[TheRealThing]

Julian Assange says he has hacked emails which prove that Hillary lied to the Senate commission, and particularly in response to Rand Paul's question regarding US involvement in arms traffic routed through the CIA Annex at Benghazi.
http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2016/08/01...n-exports/


It is possible that his promised release of these emails will shock American media and they will finally stop covering for Hillary? Speculation: if the 33,000 emails were only about yoga, I would think she'd be calling for the release ASAP.

[Granny Bear]

I had never heard of this man until luke skywalker told me about him. He has no love for either the Democratic or Republican parties and has some unflattering things to say about both candidates.

I am anxious to hear the next release of emails, scheduled at the end of this month, I believe. However, I am VERY anxious to hear the ones that is scheduled for release on October.

I doubt that anything will influence the media one way or the other. I used to be proud of the way the news was reported in America; these days I am ashamed.

[The Urban Sombrero]

I disagree with the premise of this thread. The United States of America does not need to be "saved" in the manner intended by the premise of this thread.

[TheRealThing]

I disagree with the premise of this thread. The United States of America does not need to be "saved" in the manner intended by the premise of this thread.

We differ.

[The Urban Sombrero]

⬆⬆ All I can conclude from this thread is that its originator is so convinced that Roe v. Wade and Obergefell v. Hodges have so angered God that America is in need of saving from Justices that will uphold those rulings.

Beyond that, it is difficult for me to see the "at a precipice" hyperbole this thread suggests.

[Granny Bear]

You are incredibly arrogant!

[The Urban Sombrero]

You are incredibly arrogant!

Granny Bear, Harlan County's own, care to offer your analysis of this "maybe Julian can save us from Hillary's dragging the nation to its demise" thread?

[Granny Bear]

Nope.

You know a great deal for someone who has never been here before February 2016.
nicker:

[TheRealThing]

⬆⬆ All I can conclude from this thread is that its originator is so convinced that Roe v. Wade and Obergefell v. Hodges have so angered God that America is in need of saving from Justices that will uphold those rulings.

Beyond that, it is difficult for me to see the "at a precipice" hyperbole this thread suggests.

Liberals seem scared to death of Julian Assange and those emails. There is not one person who understands the situation regarding those 33,000 deleted emails, which should have been the property of the people BTW, who has not entertained at least a brief moment of doubt IMHO. To repeat. If they were only about yoga and wedding stuff, why worry, right? And after all, if Assange really has something, they had to be hacked prior to the deletions.

The Supreme Court has reversed itself in the past, Lochner v. New York (1905) and Adkins v. Children's Hospital (1923) ; Chisholm v. Georgia (1793) ; Adler v. Board of Education (1952) ; Bowers v. Hardwick (1986) ; Pace v. Alabama (1883) ; and others. They can reverse themselves again concerning abortion and gay marriage if a new case so inspires.

Assange has already proven he's not shooting blanks about this, and certainly not about the releases of the past. I don't know if it's true on not, but Rand Paul thought he was on to something. Let the system work.

But yes, I do believe that God will not continue to tolerate the Church's failure to oppose abortion on demand and gay marriage. It should be done with respect, keeping at the forefront of the dispute the fact that it is God's law which is being run over, not the law of men. And not in judgmental terms.

Past that and on secular terms, the societies of the past which eventually slid into similar moral lapse, inevitably went through structural and social decline, fell and disappeared. In exactly the same manner the human body exhibits symptoms associated with various disease, short lived societies manifest rampant homosexuality towards their end. The historical record is replete with examples. I'm not judging the batter, just calling the balls and strikes.

[The Urban Sombrero]

Nope.

You know a great deal for someone who has never been here before February 2016.
nicker:

I can archive-search posts and posters.

[luke skywalker]

Liberals seem scared to death of Julian Assange and those emails. There is not one person who understands the situation regarding those 33,000 deleted emails, which should have been the property of the people BTW, who has not entertained at least a brief moment of doubt IMHO. To repeat. If they were only about yoga and wedding stuff, why worry, right? And after all, if Assange really has something, they had to be hacked prior to the deletions.

The Supreme Court has reversed itself in the past, Lochner v. New York (1905) and Adkins v. Children's Hospital (1923) ; Chisholm v. Georgia (1793) ; Adler v. Board of Education (1952) ; Bowers v. Hardwick (1986) ; Pace v. Alabama (1883) ; and others. They can reverse themselves again concerning abortion and gay marriage if a new case so inspires.

