# Liberty Movement > Defenders of Liberty > Justin Amash Forum >  Trump campaign manager calls Amash 'Phony,' 'Grandstanding Swamp Creature'

## Warlord

Oh the attacks are coming.. Will Trump back Justin's primary challenger? The same thing happened to Mark Sanford.




> President Trump's 2020 campaign manager accused Rep. Justin Amash (R-Mich.) of "grandstanding" for his calls to impeach the president.
> 
> If Phony @justinamash were a TRUE libertarian, he wouldnt stand for abuse of FBI power, spying, & bogus dossiers funded by political foes and fed to secret FISA courts, Trump campaign manager Brad Parscale tweeted. He is just another Grandstanding Swamp Creature auditioning for the approval of the liberal media.


https://thehill.com/homenews/house/4...swamp-creature

----------


## Superfluous Man

Of course he'll back his primary challenger. The whole neocon establishment will back Amash's challenger this time.

----------


## angelatc

> Of course he'll back his primary challenger. The whole neocon establishment will back Amash's challenger this time.


He did better in his district than Trump did.  Looks like the Trump train is going to be the death of the in-roads we made.  They've mainstreamed the Freedom Caucus and are expelling anybody that doesn't walk the line.   I liked Trump better when the GOP hated him.

----------


## donnay

> Of course he'll back his primary challenger. The whole neocon establishment will back Amash's challenger this time.


I think you have that backwards.  What Amash is doing is neoconish.

----------


## Superfluous Man

> You clearly have claimed his views as rational, and the opposing view as irrational – which contradicts the meaning of neutral.


Please provide a quote of me saying that.

Not only have I not "clearly" claimed that. I haven't claimed it at all.

----------


## nikcers

> He can have an opinion. In this case, his opinion is baseless and irrational accusations against Amash, one of the people this website supports.


Thats your opinion, not people who think that you should be innocent until proven guilty.

----------


## specsaregood

> There's room for differences of opinion about this. I don't know which posters you have in mind, but I have said nothing to either agree or disagree with either Amash or Rand Paul on this.
> 
> But there's a difference between agreeing with Rand over Amash and making baseless accusations about what Amash is doing and his motivations.


I disagree with Amash with this; but its hardly something I'm going to attack him over.  I think its stupid and counterproductive; but he's so good overall that I'm just gonna pretend it never happened and ignore it.

----------


## Superfluous Man

> Thats your opinion, not people who think that you should be innocent until proven guilty.


I do think that. And so does Amash, and nothing he has said indicates otherwise.

----------


## nikcers

> He can have an opinion. In this case, his opinion is baseless and irrational accusations against Amash, one of the people this website supports.


NO one here supports impeachment or even the idea that someone should be impeached after the justice department tried to jin up charges against them and spent tens of millions of dollars on a Hillary Clinton fake news hoax.

----------


## nikcers

> I do think that. And so does Amash, and nothing he has said indicates otherwise.


WE think he does based on his words, its not an opnion, its English. He can speak it, if he doesn't want to talk out of both sides of his mouth like a neocon.

----------


## ARealConservative

> Please provide a quote of me saying that.
> 
> Not only have I not "clearly" claimed that. I haven't claimed it at all.


"I do have a problem with people making irrational and baseless accusations against him though, like what you had others have done"

----------


## Superfluous Man

> WE think he does based on his words, its not an opnion, its English. He can speak it, if he doesn't want to talk out of both sides of his mouth like a neocon.


Your opinion on that is baseless and irrational, as proven by your inability to find any reason to think it.

Given your posts in this very thread, you're in no position to complain about somebody else's ability to comprehend and use English.

To the extent that you've even been coherent, it's you and your cohorts here who have been speaking out both sides of your mouth. I shouldn't have to hold your hands as much as you're requiring just to get you to see a simple concept, and I don't think it's because you're honestly not seeing it. I think it's because you're deliberately being slippery and dishonest to avoid admitting the weakness of your position.

To wit, the question of whether or not the acts of obstruction of justice the Mueller report provides evidence of Trump having committed are worthy of impeachment is a matter of opinion about which people like Rand and Amash can reasonably have a difference of opinion. The claim that Amash is not merely mistaken, but is furthermore a supporter of the deep state, abuses of FISA warrants, a neocon, and a grandstanding swamp creature, is baseless and irrational.

See how I could say both those things and there was nothing contradictory about it?

