Politicial post something for no reason

[CHEEZY17]

Want to know why the Democrats are losing ground with regular Americans?

WEIRD: Biden Judge Orders Non-Citizens Put Back on VA Voter Rolls Just As Poll Shows Kamala Tanking There
https://redstate.com/terichristoph/2024 ... n-n2181065

Federal judge halts Virginia’s pre-election voter roll purge aimed at suspected noncitizens
https://www.cnn.com/2024/10/25/politics ... index.html

[Who]

Want to know why the Democrats are losing ground with regular Americans?

WEIRD: Biden Judge Orders Non-Citizens Put Back on VA Voter Rolls Just As Poll Shows Kamala Tanking There
https://redstate.com/terichristoph/2024 ... n-n2181065

Federal judge halts Virginia’s pre-election voter roll purge aimed at suspected noncitizens
https://www.cnn.com/2024/10/25/politics ... index.html

I bet you loved the twilight zone

[dot]

Tweet from Guillen's sister talking about Trump in the aftermath:

"Wow.
I don’t appreciate how you are exploiting my sister’s death for politics- hurtful & disrespectful to the important changes she made for service members. President Donald Trump did nothing but show respect to my family & Vanessa. In fact, I voted for President Trump today. https://t.co/o8cDrKOKBV

— Mayra Guillen (@mguilen_) "

And here's the family's attorney:

"After having dealt with hundreds of reporters in my legal career, this is unfortunately the first time I have to go on record and call out Jeffrey Goldberg@the Atlantic: not only did he misrepresent our conversation but he outright LIED in HIS sensational story.
More… https://t.co/uJtfsNTo37

— Attorney Natalie Khawam (@WhistleblowerLF) October 22, 2024"

I can't wait for the next swing and a miss.

So just to be clear here, you're saying that the sister and the family attorney were in attendance to the meeting the Atlantic is reporting on? Cause, you know, they weren't. So good predictable try from the dutiful little soldier, but yup swing and a miss, hack.

Trump's former Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, who was in the meeting, said it never happened. His staffer Ben Williamson said his email regarding Meadows' response to the question was misrepresented in the article.

On the left: I sent Atlantic a comment saying President Trump “absolutely did not say that,” referring to the alleged comments about Ms. Guillen they printed.

On the right: Atlantic translated that comment to “didn’t hear Trump say it.”

Treat this dishonest piece accordingly. pic.twitter.com/pM1o1c9fEm

— Ben Williamson (@_WilliamsonBen) October 22, 2024

The indicted Mark Meadows? You wanna trust him? Good luck.

Mark Esper -- former Defense Secretary and no fan of President Trump -- says he has never heard Trump say anything that John Kelly is claiming he said.

Worst October surprise ever.pic.twitter.com/w4aX5CaNYd

— Greg Price (@greg_price11) October 23, 2024

https://redstate.com/nick-arama/2024/10 ... n-n2181000

If there was only one data point, maybe we could dismiss it. But we have repeated incidents where Trump demeans soldiers and veterans, even on camera, calls fellow Americans scum and vermin, even on camera, reported to have a book of Hitler speeches at his bedside, echoes Hitler rhetoric on the campaign trail, even on camera. So yeah, if there was one isolated incident maybe you'd have a leg to stand on. You don't. More on that in a bit.

Yeah, Trump is so horrible the family went ahead and still voted for him.
Basically, you have unnamed sources, a guy with a long standing history of a hatred for Trump and a publisher that is best friends with Nancy Pelosi.
Dupes gonna get duped.
Sorry, no one is buying the shit you're selling.

Since you wanna talk about being duped, how about what Esper actually said regarding the matter and not what Redstate says he said:

https://www.politico.com/live-updates/2 ... y-00185125

Mark Esper, who served as secretary of Defense under Donald Trump, backed former colleague John Kelly’s recent remarks that he believes Trump meets the definition of a fascist.

Esper told CNN Wednesday that he has no reason to doubt Kelly’s “honesty or integrity” in relaying Trump’s previous comments. He encouraged the audience to look up the definition of fascism, as Kelly did, and ask whether Trump falls “into those categories.”

“It's hard to say that he doesn't, when you kind of look at those terms. But, he certainly has those inclinations,” Esper said. “And I think it's something we should be wary about.”