Assange has already proven he's not shooting blanks about this, and certainly not about the releases of the past. I don't know if it's true on not, but Rand Paul thought he was on to something. Let the system work.

But yes, I do believe that God will not continue to tolerate the Church's failure to oppose abortion on demand and gay marriage. It should be done with respect, keeping at the forefront of the dispute the fact that it is God's law which is being run over, not the law of men. And not in judgmental terms.

Past that and on secular terms, the societies of the past which eventually slid into similar moral lapse, inevitably went through structural and social decline, fell and disappeared. In exactly the same manner the human body exhibits symptoms associated with various disease, short lived societies manifest rampant homosexuality towards their end. The historical record is replete with examples. I'm not judging the batter, just calling the balls and strikes.

The email dump in October is the one to watch out for. Those will prove once again Hillary lied under oath, not that that's a shock to anyone. The substance of those emails should shock any sane person.

[TheRealThing]

The email dump in October is the one to watch out for. Those will prove once again Hillary lied under oath, not that that's a shock to anyone. The substance of those emails should shock any sane person.

October will see WikiLeaks, November will see the real numbers on ObamaScare. :yikes:

[RunItUpTheGut]

It truly doesnt matter what the emails say or dont say.
Stupid liberals will vote Clinton no matter what happens. The media has already brain washed them this cycle into believing what they want them too.
If Trump wins it will be because he earns the votes, not because hillary is the POS we all know her to be.

[Hoot Gibson]

I really hate to agree with RIUTG, but he is exactly right. If intentionally mishandling hundreds of classified documents was not enough to destroy Hillary's core support, then it is unlikely any new emails will be enough to vault Trump to a win. So far, despite running against the second worst presidential candidate in history, Trump has done nothing to earn anybody's vote, IMO. In fact, if a candidate wanted to do long term damage to the GOP and hand the election to Hillary on a silver platter, his campaign would look a lot like Trump's campaign.

[Granny Bear]

Since Assange makes it a practice to never reveal sources, he sure is hinting strongly at one of his "probable" sources of information being murdered.

I remember reading about this and wondering why the police had officially categorized this as a robbery, when the victim's wallet and watch were not taken. This man was shot numerous times in the back.

Sure fits the history of the Clintons' way of handling loose ends, IMO.

[Pick6]

Is there a connection between the recently executed Iranian scientist and the Clinton private server emails? If information leaked from the Clinton private server led to the death of an informant, that might actually register.

[TheRealThing]

In addition to WikeLeaks and the true individual cost of ObamaScare, add Judicial Watch to the list of those who could reveal horrifying things to come under another Clinton Presidency.

EXCERPT---
"Despite denials that the State Department and the Clinton Foundation had any significant ties to each other while Hillary Clinton served as the nation's chief diplomat, a new batch of emails sheds new light on the seemingly close relationship between the two entities.

The latest email release, obtained by the group Judicial Watch from a State Department Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request, included several exchanges between a top foundation worker and State officials working under Clinton."
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/emails-show-...oundation/

But the question begs to be asked; How much bad would be enough, to dissuade the in-the-tank media and the takers from their rabid support of Hillary?

[Pick6]

In addition to WikeLeaks and the true individual cost of ObamaScare, add Judicial Watch to the list of those who could reveal horrifying things to come under another Clinton Presidency.

EXCERPT---
"Despite denials that the State Department and the Clinton Foundation had any significant ties to each other while Hillary Clinton served as the nation's chief diplomat, a new batch of emails sheds new light on the seemingly close relationship between the two entities.

The latest email release, obtained by the group Judicial Watch from a State Department Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request, included several exchanges between a top foundation worker and State officials working under Clinton."
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/emails-show-...oundation/

But the question begs to be asked; How much bad would be enough, to dissuade the in-the-tank media and the takers from their rabid support of Hillary?

I am convinced the left is totally inoculated from reality. The political media are TOLD what to think and write. Hillary is already "connected" to many crimes, what is a half dozen more?

Only war or economic depression is going to bring the liberal world to its senses. I fully expect HRC to deliver on both!

[TheRealThing]

I am convinced the left is totally inoculated from reality. The political media are TOLD what to think and write. Hillary is already "connected" to many crimes, what is a half dozen more?

Only war or economic depression is going to bring the liberal world to its senses. I fully expect HRC to deliver on both!

