Here Are Just Some of the Big Reasons 'Conservatives' Are Nuts to Be Protecting Trump at All Costs

  
Via:  john-russell  •  2 months ago  •  178 comments

Here Are Just Some of the Big Reasons 'Conservatives' Are Nuts to Be Protecting Trump at All Costs
Thanks to Trump, younger people now equate “conservatism” with racism, science-denial, and crony capitalism. That is a brand which will be extremely difficult to overcome, especially as demographics shift in the favor of liberals.

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T



mediaite.com

Here Are Just Some of the Big Reasons 'Conservatives' Are Nuts to Be Protecting Trump at All Costs


By John Ziegler


May 14th, 2019, 2:59 pm


 









Screen-Shot-2019-04-17-at-2.46.46-PM.jpg

The willingness of “conservatives” to give up all of their principles in exchange for protecting Donald Trump is not new. However, there is no doubt that, in the aftermath of the Mueller Report, it has reached a new nadir which many, including myself, still somehow find to be shocking.

This phenomenon was even the focus of an unusually spot-on opening sketch in the most recent edition of Saturday Night Live, and a commentary by former Republican Joe Scarborough on MSNBC’s Morning Joe. What is so strange about the literally comical willingness of “conservative” politicians to humiliate themselves on behalf of this conman who is obviously unfit for his office, is not that they are willing to sell out their alleged beliefs, but they have done so in exchange for so very little in return.

Yes, Trump has delivered for conservatives on judges, though it will take many years to know for sure just how impactful those nominations have been. While his supporters have claimed huge victories in the realm of “deregulation,” no one can tell me specifically what this means and, since Trump is a pathological liar, I just presume that this claim is either bullcrap, or at least much exaggerated.

Then there is the tax cut law, the only major piece of legislation passed during the two years when Republicans controlled all branches of the federal government, which is good, but was not, as conservatism dictates, paid for with spending cuts. The economy is perceived as being very solid, but is on the same exact trajectory it was from the Obama administration, and showing some signs of potential weakness.

We haven’t had a national security crisis, which is great, but we didn’t during the eight years of Barack Obama either. Finally, of course, there is the prevention of the Hillary Clinton presidency, which most conservatives wrongly believe would have been the end of the country as we know it.

So, while Trump has provided some real wins for conservatives, let’s consider the enormous price he has, and will, force them to pay for those victories. Here is a thumbnail sketch of some of the more prominent items on that prodigious bill.

– Trump’s obsession with tariffs, which every legitimate conservative knows is insane, threatens to bring down the stock market and slow the economy. His huge subsidies to farmers hurt by his own actions is right out of the socialism playbook.
Usually during great economic times the debt and deficit decrease. During Trump’s reign, despite having congressional majorities most of the time, those numbers have exploded in the name of “conservatism.”

– Thanks to Trump, conservatives have lost the moral high ground on virtually every possible issue of character in the public debate. Other than murder, it is impossible to conceive of what those who supported Trump through all of this could legitimately claim is a disqualifier to hold high federal office in the future.

– Trump has diminished the negative impact for having been caught in a lie, or being a hypocrite, down to literally nothing. This used to be one of the best weapons of attack for conservatives, and it has now been permanently disarmed.
Just a few years after then President Obama was famously ripped by some conservatives for wearing a tan suit, there is literally no longer any reasonable claim that an act by a president could be considered inappropriate.

– A president sucking up to foreign tyrants, and even letting them help their presidential campaign without alerting any of the authorities, is now perfectly fine, even if they have to destroy public faith in our intelligence agencies in order to get away with it.

– The likely eventual implosion of Obamacare, which would have been owned by liberals, will now, thanks to Trump’s efforts to alter it without fulfilling his promise to repeal it, be blamed on “conservatives.”

– Trump, with the approval of the vast majority of “conservatives,” has defied the Constitution on a regular basis. Specifically, his routine violation of the Emoluments Clause and now his universal and brazen denial of Congressional oversight.

– The precedents Trump has created for his own personal benefit, specifically the phony national emergency on the border, and the use of the position of Attorney General as his own PR hack, will allow future Democratic presidents wide latitude in making conservatives extremely upset.