----------


## Superfluous Man

> "I do have a problem with people making irrational and baseless accusations against him though, like what you had others have done"


Notice what I called baseless and irrational.

Read it carefully again, because it's right there. And it's not what you said I had "clearly claimed."

----------


## ARealConservative

> Notice what I called baseless and irrational.
> 
> Read it carefully again, because it's right there. And it's not what you said I had "clearly claimed."


huh?

I have a position that is opposite of Amash.  I stated that opinion.

you claim to be neutral - but also claim I am making irrational and baseless accusations.

you aren't neutral.  what the hell.  words mean what they mean.  you seem to think you can say anything and it doesn't stick

----------


## nikcers

> Your opinion on that is baseless and irrational, as proven by your inability to find any reason to think it.
> 
> Given your posts in this very thread, you're in no position to complain about somebody else's ability to comprehend and use English.
> 
> To the extent that you've even been coherent, it's you and your cohorts here who have been speaking out both sides of your mouth. I shouldn't have to hold your hands as much as you're requiring just to get you to see a simple concept, and I don't think it's because you're honestly not seeing it. I think it's because you're deliberately being slippery and dishonest to avoid admitting the weakness of your position.
> 
> To wit, the question of whether or not the acts of obstruction of justice the Mueller report provides evidence of Trump having committed are worthy of impeachment is a matter of opinion about which people like Rand and Amash can reasonably have a difference of opinion. The claim that Amash is not merely mistaken, but is furthermore a supporter of the deep state, abuses of FISA warrants, a neocon, and a grandstanding swamp creature, is baseless and irrational.
> 
> See how I could say both those things and there was nothing contradictory about it?


Are you Zippy's socket puppet? You can play whatever fake news games all you want, but you are wrong and everyone knows it but you.

----------


## Superfluous Man

> huh?
> 
> I have a position that is opposite of Amash.  I stated that opinion.


Yes. And I never criticized you just for that opposite opinion. Nor was that opinion what I called baseless and irrational (as the quote you found itself shows).




> you claim to be neutral


On the question of whether or not Amash is right to support impeaching Trump over this, I am.




> - but also claim I am making irrational and baseless accusations.


Which you have clearly done, right here in this thread.




> you aren't neutral.  what the hell.  words mean what they mean.  you seem to think you can say anything and it doesn't stick


I don't see why you think this. I've said nothing to support this claim. Your inability to find a quote from me when I asked you to, and your resort to that quote that plainly didn't say what you asserted is proof that you have no reason to say this.

----------


## Superfluous Man

> Are you Zippy's socket puppet? You can play whatever fake news games all you want, but you are wrong and everyone knows it but you.


You're saying that everyone here believes that Amash is a grandstanding swamp creature?

Do you really believe that?

----------


## nikcers

> You're saying that everyone here believes that Amash is a grandstanding swamp creature?
> 
> Do you really believe that?


You would know what I believe if you wanted but you want to play rhetorical fake news games that I don't frankly have time for.

----------


## donnay

> huh?
> 
> I have a position that is opposite of Amash.  I stated that opinion.
> 
> you claim to be neutral - but also claim I am making irrational and baseless accusations.
> 
> you aren't neutral.  what the hell.  words mean what they mean.  you seem to think you can say anything and it doesn't stick


SM is just playing mental gymnastics with you, or at least tries.  Kind of like Bill Clinton requesting the definition of "is" is.

----------


## Superfluous Man

> You would know what I believe if you wanted but you want to play rhetorical fake news games that I don't frankly have time for.


But that right there is the whole question that you've been arguing with me about.

If you're trying to twist it into something else, then it's you who are playing rhetorical games.

Think that Trump shouldn't be impeached for the reasons Amash does? Fine. Think that the only way Amash can hold his position is by being a grandstanding swamp creature? Not fine.

It's that simple.

----------


## ARealConservative

> Which you have clearly done, right here in this thread.


your apologist behavior for spying is plain bulll$#@!.  Rand is playing this way too nice.  

nothing I have said is irrational.  Amash is wrong.  period.  I'm not neutral - I'm pissed and suspect he was a phony all along.  or maybe he is just dumb

this is not hard to understand - so I am not sure what your problem is.  every reason Amash gives shows he is in favor of the DOJ having more power.  $#@! that, and $#@! him.