LOL just heard on FOX Business, the latest batch of emails shows there are more 'connections' between the Clinton Foundation and Hillary's State Department, than there are on Match.Com. :hilarious:

[WideRight05]

In addition to WikeLeaks and the true individual cost of ObamaScare, add Judicial Watch to the list of those who could reveal horrifying things to come under another Clinton Presidency.

EXCERPT---
"Despite denials that the State Department and the Clinton Foundation had any significant ties to each other while Hillary Clinton served as the nation's chief diplomat, a new batch of emails sheds new light on the seemingly close relationship between the two entities.

The latest email release, obtained by the group Judicial Watch from a State Department Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request, included several exchanges between a top foundation worker and State officials working under Clinton."
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/emails-show-...oundation/

But the question begs to be asked; How much bad would be enough, to dissuade the in-the-tank media and the takers from their rabid support of Hillary?

We may see the media start attacking Hillary soon. The election is coming closer and Bill Clinton is beginning to realize that he will actually have to sleep next to Hillary should she win.

[TheRealThing]

We may see the media start attacking Hillary soon. The election is coming closer and Bill Clinton is beginning to realize that he will actually have to sleep next to Hillary should she win.

I really hope the media starts to come around soon but I wonder. I listened to Judy Miller this morning on Varney and Co. She's supposed to be revered as an objective and scrupled journalist. I thought she was anything but, as she launched off into a tirade about perceived Trump failings whose origins were straight from the bowels of the DNC, and her list of character flaws was nothing short of epic in scope.

One oft quoted charge by media and Dems that she parroted was that Trump is racially biased, and she linked it to Muslim immigration. I've said this before and it bears repeating here again. Equating Trump's concerns about our government's policy of using tax payer dollars no less, to roundup and import an ISIS fifth column within our very borders, is like saying we should have done the same thing for unvetted NAZI's in WW2. Both are sworn enemies of the USA, and both openly vowed to destroy our nation. On the one hand the Judy Millers of the world insist that we not be the world's policemen, while on the other insisting just as vehemently that we are responsible none the less, to somehow cure the world's ills. Such are the lunacy and the naïve notions of he bleeding heart left who dodge personal responsibility, and at the same time insist that every man (even terrorists) should enjoy the benefits of a personally responsible lifestyle. She went on to make rash statement and charge after rash statement and charge. All of which could have easily fit the definition of a lie.

Politically charged opinion, baseless conjecture and unsubstantiated predictions are not news. For example, Miller claimed there has been 'nothing specific' or substantive in Mr Trump's economic policy statements. As if the tripledown by Hillary vowing to extend the Obama doctrine is a viable foundation on which to build her own ridiculous promises of good things to come. What was the definition of insanity again? To keep doing the same thing and expect a different outcome? One can only be so specific, I mean, it's like they expect a DVD of the future for proof or something. Miller's absurd demand for proof, which no candidate has ever delivered nor could they, is in and of itself patently dishonest; While she ignores the proof that lies all around us. For example, the fact that under current financial policy the wealth of this nation is gone.

Allow me to explain. Our GNP may be defined as follows; the total wealth of all goods and services, wages, and holdings at the industrial and commercial level such as business facilities, plants, and industrial complexes, plus all goods, wages, possessions, property such as homes, stocks, bonds, IRA's and pensions at the individual level during any given year. In other words, if you stuck a for sale sign on the entirety of the US, what would it's worth be en-toto, down to the last yo-yo. The middle class to me, can be compared to the oceans of this planet. It is there that the health of the planet derives from, healthy oceans, healthy world eco-systems. The wealth of the middle class then is the best way to gauge the wealth of the country.

We have no wealth in the broadest sense. Bank accounts are generally anemic as at least 42% of all American's who hold jobs live from check to check. Add to that the fact that it is now recognized that over 50% of all Americans get some form of government assistance. We have a miserable 62% labor participation rate, a 1% growth rate, a near zero % interest rate, and a zero % rate of return, and I defy anybody to somehow say all those 'givens' can be credibly used to make a financial happy face. In fact, our last bastion of personal wealth is home equity, (which BTW was born initially of sound fiscal reasoning in requiring buyers to put some skin in the game in the form of down payments and debt to value ratio standards) , but we are burning through our home equity as fast as we can borrow the money to so do. I believe the true driver right now of the economy, anemic as it is, is the refi industry. And what happens to everybody who at some point runs up against the reality that he has no more equity to use and has to face the inevitable? They either have to cut back and live within their means, which is a moving target anyway in this economy, or they find themselves on the curb.

