Quote (thesnipa @ Nov 30 2018 01:18pm)
of course it wasn't. because if you actually accepted the simple fact that HRC's misdeeds are less of an issue currently because she lost, mixed with the fact that you should stfu about them generally anyways because they wont lead to her getting punished legally, you'd actually have to make real defenses for some of the bullshit Trump does.
i realize you guys occasionally come in with a "ok, yeah, that was bad" and i commend you for it. but the rampant "HRC's more important" whataboutism for a woman who lost because of said transgressions and can't be indicted for them is silly. stop it. or continue to look like idiots. frankly i dont care. but ofthevoid saying icemage needs to criticize HRC more is a real eye opener for how far down the lack of thought full force whataboutism lazy counter rabbit hole the "conservative mindset" is in pard.
all of this "what about the emails" talk might as well be "guys OJ killed his wife, dont forget".
Her actions were egregious and verifiable. It doesn't matter that she lost, it matters that a person claiming foreign intervention is bad at the top of his lungs for 2 years doesn't apply the same level of criticism for the same act when it was a person he supported. We're talking about consistency here. The only way to prove/disprove someones consistency is by looking at their past. So yeah doofus, pointing out someone's inconsistency or as you like to discount it as "whatabouotism" is relevant.
Guests cannot view or vote in polls. Please register or login.