sycasey said:

---

Trump's team agreed to the conditions.

---

If he didn't accept, the regime would say he's afraid of debating Biden.

Love how the MAGAts are already making excuses for Trump crashing and burning on national television. They know the train wreck is coming, so they're scrambling for scape goats and conspiracies.

sycasey said:

---

bear2034 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

Trump's team agreed to the conditions.

---

If he didn't accept, the regime would say he's afraid of debating Biden.

---

He had a chance to negotiate for the kind of debate he wanted. He accepted these terms.

---

You are right. Of course he accepted the terms. He had to. He knows that his best chance to win this election includes getting on the same stage with Biden, mano a mano, no matter how heavily the deck is stacked against him. He knows he will face highly partisan Democrat moderators and rules and setting that will favor the Democrat candidate. No matter who sponsors or who controls these televised debates, it has always been that way. In all the years of these debates, there has been one Republican news network allowed to send a moderator to a debate, Fox, who sent Chris Wallace. Wallace, of course, just happened to be a life-long liberal Democrat. Even when the debate commission became "bipartisan" by adding Republicans to the Commission, somehow, the moderators still always turned out to be Democrats. Now an even more partisan group has picked more partisan moderators. Trump and his warts will enter the snake pit anyway. It should be interesting to see if the new rules imposed will affect either candidate, and how much.

Why is does it always have to be this way? Why doesn't Joe Biden or any Democrat candidate have to negotiate with Republicans and what might be their rules of debate designed to make the Democrat look bad, and make the Republican look the better of the two? In all my years, I've never seen it, and I often wonder why these debates are always so stacked against the Republican. They are not debates at all. Once in a while, the Republican gets lucky or shrewd, and comes up with a one-liner, or moment, where he tips the scale for viewers. It shouldn't have to be this way, but I guess that is American politics.

You guys always find a reason to whine about how everybody is being mean and unfair to the Republicans. This time you're going into preemptive whining and crying mode a week before the debate. This smacks of desperation to me.

tRump has been declared the winner of every debate he has participated in. The Moderators have always been intimidated by him and have allowed him to talk over other people's answers and do whatever he wants (like walk behind HRH).
Mics of both debaters will be muted when it isn't their turn to speak. Do you consider stopping tRump from talking over Biden's answers unfair?

In this debate we are going to find out if Biden is senile like tRump suggests.

We are also going to find out if tRump is intellectually incapable of listening to the question posed, mentally processing it, and giving an answer responsive to the question posed.

There is a reason tRump's attorneys never let him testify in court. The first reason is he is always liable (Civil case) or guilty (Criminal), the 2nd reason will become evident during the debate.

https://bearinsider.com/forums/6/topics/121137

And if you all remember when Fox News hosted the Republican primary debate in 2015, the very first question out of Megyn Kelly's mouth came directly from Rupert Murdoch himself who wanted to kneecap Trump and take him out early.

AunBear89 said:

---

And I would assume that any Republican with more than a handful of working brain cells would recognize all of this. And that is why we are getting all this "stacked deck" nonsense. Making excuses for the shyteshow to come.

---

Remember when CNN accepted former DNC chairperson, Donna Brazile's resignation letter for feeding Hillary Clinton questions prior to her debates and townhalls with Trump? Good times.

SFCityBear said:

---

sycasey said:

---

bear2034 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

Trump's team agreed to the conditions.

---

If he didn't accept, the regime would say he's afraid of debating Biden.

---

He had a chance to negotiate for the kind of debate he wanted. He accepted these terms.

---

You are right. Of course he accepted the terms. He had to. He knows that his best chance to win this election includes getting on the same stage with Biden, mano a mano, no matter how heavily the deck is stacked against him. He knows he will face highly partisan Democrat moderators and rules and setting that will favor the Democrat candidate. No matter who sponsors or who controls these televised debates, it has always been that way. In all the years of these debates, there has been one Republican news network allowed to send a moderator to a debate, Fox, who sent Chris Wallace. Wallace, of course, just happened to be a life-long liberal Democrat. Even when the debate commission became "bipartisan" by adding Republicans to the Commission, somehow, the moderators still always turned out to be Democrats. Now an even more partisan group has picked more partisan moderators. Trump and his warts will enter the snake pit anyway. It should be interesting to see if the new rules imposed will affect either candidate, and how much.

Why is does it always have to be this way? Why doesn't Joe Biden or any Democrat candidate have to negotiate with Republicans and what might be their rules of debate designed to make the Democrat look bad, and make the Republican look the better of the two? In all my years, I've never seen it, and I often wonder why these debates are always so stacked against the Republican. They are not debates at all. Once in a while, the Republican gets lucky or shrewd, and comes up with a one-liner, or moment, where he tips the scale for viewers. It shouldn't have to be this way, but I guess that is American politics.

---

What the hell are you talking about? Both candidates get to propose rules. The debate doesn't happen unless both agree. What really happened was that the Biden team made requests and the Trump team surprisingly just agreed to them. They could have pushed back. Probably would have gotten some of what they wanted.

So if the debate rules are stacked against them, it's because Trump's team was too dumb and/or weak to fight for their own case.

SFCityBear said:

---

sycasey said:

---

bear2034 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

Trump's team agreed to the conditions.

---

If he didn't accept, the regime would say he's afraid of debating Biden.

---

He had a chance to negotiate for the kind of debate he wanted. He accepted these terms.

