Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Frank Underwood" data-source="post: 436980" data-attributes="member: 35">It has nothing to do with appearances.&nbsp; Even if you put the immigration issue aside, Obama still used warrantless surveillance on Americans and defended the right to kill American targets overseas.&nbsp; He also inherited two wars and got us into five more.&nbsp; Obama and Trump may be vile for different reasons, but they&#039;re still blood thirsty monsters.Why does it have to be equal to be reprehensible?&nbsp; Is killing ten people any less reprehensible than killing 100?The fact remains that families were separated and people were caged like animals, which is exactly what Trump was criticized for (and rightly so) in his first term.&nbsp; The &quot;raw number&quot; being significantly higher than Trump&#039;s is also interesting since Democrats act appalled by Trump&#039;s anti-immigration rhetoric.&nbsp; Where was their &quot;path to citizenship?&quot;</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Frank Underwood, post: 436980, member: 35"] It has nothing to do with appearances. Even if you put the immigration issue aside, Obama still used warrantless surveillance on Americans and defended the right to kill American targets overseas. He also inherited two wars and got us into five more. Obama and Trump may be vile for different reasons, but they're still blood thirsty monsters. Why does it have to be equal to be reprehensible? Is killing ten people any less reprehensible than killing 100? The fact remains that families were separated and people were caged like animals, which is exactly what Trump was criticized for (and rightly so) in his first term. The "raw number" being significantly higher than Trump's is also interesting since Democrats act appalled by Trump's anti-immigration rhetoric. Where was their "path to citizenship?" [/QUOTE]

Verification

6 + 4 =