– Politically, Trump has not just lost the House majority, but, because of his extreme unpopularity here in California, has provided Democrats with a huge structural advantage there going forward which may be impossible for Republicans to overcome. On the presidential side, once Republican states like Virginia, Colorado, and Nevada are now likely gone forever, with even Texas soon moving into that column.

– Trump has single-handedly made conservative stances on some major issues, most prominently illegal immigration, politically toxic with over half the country, all without ever even building his wall, having Mexico pay for it, or delivering on the deportation forces he promised during the campaign.

– Thanks to Trump, younger people now equate “conservatism” with racism, science-denial, and crony capitalism. That is a brand which will be extremely difficult to overcome, especially as demographics shift in the favor of liberals.

– Having continually lied and betrayed their own beliefs all to defend someone as loathsome and relatively unpopular as Trump, conservatives, both in the media and in office, will have essentially zero credibility in the future with anyone but Trump’s cult-like base, and it seems a pretty good bet that many of them will turn into Democrats anyway the moment that he is finally gone.

Man, Vice President Mike Pence must REALLY be feeling unliked by his fellow conservatives. After all, Republicans, with the help of almost all Democrats, could easily make him president, if not for the fact that the party has become a hostage to the cult of a conman.





Article is Locked by Moderator

Find text within the comments Find 
 
 
Drakkonis
1.1  Drakkonis  replied to  JohnRussell @1    2 months ago

Why do you do this? You think people support Trump because they like him? Even the one's who claim they do know all this about him. The single greatest reason anyone supports Trump is simply this:

They feel it's better than where the left wants to take us. 

People like AOC do more to push people into Trump's camp than anything else. The idiotic talk about reparations. Crap like that. But you probably know that. So I wonder why you keep posting this crap. Somehow, you post this stuff and apparently think you're going to change someone's mind. How do you imagine you're going to do that if all you do is endlessly harp on about how much you hate Trump but don't give anyone an alternative? What can you offer up as an alternative? All those people you are disparaging are going to vote for Trump again because if they don't, they may end up with a president who backs policies they hate. 

And what do you do? Trot out the tired, "they're all uneducated" meme. They're all racists. They're all bigots. It's so transparent that sometimes I wonder if you're a Russian or Chinese bot or something. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
1.1.1  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Drakkonis @1.1    2 months ago

If you don't know there is something seriously wrong and lacking in Donald Trump, I feel sorry for you pal.

If you think ignoring him is the answer you are out of your mind.

 
 
 
Drakkonis
1.1.2  Drakkonis  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.1    2 months ago

Still don't get it, do you? I'm no fan of Donald Trump. I don't find anything personally worthy in the man. I didn't vote for him ( I didn't vote for Clinton, either) and I probably won't vote for him again (probably won't vote for a democrat, either). But what does it say about your side of the isle that people would rather vote for him rather than let you guys have the power you desire??? You keep putting it in terms of Trump being so bad everyone should vote for anyone else at all just to keep him out of office. You just don't seem to get it that the policies of the left are so bad that they prefer Trump. So instead of recognizing this, you just keep on with the policies you have and can't figure out why people don't reject Trump and embrace your side. 

Let me help you out. Why don't you guys try something like not dragging this country into socialism so that maybe more people would actually take you seriously? Because here's what you're offering many in the center and most on the right:

A choice between leftist policies they can't stand or a person of bad character that at least isn't going to drag the country into the ruin the left has planned for it. Right now all you are saying is, vote for us because Trump is a jerk. Not going to work, pal. You have to give them a better reason than that. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
1.1.3  TᵢG  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.1    2 months ago
If you don't know there is something seriously wrong and lacking in Donald Trump, I feel sorry for you pal.

Read what Drakk wrote:

Drakk @1.1 - You think people support Trump because they like him?

Those who support Trump seem to do so in spite of his character flaws.    This is part of the problem I see with your approach of chastising those who do not condemn Trump (or do not condemn in strong enough language).   You have plenty of people who agree with you that Trump is a horrid choice for PotUS yet you get in their face and make it personal if they do not exhibit obsessive anti-Trump sentiment.

Not the smartest tactic I have seen.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
1.1.4  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Drakkonis @1.1.2    2 months ago

I am not here trying to convince trolls on an internet forum to vote against Trump. From what I've seen, there is not a single Trump supporter on this site that will abandon him because he is a piece of shit human being.

