First off, deal with what I've actually written when you're addressing me and not what you believe I've said.  I haven't moved the goal posts.  I haven't said word one about this report today except in response to you.  You have, as if you've read it, dissected it and know it in its entirety.  That's you, Paul, not me. But thank you for admitting that you're happy being a condescending asshole when you think it's deserved.  Point made and understood.  Just understand that the same can be said when others believe you are just as deserving.

Neither am I.  But you make it sound like everyone is saying that.  Making broad, sweeping generalizations using a misreading of posts like the one made by Charles which in no way diminished the Mueller report, but was explicitly saying what could come after this report. And then you applied that generalization to anyone who disagrees with you regardless of why they have a disagreement. So, yeah, give me a break.    

Give me a goddamned fucking break, Paul.  I'm a mod.  I can go back to your first posts. I just did, in fact. Your first posts were hot long before anyone took offense to what you wrote.  That some may have painted you in a less than flattering light doesn't mean that you entered here pure of snow, wide eyed as a doe and interested in just "getting to know the fellas" but was, instead, turned away, bullied and called names at every juncture.  Your first post was agenda driven and you've been singular in your interaction on this board ever since. That you want to play the victim of some board-wide injunction against you while simultaneously claiming that dissenting opinions are not accepted is bullshit.  You've never posted in another thread on this board that is not political in nature nor have you taken any sort of time to get to know the personalities on this forum away from politics even though you lurked here for 7-8 years before joining. No.  You're too above it, not wanting to debate in comic book related threads because they're beneath you, but perfectly willing to jump into a political discussion expecting some sort of  automatic "attaboy" because you lean right where the board leans left.  

Seriously.  Michael Roberts summed it up best a year ago when he said that if all you want to do is debate politics, why are you doing it on a comic book board?  A board where you can't be bothered to comment in threads unrelated to politics that ::shocker!:: have to do with the subject of this board, John Byrne. 

Thomas Woods and I don't agree on much.  We're diametrically opposed, actually.  But I give him credit for posting on a wide variety of subjects across multiple boards here on the JBF.  You?  This one.  Singular.  And you took an adversarial position from the jump before you got to know a single person with whom you were interacting.  Shocking that you've received the reaction that you have.

Who’s names are on them?

First, to your personal attacks and in particularly referring to me as a "condescending asshole" (and other language in your post that wasn't necessary). You may disagree with the points I make. That's fine. But I never resorted to the language that you used. You throw around that you're a moderator. I'm pretty sure that if I used that language I wouldn't be on the boards anymore. 

Second, as to why I respond to the Trump posts and not others. That's because aside from myself, Thomas Woods, and a very occasional other poster, there is no one defending Trump. It's the same dozen or so Trump bashers doing the same old echo chamber, back slapping routine over and over. They go unchallenged, no matter how ludicrous their statements. At some point I had enough. That got me to make the move from just years of reading posts to responding to some. After seeing the responses I received it's no wonder more people don't comment on the political posts - unless of course if they agree with you. 

 I'm passionate about comics and politics. I'm not sure why it's any of your business or concern what I choose to take my time to respond to. I don't have the time to spend (that you seem to) posting on numerous subjects. I have too many other positive things in my life to spend time doing. If you look at any of the current subjects at any particular time on the forum generally more than half are not dealing with comics in any way. I'd like to respond to more posts, but most time don't have anything to add that hasn't already been discussed. I feel I have something to add when it comes to the political postings. You may disagree with them, but it's not a perspective you're getting from anyone else here on the forum. And I see why.

As to getting to know people on the forum, I think I have a good idea of who many are just from reading their posts. When people respond like you do I'm not sure I want to know them any better anyway. 

As to JB - I could specifically respond to each of the statements you made regarding Trump. Some I'd even agree with - adultery. The others I find as various degrees of half-truths and over statements. But let's just say for sake of argument that I agree with you. Please tell me why those things actually matter? Why these thoughts and words are of any real importance as opposed to the actual RESULTS achieved? You hate Trump personally. I get that. Personally I don't like him either. But I like the results he's had as President. I like his economic policies, border security, foreign policy, recognizing Jerusalem, VA changes, low unemployment, tax law changes, annihilation of ISIS, jobs added and people removed from food stamps, etc. Disagree with those things. That's fine. They're what matters, But I'm not electing a homecoming king, or looking for a role model. I wish he was, but he's not. I'm looking for political results. The rest is National Enquirer nonsense or selective outrage. 

You want a moral President. You couldn't do much better than Jimmy Carter. I don't want him back- based on his results. Mitt Romney is considered to be one of the better men to ever run for president. Did you vote for him or Obama? Harry Truman was an open anti-semite. But he was also the first leader to recognize Israel- going against the wishes of his cabinet. His actions arguably did more for the Jewish people than anyone else in the 20th century. Should he be judged on what he said or what he did? 

And specifically I don't in any way believe that he sides with Neo-nazis or preaches white supremacy.

**** One other thing I'd like to point out to forum members (who for some reason are masochistic enough to have read this far). Earlier this morning I tried to respond to this post. I found I had been locked out of the Forum. Both Matt and JB have proclaimed that they do not censor those who disagree with them. But somehow I had been forbidden from responding to their posts. Obviously this has been corrected, (unless you're not reading this post) but I found this curious and wanted to mention it. Never had I used any kind of vile language that others have. Just arguing against the consensus opinion of the majority. Perhaps it was just an unusual temporary "glitch" in the system. But I wanted to point it out because it's never happened before.