Kelly, who served as Trump’s chief of staff and secretary of Homeland Security, said in interviews with The New York Times and The Atlantic published Tuesday that Trump is “certainly an authoritarian” and that the former president once told Kelly he wished he behaved more like the “German generals,” and specifically “Hitler’s generals.” Trump’s recent statements about using the military against his political opponents compelled Kelly to speak out, he told the Times.

The Trump campaign said Kelly’s statements were “debunked” and “fabricated” in a statement to POLITICO Tuesday.

While Esper told CNN he had not experienced the type of incidents Kelly and others described, he recalled Trump being “very troubled by the fact that we would have America's wounded warriors out in public, and he did not like that.”

“[Trump] just thought we should conceal them. And our view — my view, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff — was that these were America's heroes and it was important to show the American people and their colleagues in the service that when our heroes come home wounded, that we take care of them,” Esper said.

When asked whether checks and balances exist to prevent Trump from using the military to go after his political rivals, the former Defense secretary emphasized his trust in the military.

“I fully believe that the uniform officers will live up to that oath to obey the Constitution and will not swear a loyalty oath to the president of the United States. And so my concern, of course, is to the institution,” Esper said.

Now that that's settled, what was the talking point I was supposed to be given? Cause you sure did descend on one thing in particular but didn't quite get to everything there is, the lion's share in fact. Whether that be the McCain incident, reiterating the German generals wishes already confirmed in other reporting, the ever so damning termination of the Constitution you never want to address, and so on. Maybe you agree with the rest of it since you aren't/can't dispute it. Course, you can't really dispute much after all since you don't have the facts on your side like usual, sucks to be you.

Oh, did he pay for the funeral? Just a final word on that from the hack, if hack is feeling brave enough to commit.

He won't believe you

For good reason. Maybe an actual Both Sides™ shtick would have caught on to what was coming before committing to the usual red rhetoric.

stop deflecting and admit dumb dot is right.

And I was.

Why? I’ve read the posts you make and the posts other make. You don’t learn. Dot I truly think you are a bot. You should let your programmers know you need upgrading to simulate a higher IQ.

Not as smart as you wanted to pretend you are, huh? Better luck next time, bud.

I can't wait for the next swing and a miss.

[necronomous]

Tweet from Guillen's sister talking about Trump in the aftermath:

"Wow.
I don’t appreciate how you are exploiting my sister’s death for politics- hurtful & disrespectful to the important changes she made for service members. President Donald Trump did nothing but show respect to my family & Vanessa. In fact, I voted for President Trump today. https://t.co/o8cDrKOKBV

— Mayra Guillen (@mguilen_) "

And here's the family's attorney:

"After having dealt with hundreds of reporters in my legal career, this is unfortunately the first time I have to go on record and call out Jeffrey Goldberg@the Atlantic: not only did he misrepresent our conversation but he outright LIED in HIS sensational story.
More… https://t.co/uJtfsNTo37

— Attorney Natalie Khawam (@WhistleblowerLF) October 22, 2024"

I can't wait for the next swing and a miss.

So just to be clear here, you're saying that the sister and the family attorney were in attendance to the meeting the Atlantic is reporting on? Cause, you know, they weren't. So good predictable try from the dutiful little soldier, but yup swing and a miss, hack.

Trump's former Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, who was in the meeting, said it never happened. His staffer Ben Williamson said his email regarding Meadows' response to the question was misrepresented in the article.

On the left: I sent Atlantic a comment saying President Trump “absolutely did not say that,” referring to the alleged comments about Ms. Guillen they printed.

On the right: Atlantic translated that comment to “didn’t hear Trump say it.”

Treat this dishonest piece accordingly. pic.twitter.com/pM1o1c9fEm

— Ben Williamson (@_WilliamsonBen) October 22, 2024

The indicted Mark Meadows? You wanna trust him? Good luck.

Mark Esper -- former Defense Secretary and no fan of President Trump -- says he has never heard Trump say anything that John Kelly is claiming he said.

Worst October surprise ever.pic.twitter.com/w4aX5CaNYd

— Greg Price (@greg_price11) October 23, 2024

https://redstate.com/nick-arama/2024/10 ... n-n2181000

If there was only one data point, maybe we could dismiss it. But we have repeated incidents where Trump demeans soldiers and veterans, even on camera, calls fellow Americans scum and vermin, even on camera, reported to have a book of Hitler speeches at his bedside, echoes Hitler rhetoric on the campaign trail, even on camera. So yeah, if there was one isolated incident maybe you'd have a leg to stand on. You don't. More on that in a bit.

