Posted on 09/05/2018 9:15:05 AM PDT by Olog-hai
There is no context that phrases such as “shekels for hire” can fit in to legitimize them. Never mind going on shows hosted by lifelong Democrat David Duke. Convictions like that are rejected by all conservatives.
I don’t care about your desperate attempt to smear Paul as an anti-Semite, and I refuse to play along.
You and the Huffington Post can work together on that one
The man “paints” himself as such with his own words and his associations.
And if anything looks “desperate”, that would be your attempt to defend him, with all due respect, which uses no facts and is turning increasingly rhetorical, reminiscent of the aforementioned Arianna Post or a certain Saul A.
So you demand that I do the impossible... To “disprove” your accusation. Yet I’m somehow employing A kindly tactics?
That’s funny... Projection, but funny.
I’m here to disprove every accusation, or defend every inartful Twitter comment. I’m here to say that I know Paul Nehlen, and I know he isn’t an anti-Semite.
Ryan is showing how well his deep state blinders remain in place.
The cases could have been brought to trial months ago, and THAT is Trumps complaint, about them only being prosecuted now with the mid-terms in play and little chance of conclusions of the cases before mid-terms are over. The defendents may yet prove their innocence in court, but the electoral damage will already have been done. Ryan desserves to no lonher be House majority leader, because he denies the politics in the timing of the cases.
Justice is so blind that Cankles isn’t in jail.
Among others...
5.56mm
Hey, American Jews, I’m not putting Israel first or compromising pro-White interests for yours, but I will make sure the Islamists who want to murder you (and annihilate Israel off the map) are deported back to their homelands. That’s something, right?So he didn’t tweet that on December 2 of last year? Only antisemites posit a difference of interests between the US and Israel or a difference on any matter between white people and Jews, pushing a wedge between ally and ally.
Because Jeffy said he wasn't likely to be convicted by another trial, that is why.
Because those weak ninnies that are complaining about him now refused to step up when the job was open. They also refuse to challenge his leadership with a vote to vacate his office, any one of them could do that, why don't they?
When has the speaker ever been anything but NWO thug?
Not in my lifetime!
Newt comes close to being an American First, but who really knows anymore? Seems everyone has a price and Speakers can demand the highest pay for play.
Yes, he posted that.
Now you’ve defined anti-Semite as anyone who sees any difference in the interests of the US and Israel.
I can’t stay ahead of the constantly moving goalposts... I thought an anti-Semite hated Jews, or worked against Jewish interests.
Guess I was wrong...
Go retire and bathe in the glow of your own millions for the rest of your worthless life.
Now you’re trying to put words in my mouth. Not a defense of the man.
So what does using such rhetoric make him? Never mind going on David Duke’s radio show, for which I see no defense.
.
Noot carried the NWO water just like all the rest.
He fully negated the ‘94 victory. Absolutely nothing was gained.
"Only antisemites posit a difference of interests between the US and Israel"
Now you’ve defined anti-Semite as anyone who sees any difference in the interests of the US and Israel …Your words. Not the same as pointing out that it is only antisemites who falsely posit that there are differences between the interests of the USA and Israel. Therefore, you are putting words in my mouth.
Your dishonest edit; (adding the word “falsely” to your original irrationality) has been noted.
They are the same words. I’ve not imputed meaning to your words that was not contained in the original.
“Only antisemites posit a difference of interests between the US and Israel “
And then my statement: “you’ve defined anti-Semite as anyone who sees any difference in the interests of the US and Israel”
So maybe my mistake was in using the word “sees” instead of “speaks of”..
It’s not anti-Semitic to know there’s a difference between “America First” and “Israel First”; but it is anti-Semitic to SAY there’s a difference between “America First” and “Israel First”?
No. There is no difference.
And by the way; My saying “You’ve defined” etc. does not “put words in your mouth”. It’s me, making a clear statement about what you’ve already said. Me “putting words in your mouth” would be misquoting you, or changing the meaning of what you’ve said... I have done no such thing.
You said it: “Only antisemites posit a difference of interests between the US and Israel “
...So, accepting the premise that US and Israeli interests cannot be allowed to differ; in the unlikely event that they diverge somewhat (as in the example above), who must realign? The US or Israel?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.