Image 01 Image 03



The fight moves to South Carolina

Welcome to our live Republican debate coverage. Tonight’s debate will air on CBS, live from the Peace Center in Greenville, South Carolina. The debate begins at 9:00 PM ET.

Obviously, the death of Justice Antonin Scalia sets a somber mood for the night.

DEBATE OVER. Aleister nailed it:

Legal Insurrection Authors:

Political media reaction:

Hashtag #GOPdebate

Follow Kemberlee on Twitter @kemberleekaye


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


I think this a bad debate for Trump. First he has something in his eye, but also he’s attacking W. Who Republicans still like.

Rubio: Ted Cruz lied about … Mairrage…

What is that charge about?

    Mercyneal in reply to rotten. | February 13, 2016 at 11:28 pm

    Cruz has been telling voters that Rubio wasn’t against gay marriage

    DuraMater in reply to rotten. | February 14, 2016 at 1:33 am

    Cruz & I think in one of his campaign videos pointed out that both Marco and Trump came out and said that after SCOTUS ruled, it’s time to just accept move on. Whereas Cruz remains defiantly and vociferously opposed.

    Marco Rubio is a despicable sleaze. As he stood there tonight spitting, “liar, liar” at Cruz, whilst it is HE who is lying, he was disgusting. So ashamed I once supported him. I was glad to hear Ted bring up Rubio’s record in FL House tonight, but there’s more to that story that needs to be made public.

    Rubio and Trump both continue to advance Carson’s “Hands Up Don’t Shoot” style meme about the Iowa vote is an outrageous lie, itself…All three need to be smacked down by honest moderators or interviewers.

      Ragspierre in reply to DuraMater. | February 14, 2016 at 10:13 am

      “Marco and Trump came out and said that after SCOTUS ruled, it’s time to just accept move on.”

      That’s the basis of the Collectivist Britt’s apologia respecting Kelo, as well.

      The Supremes say it’s cool… So there was nothing wrong in T-rump using Kelo-type takings in his crony ventures.

      If that’s at all true, what CAN’T the Supremes tell us is groovy, despite being an affront to what we know is right?

      The T-rump/Britt apologia would have us all sheep.

Why are there still six guys on stage? Let’s be honest, three of them have no shot. At all.

Ben, you’re a great human that all people should strive to be. But it’s time to go.

Jeb, you never really wanted it, until you were told you wanted it. Time to go.

John, go back to Ohio. Time to go.

Look at the Dem debate from the other night, and you have Bern and Hill duking it out. Each has their say on the “Issues” (some would say pandering, but I digress). It’s time to have a true LD style debate. Trump vs Cruz, maybe Rubio on the side.

I think that Dr Carson had a good debate tonight and will gain some support. Question is who will it cone from. I think Trump won tbe debate because he held up well against attacks from all sides, and stuck to his themes. I was surprised that Cruz didn’t do any speaking in tongues. It seems tyat many on the stage were getting tired with Cruz’s lies and dirty tricks.

    quiksilverz24 in reply to Gary Britt. | February 14, 2016 at 12:05 am

    That right there is the issue I have with Trump and his supporters: Sticking to his Themes. Not sticking to facts, methods, or intrinsic belief, but a theme. Some would say a Theme of the day.

    HandyGandy in reply to Gary Britt. | February 14, 2016 at 12:18 am

    Wasn’t there a brief moment when Cruz was speaking to Rubio in tongues?

      quiksilverz24 in reply to HandyGandy. | February 14, 2016 at 12:25 am

      Is that supposed to be a knock on Cruz and his religious beliefs? Willful ignorance? Or just a blatant attack against a candidate whose last name isn’t Trump?

        HandyGandy in reply to quiksilverz24. | February 14, 2016 at 12:30 am

        No you moron. That was a joke. In case you missed in the story above;

        ‘what Cruz said to Rubio (translated): “Dude, if you want to tell them now, tell them now in Spanish, if you want.”

        — Rick Klein (@rickklein) February 14, 2016

          quiksilverz24 in reply to HandyGandy. | February 14, 2016 at 12:35 am

          I find myself to be far from a moron, but appreciate how you can keep up the intellectual level of discourse in the room. Or far from it. Regardless, your statement is nothing more than a slam on Cruz in the name of Trump. My opinion.

          Probably the funniest moment of the debate. Bubble-head Rubio claims Cruz doesn’t know Spanish and Cruz responds in Spanish. Not sure if that bests Rubio, once again, trying to Rubio-splain why amnesty really isn’t amnesty or something.

          And Bush referencing his Mama when Trump fires a shot at him. Every time Bush gets hit by Trump his body goes limp, he gets a frazzled expression on his face and he looks like he’s about to cry. It really isn’t possible for a person to look any weaker than this fellow. At least Rubio, fourth rater that he is, rambles instead of crumbling.

          Mercyneal in reply to HandyGandy. | February 14, 2016 at 11:57 am

          Curle: Cruz has said in many interviews that he doesn’t really speak Spanish. Here is a story from Time magazine that plainly states Cruz doesn’t speak Spanish

          Mercyneal in reply to HandyGandy. | February 14, 2016 at 11:58 am

          Curle: Here’s the story from Time about Cruz not speaking Spanish:

          HandyGandy in reply to HandyGandy. | February 14, 2016 at 2:27 pm

          Well I just downvoted myself. That really needs to be fixed.

          I thought one of the funniest moments was when Bush tried to hide behind Mama, and Trump said “Why doesn’t your Mother run?”

    Mercyneal in reply to Gary Britt. | February 14, 2016 at 12:27 am

    Huh? He attacked George W. Bush about lying about weapons of mass destruction ! Do you have ANY idea how popular George W is in South Carolina? This debate was a disaster for Trump

      All the polls even at Glenn Becks the Blaze show Trump won Yuuuge.

        smfoushee in reply to Gary Britt. | February 14, 2016 at 3:43 am

        Oh, online polls show Trump won YUGE, knock me over with a feather. Let’s wait and see how the votes are counted instead of electronic parlor gags. Remember, Rand and Ron Paul’s groupies were great at stuffing electronic polls too.

          The online polls correlated well with Trump’s win in NH. And, SC conservative websites have been noting for weeks other tangible evidence of Trump’s strength in that state, including support from leading Republicans and the backlash that forced Haley to mea culpa for her criticism of Trump. Face it, W is part of the distant past except for those folks who received tickets to the event from the Bush-owned state party apparatchiks.

          Trump will win big in SC. Then he will win big on super Tuesday. Rubio may play well in Miami but he will never gain real traction in the rest of the country nor will he become any real standard bearer for the much fantasized but never materializing establishment rebellion against Trump. And even Cruz, capable and talented fighter that he is, is less appealing to more people than Trump.

          This is Trump’s race to lose because enough of the base are ready for a re-alignment of the party away from the noble lies of multiculturalism (pushed by the Bush family and the Rubios of the world) and towards economic nationalism and a unified national identity. Trump owns the economic nationalism message and the base has come to realize that economic nationalism is the best hope for this nation’s future and turning towards economic nationalism is more important, at least this cycle, than any other issue.

          The R establishment had their chance and they chose the globalist donor class over the people. They blew it. Time to move on.

          Very well said Curle. I would add that tge wall and immigration issues are as important as economic nationalism.

          Ragspierre in reply to smfoushee. | February 14, 2016 at 9:40 am

          Yay…!!! Curle earns a quickie tongue-bath from Britt!

          Attaboy, Curle. Big Brother is proud!

      Mercyneal in reply to Mercyneal. | February 14, 2016 at 11:58 am

      Gary Britt: Polls like Drudge had Trump winning 45 minutes BEFORE the debate started.

    Radegunda in reply to Gary Britt. | February 14, 2016 at 12:40 am

    Trump revealed, again, that he’s nasty and superficial. He’s also channeling the Code Pink loons.

    He’s ignorant about the whole WMD issue. He knows nothing of the multiple intelligence agency reports from other countries saying that there were WMDs. He knows nothing of the evidence that WMDs were being transported to Syria. He knows nothing about the reports from soldiers on the ground of what they saw with their own eyes.

    Trump just absorbed the left-wing talking points and never bothered to learn more.

    inspectorudy in reply to Gary Britt. | February 14, 2016 at 12:54 am

    Oh please Mr. Britt, tell us your esteemed opinion of Cruz’s lies and dirty tricks? How about your child/man interrupting anyone who pointed out his failings? The man was a spoiled brat who could not abide the rules that they all agreed upon. He claimed that he would form a consensus to get things done. Can you just imagine this thin skinned onion after a Congressman called him a loser how much consensus he would get?

      Cruz lies you ask.

      Lies about Sarah Palin started days before Iowa vote and continue to this day.

      Lies about Ben Carson in Iowa and then lies when he apologizes

      Lies about Trump and Obamacare

      Lies about Trump dropping out in South Carolina

        Another lie by Cruz is his claim that his insane tax plan proposal is not a VAT tax.

        Also would note that his tax plan strongly favors robots over workers because it makes the cost if machines and technology 100% deductible (not subject to his 16% vat tax) but wages and salaries paid to workers are NEVER deductible and fully subject to his 16% vat tax. This will have the effect of increasing layoffs and job lisses because machines are tax subsid8zed over people.

    Thank you Gary for providing the contrast needed between Trump supporters and Cruz supporters.

    Your middle school bullying tactics used to promote DJT, another middle school bully gives everyone a clear picture of what a Trumph presidency would be like – hell.

    Constantly glorifying himself, saying, “I’m Yuge! I’LL (capital “I”) make America great again.” and tweeting non-stop gibberish about how wonderful he is are all characteristics of a angel we all know, the one cast out of heaven, the one that became a serpent so as to temp mankind.

      So I guess with your talk about serpents and other religious illiterations that we should count you as a pro dominionist who thinks it is vital that Cruz get control of usa military and thermonuclear weapons so the dominionists can take control over the world as a necessary precondition to the return of Jesus to rule the world.