We have the single most unqualified person to ever run for the presidency, let alone win, in the office right now. After just a year in office a panel of presidential historians placed him dead last in a rating of all 44 U.S. presidents.

What you are saying intentionally or inadvertently is that this man's mountain of disqualifying characteristics don't really matter, when in a very real sense they are all that should matter. We made a huge national mistake in 2016. Normalizing Trump only feeds that mistake and justifies Trump's presidency, which should never be justified.

To say it's not Trump's fault, it's not the Trump voters fault, it's the political opposition's fault for not properly offering an alternative is a cop out of the highest degree.

You probably think Trump shouldn't be held to account for his transgressions in the Mueller report because that would only rile his voters up. Fuck that.

Three years of this national nonsense is far more than enough.

If people like you had spoke out against him a long time ago we probably wouldn't be in this mess.

I do not support "socialism" , although we certainly need to address "inequality" in a major way (wealth tax, higher marginal tax rates on multi million dollar yearly incomes).

That will probably need to be taken off the table in the 2020 election because Trump is still president and the Democrats can't afford to take any chances.  Hopefully Biden will take Trump apart.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
1.1.5  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @1.1.3    2 months ago

Moderates and independents have been a huge disappointment in the battle against Trumpism. They are missing in action. You have to account for your indifference, not me.

 
 
 
cms5
1.1.6  cms5  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.4    2 months ago

Basically, people voted for Trump because Clinton was an unacceptable alternative.

Does that mean that everyone who voted for Trump support him in every way, or strongly approve of everything he has done? No...it means they are damn happy that Clinton isn't running this Nation.

There are many Republicans that remain in Trump's camp simply because to remove themselves would mean supporting a Democrat. That would be like some here, especially the vocal Trump haters, suddenly joining Trump's camp. Gee...did I hear, "...cold day in hell..."? I believe some will get the picture.

There has been so much negativity regarding Trump that most are becoming immune to the rantings, comments, negative articles and propaganda. We are accustomed to being belittled, shamed, scorned, etc. Over two plus years...we've heard it all. It isn't 'shocking' anymore...it doesn't sting or hurt...it just makes us shake our heads and move on.

The current large pool of Democratic Candidates running should strengthen their platforms...listen to the People, and that means ALL of the People...not just their base...if they want to become an acceptable alternative. The costly ideas they are touting need to be scrapped for believable solutions. Ditch the 'Beat Trump' mantra and tell the People how they can move this Nation forward.

Trump is our President because Clinton was an unacceptable alternative. If the Democratic Candidate for 2020 isn't an acceptable alternative...Trump will have another four years in office.

 
 
 
Greg Jones
1.1.7  Greg Jones  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.4    2 months ago

You haven't made your case John. Millions of people disagree with you. Your claims are hollow and invalid 

Very few people support your disturbed views about Trump and his supporters.

 
 
 
TᵢG
1.1.8  TᵢG  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.5    2 months ago

Realistically the nation will be rid of Trump by voting him out of office.

Attacking those who do not favor Trump because they are insufficiently obsessed per your standards is illogical and counterproductive.

The smart approach would be to illustrate the clear flaws in Trump as PotUS (the plentiful important stuff, not petty nonsense) and be inclusive of everyone who opposes Trump — even the lukewarm supporters.   Do not attack fellow non-Trumpers who do not express themselves per your requirements.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
1.1.9  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  cms5 @1.1.6    2 months ago
Trump is our President because Clinton was an unacceptable alternative. If the Democratic Candidate for 2020 isn't an acceptable alternative...Trump will have another four years in office.

This attitude is nothing short of idiocy. 

Why not say "I voted for Clinton because Trump was unacceptable"? It makes infinitely more sense. 

Of course more people did vote for Clinton. 

Now, after seeing Trump perform like a buffoon for two years in office, constantly lying to the American people, you want to double down and say IF the Democrats don't do this or that we will support Trump again. 

Trumpsters are the worst people in this country, and I think you more or less explained why. They want to hold the country hostage to their grievances. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
1.1.10  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Greg Jones @1.1.7    2 months ago

Greg, I don't pay any attention to you. Sorry. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
1.1.11  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @1.1.8    2 months ago

Trump won because enough white racists were impressed by his pledges to Make America Great Again which they interpreted as code for make America white again. 

