WATCH: Ric Grenell Calls on GOP Candidates to Drop Out, Endorse Trump After Indictment

[roamer_1]

What do the right to life, liberty and the rule of law have to do to get more support?   

You'll fix nothing without Conservatism, least of all, Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness...

[Right_in_Virginia]

You'll fix nothing without Conservatism, least of all, Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness...

Nonsense.  Get your priorities straight.

[Right_in_Virginia]

The Democrats want Trump as the nominee

Nonsense.

[roamer_1]

Nonsense.  Get your priorities straight.

Nonsense?

Conservatism is founded in 'what works', from all of history. And that includes the principles behind 'life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness', and includes the elements of Christian Protestantism that makes the US so very unique.

The very concepts of our law, the very root of the USA, would not exist if not for Conservatism, in its broad, philosophical sense. You are scoffing at something more ancient and true than you can imagine.

You really should read Burke and Kirk at least... You might better understand what this board is supposed to stand upon.

[kevindavis007]

Nonsense.

Trust me they do.


Then explain to me his pathway to winning a national election (not primary) without the following:


1. The suburban vote
2. The independents
3. Conservatives who he pissed off
4. People who support mainstream GOP

[LMAO]

Trust me they do.


Then explain to me his pathway to winning a national election (not primary) without the following:


1. The suburban vote
2. The independents
3. Conservatives who he pissed off
4. People who support mainstream GOP

“The will of the MAGA voter and a strong belief in the MAGA cause”

[Maj. Bill Martin]

The fact that he ceded control of this country to the likes of Dr. Fauci says a lot. In fact, Trump should have fired Fauci.

The excuse-making for him on this forum consists of "he did what he thought was best" which as an excuse is about as bad as it gets.  It just means that he has good intentions but awful judgment.  Who really cares about his intentions if his judgment sucks?

[catfish1957]

The excuse-making for him on this forum consists of "he did what he thought was best" which as an excuse is about as bad as it gets.  It just means that he has good intentions but awful judgment.  Who really cares about his intentions if his judgment sucks?

That's the conclusion I have come up with.  For someone who claimed he only hired the best, he sure sucked at it.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

What do the right to life, liberty and the rule of law have to do to get more support?   

This is such an incredibly revealing post.

She is equating Donald Trump, the person, with "life, liberty, and the rule of law", as if those concepts that have been with us since the founding of this country only exist now in the singular person of Donald Trump.   What an insult to all the people in our country's history who have fought for and defended those ideals -- which existed long before Trump was born and that will exist long after he is gone.

Like many others, I oppose the attempt to use the criminal justice system to target Trump.  I also oppose Trump becoming the GOP nominee. Those two things are not mutually exclusive.

[jmyrlefuller]

What do the right to life, liberty and the rule of law have to do to get more support?   

Not be an oxymoron.

[Sighlass]

In the meanwhile.... the conservative in Florida just signed the Florida state a "Constitutional Carry State" ... While another has a history of not supporting the Second Amendment... (even calling for a ban on Assault Weapons in the past).

[Right_in_Virginia]

Nonsense?

Conservatism is founded in 'what works', from all of history. And that includes the principles behind 'life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness', and includes the elements of Christian Protestantism that makes the US so very unique.

With all respect, the principles upon which this nation stands or falls are the right to life, liberty, the equal application of the rule of law, not of men, and the sanctity of the vote. In this moment, the nation is falling. In NYC, we are witnessing the epicenter of the Marxists's efforts to further and more deeply dismantle and erase each principle. 

And, still you refuse to stand in support of their target and continue to redirect attention, time and energy to a political spending policy debate ----when there will be no debate if you continue to surrender the true founding principles.

I do not know if you appreciate the depravity of your focus, or not.  But, your insistence that federal spending is most important is taking on the stench of an artifice.

[Right_in_Virginia]

In the meanwhile.... the conservative in Florida just signed the Florida state a "Constitutional Carry State" ... While another has a history of not supporting the Second Amendment... (even calling for a ban on Assault Weapons in the past).

The President never called for a ban on assault ---- or any other ---- weapons.

[catfish1957]

I do not know if you appreciate the depravity of your focus, or not.  But, your insistence that federal spending is most important is taking on the stench of an artifice.