For we Americans the ocean is dry. And yet though we all stand here staring down into a bottomless economic pit which makes the Grand Canyon seem like a divot on a golf course, we are none the less poised to elect Hillary Clinton to the White House. The word incredible does not start to capture the insanity from my perspective.

[WideRight05]

I really hope the media starts to come around soon but I wonder. I listened to Judy Miller this morning on Varney and Co. She's supposed to be revered as an objective and scrupled journalist. I thought she was anything but, as she launched off into a tirade about perceived Trump failings whose origins were straight from the bowels of the DNC, and her list of character flaws was nothing short of epic in scope.

One oft quoted charge by media and Dems that she parroted was that Trump is racially biased, and she linked it to Muslim immigration. I've said this before and it bears repeating here again. Equating Trump's concerns about our government's policy of using tax payer dollars no less, to roundup and import an ISIS fifth column within our very borders, is like saying we should have done the same thing for unvetted NAZI's in WW2. Both are sworn enemies of the USA, and both openly vowed to destroy our nation. On the one hand the Judy Millers of the world insist that we not be the world's policemen, while on the other insisting just as vehemently that we are responsible none the less, to somehow cure the world's ills. Such are the lunacy and the naïve notions of he bleeding heart left who dodge personal responsibility, and at the same time insist that every man (even terrorists) should enjoy the benefits of a personally responsible lifestyle. She went on to make rash statement and charge after rash statement and charge. All of which could have easily fit the definition of a lie.

Politically charged opinion, baseless conjecture and unsubstantiated predictions are not news. For example, Miller claimed there has been 'nothing specific' or substantive in Mr Trump's economic policy statements. As if the tripledown by Hillary vowing to extend the Obama doctrine is a viable foundation on which to build her own ridiculous promises of good things to come. What was the definition of insanity again? To keep doing the same thing and expect a different outcome? One can only be so specific, I mean, it's like they expect a DVD of the future for proof or something. Miller's absurd demand for proof, which no candidate has ever delivered nor could they, is in and of itself patently dishonest; While she ignores the proof that lies all around us. For example, the fact that under current financial policy the wealth of this nation is gone.

Allow me to explain. Our GNP may be defined as follows; the total wealth of all goods and services, wages, and holdings at the industrial and commercial level such as business facilities, plants, and industrial complexes, plus all goods, wages, possessions, property such as homes, stocks, bonds, IRA's and pensions at the individual level during any given year. In other words, if you stuck a for sale sign on the entirety of the US, what would it's worth be en-toto, down to the last yo-yo. The middle class to me, can be compared to the oceans of this planet. It is there that the health of the planet derives from, healthy oceans, healthy world eco-systems. The wealth of the middle class then is the best way to gauge the wealth of the country.

We have no wealth in the broadest sense. Bank accounts are generally anemic as at least 42% of all American's who hold jobs live from check to check. Add to that the fact that it is now recognized that over 50% of all Americans get some form of government assistance. We have a miserable 62% labor participation rate, a 1% growth rate, a near zero % interest rate, and a zero % rate of return, and I defy anybody to somehow say all those 'givens' can be credibly used to make a financial happy face. In fact, our last bastion of personal wealth is home equity, (which BTW was born initially of sound fiscal reasoning in requiring buyers to put some skin in the game in the form of down payments and debt to value ratio standards) , but we are burning through our home equity as fast as we can borrow the money to so do. I believe the true driver right now of the economy, anemic as it is, is the refi industry. And what happens to everybody who at some point runs up against the reality that he has no more equity to use and has to face the inevitable? They either have to cut back and live within their means, which is a moving target anyway in this economy, or they find themselves on the curb.

For we Americans the ocean is dry. And yet though we all stand here staring down into a bottomless economic pit which makes the Grand Canyon seem like a divot on a golf course, we are none the less poised to elect Hillary Clinton to the White House. The word incredible does not start to capture the insanity from my perspective.

I was more joking about the media flipping on Hillary, maybe it will happen if something overly drastic occurs but after all the scandals she's had and still no alarm, they probably won't.

Now that I think about it more, slick Willie will likely have more access to interns if he wins....so he might encourage them to remain biased.