I'm not going to be nice to these people. Ain't happening. 

We will be rid of Trumpism sooner or later, no thanks to the "go along to get along" crowd of "moderates". 

 
 
 
TᵢG
1.1.12  TᵢG  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.11    2 months ago
I'm not going to be nice to these people. Ain't happening. 

You did not read what I wrote then.   I did not recommend you be nice to staunch Trump supporters.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
1.1.13  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @1.1.12    2 months ago

First of all you and Drak started up on me for seeding this article. This article was written by a conservative who is lamenting what Trump has done to the conservative brand, and he goes into considerable detail. But you and Drak decided to question why the article was seeded rather than address the content. 

If you can't address the content then your intention is more clear. You don't care what Trump does every day. Yeah, I know you're not going to vote for him, but that is not enough. Without the "resistance" Trump would be normalized by now, which would make it much easier for him to be re-elected ("no one is really complaining about him so it must be ok") He has to be presented as unacceptable, not just the greater of two similar political evils. 

 
 
 
cms5
1.1.14  cms5  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.9    2 months ago
Why not say "I voted for Clinton because Trump was unacceptable"? It makes infinitely more sense. 

Clinton was an unacceptable ALTERNATIVE. Yes, if the Democrats present another unacceptable ALTERNATIVE to voting for Trump...more will vote for him than the presented alternative. I have no doubt that you voted for Clinton because anything Republican was unacceptable.

It is mind boggling to believe that belittling, name calling, stomping feet and calling Trump a buffoon would suddenly change the minds of Republicans and make them want to vote for a Democrat. To many of them, they are willing to overlook his flaws based on the economy, unemployment rates and tenacity to get the best deals for this Nation. That is hardly holding the country hostage. It's more of a reality.

To win over Moderates and Independents...by all means, do as you wish. I'm sure that many will jump for joy and vote for an unknown socialist with glee. They will be thrilled with fewer jobs, higher taxes and a government that holds more power.

 
 
 
It Is ME
1.1.15  It Is ME  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.13    2 months ago

The only thing Trump has done to any Political brand is …… upset "THIER NORM".

Don't forget....the "Norm" got us to where we were at until 2016. 

Now.....things are-a-growen for this country now, unlike the "Norms" did for us folks, and the phony politicians are being put in the Lime Light for all to see.

They, and you it seems....HATES IT !

 
 
 
Dean Moriarty
1.1.16  Dean Moriarty  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.13    2 months ago

A conservative that has a track record of being dead wrong. Watch him make the claim that Hillary will win and there is no possible way for Trump to beat her. The man has no credibility. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
1.1.17  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  cms5 @1.1.14    2 months ago
To many of them, they are willing to overlook his flaws based on the economy, unemployment rates and tenacity to get the best deals for this Nation.

What best deals has he gotten? 

North Korea- failure

Iran- failure

NATO - inconclusive disarray

China - nothing

Middle East - nothing

What best deals are you talking about? 

Trump claims that we have the best economy EVER. As I pointed out the other day, this "best economy ever" has resulted in an average of a real wage increase of a quarter an hour year to year for someone making 12 dollars an hour.  Is that person supposed to jump for joy? They might , to go along with the crowd, but Trump has done nothing for them. He also wants to severely cut back on the nation's social safety net.  He also is ok with restricting abortion, if not making it completely illegal. He also had given tacit support to racists and white supremacists. 

Oh let's not forget his border policy. That has really worked well, hasn't it? 

Have you fallen for right wing media bullshit? 

 
 
 
cms5
1.1.18  cms5  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.11    2 months ago
Trump won because enough white racists were impressed by his pledges to Make America Great Again which they interpreted as code for make America white again. 

Propaganda.

 
 
 
TᵢG
1.1.19  TᵢG  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.13    2 months ago
First of all you and Drak started up on me for seeding this article.

No, that is not what I wrote.   I did not write anything about you seeding this article.   Rather, I got involved when you misinterpreted Drakk.

But you and Drak decided to question why the article was seeded than to address the content. 

I did no such thing.   You are clearly making this up.   Why?   Read my opening comment:

TiG @1.1.3 - Those who support Trump seem to do so in spite of his character flaws.    This is part of the problem I see with your approach of chastising those who do not condemn Trump (or do not condemn in strong enough language).   You have plenty of people who agree with you that Trump is a horrid choice for PotUS yet you get in their face and make it personal if they do not exhibit obsessive anti-Trump sentiment.   Not the smartest tactic I have seen.