Just shows how clueless you are.  If our economy collapses due to the world decoupling from the $USD, or we hit the tipping point of unsustainable debt, and we plunge into either 1930's or Zimbawe hyperinflation, all the silly bloviating that you feed us 24/7 is for naught.

[Right_in_Virginia]

Just shows how clueless you are.  If our economy collapses due to the world decoupling from the $USD, or we hit the tipping point of unsustainable debt, and we plunge into either 1930's or Zimbawe hyperinflation, all the silly bloviating that you feed us 24/7 is for naught.

How do you plan on restoring economic health after you finish surrendering the rule of law, the sanctity of elections and the right of the people to petition their government to redress grievances?

[BellyAche]

This is such an incredibly revealing post.

She is equating Donald Trump, the person, with "life, liberty, and the rule of law", as if those concepts that have been with us since the founding of this country only exist now in the singular person of Donald Trump.   What an insult to all the people in our country's history who have fought for and defended those ideals -- which existed long before Trump was born and that will exist long after he is gone.

Like many others, I oppose the attempt to use the criminal justice system to target Trump.  I also oppose Trump becoming the GOP nominee. Those two things are not mutually exclusive.

Bravo!!
 

[catfish1957]

How do you plan on restoring economic health after you finish surrendering the rule of law, the sanctity of elections and the right of the people to petition their government to redress grievances?

You are the last person at TBR worth discussing chicken/egg scenarios.  I'd just say that a nation  poor, destitute, and starving due to newly plunging into economic collapse?    The orange silly guy is the last thing they are going to be worried about.

[kevindavis007]

The excuse-making for him on this forum consists of "he did what he thought was best" which as an excuse is about as bad as it gets.  It just means that he has good intentions but awful judgment.  Who really cares about his intentions if his judgment sucks?

Nah Deep State made him do it, but we need to have him go back to the White House to fight Deep State

[Right_in_Virginia]

This is such an incredibly revealing post.

She is equating Donald Trump, the person, with "life, liberty, and the rule of law", as if those concepts that have been with us since the founding of this country only exist now in the singular person of Donald Trump. 

No, I am not.  But, you know that already.

[Right_in_Virginia]

You are the last person at TBR worth discussing chicken/egg scenarios.  I'd just say that a nation  poor, destitute, and starving due to newly plunging into economic collapse?    The orange silly guy is the last thing they are going to be worried about.

And I asked you to tell us your plans for restoring economic health after you finish surrendering the rule of law, the sanctity of elections and the right of the people to petition their government to redress grievances ---- a surrender you've joined to take out "the orange silly guy".

Have you got a plan or not?

[libertybele]

And I asked you to tell us your plans for restoring economic health after you finish surrendering the rule of law, the sanctity of elections and the right of the people to petition their government to redress grievances ---- a surrender you've joined to take out "the orange silly guy".

Have you got a plan or not?

I've been worried about The Rule of Law, the sanctity of elections and the right of the people to petition our government to redress grievances since SCOTUS turned their backs on us regarding this past election.

The fact that they just indicted a former president is just yet another worry.

None of which I or you have control of. 

[catfish1957]

And I asked you to tell us your plans for restoring economic health after you finish surrendering the rule of law, the sanctity of elections and the right of the people to petition their government to redress grievances ---- a surrender you've joined to take out "the orange silly guy".

Have you got a plan or not?

My plan is would be to restore fiscal sanity, and return this government to one that remained within budgetary guidelines without defict spending.   Something you and your Orange Julius doesn't  have clue about.  He's just made the problem worse.  I have proven that, and you know it.  I have screamed this at the top of my lungs for decades, and very few are waking up to the fact that this shit is coming down the road at us, quicker than they realize.

And as far as answering questions, and for about the 5th time, just how are you and DJT going to pay for these silly Freedom Socialist Cities with Jetson cars that he proposes.  I am dying to know where that $10-15T is coming from.

[Kamaji]

How do you plan on restoring economic health after you finish surrendering the rule of law, the sanctity of elections and the right of the people to petition their government to redress grievances?

Considering that Trump has done precious little - i.e., just about nothing - to preserve or protect the sanctity of elections, nor the right of people to petition their government for redress of grievances, talismanically voting just for him simply and solely because he got indicted is not going to do squat about those issues.

