Zed,

"I interact with you, BILL, because you've helped me a conceive a whole new slant on the nature of evil."

It is quite interesting the way liberal leaning and conservative leaning people are able to look at the world so differently.

Perhaps the difference between me and you is that I see good and bad virtues in both.

You, apparently, can only see anything positive with liberals, while conservatives are automatically cast as villains.

2020,

"MAGATs wouldn't say a peep if Orange Bastid kicked in their door, kicked their dog, slapped their children, fucked their wife, and fled the scene in their car."

If he would leave me some of the 1.7 billion, how can you object?

I can buy another car.

Chan,

"Oh goodie, another thread for BJ to practice his self flagellation."

That's actually funny.

But why self-flagellate when there's a line of eager participants willing to do it for you?

Saves effort on my part, and we both get something out of it.

Dan,

"Is that what YOU believe, Bill?"

To some degree.

It's certainly possible Obama was used as a baseline or for comparison, behind the scenes.

Or even that people point-blank asked for his opinion.

This really isn't anything new in politics.

Dan,

"The definition of lawfare is prosecuting someone for an action ANYONE ELSE COULD DO WITHOUT FEAR OF LEGAL REPERCUSSIONS."

Using your definition, you're essentially saying Biden and his family were subjected to lawfare, but Trump wasn't?

I don't agree with your definition, and neither do several that I found.
At its core, lawfare is the use of the legal system as a weapon to intimidate, damage, or politically target opponents.

Honestly, I thought you were going to come back from a different angle.

I figured you'd argue it's only lawfare against Biden because "Biden and his family aren't guilty of anything...it's all trumped up while Trump actually is a criminal" or something along those lines.

(I loved how trumped up worked in so well.)

Dan,

Unless Obama was going to be the one really running things again like many people believe he did during Biden's presidency.

Dan,

I just find it hard to believe she actually got so many people to vote for her.

It was obvious she was over her head and thank God she lost.

Dan,

"If you think Biden pardoning his family AFTER the PRESIDENT-ELECT had publicly threatened lawfare against them is immaterial, you're a moron."

It's not that lawfare is insignificant.

Trump has been dealing with politically motivated accusations and prosecutions for years. That's lawfare.

What changed is that Democrats largely considered it acceptable when directed at Trump, but now suddenly it's unacceptable when it's aimed at Biden's family.

So Biden responded by pardoning them preemptively.

That makes it difficult to act morally outraged about Trump's DOJ tactics while simultaneously defending Biden's pardons.

My point was simply that once Biden pardoned his family, it severely weakened criticism of Trump on this issue.

Dan,

I believe Trump probably would exploit people's weaknesses.

Trump likes to win.

He isn't someone I would want to go up against.

Jpw,

My wife and I are best friends.

Always have been.

Long before we became intimate.

We've only gotten closer as years went by.

We're so grateful to have a good companion in our older years.

Dan,

"Gosh. It almost sounds like you like to suppress those votes."

No...you have me all wrong. I don't want to suppress votes.

I'm wondering how many are bogus. You know....illegal.

Dan,

It's immaterial for what I said.

Biden pardoned his family.

It will be hard to attack Trump for doing something similar.

Are you suggesting maybe Trump played Biden?

He threatened Biden thinking he might do something like he did.

Then Trump waited for the right moment to play his hand?