---

You are right. Of course he accepted the terms. He had to. He knows that his best chance to win this election includes getting on the same stage with Biden, mano a mano, no matter how heavily the deck is stacked against him. He knows he will face highly partisan Democrat moderators and rules and setting that will favor the Democrat candidate. No matter who sponsors or who controls these televised debates, it has always been that way. In all the years of these debates, there has been one Republican news network allowed to send a moderator to a debate, Fox, who sent Chris Wallace. Wallace, of course, just happened to be a life-long liberal Democrat. Even when the debate commission became "bipartisan" by adding Republicans to the Commission, somehow, the moderators still always turned out to be Democrats. Now an even more partisan group has picked more partisan moderators. Trump and his warts will enter the snake pit anyway. It should be interesting to see if the new rules imposed will affect either candidate, and how much.

Why is does it always have to be this way? Why doesn't Joe Biden or any Democrat candidate have to negotiate with Republicans and what might be their rules of debate designed to make the Democrat look bad, and make the Republican look the better of the two? In all my years, I've never seen it, and I often wonder why these debates are always so stacked against the Republican. They are not debates at all. Once in a while, the Republican gets lucky or shrewd, and comes up with a one-liner, or moment, where he tips the scale for viewers. It shouldn't have to be this way, but I guess that is American politics.

---

Cry me a river. Why are you always the victim when the deck is stacked in your favor!

A millionaire liberal who owns the million dollar Obama Hope artwork has abandoned the Democrats. People are waking up. pic.twitter.com/9RneQwmHwK

— Ian Miles Cheong (@stillgray) June 24, 2024

We are being told crime is down but even Democrats are rejecting the gaslighting.

movielover said:

---

Massive egos here, some fired by Trump or merely tolerated. How many wanted war with Iran, which Trump nixed at least four times?

Tillerson blabbering on, but President Trump signed five Mideast peace deals, peace talks w North Korea, and no war in Ukraine or Gaza.

The proof is in the pudding - no new wars, low inflation, tens of thousands of regulations cut, USMCA, etc.

You left off Mike Pompeo, who allegedly wanted to assasinate Julian Assange.

Gary Cohn - New York Liberal
Tillerson - fired
Pence - tried to usurp Trump after the Access Hollywood tape dropped
McMaster & Mattis - MIC Swamp creatures

Edit: yes, his administration can make better hires. But since he wasn't UniParty, he didn't have a Machine behind him including 10,000 vetted individuals in a database. Also bc he wasn't a career politician, he didn't know hundreds or thousands of DC individuals. He also, historically, had the FBI, DOJ, and CIA breathing down his back, along with a Liberal MSM. So he was a little busy.

---

Add former House Speaker, Paul Ryan to the list of swamp creatures who backstabbed Trump. Ryan, who oversaw the entire investigation, knew about the Steele Dossier the entire time but never disclosed this to the select committee intelligence or the public.

KASH PATEL EXCLUSIVE: Speaker Paul Ryan and His Team Rigged Our Russiagate Investigation Before He Started It | The Gateway Pundit | by Kash Patel

movielover said:

---

Tucker Carlson drops teaser to Julian Assange interview. Five minutes.

Mike Pompeo wanted the CIA to kill Assange? Whoops.

https://rumble.com/v42u07e-tc-shorts-julian-assange.html

---

Julian Assange boards flight at London Stansted Airport at 5PM (BST) Monday June 24th. This is for everyone who worked for his freedom: thank you.#FreedJulianAssange pic.twitter.com/Pqp5pBAhSQ

— WikiLeaks (@wikileaks) June 25, 2024

Now That Julian Assange Will Be Freed After Striking A Plea Deal, Bill Clinton & Hillary Clinton Have A Lot To Worry About

🚨 Julian Assange Exposed Hillary Clinton Was Taking Saudi Arabia Donations & Approving The Arms Sales Supplied To ISIS
‌
Julian Assange: “There's an early… pic.twitter.com/YjTyEXmYke

— Wall Street Apes (@WallStreetApes) June 25, 2024

Assange is free! I wonder what kind of deal was struck between Assange and the Deep State? Do the Clintons or Obama have anything to worry about?

Adam Carolla in epic takedown of Gavin Newsom.

Fox News: Adam Carolla says he's leaving 'horrible' California, pans 'sociopathic' Newsom: 'Slippery eel of nothingness'

The comedian called the governor a 'narcissistic empty bag' on Sage Steele's podcast

"…"I told him 10 years ago, I go, 'Look, we got a homeless problem. And the homeless problem are people with mental issues and drug addiction. That's the homeless.' And he goes, 'Let me tell you the real face of homeless: mother of two, divorced, full-time minimum wage job, doesn't have anywhere to go.' And I said, that's not homeless! It's drug-addicted people with mental disorders. And he tried to explain to me ten years ago that the real face of homeless was a sober mother of two who was freshly divorced and had a full-time job at McDonald's," he continued."

https://www.foxnews.com/media/adam-carolla-says-leaving-horrible-california-pans-sociopathic-newsom

movielover said:

---

Adam Carolla in epic takedown of Gavin Newsom.

Fox News: Adam Carolla says he's leaving 'horrible' California, pans 'sociopathic' Newsom: 'Slippery eel of nothingness'

The comedian called the governor a 'narcissistic empty bag' on Sage Steele's podcast

"…"I told him 10 years ago, I go, 'Look, we got a homeless problem. And the homeless problem are people with mental issues and drug addiction. That's the homeless.' And he goes, 'Let me tell you the real face of homeless: mother of two, divorced, full-time minimum wage job, doesn't have anywhere to go.' And I said, that's not homeless! It's drug-addicted people with mental disorders. And he tried to explain to me ten years ago that the real face of homeless was a sober mother of two who was freshly divorced and had a full-time job at McDonald's," he continued."

https://www.foxnews.com/media/adam-carolla-says-leaving-horrible-california-pans-sociopathic-newsom

---

You'd better hope Biden is halfway sharp Thursday evening. Otherwise, we might end up with President Gavin Newsom in another seven months. You and Toyota Corolla will love that, no doubt!