        Ragspierre in reply to Gary Britt. | February 14, 2016 at 9:13 am

        Note again, that Gari (the liar) Britt always up-thumbs his own bullshit.

        He lies in little things, as well as large. He’s a lying liar, who lies. And he loves T-rump with a disturbing, cultish slavishness.

          Note that Ragspierre is an imbecilic man child with nothing of any merit to add to a discussion so he just posts lies and fud.

          Cruz seems to attract liars as supporters. Birds of a feather and all that.

        I am pro-Kingdom of God, not Kingdom of Trumph.

        BTW: Trumph talks in the terms of a monarchist. The bully wants to be king of the hill.

        Ted Cruz is much like David, a man after God’s own heart. Trumph, though, is much like the loser Saul, King Saul.

        Your “dominionist” nonsense is a projection of your worry over eminent domainist DJ Trumph.

        I noticed an ad on this site about getting rid of nail fungus. You immediately came to mind, Gary.

          I don’t know about your bible but my bible doesn’t have David telling lies about good people and making false character attacks on good people in order to gain power for himself.

          Also David was beloved by many. Cruz has no friends in the senate or on the debate stage.

          As for Cruz’s dominionist perversion of the gospel and their DANGEROUS belief they must take control and rule over the whole world as a precondition to Jesus returning it is all overvthe web via google search. You have been providex links by others and you choose to ignore them. Maybe your kingdom of god is a dominionist like Cruz.

          read your Psalms Gary. David had many enemies, the Philistines were among them. And so was Saul.

          As I see it, Crux will slay the giant self Trumph.

          Dominionism has your mind gary, a vacuous place ready to be taken over by Trumph.

The audience sure sounded like a Jerry Springer crowd.

They were cheering Rubio before he could even answer

    The GOPe is determined to make sure primary debates destroy any chance of gop victory because the mega donors want a democrat to win rather than a person like Trump who doesn’t take their money.

Is it true that Cruz is now sending out robocalls in SC saying Trump is dropping out?

    Mercyneal in reply to HandyGandy. | February 14, 2016 at 12:27 am

    No Cruz is not sending out any robocalls. Trump made that up on the spot. Totally debunked and irresponsible of Trump to do that

    quiksilverz24 in reply to HandyGandy. | February 14, 2016 at 12:31 am

    What is that supposed to mean? Akin to, “If you don’t stop attacking me, I’m going to sue you.” Trump is acting like a spoiled brat, and now his supporters are coming up with cockamamie stories in the hope of boosting their self-esteem and campaign morale.

    How about this? Win in the arena of ideas. I have heard Trump has position papers out supporting his Make America Great Again campaign slogan. How about using those positions to support why I should vote for Trump?

      Psst Trump is winning in the arena of ideas.

        Estragon in reply to Gary Britt. | February 14, 2016 at 4:08 am

        Only an idiot could say that.

          Only a liar or a retard or a democrat could deny the reality plainly befire tgeir eyes.

          Tell me who is it you support for president. We are still waiting for you and your partner in trolling Radegunda to tell us whether it is Hillary or the other communist Bernie.

        you mean DJT is “winning in the area of tongues” – speaking out of both sides of his mouth.

        Mercyneal in reply to Gary Britt. | February 14, 2016 at 11:54 am

        Um, no he’s not.

        Radegunda in reply to Gary Britt. | February 14, 2016 at 12:24 pm

        The Polling Company found that Trump supporters are the least interested in policy, and the most unwaveringly besotted with their hero. And that’s exactly what I’ve seen in Trump fans.

        They ascribe views and aims to Trump that he has not expressed (or not without contradicting himself soon afterward).

        They ascribe a level of wisdom and virtue to Trump that he clearly does not possess. (Gary Britt even tried to argue that he’s a solid family man.)

        It’s largely a religious sort of faith in the salvific powers of The Donald.

      tom swift in reply to quiksilverz24. | February 14, 2016 at 8:45 am

      I have heard Trump has position papers out supporting his Make America Great Again campaign slogan.

      He does indeed have position papers. And they’re hidden in plain sight, at

      Are you demanding that he read them to you?

        Ragspierre in reply to tom swift. | February 14, 2016 at 9:20 am

        They aren’t his, and he’s remarkably ignorant of what’s in them, as he’s shown in debate and interview. You’re aware that Der Donald has said those papers were mostly for “the press”.

        He did. Look it up. The man has no positions you can count on, except he is a NE Collectivst puke, who seeks to rule and reign.

        Radegunda in reply to tom swift. | February 14, 2016 at 12:30 pm

        We’re suggesting that he should be able to speak about his putative positions with the same coherence and consistency that other candidates are expected to do.

        Trump fans would be unlikely to accept the “go look at my position papers” tactic from any other candidate. Trump fans don’t hold the TV celebrity to the same standards as they hold “politicians.”

    inspectorudy in reply to HandyGandy. | February 14, 2016 at 12:58 am

    Hey handjob, has it ever occurred to you that if it really happened that it might be a pac that did it which as you know no candidate has any control over. Just like in Iowa when a staffer sent out the Carson/cnn tweet Cruz was blamed for it even though he was in a meeting at a caucus when the tweet went out. It’s very amusing that nothing Trump does or says that is stupid or wrong is blamed on him by any of you but everything is blamed on the other candidates for ANYTHING that is negative. Grow up!

I’m sure the Democrats enjoyed the spectacle of Republican candidates gutting each other at the prompting of Democrat “journalist” operatives.

Trump fans like to refer to his position papers when their other ridiculous arguments fall short. But why can’t Trump speak coherently about what’s supposedly in his position papers?

    quiksilverz24 in reply to Radegunda. | February 14, 2016 at 12:52 am

    Or, as I asked above: Why can’t his supporters use specifics in those position papers to sway my vote? I won’t say they can’t ready, but I must question their ability to comprehend the written language. Or maybe, just maybe, the position papers are like the emperor and have no clothes…

      Radegunda in reply to quiksilverz24. | February 14, 2016 at 12:36 pm

      Trump fans often say things like “I’m sure Donald understands this problem very well” — even if he hasn’t expressed any deep understanding of the problem. They’ll suggest that he’s holding his deep understanding of the truth in reserve for when it’s politically more opportune to express. (But wait — isn’t he the one guy who always says exactly what he thinks?)

      gulfbreeze in reply to quiksilverz24. | February 15, 2016 at 2:51 pm

      “Why can’t his supporters use specifics in those position papers to sway my vote?”

      I wouldn’t trust anyone on the internet to confirm any candidate’s positions accurately, neither a candidate’s supporters or their detractors. So much bad information out there among both groups. Way too easy to go straight to the source…seriously, the truth/facts are 15 seconds away. I doubt 10% of any candidate’s supporters have read all of their own candidate’s “Issues” website sections yet (and far less have studied their competitors’ sites), and instead are relying on the press, appearances and debates.

      I’m not supporting any candidate yet, but having read the 5 remaining GOP candidates “issues/positions” sections on their websites, IMO the Ted Cruz site is one of the most comprehensive in terms of numbers and breadth of issues addressed (9 issues…education and healthcare are missing, I hope he adds them) with narratives, detailed plans for immigration and jobs/opportunity (including taxes), many op-eds he’s written, and videos. Overall a very good/thorough job, reflecting several years of articulating his positions in preparation for a 2016 run.

      The Trump site addresses 5 issue areas, including a “Trade Reform” section not specifically addressed by Cruz, and detailed plans on tax reform and immigration. He’s promised more sections, but none have been added to date. IMO he needs to add healthcare, education and national security ASAP. The lack of breadth reflects not taking several years to articulate his positions (unlike Cruz).

      Overall, I give Cruz a significant edge on specifics, particularly since he’s been very active writing op-eds over the last few years.

    inspectorudy in reply to Radegunda. | February 14, 2016 at 1:01 am

    I’ll tell you why, because he didn’t write them or have any idea whats in them. He can’t discuss anything except poll numbers and insult the other candidates. I am ashamed of being a Republican at this moment. If we can’t come up with a viable candidate to beat the likes of a multi felon the this country deserves all it elects.

    Arminius in reply to Radegunda. | February 14, 2016 at 9:58 pm

    So, the Trumpsters are basically admitting they’ll vote for the third term of Barack Obama. Or the male version of Hillary Clinton.

    I guess they hate their country. I don’t see why otherwise they’d vote for what looked like a loud obnoxious drunk spouting looney hard left code pink conspiracy theories otherwise.

    He loves him some big government and he loves him some socialized medicine.

    He also really likes Nancy Pelosi and he’s always been really close to Chuck Schumer.

    Trump brags about being a politician all his life, being part of the establishment all his life. For some idiot reason people have been fooled into believing because he’s been buying influence instead of selling it he’s somehow purer, when they’re both part of the same stinking system. And Trump loves the system; that’s how he got rich by making the system work for him and having the system crush people who get in his way.

    “…This point has been made often, most recently by Andy McCarthy, but it can’t be repeated enough: This guy is on the verge of beating Ted Cruz as an “outsider” by touting his record of cronyism. How can you be anti-establishment, wonders McCarthy, when you’re crowing about your history of essentially bribing politicians, including politicians from the other party?

    …Three points. One: To reiterate the takeaway from last night’s post, Trump feels free to tout his chumminess with Pelosi et al. only because he has absolute confidence that there’s nothing he could say or do that would alienate his base. (In this case, the right side of his base, although it’s the right who’ll decide Iowa.) Cruz’s brand as a full-spectrum conservative is a form of accountability: If he’s elected and tacks towards the center, he can be held to account for why his principles don’t match his actions. Trump’s brand is a total lack of accountability. My fans won’t abandon me no matter what I do in office, he says, and he’s testing that theory by talking up his relationships with Democratic villains in crunch time before a conservative electorate goes to vote. Not even a centrist like Kasich would tout his relationships with Pelosi and Schumer, not even in order to draw a contrast with Cruz’s obstructionism. Trump does it because he thinks his cult of personality will forgive him anything.”