[roamer_1]

With all respect, the principles upon which this nation stands or falls are the right to life, liberty, the equal application of the rule of law, not of men, and the sanctity of the vote.

@Right_in_Virginia

All of them deeply founded in Conservatism, whether all the way back to Aristotle via Republics, or through the Celtic law which winds through 1500 years  to wind up as the English Common law, or I can argue them right from the Bible - Likely the origination of the above.

In this moment, the nation is falling. In NYC, we are witnessing the epicenter of the Marxists's efforts to further and more deeply dismantle and erase each principle. 

And, still you refuse to stand in support of their target and continue to redirect attention, time and energy to a political spending policy debate ----when there will be no debate if you continue to surrender the true founding principles.

Well you're throwing a whole lot of dirt in the air for an indictment. Rule of Law is NOT crashing down. It's a friggin indictment, not a conviction. If you can indict a ham sandwich, you can certainly indict an ex-president. And that's really the only thing here that's new and unusual.

As I said before, they dd the very same thing to Tom DeLay decades ago.

But what they are doing is to be met on the battlefield of the Court - And that is what is happening. And I have no doubt he will succeed, even if he is convicted... The appeals process will serve, in the end, and move him out of the reach of the liberals on the east coast.

And don't think for a moment he ain't gonna make hay with that.

I do not know if you appreciate the depravity of your focus, or not.  But, your insistence that federal spending is most important is taking on the stench of an artifice.

Quite to the contrary. A government big enough to give you what you want is big enough to take all you have... And it will... And it IS.

A myopic love of big government ALLOWS it to be powerful enough to upend the rule of law.

A small government could not afford these travesties.

And just wait till a loaf of bread costs a wheelbarrow full of money. Guess how the rule of law will be doing then?

Your protestations are foolishness.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

No, I am not.  But, you know that already.

Yes, you are.  And I do know that already.  At least twice in this thread, you have directly equated supporting Trump with defending core principles such as the rule of law, right to life/liberty, etc..  That is a false dichotomy.  It is entirely possible to 1) oppose the politicized prosecution of Trump, 2) stand up for those core principles, 3) and criticize his policies and support a different candidate.

Your attempt to leverage this prosecution into a moral requirement to support Trump's candidacy is transparent, and rightly rejected by many of us here.

[Right_in_Virginia]

@Right_in_Virginia

Your protestations are foolishness.

@roamer_1

No. They are not. 

You fail to recognize that smaller government is not an option when you turn a blind eye to the rampant dismantling of the rule of law, not men, the right to redress the government, and the sanctity of free and fair elections. 

All is now being systematically moved under the "principles" of rule by lawfare, intimidation and election interference.  Opposition to the federal regime ---- at any level or for any reason ---- will soon be impossible.

You are becoming more powerless with each passing day.  Get your priorities straight, while you still can.

[Hoodat]

@roamer_1

No. They are not. 

You fail to recognize that smaller government is not an option when you turn a blind eye to the rampant dismantling of the rule of law

Conservatives aren't the ones turning a blind eye to that.  (See:  Kelo v. New London)

[roamer_1]

No. They are not. 

You fail to recognize that smaller government is not an option when you turn a blind eye to the rampant dismantling of the rule of law, not men, the right to redress the government, and the sanctity of free and fair elections. 

Yes, it is. Foolishness.
The election remains the very same: The only corruption that matters is that which you can prove. In court. Nothing new in that... And Democrats have been rigging elections since Hector was a pup.

Rule of Law is being dismantled? Well, yes, in liberal cities. Not anywhere else. Certainly not here, or the other red states.

And Tumpy is going RIGHT NOW to face his accusers - In a court.

So take a breath...  There is a reason why folks ain't buying into your drama. This is court... Wholly different than the media driven drivel so many get bound up over. Proof requires verity, unlike in the media. If he doesn't get a fair shake, appellate courts are standing by.

All is now being systematically moved under the "principles" of rule by lawfare, intimidation and election interference.  Opposition to the federal regime ---- at any level or for any reason ---- will soon be impossible.

Well first off, 'lawfare' is no principle. Nice try. But neither is it anything new in liberal cities and states. And you should have thought of all this when you were in power, and building that bigger, better federal government. Now it is just that much more for the Democrats to build upon.

