Regarding a recent question; what exactly does attacking the President's underage non-political minor child prove to anyone?

Seriously Liberals, I don't think that really helps your cause in any measurable way.

10 Answers

Relevance
  • Shilo
    Lv 7
    1 month ago

    The underage minor wasn't attacked; his name was invoked to ridicule the president's behavior. 

    • Login to reply the answers
  • y
    Lv 7
    1 month ago

    With the numbers that defend or spin the attack from not only the flock, but their elected leadership. Did you really think you would get a meaningful answer?

    It is one think for members of the flock on either side to go after the kids. It shows how low they are. It is another when elected officials do it or their supposed educated witnesses do.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 1 month ago

    and in relation that recent question........I will REPEAT    my  answer  *again* in case YOU didn't see it. 

    and just WHO "attacked" his son?

    His name was referenced , in a discussion about the difference between a president and a king.

    I heard no one "attack" him.......call him names, belittle him, or call him out---personally--- in any way, shape or form.

    There was not a damn thing wrong with the reference...........but she aplogized anyway, because republicans cried SOOOOOOOO hard, because the boys mere NAME was mentioned.

    well, Trump DOES have a son named Barron, right????? It's not exactly a SECRET is it?

    And when Trump went to the world series game..........yeah, gee.........you'd THINK he take his ***SON*** to the ball game.

    Instead he took Matt Gaetz. Yeah, father of the year, right there.

    I am sure his son, didn't want to go the world series, anyway, right?

    so stop your Faux  OUTRAGE,  just because she used the word "BARON"  in reference to the difference between KINGS and Presidents- 

    The kids name is BARRON.  She used the word  "Baron"  in reference to Royal Titles......but I wouldn't expect cons to know the difference. 

    • Login to reply the answers
  • TB12
    Lv 7
    1 month ago

    As opposed to the way y'all went after Obama's daughters,, or Chelsea Clinton when she was a minor,,, how exactly did that help your cause

    • Desolate
      Lv 6
      1 month agoReport

      https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/20/politics/peter-fonda-baron-trump-secret-service/index.html

    • Login to reply the answers
  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • Zack
    Lv 7
    1 month ago

    They didn't attack Barron. You just think that because that's what Trump and Faux News said. Quit listening to Trump.

    • ...Show all comments
    • Zack
      Lv 7
      1 month agoReport

      First of all, that was over a year ago. Second of all, that was more of an attack to Donald than to Barron. Peter was wondering if Melania would stand up to PoS Donald if Barron was put in a cage of pedos, he didn't say Barron deserved to be put in there.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • RockIt
    Lv 7
    1 month ago

    It proves that liberals are so degenerate that they take pleasure attacking minor children in front of millions of Americans.

  • 1 month ago

    It proved Karlan's testimony was hate based.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 1 month ago

    No one attacked anyone. It what way is saying, "You can name your son Barron, but you can't make him a Baron" attacking him.  Another faux outrage by the GOP to try to distract from crimes they can't defend.

  • you are just mad that liberals are more educated than you

  • Anonymous
    1 month ago

    There's no attack.  . The barons are coming.

    • Login to reply the answers
Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.