    And they will. That’s the one thing we’ve learned from commenters like Gary Britt. They don’t care what Trump says. And they won’t care what he does if he gets into office.

    So, if you think the GOP’s problem is that it hasn’t been cutting enough deals with Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer (Trump brags about making deals; that’s why the Trumpsters like him) then Trump is your guy!

    Also if you think the GOP’s problem is that it hasn’t been breaking enough campaign promises to its idiot base, Trump’s your guy, too!

    “Donald J. Trump


    Remember, it was the Republican Party, with the help of Conservatives, that made so many promises to their base, BUT DIDN’T KEEP THEM! Hi DT
    10:14 AM – 11 Feb 2016

    …It may seem counterintuitive that Trump is deriding conservatives ahead of a primary in South Carolina, which is a lot more conservative than New Hampshire is. But it makes sense strategically. There’s no point in him spending the next nine days trying to convince voters there that he’s a conservative when Cruz will be showcasing ample evidence to the contrary. He’s better off trying to consolidate populists and moderates — and there are plenty of the latter in the SC GOP, which is how Lindsey Graham keeps getting reelected — by wearing Cruz’s accusation as a badge of honor. Okay, says Trump, I’m not conservative. But what has conservatism done for anyone over the past eight or 16 or 24 years?

    …Never forget, though, that Trump’s more daring public statements usually come with a walkback later. Whether it’s mass deportation (the “good ones” can come back in) or banning Muslims from entering the U.S. (the ban might not last long), his ability to seem as hardline or “malleable” as his individual supporters want to perceive him means he’ll be able to massage this if there’s any backlash. If he’s challenged on this, he’ll probably say that the “conservatives” he had in mind who are aiding and abetting the GOP are Rubio and Cruz, even though Cruz is the Senate’s most notorious obstructionist — and has been derided as a “maniac” by Trump because of it.

    …Would Republicans who are open to Trump buy that? Sure, probably. One thing we’ve learned about voters who claim, or have claimed, to be conservative is that a lot of them are very cheap dates ideologically:

    …Here’s Trump telling Fox News that he’s very capable of changing into anything he wants to — a reference in this case to his tone, but true enough about his policy positions too given his record…”

    Trump has found out his cult members don’t care what he says; one thing one minute, the opposite the next, then back and forth. And they won’t care how he says it. They like him because he’s anything but PC. Here’s Trump saying that when he gets to a higher level he’s going to be much more PC. And his fans will still love him.

    And since they’ll love him no matter what he says, or no matter how he says it, they’ll still love him if he doesn’t do what he says. As Trump said in another interview, you’ve got to be a little establishment. Of course, as I mentioned earlier 69 year old Trump has been a YUUUGE establishment guy. He’s going to cut the same deals he always cut. With leftists, not with China or Mexico.

    How can anybody be so gullible as to put any faith in this guy, who has conned millions of dollars out of thousands of people? And he did it by using the same two major assets he expects will also get elected. His name and is well developed skill of telling people exactly what they wants to hear.


Regarding Trump’s position on President Bush and the decision for OIF, see the answer to “Did Bush lie his way to war with Iraq?”. The whole post linked at “answer” draws on the primary sources of the mission to explain the law and policy, fact basis of Operation Iraqi Freedom.

Gotta love Republicans saying they’re real conservatives by supporting a candidate that blames 9/11 on Bush, supports Planned Parenthood, calls everyone on stage a liar while admitting he lied about Carson being a child molester for votes, and defends the use of eminent domain for private enterprise.

But WALL you guys! It’ll be YUGE! Better Again! Top Men! DEALS! WOOOOOO ‘MERICA!

    Trump never said Carson was a child molester. Are you really that uninformed or just a liar?

      Ragspierre in reply to Gary Britt. | February 14, 2016 at 9:29 am

      No. He’s too big a pussy to openly say that. When Der Donald back-stabs you, he won’t do it except as the Prince Of Passive-Aggressive. He thinks he’s cute and clever.

      He’s not. He’s a coward and a thug. Like his Bierhall Bigot bullyboi Britt.

Just wondering when conservatives, even moderate Republicans, started supporting Planned Parenthood and Eminent Domain. When did that happen?

    Were the founders originalist conservatives to you? Because they supported eminent domain so much they put it in the constitution.

      Ragspierre in reply to Gary Britt. | February 14, 2016 at 9:26 am

      There’s the old, old lie by straw man that Britt never ceases to lie.

      Kelo is not the ED the Founders included, you lying sack of sharia. You know it. T-rump knows it. You both are liars.

        That is your claim but the supreme court says it is.

        The fact remains that em8nent dokain is an originalist conservative idea because the founders put it in the constitution.

          Ragspierre in reply to Gary Britt. | February 14, 2016 at 9:44 am

          The fact is that the Founders would spit on Kelo, T-rump, and his myrridons. Like you. I know I do, you lying SOS.

          The Founders also included the Commerce Clause, which the Supremes told us meant something it never meant in Filburn, you lying SOS.

          As you know. You Collectivist liar.

          Radegunda in reply to Gary Britt. | February 14, 2016 at 12:43 pm

          The Founders didn’t say that rich people should be able to kick little people out of their homes to build a casino parking lot (just because rich people can buy influence with politicians).

          Ordinary people in Scotland utterly rejected Trump’s efforts to kick them out of their humble homes to build a golf course for the well-to-do. Trump then called the dirty, stupid people because they wouldn’t bow to his will.

          In GaryWorld, the Scots had it all wrong.

          Arminius in reply to Gary Britt. | February 14, 2016 at 11:22 pm

          I see like all socialists/Obamatons you don’t care what the Constitution actually says. And you Trumpsters are the 2016 version of Obama fans.

          The words eminent domain are not in the Constitution. But there are restrictions on when a government can take someone’s private property in the Fifth Amendment. It can only be for a bonafide public use, and the owner must receive just compensation.

          The framers would be horrified by people like you as they never dreamed that, instead of a limitation , it would be twisted into a grant of unlimited power that would be use for the redistribution of wealth.

          You’re not even smart enough to realize what you’re saying, are you?

          Thanks for revealing your true colors, moron. You’re for the redistribution of wealth. Converting one person’s private property like the home of an old lady of moderate means into another person’s private property such as a really rich guy’s casino who can afford to buy politicians is not a public use. They just raped the meaning of the words “public use” and redefined them to mean if one person’s private property generates more in taxes than another person’s private property, then that means the first person’s private property will be of greater public use. That is the farthest thing from conservative or originalist as you can get. But you’re a leftist, Gary. You’ve just convicted yourself of that. And leftists don’t care about the meaning of words when they’re trampling the Constitution.

          So, why stop at casinos, socialist? How about a mansion? For the greater good, and you socialists are all for screwing over the individual and trashing individual rights for the greater good. If some really rich guy goes down to the mayor of beach town, who he’s bought just like Trump has done many times over, and says “I’d like to build a 10 million dollar vacation home, but I want to build it on property somebody owns. But they shouldn’t own those properties. They’re losers, they’re nobodies, they live like slobs, and those houses look like run down shacks. I’ve had those houses appraised. Together they aren’t worth even a million dollars. If you condemn those properties my mansion will generate at least 10 times the property taxes those eyesores are bringing in.”

          Why not, socialist Gary? That’s the same argument you’re a YUUUGE fan of. When Trump is making it to put in a limo parking lot for his casino.

          This is the very definition of redistribution of wealth; the government taking things away from one private individual and giving it to another private individual. In this case, redistributing wealth from the middle class to the super wealthy.

          But once you come out as an advocate of the redistribution of wealth, as you have, you can’t complain which direction the wealth is redistributed.

          There are lots of words that can be twisted the same way your cult leader and the politicians have twisted those of the Fifth Amendment. From what was supposed to be a restriction on government to a grant of unlimited governmental power. Such as the Commerce Clause. Again, the framers would be horrified by how it’s now used to say the government can force the individual to buy something. And that something, oh by the way, also means you have to subsidize someone else.

          So, be honest Gary. You’re a big fan of Obamacare. You must be. We got that by the same illogic you are declaring your love for now.

          Again, it’s the redistribution of wealth. But, Trump fanboi, you by your own words are just fine with the redistribution of wealth. Because, go Trump! It’s in the Constitution! It’s conservative! It’s originalist!

          So, vote for Sanders if Trump doesn’t make it all the way. I’ve seen a lot of weird stuff from leftists like you, Gary. The supposedly conservative case for this or that. But I never thought I’d see the day when somebody would be stupid enough to make the conservative case for socialism. Until now.

          I know you don’t realize that’s what you did. But face it; being a Trump fan is practically like lighting a YUUUGE neon sign that says, “I can’t think for myself, so I want Trump to think for me.”

          It must come as a shock to realize you’re a socialist. But you are well and truly out of the closet. Embrace your true self and vote Sanders if Trump doesn’t make it all the way.

          Accuse me of lying or call me names or something. I realize that’s all you have. You can’t think rationally enough to win an argument on the merits. So, lash out and throw a Trumper tantrum; you Trumpsters are ideologically, intellectually, and temperamentally one and the same as your god.

          Arminius in reply to Gary Britt. | February 15, 2016 at 12:24 am

          Genius, do you even know what the words eminent domain mean?

          It’s Latin for “Supreme Lordship.” That’s why the founders didn’t put those words in the Constitution. It was the right of kings to violate the rights of their subjects at will and for any reason the king fit. And seize their property for the state’s own use.

          That’s what the founders intended to put a stop to when they wrote the Fifth Amendment.

          But Trump is a robber baron (as well as a fraud). Like the kings of the Middle Ages, as far as Trump is concerned might makes right.

          And you are so breathtakingly stupid, gullible, and historically AND Constitutionally ignorant you actually think doing the exact opposite of what the framers intended is “originalist.”

