCRAT. 
Wow.
Talk about insecure!

I guess she wanted the comfort of a rally where she knew she wouldn't hear any booing or heckling.

The desperation behind having a rally there is obvious.
That was done purely for her own fee-fees, not to gain her a single vote in a slam-dunk district that she will win automatically.

Pathetic thin-skinned loser. 

[RobertELee]

Also have to ask if anyone noticed that Kamala had a rally in Washington DC yesterday.

Think about that for a second.
She NEEDS to win in the battleground states, so where does she waste her time, energy, and money?

Washington DC, which is full-on NINETY TWO PERCENT DEMOCRAT. 
Wow.
Talk about insecure!

I guess she wanted the comfort of a rally where she knew she wouldn't hear any booing or heckling.

The desperation behind having a rally there is obvious.
That was done purely for her own fee-fees, not to gain her a single vote in a slam-dunk district that she will win automatically.

Pathetic thin-skinned loser. 

And she did it all right in front of her bosses house and didn't even invite him.

[Smit]

4 years after Trump's presidency and just before elections. Did it take him that long to work up the courage?

I believe, as a general rule, anything new said within 2 or 3 weeks of an election can be ignored.

If you are truly interested,  google Kelly's criticisms of Trump over the years. You will find it didn't start 4 years after he left.

Out of curiosity I will ask if you also ignore everything from the righties 2 or 3 weeks before the election?

[Incogneeto]

And she did it all right in front of her bosses house and didn't even invite him.

He was busy taking out The "GARBAGE".

[mowens]

If you are truly interested,  google Kelly's criticisms of Trump over the years. You will find it didn't start 4 years after he left.

Out of curiosity I will ask if you also ignore everything from the righties 2 or 3 weeks before the election?

Yes. I normally ignore most political rhetoric. I just seem to hear "fascism" a lot more the last week or two.

I vacillate over which candidate I fear more. 

[Incogneeto]

Yes. I normally ignore most political rhetoric. I just seem to hear "fascism" a lot more the last week or two.

I vacillate over which candidate I fear more. 

You better explain "Vacillate" to Del.

Specially if he is on Pornhub.