But I deny the premise generally. Red states are becoming more FREE. Nullification has shifted gears. The play is going to fail, unless of course the dollar crashes... Maybe it wasn't a good idea to print so much money, eh?

You are becoming more powerless with each passing day.  Get your priorities straight, while you still can.

No I am not. Unlike where you are, people here are liberty minded... and still very likely to survive the coming crash. We are not tied to the idea of the ponderous government you have... And the ponderous government y'all left us at the federal level has been largely nullified.

Which is neither here nor there. I will die free. FAFO. Come and take it. You will find the inland Northwest and the Rocky Mountains entirely unaccommodating. And the same can be said all across flyover country.

And I can always walk off where government can't go. The principles I live by are still kept close by all of us out here. I switched to subsistence living years past now... I need very little from society... Which means there are damn few levers to use on me... My present condition excepted of course.

[Right_in_Virginia]

This is such an incredibly revealing post.

She is equating Donald Trump, the person, with "life, liberty, and the rule of law", as if those concepts that have been with us since the founding of this country only exist now in the singular person of Donald Trump.   

No, I am not @Maj. Bill Martin 

I am saying that what is happening is larger in scope and affect than even Donald Trump.  It is the Marxists who have designated Donald Trump ground zero in the fight to resecure the rule of law, our liberty and the sanctity of our elections.

You have the right to turn the Marxists's strategy into an opportunity to shit on a man you so clearly dislike ---- and distort my opinions as part of your efforts.  Or, you can stand with Trump alongside tens of millions of American patriots and fight to take back this country ---- this, too, is your right.

[LMAO]

No, I am not @Maj. Bill Martin 

I am saying that what is happening is larger in scope and affect than even Donald Trump.  It is the Marxists who have designated Donald Trump ground zero in the fight to resecure the rule of law, our liberty and the sanctity of our elections.

You have the right to turn the Marxists's strategy into an opportunity to shit on a man you so clearly dislike ---- and distort my opinions as part of your efforts.  Or, you can stand with Trump alongside tens of millions of American patriots and fight to take back this country ---- this, too, is your right.

Lol…
You just countered yourself in one post

Bill is exactly right in his observation of what you’re doing here

You furiously tell him that he is wrong in his assessment.  Then in the last sentence, you imply that only choice he has if he wants to “take back his country” is to stand with Trump. To do otherwise, according to you, means he’s unwittingly siding with the Marxist. He, by not supporting Trump’s candidacy, has become a “useful idiot.”

It’s clear to everyone here what you’re attempting despite your protestations

And, you believe that this indictment gives you an opportunity to bash conservatives who support the reducing the size of the federal government and gives you cover in your support of Trump’s desire to grow it. Yet, reducing the size of the Government is a huge step in reigning its abuses

[Maj. Bill Martin]

You have the right to turn the Marxists's strategy into an opportunity to shit on a man you so clearly dislike....

At least attempt to be honest - I didn't need any "opportunity" because I was shittting on Donald Trump before this indictment because of policies he has advanced and statements he has made wholly separate from this prosecution.  You know, the kind of issues on which the nominations should be decided.

I also have said that this is a corrupt, politicized prosecution.

and distort my opinions as part of your efforts.  Or, you can stand with Trump alongside tens of millions of American patriots and fight to take back this country

It's incredibly ironic that you double down on the exact argument I say you are making while denying that you are making that argument.  You are very clearly asserting that other Republicans have an obligation to rally around Donald Trump as a candidate because of this prosecution.  And that is bogus. 

There is absolutely nothing wrong, or remotely inconsistent, with continuing to criticize and oppose Donald Trump as a candidate, while simultaneously opposing this politicized prosecution.  Certainly, neither Trump nor his supporters are going to stop condemning and criticizing other Republicans.

I will say one thing in defense of Donald Trump that I don't believe has gotten enough attention. When so many of his (pejorative deleted) supporters were screaming "lock her up" about Hillary Clinton both pre and post election in 2016, Trump actually pulled back from that idea and did not support that prosecution.  Whether he did it as a matter of principal to avoid the appearance of politicized prosecution, or simply because he was friends with the Clintons, doesn't matter. He did the right thing then, which makes it even worse what Democrats are trying to do to him now.

Of course, no similar credit goes to his supporters who were engaging in those chants in the first place.