          No wonder you’re a Trump cultist, Gary.

          Bravo, Gary, Bravo.

          You’re doing a fine job of defending your support of Trump. If, that is, you intend to prove every insult directed toward the low intelligence, blind loyalty, and gullibility of Trump fans is well deserved.

          Arminius. There is so much pretentious BS in your posts. So little time.

          Eminent Domain was a commonly accepted and natural power of the federal government. The founders clearly understood and approved that the federal government had the power of eminent domain.

          How do we know this?

          If the federal government wasn’t intended by the founders to have the power of eminent domain then the just compensation and public use provisions of the 5th amendment would not be required. They are only needed because the founders recognized the federal government was granted the power of eminent domain.

          Oh oh Guess it is YOU that doesnt understand how to read the limitation in the 5th amendment.

          Now for your further education I’ll give you the following:

          The founders never intended that the public use and just compensation provisions of the 5th amendment would apply to the eminent domain powers of state governments.

          So yes Arminius the founders put eminent domain in the constitution as part to the understood powers of the soverign federal government.

          As for all the bullcrap in the rest of your two posts about socialists and Obama those parts aren’t even as close to being correct as your completely WRONG pronouncements on eminent domain.

          Get back to me when you actually have something intelligent to say.

          Ragspierre in reply to Gary Britt. | February 15, 2016 at 12:00 pm

          Wow. ALLLLLLLL that BS verbiage, just to say…

          “Straw man”, plus…

          Ad hominem, in addition to…

          stupid hand-wave, with lying deflection.

          Britt, you’re a lying moron. (See how simple and concise one may be?)

          Ragspierre loves to lie and make false attacks on the PERSON delivering a message when he KNOWS the MESSAGE is correct.

          So your post above admits:

          1. The founders gave and understood the federal government had the power of eminent domain, and that is clearly shown by the fact that the founders put limits for public use and just compensation on the power of eminent domain in the 5th amendment.

          2. The founders did NOT intend that the limits for public use and just compensation in the 5th amendment would ever apply to the state government powers of eminent domain.

          You claim to be a lawyer. Tell me if the above is wrong and why AS OF THE TIME THE CONSTITUTION WAS WRITTEN AND ADOPTED BY THE FOUNDERS ?? Can you be even a little bit honest and truthful ??

          Under the founders set up of the constitution, KELO would never be needed BECAUSE the 5th amendment limits for public use and just compensation DID NOT APPLY TO STATE GOVERNMENT POWERS OF EMINENT DOMAIN.

          Now note that Ragspierre will not address how ANYTHING above is incorrect in any kind of calm reasoned logical legal analysis. The reason why he won’t is because the above is 100% correct.

          What Ragspierre will do is post some 5th grader comments about my mother or some other childish name calling completely unrelated to address with logic and rational thought the facts stated above.

          “facts, logic and argument.”

          Ragspierre, If only your posts contained any of those things instead of just 5th grader ad hominems, name calling, and obfuscation.

          Whenever someone posts the TRUTH about something and you find the TRUTH inconvenient then you just call the poster names, and pat yourself on the back as though you have achieved something.

          Your time would be better spent studying to take the bar exam again. Maybe you will finally pass and really become a lawyer.

          Ragspierre in reply to Gary Britt. | February 15, 2016 at 1:31 pm

          You’re a lying SOS, who lies. And is a sack. Of T-rumpian sharia.

          Oh, and you lie.

          ED is to Trump as the Commerce Clause is to ObamaCare.

          Lying SOS.

          Arminius in reply to Gary Britt. | February 15, 2016 at 2:43 pm

          @10:13 today Socialist Gary said:

          “If the federal government wasn’t intended by the founders to have the power of eminent domain then the just compensation and public use provisions of the 5th amendment would not be required. ”

          There’s nothing originalist or conservative about violating the Fifth Amendment. But because you’re a Trumpster, that’s the kind of inane, cognitively dissonant position you have to take.

          Then wrap yourself in the flag and call yourself and your hero Trump a patriot because Trump once did a photo op with a Bald Eagle.

          The feds knew they might have to build forts, or roads. But that power can be abused.

          So those provisions were required to stop people like Trump from abusing the powers of eminent domain. To stop people like Trump from using government to take other people’s property for his own private property.

          Those provisions were intended to stop the rich and the powerful from using government power to steal someone else’s farm to add it their large estates. That’s how they would have thought in 18th century terms. In 20th/21st century terms, it was intended to stop the rich and the powerful from using government power to steal someone’s house to build a limo parking lot for his casino.

          I realize you can’t stick to the point, socialist Gary. To be a Trumpster means ignoring facts and substance in favor of blind faith in your Vozhd.

          Oh, BTW, I’m not the only one who has noticed that the closest candidate to Trump ideologically is…

          Bernie Sanders.

          “Shortly after Barack Obama swept into the White House while giving Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid a coattail Marxist Congress, Newsweek Magazine ran the cover “We’re all Socialists now,” based on Jon Meacham’s lead article with the same headline.

          …Yet it took until last night before it was literally true, as New Hampshire gave a full-throated socialist a rout over semi-socialist Hillary Clinton on the Democrat side and the once and now apparently again socialist Donald Trump won the GOP primary after going left of Bernie Sanders in his final rallies in the state.

          Now, I’m sure some of you are giving me the middle finger by calling out Trump as a once and now again socialist – but I defer to Trump’s own words in the final rallies of his New Hampshire campaign.”

          The guy giving the middle finger to anyone who dares to use Trump’s own words to prove who Trump actually is? That’d be you, socialist Gary. You’d also be blowing a gasket shouting LIAR, calling him names, and not doubt getting hauled off by the cops for a mandatory 72 hour mental hold as you attempt to charge the stage.

          “According to Breitbart News, Byron York reported that “in a nearly one-hour speech, Trump railed against pharmaceutical companies. He railed against oil companies. And insurance companies. And defense contractors. And he set himself against a political system that he said allows big-money corporate ‘bloodsuckers’ to control the government with campaign contributions.”

          In case this confuses you: According to Trump, the problem is business, not government. No, government is as pure as the wind-driven snow. The problem with health care is big pharma and not the precious, amazing government bureaucrats.”

          Trump is in love with government bureaucracy, sociallist Gary. Those are the people who help him steal other people’s real estate so he can add it to his personal portfolio. Which you are convinced is a public use, because your cult idol can do no wrong. If it benefits the Donald, it can’t be an unconstitutional abuse of eminent domain.

          Congrats, socialist Gary! That’s how Hillary Clinton fans think. If it benefits Hillary, it can’t be illegal.

          “This is not isolated, nor just in the past, either. For decades – as we all know – Trump has been an advocate for universal government health care. And while now he promises to replace Obamacare “with something terrific,” other than mentioning something about state lines, his rhetoric reeks of a big-government program and has nothing to do with market economics. I don’t care what some ghostwriter put down on the website position paper…I’m talking about words from The Don himself.

          He’s said very recently that “we’re gonna take care of everybody” and that Ted Cruz was “heartless” for apparently wanting to immediately replace Obamacare without some government-based Cruzcare. Funny thing: Rick Perry effectively ended his campaign in 2012 with his infamous “heartless” comment in a debate over deportation. Trump gets a pass. Hell, he even gets credit for saying that.

          Consider: A few months ago, Trump promised that “I’ll be terrific for women’s health care.” The Don himself will be terrific for women? Cue the creepy Daniel Ortega billboards, etc. What the hell does it mean that “we” and “I” will take care of everybody? It means our money and some iteration known as Trumpcare.

          These words – these phrases – mean certain things in context of an election. Trump is sounding like Bernie now and as Obama sounded in 2008-9-10. We have to elect Trump to know what is in him, I guess. But actually, we don’t. When you sound like a Marxist on health care and attack someone like Cruz the way a Marxist would attack someone like Cruz, then it follows logically to apply “the duck test.””

          You are a socialist, Gary. Trump is a YUUUGE fan of eminent domain because the pols he pays off will use it in his favor. Eminent domain means, as far as the Donald is concerned, he has the power to redistribute someone else’s wealth to himself.

          So what’s the difference between Trump using his money and influence so that the pols he has bought will redistribute someone else’s wealth to himself, and Sanders fans using their votes with the expectation the pol that is beholden to them will redistribute someone else’s wealth to themselves? None. Zero. Zip. Nada.

          You are all fans of government redistribution of wealth. Stop kidding yourself.

          Trump and you are ideoligically indistinguishable. But then, there’s not much daylight between Trump and Sanders, and you and the Sanders crowd.

          Keep hitting yourself in the face with that shovel, socialist.

          Arminius in reply to Gary Britt. | February 15, 2016 at 3:52 pm

          Shorter socialist Gary: the fact that the framers put meaningless words in the Fifth Amendment about public use shows eminent domain means Trump can buy the power to have his casino in Jersey no matter who was living there first.

          And if you disagree you hate the founding of this country.

Ugly debate. Uglier Audience Weak Moderators I find myself agreeing with Aleister. I think stacking an audience is wrong, no matter what candidate you support. Just another part of the struggling GOPe agenda. This SC voter was not impressed by the audience noise for one minute. Gov. Kasich did have a very good point about negative campaigning. I wish it was somehow a rule, but it will never happen. There is just too much money at stake. Argue about policy, about positions, but, follow the money.

Gov. K-itch apologized to the moderators over the debate getting a little testy. Give me a break. Man up K-itch.

Mr. “Reasonable” gelatin would not be a good president. The current Apologizer-in-Chief has done great damage to this nation.

I think Trump hurt himself badly tonight, enough to knock him out of his first-place standing in most states. Oh he won’t completely disappear — but 2nd Place Trump is not the same thing as Frontrunner Trump.

Trump damaged himself with his claim that Bush lied us into war in Iraq. Not botched the intelligence, not read too much into thin intelligence.
—Ace Of Spades

Others are saying that Donald Ducks went full Code Pink.

