We own a Suzuki, does this mean you couldn't be honest in an assessment of a Honda.....
No, of course not.

Look at our courts, we pick a jury.
Yes, mitigating circumstances can contribute, we can ask questions of them.
They can also be stricken from serving based on some beliefs. etc....
Both parties, get to choose.
If its good enough to decide life, and death, for a person, then its good enough to believe it (a person with different party affiliations) can render an honest outcome based solely on the evidence....

I feel people will be surprised by the outcome.
I think it will reveal more than what people want, when they get caught up in it.
They will then say he exceeded his scope, yada, yada, yada.....
These politicians have been living to their own rules for decades.
Time they come to heed and live under our laws too.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/08/01/top-republican-congressman-calls-f...

I understand the point you are trying to make with the intellectual dishonesty statement; however, moving forward I will simply use dishonesty.  It seems a little more forthright, to me at least.

Best regards,

I don't believe she won the polls they said she did. That was just an effort to get people who Might support her to think they weren't going to be voting for a DOA corpse. It was an effort to create support. The popular vote she allegedly won didn't happen, that was a lie to create the perception that he didn't Really win, and to set the stage for
He's not legitimate.
Some people are so lost that they thought the electoral college was some sneaky crap the bubs just pulled on them to steal the election.. ignorance knows no bounds..
Trust me, a bunch of bubs would have preferred to lose to Hillary. The overt establishment bubs ran to support Her over TRUMP! How is That not telling?
The same buncha criminals ruined Ron Paul s shot at it. America wanted him, the establishment was puking from fear.