----------


## nikcers

> But that right there is the whole question that you've been arguing with me about.
> 
> If you're trying to twist it into something else, then it's you who are playing rhetorical games.
> 
> Think that Trump shouldn't be impeached for the reasons Amash does? Fine. Think that the only way Amash can hold his position is by being a grandstanding swamp creature? Not fine.
> 
> It's that simple.


That's the sort of the thing people call you when you side with the swamp nowadays, if you want to be a swamp creature and side with Pelosi on the Hillary Clinton fake news than you are wrong, and when Rand says JA is wrong, he is wrong. I have defended JA probably more than anything but this is indefensable.

----------


## Superfluous Man

> your apologist behavior for spying is plain bulll$#@!.  Rand is playing this way too nice.


At least now you admit that what you're doing is not the same thing that Rand is doing.

At this point, I think we can say case closed on all this sophistry that you and your cohorts have been resorting to trying to slip around between a mere difference of opinion and the irrational and baseless accusations you've been lobbing at Amash.

----------


## Superfluous Man

> That's the sort of the thing people call you when you side with the swamp nowadays


People? Not just people. The Trump campaign manager. I.e. the swamp incarnate is calling Amash a grandstanding swamp creature.

You want to play the guilt by association game? Well that's who you're siding with.

Isn't it better to give both Amash and Rand the benefit of the doubt when it comes to their core allegiances, rather than resort to this argument that bad guy X says A, and good guy Y also says A, so good guy Y must be a bad guy after all.

And notably, Pelosi is doing all she can *not* to impeach Trump. It seems to me that you're the one siding with her, and plenty of other swamp creatures.

----------


## nikcers

> People? Not just people. The Trump campaign manager. I.e. the swamp incarnate is calling Amash a grandstanding swamp creature.


I am saying it. Unless he refutes his previous statements than he is wrong. I am not a Trump campaigner, you can ask all the Trump people, they have neg repped me on this board more than you will ever.

----------


## Cleaner44

> Of course he'll back his primary challenger. The whole neocon establishment will back Amash's challenger this time.


This is one reason why Amash attacking Trump was a stupid move. If instead he lead an attack on the corrupt deep state communists, he would be winning allies and gaining stature with Republican voters and politicians. Now he is in the same place as Megyn Kelly. Remember her? She is unemployable and has no allies. 

Not a great place for a libertarian Republican to be and yet he put himself into this position. Republicans won't trust him and Democrats won't either. Amash could have been working to move the GOP toward a more libertarian position, but now he is toxic.

----------


## ARealConservative

> At least now you admit that what you're doing is not the same thing that Rand is doing.
> 
> At this point, I think we can say case closed on all this sophistry that you and your cohorts have been resorting to trying to slip around between a mere difference of opinion and the irrational and baseless accusations you've been lobbing at Amash.


I never would of said otherwise.  I'm not trying to win friends and gain influence like Rand.  I can be much more honest and call idiots idiots.

----------


## Superfluous Man

> This is one reason why Amash attacking Trump was a stupid move. If instead he lead an attack on the corrupt deep state communists, he would be winning allies and gaining stature with Republican voters and politicians. Now he is in the same place as Megyn Kelly. Remember her? She is unemployable and has no allies. 
> 
> Not a great place for a libertarian Republican to be and yet he put himself into this position. Republicans won't trust him and Democrats won't either. Amash could have been working to move the GOP toward a more libertarian position, but now he is toxic.


I predict Amash will beat the establishment again in 2020 if runs for reelection.

----------


## Cleaner44

> I predict Amash will beat the establishment again in 2020 if runs for reelection.


Even if he does, he still is left in a bad spot. Will he earn a fat paycheck? Sure. Will he help make the GOP a better party? I doubt it.

Rand has laid down the blueprint for how to make headway within the GOP and Amash instead appears to be following the AOC blueprint.

----------


## nikcers

> Pelosi is doing all she can *not* to impeach Trump. It seems to me that you're the one siding with her, and plenty of other swamp creatures.


fake news, she wants it but she doesn't want to lose so she is making these emotional appeals like Trump needs an intervention. You can pretend not to understand words but you aren't this stupid you are just fake news.

----------


## RonZeplin

> He can have an opinion. In this case, his opinion is baseless and irrational accusations against Amash, one of the people this website supports.


Justin Amash didn't leave RPF.  
RPF left Justin Amash



We're all Saudi-Israeli now.