I’m also reading he apologized for Planned Abortionhood.

Who says these debates are worthless? Der Donald is lifting his skirts, little by little.

    I think Trump hurt himself badly tonight, enough to knock him out of his first-place standing in most states.

    I think the Cult of Trump is so unmoored from reality that it’s probably not going to make much of a difference.

    He could rant that handicapped people are using up too many resources and that these useless eaters must be eliminated in order to Make America Great Again™, and his mindless devotees would roar with enthusiasm.

      Ragspierre in reply to Amy in FL. | February 14, 2016 at 2:22 pm

      Certainly that’s true of his cultists, but I persist in believing that many people who “support” Der Donald are much more prone to reason and exposition.

      I’ve converted several. Which I hope makes Britt’s head explode.

So, Donald Ducks accused Cruz of lying…??? YuuuuuGE mistake!

Donald Ducks left a trail of moldy old bread crumbs to follow, proving that HE’S the liar.

“We have to take care of the women”, T-rump has repeated, referring to federal funding of Planned Abortionhood. But how is that NOT the essence of PC pandering? What about “taking care of the men”? Or getting the federal government out of the “taking care of” any-flucking-body business, and letting ordinary Americans do it…when it really NEEDS done?

See? Collectivist. And panderer. Plus, demonstrated liar.

Last night Donald Trump achieved maximum obnoxiousness in his impersonation of Michael Moore. He seemed to be acting as an agent provocateur. His assertion as the leading Republican presidential candidate that President Bush lied us into war with Iraq is simply mind-boggling. He may have spoken on this matter with some forethought, but he appeared to be deranged. At this point he not only damages our public discourse, he damages the Republican Party.
—Scott Johnson, who does more for the conservative cause by eating his breakfast than Der Donald has done his entire life

Limbaugh warned Donald Ducks this was a BAD course months ago when he trotted out this bullshit. But Donald Ducks REALLY, REALLY wanted W impeached, so at least he’s consistent in his fruitcakery.

The debate was a total disappointment. What’s more disappointing is that the comments on this blog have devolved Into the same crappy comments I would likely find on Salon or HuffPo instead of being a place where reasoned minds debate serious subjects, a place I could learn from. Sad.

    Radegunda in reply to JoAnne. | February 14, 2016 at 1:34 pm

    “The Trump Effect.”

    Mich in reply to JoAnne. | February 14, 2016 at 2:58 pm

    When you are debating someone who doesn’t have much knowledge on what they are discussing, it is a rather short lived affair, generally ending in someone being angry and an insult hurled.

    Cruz has a history with the FTC, was Solicitor General of Texas and argued in front of the SCOTUS. Cruz has potential to be on the Supreme Court, or an AG for the next President.
    Many Trump supports think Cruz should be used by Trump in one of those capacities or as VP recognizing his credentials. He is taken seriously as a qualified person outside of the presidency to have an impact in the direction of the country.. Rubio is a lawyer also, but is not talked about in the same capacity. I like him too though.

As an interesting aside…

Curle along with Beirhall Britt uses the term “economic nationalism”.

This is merely a euphemism for a COMMAND economy, a feature of Collectivism. In this case the Collectivism takes the form of fascist economics, in which the ownership of assets remains nominally in its private hands, but CONTROL of assets is exerted by government. Der Donald will tell you how you may use your property, where, and with whom and under what circumstances you may trade.

It would be one thing, of course, to attempt to persuade a company to keep its operations here. But that is NEVER what Der Donald proposes. He’ll by gawd force them to stay!

Oh, and he’ll ALSO dictate drug pricing, etc.

You can’t have all that “chosin'” goin’ on ou-ed dare…

IOW, Curle and Bierhall Britt HATE the liberty of markets, and don’t trust you with choice. This is, as I’ve said, ANTI-conservative and Collectivist at its core.

    I can’t speak for Curle. I’m not a mind reader like Ragspierre claims to be so I can only speak for myself.

    To me economic nationalism whenever I have used the phrase which isn’t very often has nothing to do with command economies or government control over the means of production.

    For me it merely refers to having trade policies of the type supported by Jeff Sessions and Donald Trump. Smart and Fair free trade policies that look out for the interests of the USA. It refers to trade policies whereby both parties to the trade deal get wealthier and not the dumb trade policies of 8the purist free traders where one party gets wealthier and the USA

      Ragspierre in reply to Gary Britt. | February 14, 2016 at 2:28 pm

      See how Britt immediately up-thumbs his own comment…???

      Fascinating dishonesty.

      Note that he then goes on to inveigle Sessions in the fallacy of resort to authority, RIGHT after accusing me of mind-reading!


      He NEXT goes on to elaborate on my point for me. Trade WILL be made “fair” by Der Donald. No more of that “choice” nonsense. All your trading belonga T-rump! Stupid, stupid people…!!!

      Continuing post above:

      And the USA gets poorer.

      The free trade purists have decimated the middle class and their jobs in this country for the past 30 years and it is way past time to try something different. Something that says we will look out for USA citizens and workers in all we do AND NOT PLACE THE INTERESTS OF GLOBAL CORPORATIONS AND THE OPEN BORDERS IDIOTS OVER THE INTERESTS OF USA WORKERS AND SMALL BUSINESSES.

      That is what economic nationalism means to me when I use the term.

      Ragspierre in reply to Gary Britt. | February 14, 2016 at 2:40 pm

      “The free trade purists have decimated the middle class and their jobs in this country for the past 30 years and it is way past time to try something different. Something that says we will look out for USA citizens and workers in all we do AND NOT PLACE THE INTERESTS OF GLOBAL CORPORATIONS AND THE OPEN BORDERS IDIOTS OVER THE INTERESTS OF USA WORKERS AND SMALL BUSINESSES.”

      See? “Free trade purists” is like saying, “Liberty purists”. Or, like my favorite Britt-ism, “This election is not about conservative principles”.

      He then goes on to tell the amazing lie that “trade” has ruined the American middle class, when it is, IN FACT, Britt’s Collectivism that has been at war with the American middle class always, and has CAUSED the flight of SOME industries to more hospitable places via BIG GOVERNMENT, which, of course, is the ONLY means Britt could FORCE his preferences.

      It never works. But that’s an aside. It’s immoral. It is Big Brotherism, telling you and I how we may conduct our affairs.

      It’s repugnant and disgusting.

        Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | February 14, 2016 at 3:29 pm

        Again, Britt is the master of self-parody.

        He earnestly expects to conduct a propaganda monologue here, and loses his sh1t in good Bierhall tradition when opposed by facts, logic and argument. Heh…!!!

        (That was just two lines. Brevity is the sole of wit.)

      See how Ragspierre writes 9 lines with double spacing that say absolutely nothing. One of his common techniques to try and disrupt and censor ideas he doesn’t want others to read and discuss is to intersperse his meaningless BS, name calling and vulgarity so much and so often that it becomes impossible to conduct a civil and intelligent discussion. To fill the air with so much offensive andģor meaningless noise that people will just skip the entire discussion and his mission of thought suppression is accomplished.

9 debates and Ragspierre predicts 9 times that Trump has lost. WRONG AGAIN !

Based on what ive Seen.

Trump’s lead will grow after debate by time voting starts.

Cruz will drop a few points after debate

Carson and Rubio both grow a few points. Rubio more than Carson.

Not sure about what happens with Jeb. Depends on non debate factors.

Saturday debate probably smaller audience than other debates.

    Ragspierre in reply to Gary Britt. | February 14, 2016 at 1:50 pm

    See, you just can’t help but lie.

    I’ve never “predicted” a past event, which is simply your kind of stupid, Intercontinental Railroad Britt.

    Nor have I ever “predicted” polling, especially since I consider most polling bogus.

    As I’ve said several times before, Der Donald could very well be the next POTUS. After all, a lying narcissistic asshole has been elected twice now. It could be a trend…

Source: ARG

Method: Phone

Date: 02/12/2016 – 02/13/2016

Voters: 400 (Likely voters)

Margin of Error: 5 %

Full Result:

Trump 35%
Cruz 12%
Rubio 14%
Bush 10%
Kasich 15%
Carson 2%

As Ed Driscoll says at InstaPundit…


Well, yes, there IS that… But he’s also so crazy he thinks BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOoooooosh deliberately lied about it all. That’s Michael Moore/Code Pink crazy.

new poll from CBS News conducted before Saturday’s GOP debate, shows Donald Trump with 42 percent support among Republicans, and a massive 22 point lead over second-place candidate Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX)

“Among the two candidates whose results look at all like those of an eventual GOP presidential nominee, polling suggests that Ted Cruz would do significantly better than Donald Trump in the general election. According to the Real Clear Politics average of recent polls, Cruz would fare 5 points better versus Hillary Clinton than Trump would.”

Yep. Der Donald is a loooooooser…

Ah, well…he opposed it LATER.

What’s another lie among SO many…???

CBS conducted a national telephone poll immediately after last night’s CBS presidential debate asked Republicans and independents who they thought had won the debate.

Here is how it stacks up:

Sen. Marco Rubio 32%
Donald Trump 24%
Gov. John Kasich 19%
Se. Sen. Ted Cruz 12%
Dr. Ben Carson 8%
Former Gov. Jeb Bush 5%

“Marco Rubio is the clear favorite among Republicans, while independents are largely divided between Trump, Kasich, and Rubio,” CBS reported.

But when asked who was most likely to be president, more respondents chose Donald Trump.

Trump 42%
Rubio 22%
Cruz 14%

The poll was conducted among a nationwide random sample of 601 voters who identified themselves as Republican or independent and who watched the debate.

Another one of Cruz’s lies at debate was when Cruz denied he had pushed for John Roberts nomination to supreme court.

    Ragspierre in reply to Gary Britt. | February 15, 2016 at 12:47 am

    In reading the Beastly Day hit piece, I found no lie told by Cruz.


