For the first time in decades, White House lackeys say NO to presidential debates

The corrupt lackeys who run the White House now say that for the first time in decades there won't be any presidential debates before the election.  Not even one.

Yep, they don't want to risk the utterly corrupt, senile piece of crap they so deftly handle getting confused and declaring World War 3 while trying to debate Trump.

Rumors are that the TV networks are banding together to beg the handlers to reverse that decision, but that's horseshit.  The networks are perfectly fine with no debates--which they'll blame on Trump, of course.  And they'll gush that not having debates is "perfectly normal, because...we say so."

The lackeys in the White House are putting out the quiet talking point that debates would "debase the president by putting him on-stage with a buffoon."

But everyone with a functioning brain knows this is horseshit--that the senile biden ("too old to be prosecuted for violating the law on mis-handling classified materials") is too mentally feeble to think on his feet.  His verbal gaffes are a major risk, so why take any chances if we don't have too, eh?

To help the Democrats out, a never-Trump fake-conservative site says "Trump is also a very old man but comes off as slightly more robust."
"Slightly more robust"?  Are you kidding? Putting aside your anti-Trump bias, it's clear that Trump seems at least 20 years more cogent and mentally acute than the stumbling, confused biden.

Now, since the Mainstream Media has loved presidential debates for decades, you might think they'd be upset that ONE of the two candidates is refusing to debate.  And of course if the roles were reversed the Media would be screaming 24/7 that Trump's refusal to debate showed he was unfit for the office, or some such.

"Presidential debates are crucial to let the public evaluate whether each candidate is fit to govern," they'd scream.  "They're a basic tool of our democracy!"

That's what the Media would be screaming if the roles were reversed.  But strangely, not a single member of the Media seems to be the least bit upset about biden refusing to debate.  Odd, eh?

Not at all: The Mainstream Media are all totally pro–Democrat, pro-Biden, so they aren't saying a critical word.  Like biden himself, they're hiding.  biden refusing to debate is fine with them.  

Here's some moron at CNN wearing a skin-suit claiming to be a "senior media reporter" (Oliver Darcy):

"While debates have played crucial roles in American elections for decades, we no long live in normal times.  We live in a world in which Trump uses 'sizable platforms' to lob nasty insults and spread lies and conspiracy theories..."

Gosh, shithead, is that anything like biden using the entire f-ing Mainstream Media to call Trump supporters "terrorists"?  Saying "The greatest threat this nation faces is...white supremacy"?

Is it like Hilliary calling people in flyover country "deplorables"?  Inventing the lie that "Trump colluded with Russia to steal the election from me"?  Insults, lies and conspiracy theories, eh?  Darcy, look in a mirror.   

So...like everything else controlled by the totally corrupt Democrats, all the prior rules are suddenly reversed (by them or their Media allies) when they determine those rules will hurt their party.  So, we've had debates for decades, but suddenly the Media will tell you they were never really needed cuz...um...uh... reasons.

Media: "Uhh, see...uh...debates used to be needed because no one knew anything about the challenger.  But you all know all about the raaacist, homophobic, transphobic, xenophobic Trump, right?  And you also know all about our wonderful, compassionate, totally generous, tolerant, climate-saving, global-thinking, U.N.-loving president.  So we don't need to have any debates this year."

But four years from now, suddenly the Media will be screaming that we simply must have debates, cuz "They're a basic tool of our democracy!"

Double standards.  Fits right in with that core principle laid down by the Founders: "One set of laws for little people, a more lenient set for the powerful, just like in our home, England."

Wait...I could have sworn we were taught that the Founders actually said "All men are equal under the law."  Is it possible we were all mistaken?

Ask the Democrats.  "Did the Founders write that "All men are equal under the law"?  And "Is that true today?" 

But of course no reporter would dare to do that.  Anyone who dared would immediately be taken off the invitation list for "A"-list parties!