Any liberal haters out there willing to commit to apologize and admit they were wrong if the facts ultimately establish that?

Intellectual honesty? Surely you jest. @xxxxxx

I did notice that and even hearted it. You’re mistaken about what I’m invested in. I’m invested in the principal of innocent until proven guilty. If the administration engaged in election collusion with the Russians I will readily condemn the president but not prematurely. So are you taking the pledge to do the same as me or not? @Graylight

@jackjjackson We already know there was collusion with the Russians. This is like saying if the sun rises tomorrow we can talk about solar energy. Meetings, phone calls and emails are abundant on this matter. Pleas have been made and sentences will be given.

The adjudicating authorities, Mr Mueller is some cases, courts in some cases, Congress in others will be making the decisions regarding wrongdoing. You’ve written repeatedly and regularly regarding what you “know” however your “knowing” is not the official adjudication process. Are you taking the pledge or not? All this means is admitting you were wrong if there is not an adjudication of wrongdoing. I’ve pledged to stating that I was wrong if there is an adjudication of wrongdoing. Inasmuch as you “know” why are you waffling so much when it comes to taking the pledge? @Graylight

@jackjjackson [quote]As I recall the democrats spent a lot of time in court fighting the results of the 2000 election.[/quote]

Your recall is faulty. The Florida recount was mandatory, due to the close margin. The court challenge was to see if they will do a machine recount or a hand recount. The Supreme Court ruled it will be a machine recount, confirming the 930 votes Bush margin (later it was narrowed down to about 300 votes).

Gore accepted the ruling.

[quote]You didn’t directly answer the question. Is your response an indirect NO?[/quote]

Why would I not accept the rule of law? I was questioning your assertion that liberals somewhat did not.

Is your response, an indirect acknowledgment, that Trump does not respect the rule of law, or anything/anyone that does not agree with him?

[quote]Your recall is faulty. The Florida recount was mandatory, due to the close margin. The court challenge was to see if they will do a machine recount or a hand recount. The Supreme Court ruled it will be a machine recount, confirming the 930 votes Bush margin (later it was narrowed down to about 300 votes). Gore accepted the ruling.
[/quote]

Gore and the democrats spent millions of dollars on a legal team headed by David Boise who took any and all issues through any and all courts as far as the process went. Running out of appeals after all thst is hardly accepted the ruling unless Gore had a squadron of tanks he was planning on driving up Pennsylvania Avenue.

All you had to to was a simple yes or no like I did as to whether you would agree with the final determination and admit the any preconceived notions of what it would be were innacursfe if in fact that’s the way it turns out. Instead you launched into a lengthy off topic speech.



@Northwest

@jackjjackson [quote]Any liberal haters out there willing to commit to apologize and admit they were wrong if the facts ultimately establish that?[/quote]

I am totally on topic. You proposed that liberals are haters, and suggested they don't respect official results.

The reason the Democrats challenged the Florida results, is because there were questions about the ballots. You're confusing what was done: a perfectly legal, challenge, with refusing to accept legal results, as Trump suggested he would do, if the results were not to his liking.

Perhaps you missed my statement:

[quote]Why would I not accept the rule of law?[/quote]

I am challenging your fantasy of democrats not accepting the final results.

@jackjjackson your question is a bit vague can you be more specific? I always apologise when I am wrong, but I don't really understand what you are referring to.

Do you believe that the Trump campaign colluded with the Russians regarding the 2016 president election? @SW-User

@jackjjackson I have no idea!

@SW-User small bandaids on a gaping wound.

@basilfawlty89 exactly

As usual no straight answer. @Graylight

@jackjjackson Do you understand the concept of inference or do you need everything spelled out like a paint-by-numbers picture? Yes, not only would I change my opinion - I have.

The final determination has not been made. Will whatever opinion you currently have be affected by the ultimate conclusion? @Graylight

So based on the knowledge you have your mind is made up? If an actual legally constituted authority made a different decision based on more complete facts that doesn’t matter to you?@Mamapolo2016

@jackjjackson Au contraire. President Obama was my President and President Trump is my President.

Unlike most of the people in the U.S., I don't think the half that disagrees with me are idiots. I don't have that particular arrogance.

I think the vanity of those who believe the fact they[i][b]didn't get their way[/b][/i] is cause enough to tear down Washington and the rest of the nation with it are going to rue the day.

I think waiting for proof to confirm opinion is going the way of the dodo bird, and I think anyone on either political extremity, in the rare event that somebody offers concrete proof of anything would remain rooted in the position where they now stand.

As evidence, I give you the 2016 election. Ms. Clinton won the popular vote. Mr. Trump won the electoral votes. The way this nation operates makes Donald Trump president, like it or hate it.

Getting their own way has become so important to so many people that they would far rather burn the White House to the ground than allow President Trump to live in it. Even though his presidency is legal.

Therefore, legal decisions and rulings will not make a tinker's damn worth of difference.

Very well thought out and written. I agree. @Mamapolo2016