Yeah, Trump is so horrible the family went ahead and still voted for him.
Basically, you have unnamed sources, a guy with a long standing history of a hatred for Trump and a publisher that is best friends with Nancy Pelosi.
Dupes gonna get duped.
Sorry, no one is buying the shit you're selling.

Since you wanna talk about being duped, how about what Esper actually said regarding the matter and not what Redstate says he said:

https://www.politico.com/live-updates/2 ... y-00185125

Mark Esper, who served as secretary of Defense under Donald Trump, backed former colleague John Kelly’s recent remarks that he believes Trump meets the definition of a fascist.

Esper told CNN Wednesday that he has no reason to doubt Kelly’s “honesty or integrity” in relaying Trump’s previous comments. He encouraged the audience to look up the definition of fascism, as Kelly did, and ask whether Trump falls “into those categories.”

“It's hard to say that he doesn't, when you kind of look at those terms. But, he certainly has those inclinations,” Esper said. “And I think it's something we should be wary about.”

Kelly, who served as Trump’s chief of staff and secretary of Homeland Security, said in interviews with The New York Times and The Atlantic published Tuesday that Trump is “certainly an authoritarian” and that the former president once told Kelly he wished he behaved more like the “German generals,” and specifically “Hitler’s generals.” Trump’s recent statements about using the military against his political opponents compelled Kelly to speak out, he told the Times.

The Trump campaign said Kelly’s statements were “debunked” and “fabricated” in a statement to POLITICO Tuesday.

While Esper told CNN he had not experienced the type of incidents Kelly and others described, he recalled Trump being “very troubled by the fact that we would have America's wounded warriors out in public, and he did not like that.”

“[Trump] just thought we should conceal them. And our view — my view, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff — was that these were America's heroes and it was important to show the American people and their colleagues in the service that when our heroes come home wounded, that we take care of them,” Esper said.

When asked whether checks and balances exist to prevent Trump from using the military to go after his political rivals, the former Defense secretary emphasized his trust in the military.

“I fully believe that the uniform officers will live up to that oath to obey the Constitution and will not swear a loyalty oath to the president of the United States. And so my concern, of course, is to the institution,” Esper said.

Now that that's settled, what was the talking point I was supposed to be given? Cause you sure did descend on one thing in particular but didn't quite get to everything there is, the lion's share in fact. Whether that be the McCain incident, reiterating the German generals wishes already confirmed in other reporting, the ever so damning termination of the Constitution you never want to address, and so on. Maybe you agree with the rest of it since you aren't/can't dispute it. Course, you can't really dispute much after all since you don't have the facts on your side like usual, sucks to be you.

Oh, did he pay for the funeral? Just a final word on that from the hack, if hack is feeling brave enough to commit.

He won't believe you

For good reason. Maybe an actual Both Sides™ shtick would have caught on to what was coming before committing to the usual red rhetoric.

stop deflecting and admit dumb dot is right.

And I was.

Why? I’ve read the posts you make and the posts other make. You don’t learn. Dot I truly think you are a bot. You should let your programmers know you need upgrading to simulate a higher IQ.

Not as smart as you wanted to pretend you are, huh? Better luck next time, bud.

I can't wait for the next swing and a miss.

Told you

[CHEEZY17]

Weaseling bullshit

In their own words via Twitter:
The dude that was in the meeting said it never happened.
The family is perfectly happy with the way Trump handled the situation and even voted for him.
The family's attorney publicly chastised the author for lying about their conversation.

That leaves you (still) with an author with a known hatred for Trump, unnamed sources (shocker!), a source with a well known hatred for Trump and a willing publisher that is best friends with Nancy Pelosi.
You got duped by the same people that got you last time!
Oh, you poor hapless retard.

[dot]

I still got nothin'

In their own words via Twitter:
The dude that was in the meeting said it never happened.

The guy indicted for trying to help his boss usurp power in this country? Yeah, keep believing him.

The family is perfectly happy with the way Trump handled the situation and even voted for him.

And yet, none of them were part of the meeting being referenced.