I actually will cede to you about Trump being perceived as a racist. I think he is crazy in a lot of ways and he flip flops a lot, but he's no racist. Same with his supporters. I don't like a lot of them for reasons we have discussed like with Trump, but an overwhelming majority of them are not racists.

[Hoot Gibson]

The mainstream media, aside from the Fox News Channel, is very biased against Donald Trump. However, rather than repeatedly referring to the "avalanche" or tsunami of media lies, it would be great if the Trumpsters would detail and refute those lies. I question the need to fabricate lies about either Trump or Hillary when the truth about both candidates is so damning.

What, specifically, has the media lied about with regard to Trump?

IMO, the worst kind of media bias is the following:

1. Refusing to cover stories damaging to the candidate of their choice.

2. Blanket coverage of damaging stories about their candidate's opponent.

3. Article placement - positive stories about the media's favorite get front page coverage (or lede story coverage in the non-print media), while positive stories about their chosen candidate's opponent get buried - and vice versa for negative stories.

4. Story "legs" - the duration and volume of negative and positive media coverage of political stories based on how the media determines it will help or hurt their candidate of choice.

While I agree that there has been heavy media bias in favor of Hillary Clinton and against Donald Trump, but I wish Trump's most enthusiastic supporter would be more specific about media "lies" about Donald Trump. I think that he may be mistaking blog coverage for media coverage again. :biglmao:

If there is a multitude of media lies about Mr. Trump, then supporters should be more specific and stop demonizing the media with blanket statements. Media bias in favor of liberals is bad enough without exaggerating it.

As for media bias against conservatives, that is not happening because there is neither the Democrat or Republican candidate remotely resemble a conservative. Bias against conservatives in the media ceased when Donald Trump won the nomination. Now, it is simply garden variety media bias in favor of liberals, with FNC backing their liberal candidate, and most of the rest of the media backing Hillary Clinton.

[TheRealThing]

Varney & Company runs for 3 hours every week day, Lou Dobbs is on for an hour each night. Now that Neil Cavuto is down with heart issues, Charles Payne has been on in the afternoon for two hours each day. That's on FOX Business. On the parent channel Bill O'Reilly and Hannity represent two more hours of reasonably unbiased reporting, not to mention the Saturday shows. These guys give the Trump lie debunking all they've got and still can't get around to all that would be necessary in order to accomplish the task.

There is an absolute avalanche of lies, which is threatened to be washed away by a tsunami of lies. I write about some of the things I feel to be noteworthy.

[Hoot Gibson]

Varney & Company runs for 3 hours every week day, Lou Dobbs is on for an hour each night. Now that Neil Cavuto is down with heart issues, Charles Payne has been on in the afternoon for two hours each day. That's on FOX Business. On the parent channel Bill O'Reilly and Hannity represent two more hours of reasonably unbiased reporting, not to mention the Saturday shows. These guys give the Trump lie debunking all they've got and still can't get around to all that would be necessary in order to accomplish the task.

There is an absolute avalanche of lies, which is threatened to be washed away by a tsunami of lies. I write about some of the things I feel to be noteworthy.

Avalanches and tsunamis of lies. If there have been so many lies, it should not be difficult for you to refute a few of them with specifics, yet you have declined that opportunity repeatedly. Fox News Channel is a Trump propaganda machine, just as CNN is for Hillary. I have witnessed Trump and Hillary lie day after day with my own eyes and ears. Who needs to rely on the professional opinion makers to judge two candidates as bad as Hillary and Trump? They can and do speak for themselves.

[TheRealThing]

Avalanches and tsunamis of lies. If there have been so many lies, it should not be difficult for you to refute a few of them with specifics, yet you have declined that opportunity repeatedly. Fox News Channel is a Trump propaganda machine, just as CNN is for Hillary. I have witnessed Trump and Hillary lie day after day with my own eyes and ears. Who needs to rely on the professional opinion makers to judge two candidates as bad as Hillary and Trump? They can and do speak for themselves.

I have refuted them, especially the ones you have spewed out on this forum, time and time again. As to this idea about opinion makers goes, you at one time said you were going to vote for Trump. Then like throwing a switch, you went OCD in a millisecond and began posting hundreds of distortion infused tirades with which you intended to do Trump damage.