----------


## nikcers

Yeah let's reward the deep state for weaponizing the FISA abuse and fake news by pushing their talking points. That will surely encourage them not to do it to us.

----------


## PAF

> Justin Amash didn't leave RPF.  
> RPF left Justin Amash
> 
> 
> 
> We're all Saudi-Israeli now.



The 3% of freedom fighters just went down to .5%

They all been trump'd.

----------


## nikcers

> Justin Amash didn't leave RPF.  
> RPF left Justin Amash
> 
> 
> 
> We're all Saudi-Israeli now.


Yeah and Justin Amash is all Jim Comey now it's an upside down world

----------


## ARealConservative

Comey ~ throws constitution on ground and pisses on it.  "We have always been independent and always will be"

Amash  ~ "hold my beer".  Hands beer to Comey.  picks Constitution up off the ground and wipes ass with it.

----------


## PAF

Vote The Record, Not The Rhetoric

----------


## ARealConservative

> Vote The Record, Not The Rhetoric


It is on record.  Amash agrees with Comey that the DOJ and FBI are independent of POTUS and POTUS violated rules by pretending to be in charge of those agencies.

----------


## Swordsmyth

> There's room for differences of opinion about this.


That's funny coming from the guy calling on the mods to silence people for opinions that he doesn't like but that are more in line with Ron and Rand than he is.

----------


## Swordsmyth

*White House: Amash 'not worth the time'*

----------


## donnay



----------


## Cleaner44

> It is on record.  Amash agrees with Comey that the DOJ and FBI are independent of POTUS and POTUS violated rules by pretending to be in charge of those agencies.


The Department of Justice is most definitely a part of the Executive branch. How do people not know this? 

source:
https://www.whitehouse.gov/about-the...cutive-branch/

If Amash is agreeing with the corrupt person like Comey, he is doing this wrong.

----------


## loveshiscountry

> Not in the least.


lol Yes in the most.

----------


## loveshiscountry

> The Department of Justice is most definitely a part of the Executive branch. How do people not know this? 
> 
> source:
> https://www.whitehouse.gov/about-the...cutive-branch/
> 
> If Amash is agreeing with the corrupt person like Comey, he is doing this wrong.


It's not about who he is agreeing with it's about what Amash has said.

----------


## enhanced_deficit

*Are Libertarians the New Neocons?*


Nope 


A few  neocons falsely may have claimed to be Libertarians ( Bill O'Really, Tucker Carlson etc).

That said, neocon/globalist/foreign firster lobbies have been actively  trying to recruit politicians from all sides including Libertarians but  with exception of *a few gullible, simple minded folks* here and there,  they are shunned.
Notorious Neocoservative and social liberal Democrat Sheldon Adelson  funded GOP-Neocon-Lite wing lately is trying to do same to legitimize  their globalist interventionist agenda/Iran war push for cause of  parasitic foreign-first lobbies but they are bound to fail.  Bold  leadership by likes of rookie Amash so far, others are also starting to  see things through to stop hijacking of GOP by globalist neocons.

NEXODUS: Neoconservatives from both parties joining GOP-Adelson (MAGA)

#1 GOP Cash Bundler, Sheldon Adelson, Calls For US to Bomb Iran w/Nuclear Weapons

----------


## UWDude

Out of principle, Amash stands up, and says the right thing that must be done, he says Trump should be impeached.

But then, when it comes time to vote, Amash gets cold feet.

Why?  Amash is retiring, or running as a model-t stovepipe backfiring syphon or as a loser 3rd party candidate.

But now, he did not vote for impeachment, angering leftists he was trying to woo by saying Trump should need to be impeached.

Where was the principles, Amash?

Was it all just one big troll?  You laid out quite the long and well thought out list about why Trump should be impeached.  Why did you vote to table the impeachment vote? 

Lawyer dork boy just figured out his bean counting math was all lopsided and wrong.  Now he realizes he just lost, and lost for good, lost everything.

----------


## cruzrulez

> Why do so many of you disagree with Rand Paul on this?
> Whose position are you guys taking? 
> You guys sound more like Rachel Maddow than Rand Paul sometimes.


https://pastebin.com/irj4Fyd5

Technique #2 - 'CONSENSUS CRACKING'
4. Use a straw man.
4) Teamwork.
5. Sidetrack opponents

Just a few to consider. Read the entire document if you'd like because you'll notice a lot of it is in play here on this forum and has been for quite a while now.

----------