The family's attorney publicly chastised the author for lying about their conversation.

And yet, she also was not part of the meeting being referenced.

That leaves you (still) with an author with a known hatred for Trump, unnamed sources (shocker!), a source with a well known hatred for Trump and a willing publisher that is best friends with Nancy Pelosi.

It absolutely tickles me that you are this in the bag for a convicted criminal, liar, serial fraudster, adjudicated rapist, documented racist, chronic adulterer, that you can take all that and discard it and the words of people who worked in his administration exposing his lack of character and human decency. People by the way that you've cited for their words, before you were informed of what they actually said contrary to what you thought. Kinda sounds familiar, like certain star testimony you swore by before it turned out to be a big nothingburger.

You got duped by the same people that got you last time!
Oh, you poor hapless retard.

The projection is so strong with you, but if you want to keep humiliating yourself for the lost causes, be my guest, you disingenuous delusional intellectually dishonest functionally retarded partisan hack dupe.

[CHEEZY17]

So when the guy that was actually in the meeting said it didn't happen you just ignore it. Got it. Oh, you poor hapless retard.

[CHEEZY17]

[media] [/media]

[necronomous]

I still got nothin'

In their own words via Twitter:
The dude that was in the meeting said it never happened.

The guy indicted for trying to help his boss usurp power in this country? Yeah, keep believing him.

The family is perfectly happy with the way Trump handled the situation and even voted for him.

And yet, none of them were part of the meeting being referenced.

The family's attorney publicly chastised the author for lying about their conversation.

And yet, she also was not part of the meeting being referenced.

That leaves you (still) with an author with a known hatred for Trump, unnamed sources (shocker!), a source with a well known hatred for Trump and a willing publisher that is best friends with Nancy Pelosi.

It absolutely tickles me that you are this in the bag for a convicted criminal, liar, serial fraudster, adjudicated rapist, documented racist, chronic adulterer, that you can take all that and discard it and the words of people who worked in his administration exposing his lack of character and human decency. People by the way that you've cited for their words, before you were informed of what they actually said contrary to what you thought. Kinda sounds familiar, like certain star testimony you swore by before it turned out to be a big nothingburger.

You got duped by the same people that got you last time!
Oh, you poor hapless retard.

The projection is so strong with you, but if you want to keep humiliating yourself for the lost causes, be my guest, you disingenuous delusional intellectually dishonest functionally retarded partisan hack dupe.

Told you

[CHEEZY17]

God, I love the Bee. Consistently amusing.

Democrats Explain Trump Was Going To Be Hitler During His First Term, But He Forgot
https://babylonbee.com/news/democrats-e ... -he-forgot

[dot]

So when the guy that was actually in the meeting said it didn't happen you just ignore it. Got it. Oh, you poor hapless retard.

The guy you're relying on is indicted for participating in Trump's fake elector fraud scheme. When you're relying on criminals to defend your criminal idol, you're out of lifelines. You have yet to identify the talking point directive supposedly given, and are unable to dispute the majority of the rest of the reporting. The only thing you've taken issue with, you've taken the word of people that weren't there and are under indictment for crimes. The projection is very real when it comes to you, hack.

I still got nothin'

[CHEEZY17]

So when the guy that was actually in the meeting said it didn't happen you just ignore it. Got it. Oh, you poor hapless retard.

The guy you're relying on is indicted for participating in Trump's fake elector fraud scheme. When you're relying on criminals to defend your criminal idol, you're out of lifelines. You have yet to identify the talking point directive supposedly given, and are unable to dispute the majority of the rest of the reporting. The only thing you've taken issue with, you've taken the word of people that weren't there and are under indictment for crimes. The projection is very real when it comes to you, hack.

I still got nothin'

You wanted somebody that was in the meeting. You were given someone that was in the meeting. It's not my fault that his account of when he was actually in the room blows up your hack writers story.
You don't get to pick and choose who you think is OK. The fact remains that your writer is a known Trump hater, your main source is a disgruntled former employee, your other sources are, of course, unnamed and your publisher is a known Trump hater that is best friends with Nancy Pelosi.
Keep pushing the Trump is Hitler narrative, retard. That's working great!

[dot]

You wanted somebody that was in the meeting. You were given someone that was in the meeting. It's not my fault that his account of when he was actually in the room blows up your hack writers story.

