Prosecute the torture.

August 12, 2016

A Question For Senator Pat Toomey - Who's Unacceptable?

Senator, recently you said on Philadelphia radio station that, while you still have some "real problems" with some of the things Donald Trump has said on foreign policy, you think that Hillary Clinton is "completely, permanently unacceptable."

Yesterday, Donald Trump stated (and then restated) his belief that President Obama literally "founded" ISIS.

Given how completely wrong that very clear and unambiguous foreign policy statement was, can you still think that Hillary Clinton is the one who's completely and permanently unacceptable?

Remember Trump was the guy who said that:
  • Thousands and thousands of people were cheering" in Jersey City, celebrating 9/11 - Completely False.
  • The Obama administration was actively supporting Al Qaeda in Iraq, the terrorist group that became the Islamic State. - Completely false
  • He wants to bring back waterboarding - an illegal method of torture and thus a war crime.
Besides, Donald Trump is a birther.

The NYTimes reported:
Fifty of the nation’s most senior Republican national security officials, many of them former top aides or cabinet members for President George W. Bush, have signed a letter declaring that Donald J. Trump “lacks the character, values and experience” to be president and “would put at risk our country’s national security and well-being.”

Mr. Trump, the officials warn, “would be the most reckless president in American history.”
And yet you, Pat Toomey, still think Trump's opponent is the unacceptable one?

Good God man, if all that isn't enough to sway your opinion, then your judgement has to be called into question - you're the one who's unacceptable.



3 comments:

Omega Cuck Supreme said...

Dayvoe joins the neocons against Trump

"if all that isn't enough to sway your opinion, then your judgement has to be called into question - you're the one who's unacceptable."

https://reason.com/blog/2016/08/01/is-scotus-a-good-reason-to-support-trump
Hillary has basically promised to nominate justices who would gut the First and Second Amendments. She would create the most prolonged period of judicial lawlessness since the Warren era.

Ol' Froth said...

"Judicial Lawlessness"= Court rulings you do not agree with.

Omega Cuck Supreme said...

"Judicial Lawlessness"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qualified_immunity