    What he said was true. Roberts certainly had a reputation as an uncommonly good appellate lawyer, and a lot of people considered him a conservative.

    One of the things that makes nominating a Supreme tricky is that you can’t know how ascending to that bench will change a person. And Roberts is just a lose cannon. Wasn’t he instrumental in Citizens United, which returned free speech to campaigns after McAnus-Feingold?

    Of course, with T=rump every pretense at being a conservative is an outright lie. He’s a stinking Collectivist thug. Like some his butt bois.


T-rump did NOT immediately denounce this “sent from god” business, meaning he thinks he’s god’s personal messenger!

BURN HIM…!!! BURN THE WITCH…!!! He can’t be trusted with the nukler launch codes!

(I think we all see just how daffy and bigoted Bierhall Bully Britt is here. Because…just damn…)

Most polling is bogus as hell, as the Iowa caucus proved.

At least this seems to pass the smell test, which a lot of SC polling simply does not.


    “Polls are snapshots, and often miss the mark. Take internal polls with grain of salt. Trump may attract new voters in SC, we don’t know
    7:01 PM – 14 Feb 2016 ”

    The only thing you are smelling Rags is your stinky foot in your mouth.

      Ragspierre in reply to Gary Britt. | February 15, 2016 at 1:48 pm


      OK, cult boi.

      So YOUR prediction is that Der Donald takes SC by 20, and Cruz doesn’t even show.

      Right, you T-rump sucking SOS?

    The polls in Iowa couldn’t poll for the effect of Cruz’s telling lies about Sarah Palin and Dr. Carson. They didn’t account for all the votes Cruz would steal from Carson with lies and dirty tricks.

    In Iowa Trump got more votes than any GOP candidate in prior caucuses, AND HE DID IT WITH ABSOLUTELY NO GROUND GAME.

    Now Trump has ground game… Ooops.

Rush is SCREWING T-rump to the wall.

About time.

Is Der Donald a lying Collectivist thug of the Code Pink variety?

Hell, yah.

“Similarly his 2000 book, The America We Deserve Trump noted Iraq was developing weapons of mass destruction and targeted Iraq strikes had little impact on their overall capabilities. The Donald said the best course might be against Iraq to “carry the mission to its conclusion.”

Wrote Trump:

Consider Iraq. After each pounding from U.S . warplanes, Iraq has dusted itself off and gone right back to work developing a nuclear arsenal. Six years of tough talk and U.S. fireworks in Baghdad have done little to slow Iraq’s crash program to become a nuclear power. They’ve got missiles capable of flying nine hundred kilometers—more than enough to reach Tel Aviv. They’ve got enriched uranium. All they need is the material for nuclear fission to complete the job, and, according to the Rumsfeld report, we don’t even know for sure if they’ve laid their hands on that yet. That’s what our last aerial assault on Iraq in 1999 was about. Saddam Hussein wouldn’t let UN weapons inspectors examine certain sites where that material might be stored. The result when our bombing was over? We still don’t know what Iraq is up to or whether it has the material to build nuclear weapons. I’m no warmonger. But the fact is, if we decide a strike against Iraq is necessary, it is madness not to carry the mission to its conclusion. When we don’t, we have the worst of all worlds: Iraq remains a threat, and now has more incentive than ever to attack us.

In August 2004 Trump turned loud and vocally against the war in an interview with Esquire, more than a year after it started and it was clear after the initial successes an insurgency was developing.”

He lies constantly. As a matter of fact, if you want to name something CONSTANT about Der Donald, it is his lies.

Like his butt boi bung suckers here.

    Trump quite correctly opposed Iraq invasion in 2002 and 2003.

      Ragspierre in reply to Gary Britt. | February 15, 2016 at 2:29 pm

      Bullshit. You lie.

      AND he LIED about BOOOOOOOOOoooooooosh lying about WMD.

      You liar.

      Arminius in reply to Gary Britt. | February 15, 2016 at 4:58 pm

      Do you have evidence of this con man “quite correctly opposed Iraq invasion in 2002 and 2003?”

      Those of us who aren’t members of your Trump cult don’t have the same blind faith in your god.

      “Trump said it would be easier to find “25 different stories” of him being against the war before the invasion.

      “You can check it out, check out — I’ll give you 25 different stories,” said Trump. ”

      Guess how many stories man-does-what-he-says, take-his-word-to-the-bank provided since saying that last year? None.

      That makes him 25 times the liar John F’n Kerry is, document wise, since Kerry only lied about making his DD214 public.

      “An extensive BuzzFeed News review was unable to find any Trump statements on the Iraq War before the invasion in March 2003, but did find two statements he made the week the war started, one calling it “a mess” and one saying it would have a positive impact on the stock market.

      Trump was quoted by the Washington Post as saying, “The war’s a mess.”

      He said on Fox News the weekend the war started, “I think the market’s going to go up like a rocket.”

      Trump did turn against the war in 2004, calling it a disaster.”

      Before you start, socialist Gary, I know how your twisted pretzel Trump-logic works so I’m going to head off at the pass. Saying a war is a mess doesn’t mean you oppose a war no matter how you twist it. Read a book about Guadalcanal sometime. Some of the men who fought there kept journals, because if they put what they really thought at the time into letters home the censors would have blacked it out.

      They thought it was a mess. In fact, “mess” was the most polite thing they called it. And they weren’t opposed to the war. They wanted to win it.

      So, you’re stuck with the fact Trump is conning you. Because he knows your Trumpsters are gullible enough to believe anything. So call us names, socialist Gary. Only liars would quote Trump about Trump.

        Yes there is evidence.

        Arminius, whom do you support for President?

          Arminius in reply to Gary Britt. | February 16, 2016 at 7:58 am

          Of course there’s evidence, socialist Gary. Your cult icon tells you so.

          The rest of us need more than Trump’s word or your blind faith. Neither of which constitute evidence. And I see, you’re not providing any.

          As far as who do I support? Well at this point it’s really more of a question of who I’m willing to settle for. And the one answer I’m sure of is I’m NOT willing to settle for the three remaining antique Leninists; Hillary, Bernie, and your fetish the Donald.

          I’m going to have to take a brief detour at this point; did you see my three comments from 10:30pm, 11:09pm, and 1:06pm? In which I elaborate on on why the following statement uttered by Trump has to be the stupidest statement ever uttered by any candidate ever:

          “Donald Trump: Well, that, the war with Iraq which started this whole thing, the whole thing starts with the war in Iraq. You know, Saddam Hussein was a terrible guy but one thing about him, he killed terrorists.”

          Honest to God, up until now I thought Bernie Sanders was the biggest idiot left in the race. But Trump may have just edged him out for the title, and up until the point he said that I thought Trump must be a pretty smart guy. He has all kinds of other damning faults, but I thought he had to have at least some smarts. He said a lot of stupid things but I figured he’s just playing to the crowd. Not any more.

          If you’re not aware of why what Trump said is breathtakingly stupid, you need to read my comments. At this point you’d think Trump would have done something to prepare for the job of CinC. He’s flubbed a lot of answers to questions related to defense and national security in all sorts of embarrassing ways. But with that one one statement about Saddam Hussein he demonstrates that not only has he not brushed up on national security 101. Not only is he not even at the level to begin national security 191. He’s not even ready for national security security universal day care.

          I’ll let you in on a secret. Up until, I’d say January, I was actually willing to settle for Trump. He was never my first choice, or even my second or my third. But if it came down to Hillary/Bernie or Trump I’d have voted for Trump.

          Not any more. There’s no way I could put up with four years of watching some guy with a cat on his head on TV, saying such stupid things from the Oval Office.

          I used to think I could never sink so low as to settle for Jeb Bush but after watching Trump play with his own dung these past few weeks, Jeb may just rise to some minimal level of acceptability. And by minimal level of acceptability I mean I won’t have flee the country for Belize.

          I’m not there with Kasich, and I’ll never be there with Kasich.

          As it stands now, if Trump is the front runner against Bernie or Hillary I’ll be checking out monthly or annual slip rentals at marinas in various spots in Belize. Unless Texas does the sane thing and secedes.

Der Donald is showing every sign of desperation in SC, with him going ape-spit on Cruz.

Full flop-sweat lie-fest on the part of Donald Ducks.

Trump is destroying Cruz right now in live news conference carried on all cable news networks.

Pointing out how Cruz is the biggest liar he has every seen. Discussing how Cruz is running around telling people out and out lies claiming Trump is for Obamacare, is against 2nd amendment, will appoint liberal justices. Just one lie after another and Trump is exposing him on national TV.

I guess the face of the god Cruz serves is the FACE OF A LIAR.

That can’t be a christian god then. Must be the dominionist god or satan or something that Cruz worships.

Der DOnald repeats his pussy threat to “sue” Cruz.

What a stinking Collectivist thug and coward!



Purrrrr Der Donald…!!! Got his feeewings huuurt by the bad booing people…!!!

So now he’s talking about declaring political bankruptcy!


This is what Trump said:


Ted Cruz is a totally unstable individual. He is the single biggest liar I’ve ever come across, in politics or otherwise, and I have seen some of the best of them. His statements are totally untrue and completely outrageous. It is hard to believe a person who proclaims to be a Christian could be so dishonest and lie so much.

Cruz said I would be appointing a liberal judge when in fact I will appoint a great conservative and I am the only candidate who has gone so far, at the debate, as to suggest two individuals I feel would best represent the conservative values we need to protect: William “Bill” Pryor Jr. and Diane Sykes.

Cruz says I am pro-choice, when in fact I am staunchly pro-life and have been for a long time. Like Ronald Reagan, on many issues, I have evolved.

Cruz says I am in favor of ObamaCare, when in fact I have spoken about repealing and replacing this disaster of a system at every speech throughout my campaign and since it’s inception. Meanwhile, Cruz was responsible for getting Bush to put in the judge that failed to vote against ObamaCare twice.