You cited two people who weren't there and then a third that is indicted for crimes to benefit the criminal in question. Your fourth ended up affirming his belief in the reporting. Keep digging, hack.

You don't get to pick and choose who you think is OK.

Just as you don't get to pick and choose who committed crimes, forcing you to use their words in defense of the indefensible.

The fact remains that your writer is a known Trump hater,

Spoken like a true cultist hack.

your main source is a disgruntled former employee,

Regurgitate the party line, hack.

your other sources are, of course, unnamed and your publisher is a known Trump hater that is best friends with Nancy Pelosi.
Keep pushing the Trump is Hitler narrative, retard. That's working great!

Kelly is unnamed? Milley is unnamed? McCaffrey? Seems you didn't read that deep, probably explains why you jumped in with both feet and tried to figure things out later. Keep flailing, hack. You're doing terrific.



The best part about this is no matter how much you protest Nazi things are not happening, there's always the next incident that shows it is all so very much happening.

[necronomous]

So when the guy that was actually in the meeting said it didn't happen you just ignore it. Got it. Oh, you poor hapless retard.

The guy you're relying on is indicted for participating in Trump's fake elector fraud scheme. When you're relying on criminals to defend your criminal idol, you're out of lifelines. You have yet to identify the talking point directive supposedly given, and are unable to dispute the majority of the rest of the reporting. The only thing you've taken issue with, you've taken the word of people that weren't there and are under indictment for crimes. The projection is very real when it comes to you, hack.

I still got nothin'

Told you

[CHEEZY17]

A bunch of bullshit

Sorry, retard. You can try to dismiss it all you want but the dude that was in the meeting said it didn't happen.
I mentioned the other people simply to provide context about Trumps handling of the situation. The family was so happy with Trump that they voted for him. The attorney for the family publicly said the author lied about their conversation. Both undeniable inconvenient facts for you. But hey, she's just the family attorney that spoke directly with the author and then very publicly called him a liar after his hit piece. Just some meaningless nobody, right?

Your NAZI bullshit narrative that nobody is buying but you fucks keep trying to sell?



I don't think that clip you posted means what you think it does. Rewatch it with a sense of humor you absolute fucking retard.

[CHEEZY17]

Welcome to the world out of your billionaire bubble, Jeff! A world where Americans have become wise to the yellow journalism and biased reporting that runs rampant in our newspapers.

Most people believe the media is biased. Anyone who doesn’t see this is paying scant attention to reality, and those who fight reality lose. Reality is an undefeated champion. It would be easy to blame others for our long and continuing fall in credibility (and, therefore, decline in impact), but a victim mentality will not help. Complaining is not a strategy. We must work harder to control what we can control to increase our credibility.

I believe it when I see it but it seems like an acknowledgement of the problem at least.

[Who]

Interesting rally 45 had in NY.

Made some serious inroads with voters in Puerto Rico , no.

[CHEEZY17]

And another one!

USA Not Today—Yet Another Major National Outlet Refuses to Endorse Kamala Harris
https://redstate.com/bobhoge/2024/10/29 ... s-n2181217

[CHEEZY17]

Interesting rally 45 had in NY.

Made some serious inroads with voters in Puerto Rico , no.

You mean the "NAZI rally" featuring jews, blacks and other minority speakers?

[dot]

I still got nothin'

Sorry, retard. You can try to dismiss it all you want but the dude that was in the meeting said it didn't happen.

The guy that is indicted for trying to defraud the American electorate for his boss said it didn't happen. Sure, trust him on that.

I mentioned the other people simply to provide context about Trumps handling of the situation. The family was so happy with Trump that they voted for him. The attorney for the family publicly said the author lied about their conversation.

And you've never known Trump to be two faced, right? There's no established history of Trump being chummy to someone's face, and sticking a knife in their back after, yeah? So once again, you are citing people that would have zero input of what he did in the referenced meeting because they were not there. The only one you did indirectly cite who was there is also indicted for trying to defraud the election for Trump. The attorney for the family also said Trump never paid for the funeral as promised.

Both undeniable inconvenient facts for you. But hey, she's just the family attorney that spoke directly with the author and then very publicly called him a liar after his hit piece. Just some meaningless nobody, right?