I don't think you can discern truth from lies. I believe the record of our founding clearly shows the deference the framers gave to our Creator, as should we. To do that requires more than a passing personal commitment, something most just cannot muster. In the foolhardy effort to separate Spiritual truth from Constitutional truth we have forfeited two things, the authority to govern, and the ability to distinguish right from wrong. And I believe your inability to interface the truths of His Word with the realities of this world limits you profoundly in general terms. But you insist that voting for the lesser of two flawed candidates is beneath your highly evolved political sensitivities, a rationale that is as shallow in my view, as it is untethered in any practical sense. An honest comparison between her record and Trump's, disqualifies her candidacy on moral and ethical grounds, and frankly most would add legal.

You're continually sidestepping the forest while looking for the trees. And your objectivity is clouded by a bias that would be obvious to even the most causal reader. Saying that, Chris Christie would be an excellent AG. John Bolton an excellent Secretary of State. Any of the Judges listed by Mr Trump as potential Supreme Court appointees would be a God send for this country. Mike Pence is probably the most solid choice for VP of any I have seen in my entire lifetime. And the list goes on without drop off from there. The point is as I have already offered back before there was any evidence that I was right, in which I said that Trump, in Reaganesque style, will surround himself with good people and he will give them the space necessary to fulfill their duties.

If elected, things will get much better for this country in the first year. In fact, I've yet to hear any official from the Reagan administration come forth to denounce Trump on policy grounds or any other for that matter. But there is one thing about you that you'll never worm your way out of, and that is the way that you have campaigned for Hillary. Given your ambitious, voluntary and persistent assaults on Trump, even Hillary's most servile and shameless adherent would view you a suitor to keep an eye on.

[Hoot Gibson]

I have refuted them, especially the ones you have spewed out on this forum, time and time again. As to this idea about opinion makers goes, you at one time said you were going to vote for Trump. Then like throwing a switch, you went OCD in a millisecond and began posting hundreds of distortion infused tirades with which you intended to do Trump damage.

I don't think you can discern truth from lies. I believe the record of our founding clearly shows the deference the framers gave to our Creator, as should we. To do that requires more than a passing personal commitment, something most just cannot muster. In the foolhardy effort to separate Spiritual truth from Constitutional truth we have forfeited two things, the authority to govern, and the ability to distinguish right from wrong. And I believe your inability to interface the truths of His Word with the realities of this world limits you profoundly in general terms. But you insist that voting for the lesser of two flawed candidates is beneath your highly evolved political sensitivities, a rationale that is as shallow in my view, as it is untethered in any practical sense. An honest comparison between her record and Trump's, disqualifies her candidacy on moral and ethical grounds, and frankly most would add legal.

You're continually sidestepping the forest while looking for the trees. And your objectivity is clouded by a bias that would be obvious to even the most causal reader. Saying that, Chris Christie would be an excellent AG. John Bolton an excellent Secretary of State. Any of the Judges listed by Mr Trump as potential Supreme Court appointees would be a God send for this country. Mike Pence is probably the most solid choice for VP of any I have seen in my entire lifetime. And the list goes on without drop off from there. The point is as I have already offered back before there was any evidence that I was right, in which I said that Trump, in Reaganesque style, will surround himself with good people and he will give them the space necessary to fulfill their duties.

If elected, things will get much better for this country in the first year. In fact, I've yet to hear any official from the Reagan administration come forth to denounce Trump on policy grounds or any other for that matter. But there is one thing about you that you'll never worm your way out of, and that is the way that you have campaigned for Hillary. Given your ambitious, voluntary and persistent assaults on Trump, even Hillary's most servile and shameless adherent would view you a suitor to keep an eye on.

I never said I was voting for Trump. You are lying again, and once again you are declining to elaborate on the avalanche/tsunami of lies that you claim the media has perpetrated about Trump. As I have said before, nobody wastes more words than you do while contributing so little substance to a debate.

Again, I challenge you to stop generalizing about the media lies about Trump and start refuting them. Unlike you, I cast a vote against Hillary Clinton in a primary election and for a conservative named Ted Cruz. Cruz was always at the top of my list of candidates. I considered Trump, but put him on my "never, ever, not in a million years" list after he started smearing other Republicans with lie after lie. Character matters.

If I wanted to be treated to non-stop Trump propaganda, I would join you in spending my days and nights watching Fox News Network and Fox Business Channel. It should be easy for a Trump devotee such as yourself to meet my challenge and provide some specifics about the media lies about Trump. The media is obviously just as biased against Trump as they have been against every other Republican candidate who has run during the past four or five decades. Lying about such lousy candidates as Trump and Hillary is overkill, IMO, because the truth about them is devastating.