Cruz says I will try to take away your second amendment rights, when I am one of the strongest proponents of the right to bear arms and I say so in every speech that I have made for years. I am a proud member of the NRA and so are my sons.

Cruz has become unhinged and is lying with the hopes that his statements will go unchecked until after the election and he will save his failing campaign.

In Iowa, Cruz told thousands of Ben Carson voters that Dr. Carson had left the race and to instead vote for Ted Cruz. He apologized when the race was over. Likewise, his fraudulent voter violation form sent to Iowa voters. If Ted is going to continue to lie with such desperation, I have no choice but to fight back.

One of the ways I can fight back is to bring a lawsuit against him relative to the fact that he was born in Canada and therefore cannot be President. If he doesn’t take down his false ads and retract his lies, I will do so immediately. Additionally, the RNC should intervene and if they don’t they are in default of their pledge to me.

I am the strongest on the borders and I will build a wall, and it will be a real wall. I am strongest on illegal immigration, strongest on ISIS, strongest on the military and I will take care of our Vets. I will end common core and preserve the second amendment. I will renegotiate our trade deals and bring our jobs back to our country. I am the only person who will Make America Great Again.

    Trump is a fighter and that is what we need right now. He will fight to do all the things he has promised and he isn’t owned by the mega donors like Cruz, Bush and Rubio.

    Trump is also brilliant because the truth about all the lies being told by Cruz and the GOPe surrogates will get great coverage for next several days.

    The face of the god that Cruz serves seems to look a lot like Satan the biggest liar of all.

    Ragspierre in reply to Gary Britt. | February 15, 2016 at 4:51 pm


    That’s all that Britt said.

“One of the ways I can fight back is to bring a lawsuit against him relative to the fact that he was born in Canada and therefore cannot be President. If he doesn’t take down his false ads and retract his lies, I will do so immediately.”

Don’t talk, pussy.


Rush Limbaugh: ‘Establishment’ Trying to ‘Rig’ Debates to ‘Humiliate and Embarrass’ Trump

Rush agrees with Trump and Trump’s complaints !

    Ragspierre in reply to Gary Britt. | February 15, 2016 at 5:00 pm

    I’ll refer people to the full transcript of the Rush show, you lying SOS.

    Not the VERY selective pull-quotes from TrumpBart, propaganda organ for the filthy Collectivist liar, Der Donald.

      DuraMater in reply to Ragspierre. | February 15, 2016 at 6:37 pm

      I must say, I had to turn off the radio today after what I felt to be an excessive amount of time and words Rush was devoting to analyzing, postulating, trying to explain Trump’s performance at Saturday’s debate. Trump’s liberal, Code Pink, anti-Bush memes as well as his other outlandish assertions and behavior (more fitting for a cock fight than a civilized debate format) did not deserve any further exploration or explanation than the harsh and revealing truth that he is unfit for public service.

      When Rush repeatedly speculated that Trump’s tirade was a strategic play for Dems and Indys in SC, that his unhinged rantings were intentional, I had enough and hit the off button on the radio. Sorry, I don’t buy the PeeWee Herman defense of..”I MEANT to do that!”
      Not sure if I will bother to tune into the show tomorrow or not.

        Ragspierre in reply to DuraMater. | February 15, 2016 at 6:49 pm

        I agree with your assessment and contempt for that part of the show.

        Rush has been twisting himself into pretzels to TRY to remain apparently neutral of late.

        But earlier, he was pretty clear that Der Donald disgusted him in the debate.

        He’s not alone. Lots of commentators have had to so state.

          DuraMater in reply to Ragspierre. | February 15, 2016 at 11:45 pm

          “But earlier, he was pretty clear that Der Donald disgusted him in the debate.”

          Yep. Must concur on that. I guess I was expecting a more sustained and well deserved thrashing from Rush. It’s so overdue from Rush and others. I wanted to tell Rush to Stop wasting time trying to make sense out of nonsense. Another person of stature whom I’ve long regarded as a statesman and man of honor is Sen. Jeff Sessions. But his interview with Levine tonight left me disappointed and troubled.

          The consequences for my country of having an unstable dummkopf whose likely to renege on most or all of the hook lines he has fed his groupies are dire, indeed.

          Don’t these people study the multiple contradictions in this man’s policy proposals? It appears to me that Trump, himself, has not even read what his advisers have written for him. So I suppose one can’t expect his followers to dig into facts re Trumps tax plan (>$10-12T/ 10 yr additional federal debt with the most optimistic offsets, no balanced budget). What about that “big door” in The Wall with its amnesty turnstile? There are highly troubling issues in writing on his website, in video documentaries in addition to Trump’s abysmal lack of character and personal restraint.
          “The man that ruleth his own spirit is greater than he that taketh a city”….or country, for that matter.

Here’s the full quote from Trump regarding RNC defaulting on pledge:

“But what happened is that some of the college kids sold their [debate tickets] to the special interests for good money, they made a couple of bucks, I don’t blame them. But the RNC does a terrible job. A terrible job. And just remember what I said, remember in this room: I signed a pledge, but it’s a double-edged pledge. As far as I’m concerned, they’re in default of their pledge.”

Naturally the above is being reported with left wing anti-trump slant.

The debate audience Saturday night was a disgrace, a stacked deck against Trump that behaved like a bunch a children at a high school basketball game. Trump was relentlessly and loudly interrupted with boos, even before he could finish his first sentence. Establishment favorites Jeb Bush and Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL)
were just as loudly cheered.

The audience not only made the Republican Party look childish and not ready to lead, it was a terrible strategic move on the audience’s part. During the debate, the audience made Trump look the Establishment Fighter his supporters love.

And now this audience has handed Trump a valid reason to violate the pledge he signed not to run as a third party candidate. There is no question the RNC did not play fair here, and a level playing field was the deal.

    Ragspierre in reply to Gary Britt. | February 15, 2016 at 5:05 pm

    “And now this audience has handed Trump a valid reason to violate the pledge he signed not to run as a third party candidate.”

    Oh, PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE call up on your Suck-line and URGE the stinking Collectivist liar, T=rump, to DO THAT…!!!!

    THAT would be SO AWESOME!

    Don’t talk about it, pussy. DO IT…!!!

Tell you what, Pussy-boi, don’t wait until Saturday…

PULL your name OFF the ballot for the SC primary.

DO IT NOW. No more talk. Time to show us some orbs, Collectivist gurli-man!

Arminius, please answer this question, is the below statement accurate or not ?

“The founders did NOT intend that the limits for public use and just compensation in the 5th amendment would ever apply to the state government powers of eminent domain.”

Just yes or no is sufficient. 25 paragraphs is not required.

    Arminius in reply to Gary Britt. | February 16, 2016 at 12:07 am

    A yes or no isn’t sufficient since you clearly require an education on the matter.

    Also, I’m not going to play your little game. You’re implying that the states were free to do what the federal government could not do.

    Wrong answer, socialist Gary.

    All the founders believed that the right to acquire right to acquire, possess and keep property was a natural right, embedded in the common law, dating back to the limits placed on the king’s power by the Magna Carta. Where else would they have derived their understanding of eminent domain? Slovenia?

    Had the states not already been placing the same limits on the power of eminent domain, the framers would have extended the Fifth Amendment to the states. It’s a matter of historical record that they considered doing so. Ultimately they decided such a “parchment protection” would have been redundant, and therefore unnecessary.

    So, no, in 1790s New Jersey it would have been just as illegal for the state of New Jersey to seize and old lady’s house and give to Trump so he could build a luxury horse and buggy parking lot for his casino as it would have been for the feds. Because they all derived their understanding from the same common law tradition.

    So you can’t pretend the language of the Fifth Amendment doesn’t matter. That language expresses the understanding of the limits on government’s power of eminent domain at all levels of government. It was incorporated in the Bill of Rights to make it explicit that private property rights were just as secure from the new federal government (which had no track record on the matter) as it already was in each individual state.

    Which, again, is why the framers decided they didn’t need to make the Fifth Amendment binding on the states.

    Nice try, socialist Gary.

    Arminius in reply to Gary Britt. | February 16, 2016 at 12:21 am

    “The founders did NOT intend that the limits for public use and just compensation in the 5th amendment would ever apply to the state government powers of eminent domain.”

    The founders DID intend that the limits for public use and just compensation DID apply to the states.

    But those limits were to be found in the common law. Since the states already incorporated those same common law restrictions, there was no need to make the Fifth Amendment binding on the states.

Oh oh, First fully POST DEBATE South Carolina poll is out. Trump has 19% point lead. Cruz and Rubio tied for Second, Bush 1 point behind in third.

South Carolina (SC House GOP): Trump 33, Cruz/Rubio 14, Bush 13, Kasich 10

    Note that Trump leads across all groups and demographics. All ages, moderate, conservative, tea party.

    No wonder Cruz is out telling some many lies so often !!

    Ragspierre in reply to Gary Britt. | February 15, 2016 at 7:12 pm

    What’s hilarious, you moron, is that you STILL don’t get the idea of averages.

    This RCP one includes the completely implausible CBS nonsense poll.

    Too funny…!!!

      You know what is really funny? When some stupid insignificant asshole like you gets the basic facts wrong because your reading comprehension is so poor and then you go on a name calling rant triggered by your own stupidity.

      As is clearly marked in my post the poll is not the RCP average you retard it is the SC House GOP poll.

      Maybe you could get Cruz to lay hands on you and pray that your damaged brain be healed.

      Can I get an amen!

“Here we are in a Republican primary, and Donald Trump, out of the blue, starts blaming the Bush family for 9/11, for knowing that the intelligence was made up, that there never were any weapons of mass destruction, and they knew it, Trump said.

Michael Moore doesn’t even say that…

On the stage at a Republican debate, Donald Trump defended Planned Parenthood. Not the abortion stuff, he said, but the fact that they do great things for women’s health. Folks, there were a number of occasions where Donald Trump sounded like the Daily Kos blog, where Donald Trump sounded like the Democrat Underground, sounded like any average host on MSNBC.”