A nobody who wasn't in the meeting that took place, that's the key that you aren't willing to accept or admit. The family and attorney would have no idea what Trump did or said at the meeting because they were not there. Keep flailing, hack.

Your NAZI bullshit narrative that nobody is buying but you fucks keep trying to sell?

When a speaker for your own side is calling your rallies Nazi rallies, you really gotta work overtime to ignore the obvious. Run that cover, hack.

https://www.ccarnet.org/jewish-groups-c ... en-miller/

That's regarding the guy saying "America is for Americans and Americans only" at your fascist rally and it's by no means his first entry into the fascism picture. Interesting echo to "Germany for the Germans" huh? Hell, even your would-be VP called Trump America's Hitler. At this point, just like with everything regarding your criminal idol, the mountain of evidence is insurmountable against you. So it doesn't surprise me you don't admit reality or defeat, it's what you do. Biden's corruption farce went the same way and you see where that ended up. American fascism is just another facet of the things you're willing to accept from your reps. Hack will always do hack things.

Welcome to the world out of your billionaire bubble, Jeff! A world where Americans have become wise to the yellow journalism and biased reporting that runs rampant in our newspapers.

And you want to accuse others of buying the lies you're selling. How much did the Washington Post have to pay Dominion over its lies about election fraud again? Hacks will always do hack things.

https://thehill.com/homenews/media/4957 ... -protests/

The Post itself reported hours later that Jeff Bezos, the billionaire founder of Amazon who owns the newspaper, personally made the decision not to run an endorsement after the Post’s editorial board had already drafted its endorsement of Vice President Harris.

Bezos, one man, did not endorse Harris. The Washington Post did endorse Harris.

[necronomous]

I still got nothin'

Sorry, retard. You can try to dismiss it all you want but the dude that was in the meeting said it didn't happen.

The guy that is indicted for trying to defraud the American electorate for his boss said it didn't happen. Sure, trust him on that.

I mentioned the other people simply to provide context about Trumps handling of the situation. The family was so happy with Trump that they voted for him. The attorney for the family publicly said the author lied about their conversation.

And you've never known Trump to be two faced, right? There's no established history of Trump being chummy to someone's face, and sticking a knife in their back after, yeah? So once again, you are citing people that would have zero input of what he did in the referenced meeting because they were not there. The only one you did indirectly cite who was there is also indicted for trying to defraud the election for Trump. The attorney for the family also said Trump never paid for the funeral as promised.

Both undeniable inconvenient facts for you. But hey, she's just the family attorney that spoke directly with the author and then very publicly called him a liar after his hit piece. Just some meaningless nobody, right?

A nobody who wasn't in the meeting that took place, that's the key that you aren't willing to accept or admit. The family and attorney would have no idea what Trump did or said at the meeting because they were not there. Keep flailing, hack.

Your NAZI bullshit narrative that nobody is buying but you fucks keep trying to sell?

When a speaker for your own side is calling your rallies Nazi rallies, you really gotta work overtime to ignore the obvious. Run that cover, hack.

https://www.ccarnet.org/jewish-groups-c ... en-miller/

That's regarding the guy saying "America is for Americans and Americans only" at your fascist rally and it's by no means his first entry into the fascism picture. Interesting echo to "Germany for the Germans" huh? Hell, even your would-be VP called Trump America's Hitler. At this point, just like with everything regarding your criminal idol, the mountain of evidence is insurmountable against you. So it doesn't surprise me you don't admit reality or defeat, it's what you do. Biden's corruption farce went the same way and you see where that ended up. American fascism is just another facet of the things you're willing to accept from your reps. Hack will always do hack things.

Welcome to the world out of your billionaire bubble, Jeff! A world where Americans have become wise to the yellow journalism and biased reporting that runs rampant in our newspapers.

And you want to accuse others of buying the lies you're selling. How much did the Washington Post have to pay Dominion over its lies about election fraud again? Hacks will always do hack things.

https://thehill.com/homenews/media/4957 ... -protests/

The Post itself reported hours later that Jeff Bezos, the billionaire founder of Amazon who owns the newspaper, personally made the decision not to run an endorsement after the Post’s editorial board had already drafted its endorsement of Vice President Harris.

Bezos, one man, did not endorse Harris. The Washington Post did endorse Harris.

See told you. And suddenly you care about when someone is indicted. According to you, that's not important, or all those not indicted of insurrection would not in your opinion be insurrectionists.