[TheRealThing]

I never said I was voting for Trump. You are lying again, and once again you are declining to elaborate on the avalanche/tsunami of lies that you claim the media has perpetrated about Trump. As I have said before, nobody wastes more words than you do while contributing so little substance to a debate.

Again, I challenge you to stop generalizing about the media lies about Trump and start refuting them. Unlike you, I cast a vote against Hillary Clinton in a primary election and for a conservative named Ted Cruz. Cruz was always at the top of my list of candidates. I considered Trump, but put him on my "never, ever, not in a million years" list after he started smearing other Republicans with lie after lie. Character matters.

If I wanted to be treated to non-stop Trump propaganda, I would join you in spending my days and nights watching Fox News Network and Fox Business Channel. It should be easy for a Trump devotee such as yourself to meet my challenge and provide some specifics about the media lies about Trump. The media is obviously just as biased against Trump as they have been against every other Republican candidate who has run during the past four or five decades. Lying about such lousy candidates as Trump and Hillary is overkill, IMO, because the truth about them is devastating.

At this time, I still plan to vote for Trump if he wins the Republican nomination,

but only to poke the GOP establishment in the eye. I hope that my fellow Republicans will be too smart to hand him the nomination. I believe that the signs that Trump's campaign is beginning to unravel have begun to emerge. I expect that Trump will lose in Iowa and I will not be shocked if he finishes third or fourth.

If Trump does not win Iowa, then the media will be forced to start giving more free coverage to another candidate or two. At that point, Trump will need to decide if he wants to start dipping into his own fortune to run a more conventional campaign with paid advertising.

Trump has almost universal name recognition, so I question whether saturating the airwaves with ads would really do much for his campaign anyway. Paid TV advertising is a little like air power in a war - if you don't have boots on the ground, it is difficult to capture and hold territory.

The Edge: Trump gets 25 times more media mentions than GOP field combined

I don't know if you've been struck temporarily stupid, or if you've gone senile or if you're just a little inept these days. I've NEVER lied on here, and therefore you will never catch me in the act of lying.

Declining to debate? What a laugh. I tell you what, you put up the lie you think Trump has told, and I will put up a response.

[Hoot Gibson]

I don't know if you've been struck temporarily stupid, or if you've gone senile or if you're just a little inept these days. I've NEVER lied on here, and therefore you will never catch me in the act of lying.

I tell you what. You put up the lie you think Trump has told, and I will put up a response.

I have put up lie after lie that Trump has told, and your only responses have been personal insults. You are the one who has repeatedly dismissed criticism of Trump as nothing but lies. You are the one who needs to demonstrate that the criticism of Trump is based on media lies.

Your personal attacks on Trump's behalf remind me of Hillary's conspiracy allegations of a "vast right wing conspiracy." She never offers any evidence to support her nutty allegations about the media and neither do you.

Trump's poor polling numbers and his historic levels of "negatives" are all on Trump and the people who believed and continue to claim that he is a conservative. Trump is already talking about what a loss will mean to him. He has no intention of investing the time and money that it would take for him to win.

Trump is probably campaigning in Connecticut because it is close to home, because there is no way any Republican candidate would have carried that deep blue state.

[TheRealThing]

I have put up lie after lie that Trump has told, and your only responses have been personal insults. You are the one who has repeatedly dismissed criticism of Trump as nothing but lies. You are the one who needs to demonstrate that the criticism of Trump is based on media lies.

Your personal attacks on Trump's behalf remind me of Hillary's conspiracy allegations of a "vast right wing conspiracy." She never offers any evidence to support her nutty allegations about the media and neither do you.

Trump's poor polling numbers and his historic levels of "negatives" are all on Trump and the people who believed and continue to claim that he is a conservative. Trump is already talking about what a loss will mean to him. He has no intention of investing the time and money that it would take for him to win.

Trump is probably campaigning in Connecticut because it is close to home, because there is no way any Republican candidate would have carried that deep blue state.

Whatever, you just got SERVED in epic fashion and everybody including you knows it. You did say you were going to vote for Trump and though we all know reality is subjective to you, it is none the less a matter of record and therefore somewhat more tangible for the rest of us. Besides, you have to talk out of both sides of your mouth because your foot is always firmly inserted.