Yeeeeeup. He SOUNDS like that because he IS that.

He’s a lying, fraudulent, Collectivist thug. He was, he is, and he will be.

    Arminius in reply to Ragspierre. | February 16, 2016 at 12:15 am

    I have a strong suspicion that Trump is only running for the the GOP nomination to foul the nest, fling fesces, and create a sufficiently toxic atmosphere that no Republican appears electable. Including Trump.

    Clearing the way for his BFF Hillary Clinton.

    He’s been a Democrat all his life. That circus he made of the debate on Saturday shows he still is.

During the February 2005 oral argument in the Kelo case, the lawyer for New London urged the justices to give government officials the broadest leeway possible in eminent domain disputes.

But Justice Scalia was not feeling so generous. Under your theory, Scalia asked the lawyer, “you could take [private property] from A and give it to B if B is richer, and would pay higher municipal taxes, couldn’t you?”

“Yes, Your Honor,” the lawyer conceded.

“For example,” interjected Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, “Motel 6 and the city thinks, well, if we had a Ritz-Carlton, we would have higher taxes. Now, is that okay?”

“Yes, Your Honor, that would be okay,” the lawyer conceded again. In other words, because private property can almost always be put to a more profitable purpose, the government can effectively take any private property it wants for any “development” scheme it happens to cook up. So much for the text of the Fifth Amendment.

In the end, of course, Scalia and O’Connor were outvoted. Liberal Justice John Paul Stevens, joined by Justices Anthony Kennedy, David Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, and Stephen Breyer, gave the government all the leeway it needed to kick people out of their homes and wipe their neighborhoods off the map. “The disposition of this case,” Stevens announced, “turns on the question of whether the City’s development plan serves a ‘public purpose.’ Without exception, our cases have defined that concept broadly, reflecting our longstanding policy of deference to legislative judgments in this field.”

The Kelo case has been in the news again recently thanks to the presidential campaign of Republican Donald Trump. In Trump’s oft-stated view, Kelo is a “wonderful” decision that should be respected and emulated. Trump is also known for trying to personally profit from Kelo-style land grab.

Trump’s position is of course totally anathema to the position of Justice Scalia, who once went so far as to compare Kelo to Dred Scott. Perhaps when the next Republican presidential debate rolls around, one of the moderators will consider asking Trump why it is that he prefers the legal views of John Paul Stevens over those of Antonin Scalia on this matter.

There you go, Bierhall Bullyboi Brit.

Argue with Justice Scalia, you piece of Collectivist sharia.

Oh oh. Second post debate poll in SC shows Trump leading by 17% points with Cruz tied with Rubio for second/third place. According to PPP Poll.

Donald Trump still is leading the S.C. Republican presidential race after the weekend’s explosive GOP debate in Greenville.

But the race for second place in Saturday’s primary appears to be narrowing.

Behind Trump, who has 35 percent support in the poll, U.S. Sens. Marco Rubio of Florida and Ted Cruz of Texas are tied for second place — at 18 percent each, according to a Public Policy Polling survey released exclusively Monday to The State.

Ohio Gov. John Kasich is in forth at 10 percent support, followed by former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush and retired neurosurgeon Ben Carson, tied with 7 percent support each.

Public Policy interviewed 897 likely GOP primary voters Sunday and Monday – the first look at how after Saturday night’s Republican presidential debate affected the race. The poll has a margin of error of 3.3 percentage points.

I take it back. On an earlier Trump thread I said he wasn’t a clown. But that Trump is a self-promoter and a con man.

I was wrong. Trump is a self-promoter, a con man, a clown and an idiot.

He’s doubling down on his attacks on Bush. He’s now inventing a new retroactive reason for why he opposed the war in Iraq before the invasions. Which he didn’t; he supported it in his own damn book.

And it’s beyond stupid (video of Trump spewing this moronic gas at the link).

“Donald Trump: Well, that, the war with Iraq which started this whole thing, the whole thing starts with the war in Iraq. You know, Saddam Hussein was a terrible guy but one thing about him, he killed terrorists.

Read more:

If you know anything about Saddam Hussein, you know he supported terrorism. He supported terrorism before Desert Storm, he tried to get the terrorist groups he had supported to commit acts of terror against US interests at home and abroad during Desert Storm, and one of his multiple violations of the ceasefire was he continued his support of terrorism throughout the ’90s and until GWB politely requested the US military to discomfort Hussein by invading his miserable country and capturing and killing him.

Which we were only too happy to do because we were sick and tired of the @$$hole shooting at our planes.

His support of terrorism was so extensive, and such a threat, that it was right up there with his WMD programs as a justification for invading Iraq.

“PUBLIC LAW 107–243—OCT. 16, 2002


Whereas after the liberation of Kuwait in 1991, Iraq entered into
a United Nations sponsored cease-fire agreement pursuant to
which Iraq unequivocally agreed, among other things, to eliminate
its nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons programs and the
means to deliver and develop them, and to end its support for
international terrorism;…”

Will the fact that Trump is either the YUUUGEST liar ever to run fro President on the GOP or a blithering effect Trump worshippers like socialist Gary? Hell, no. When it’s true love, you don’t facts. You don’t need reality.

Trump is socialist Gary’s reality, his world, his sweet, sweet love.

Meet one of the terrorists idiot Trump thinks Saddam Hussein killed.

“By Sue Chan CBS April 16, 2003, 7:48 AM

Achille Lauro Hijacker Nabbed In Iraq

U.S. officials say Abu Abbas, a notorious Palestinian terrorist who masterminded the 1985 hijacking of the Achille Lauro cruise ship in the Mediterranean, has been captured by U.S. forces in Iraq.

Abbas, who had moved to Iraq to escape the reach of American law enforcement, is wanted for the murder of Leon Klinghoffer, a wheelchair-bound American passenger who was shot and tossed overboard.

Lisa and Ilsa Klinghoffer, the daughters of Leon Klinghoffer, say the arrest of Abul Abbas will send a message to other terrorists.

CBS News Correspondent David Martin reports Abbas was taken into custody by American special operations forces during a raid Monday night on the outskirts of the capital city.

Officials also say several associates of Abbas were detained during raids at several sites around Baghdad. Commandos, tipped off by U.S. intelligence to Abbas’ whereabouts, seized documents documents – including Yemeni and Lebanese passports — and weapons such as rocket-propelled grenades…”

Socialist Gary likes to accuse people drinking Trump’s kool aid. That’s nothing compared to how much of Trump’s crack he’s smoking (double entendre intended).

Abu Abbas fled to Iraq because killing terrorists was the farthest thing from Saddam Hussein’s mind. Abu Abbas fled to Iraq because he knew he’d be protected, he’d get financing, he’d be equipped, any “associates” or even he could get training from Iraqi military or intelligence services, he’d be armed.

One of the ways Saddam Hussein equipped terrorists was providing them with passports. Ramzi Youssef, the mastermind of the 1993 WTC bombing entered the US with a valid Iraqi passport and claimed to want political asylum. With that passport, and that story, he only had to answer a few questions, get some entry documents, and within a few minutes he was free as a bird in NYC.

Hussein attempted to reinvent himself as a holy Muslim jihadist during Desert Storm. During the conflict he changed the Iraqi flag by putting the takbir (Allahu Akbar) on it, supposedly in his own handwriting.

After Desert Storm he doubled down on his support for terrorism, basically to give the US the finger and to show the Arab world he was defying the US and there was nothing the infidels could do about it.

Throughout the ’90s he hosted several of what can only be called terrorist summits in Baghdad. The who’s-who of Islamic terror groups attended. He also famously and publicly provided generous payments to the families of Pali suicide bombers who managed to infiltrate into Israel and blow themselves up.

Trump lies often. Trump lies a lot. But this is a really stupid, stupid, obvious lie.

Not like his Trumpster fanbois are going to care.

Trump pretends to care about the WTC attack on 9/11 (you’d think he’d also care about the 1993 WTC attack; it was the same building although I don’t believe he had any friends working there in 1993 or in 2001).

In actuality if he gave a rat’s @$$ he’d know better than to cling to this lie about Saddam Hussein killing terrorists. Iraq provided material support to the terrorists who committed both attacks.

“A United States federal judge has ruled that Iraq provided material support to Osama bin Laden and his terrorist group al-Qaeda for the September 11, 2001, attack and is liable to pay $US104 million ($163 million) in damages to two victims’ families.

The ruling, by Manhattan District Judge Harold Baer, is the first court decision stemming from the September 11 terrorist attacks.

…During the two-day hearing lawyers for the two families presented evidence that established a “conclusive link” between Saddam’s Iraq and bin Laden’s terrorist army.

The evidence included slides and declassified interviews with Iraqi military leaders who defected. They told a television news program that Saddam had a jet parked in a remote area of Iraq that, they claimed, was used to train hijackers. Evidence also featured the testimony of a former CIA director, James Woolsey.

“I conclude that the plaintiffs have shown, albeit barely, by evidence satisfactory to the court that Iraq provided material support to bin Laden and al-Qaeda,” Judge Baer wrote.”

Enough evidence is enough evidence. The plaintiffs cleared that hurdle and that’s all that matters. No need to gild the lily.

Well, that isn’t all that matters. Judge Harold Baer awarded the bereaved $104 million to be paid out of frozen Iraqi assets. But the Bush administration stepped in and asserted their prior claim to that money. They said that money belonged to the new government of Iraq and they needed all of it for Iraq’s reconstruction. Which I thought was a crappy thing to do as they wouldn’t have missed a lousy $104 million out of what was then at least $1.7 billion.

The bottom line is Saddam Hussein had his hand in a lot of terrorist activity including the WTC attack he pretends to care so much about.

If he did care, he wouldn’t be mouthing off about how it was a YUUGE mistake to take the bastard out.

The lying sack of excrement.