[dot]

See told you. And suddenly you care about when someone is indicted. According to you, that's not important, or all those not indicted of insurrection would not in your opinion be insurrectionists.

Let me know when you've gone back in time to change my argument that I was arguing charges filed, not the crime itself. Then, like now, you've still got nothin'. Run along until you are brave enough to contribute, Red.

[dot]

https://people.com/george-w-bush-s-daug ... ve-8735810

George W. Bush's Daughter Barbara Breaks Silence on Election to Campaign for Kamala Harris (Exclusive)

Barbara Pierce Bush tells PEOPLE she's "hopeful" that voters will back Harris on Nov. 5 to "protect women's rights"

Barbara Pierce Bush, the daughter of former President George W. Bush and granddaughter of former President George H.W. Bush, spent part of her weekend in Pennsylvania campaigning for Vice President Kamala Harris with just days to go before the 2024 presidential election.

"It was inspiring to join friends and meet voters with the Harris-Walz campaign in Pennsylvania this weekend," Barbara, 42, shares in an exclusive statement to PEOPLE on Tuesday, Oct. 29. "I’m hopeful they'll move our country forward and protect women’s rights."

Barbara’s Republican father served as president from 2001 to 2009. Her mother, former first lady Laura Bush, 77, broke with the party’s stance in 2010 by saying she supports same-sex marriage and abortion. At the time, Laura said abortion should "remain legal, because I think it's important for people, for medical reasons and other reasons."

In March 2017, Barbara rallied for Planned Parenthood, speaking at a fundraiser for the women’s health nonprofit.

“I am proud to stand with Planned Parenthood not only because women, regardless of where they are from, deserve to live dignified, healthy lives, [but] … because it’s a really good investment,” she said at the event, according to The Texas Tribune. “We know that when women are healthy, their families and their children are healthier, too.”

Barbara, now a mother of two, told PEOPLE in 2010 that she does not identify with either major political party, and has since been described as an independent.

While Laura and George, 78, have not weighed in on the 2024 presidential election, George’s vice president Dick Cheney stunned the nation by sharing that he plans to vote for Harris. Cheney’s daughter, former Wyoming Rep. Liz Cheney, also endorsed Harris, 60, and has campaigned with the vice president.

Harris also earned the endorsement of Susan Ford Bales, the daughter of another former Republican president — the late Gerald Ford. Bales' father took office after Richard Nixon resigned in the aftermath of Watergate in 1974.

“America cannot regress back to a divisive paradigm of loathing toward one another and disdain for our Constitution,” Bales wrote on Oct. 21. “We witnessed on January 6 the horrors of what that looks like, and we can never allow a repeat of that tragedy.”

Barbara is a nonprofit leader and author with a master's in public administration from Harvard University. In 2009, she co-founded Global Health Corps, an organization aiming to raise up new generations of leaders who can tackle global health issues.

The former first daughter co-wrote a memoir in 2017 with her fraternal twin sister, Jenna Bush Hager, about their life in the spotlight.

In September, Jenna — who hosts Today with Hoda & Jenna on NBC— told PEOPLE that Barbara inspired her to take leaps she may have otherwise not.

“I don't think I'd have this job. I don't know [that] I would've started this book club. She makes me feel brave and empowered, because she was my first audience,” Jenna said. “She was the first hand I held. And so I always felt supported, even when we were teens, and we threw shoes at each other's head.”

[necronomous]

See told you. And suddenly you care about when someone is indicted. According to you, that's not important, or all those not indicted of insurrection would not in your opinion be insurrectionists.

Let me know when you've gone back in time to change my argument that I was arguing charges filed, not the crime itself. Then, like now, you've still got nothin'. Run along until you are brave enough to contribute, Red.

If the crime was insurrection, the would be indicteed for it. But they weren't. So it's either important or it's not. Fun times.

[dot]

If the crime was insurrection, the would be indicteed for it. But they weren't. So it's either important or it's not. Fun times.

Subpoenas defied with no charges. Your logic would say the subpoenas were never defied. Charges filed was never the argument, the argument was always what the crime was. You, just like the rest of the usual crowd, couldn't disprove the literal definition of insurrection. Thus you have as little to offer now as you did then. Run along until you have something to contribute, Red.