Read the blue part in particular.

You don't care what Trump does every day. 

Presumption leads to a failure in understanding.

Without the "resistance" Trump would be normalized by now ...

Do I argue that there be no resistance?    Again, you need to actually read what people write rather than presume.   For example, read this:

TiG @1.1.8 - The smart approach would be to illustrate the clear flaws in Trump as PotUS (the plentiful important stuff, not petty nonsense) and be inclusive of everyone who opposes Trump — even the lukewarm supporters.   Do not attack fellow non-Trumpers who do not express themselves per your requirements.

The theme of my comments has been consistent and clear yet you are operating on presumption rather than comprehension.   That is never going to work well.

He has to be presented as unacceptable, not just the greater of two similar political evils. 

I agree!   And my suggestion (for years now) is to present his many significant flaws (not the trivial crap) and to encourage others to do likewise.   There is no need to exaggerate, Trump does an excellent job of making your point all by himself.   You post non-stop unbalanced seeds and then alienate those who are not at your level of anger.    That is not a smart way to operate.   Remind people why Trump is unacceptable (without coming off as obsessed or angry) and encourage people to join you.   Trying to force people to your level of emotion on Trump by attacking them for being too laid back (per your standards) is, as I have noted, counter-productive.   It is a stupid tactic.   

 
 
 
cms5
1.1.20  cms5  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.17    2 months ago

None of the 'failures' you've listed are completed deals. He certainly hasn't settled...and he hasn't allowed any of these nations listed run us over...nor has he bowed and apologized for the big bad US of A looking out for her own.

You're looking for immediate gratification? That's not how it works. Wages are increasing...instead of stagnation and loss of jobs. He's had two years...all under the Russian Conspiracy cloud...not too shabby at all.

Have you fallen for MSM liberal doom and gloom bullshit?

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
1.1.21  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  cms5 @1.1.18    2 months ago
Propaganda.

"But new research from the University of Alabama’s George Hawley, published by UVA’s Institute for Family Studies, suggests this isn’t the case. According to Hawley, a political scientist who specializes in demography and the far right, roughly 5.64 percent of America’s 198 million non-Hispanic whites have beliefs consistent with the alt-right’s worldview. Whether or not they would describe themselves as alt-right, Hawley argues, they share the movement’s belief in a politics that promotes white interests above those of other racial groups.

If Hawley is right, then the alt-right’s constituency isn’t a tiny fringe. It’s about 11 million Americans."

https://www.vox.com/2018/8/10/17670992/study-white-americans-alt-right-racism-white-nationalists

"Of the more than 120 million votes cast in the 2016 election, 107,000 votes in three states effectively decided the election."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/2016-election/swing-state-margins/

Those two facts tell it all. 11 million Americans who by the studies metric, display “a strong sense of white identity”, “a belief in the importance of white solidarity,” and “a sense of white victimization,”. And those are Americans Trump embraced and within them are the wannabe Nazi's, the KKK and the open white supremacists. Without them, Trump wouldn't have had any chance, as it was only 107,000 votes decided the election, just one one hundredth of the 11 million who express alt-right wold views and heard Trump anti-minority, anti-immigrant, anti-Islam, anti-lgtbq dog whistles.

 
 
 
Greg Jones
1.1.22  Greg Jones  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.10    2 months ago

Of course you do.

You love me!  jrSmiley_15_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Greg Jones
1.1.23  Greg Jones  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @1.1.21    2 months ago

So why are his approval ratings rising, and lots of people are deserting the far left liberal politics of the current democrat party??

The dems are likely to lose the House and have no hope for the Senate or WH. The people aren't buying what the left is trying to sell.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
1.1.24  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  cms5 @1.1.20    2 months ago

Evidently you do not understand that Donald Trump is a conman. He has been all his life.  It's a pity many Trump fans know nothing about him.

 
 
 
cms5
1.1.25  cms5  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.24    2 months ago

I'll be honest...I've yet to meet anyone holding a public office that is truly genuine...that always tells the truth...that is in it only to serve the public.

 
 
 
luther28
1.1.26  luther28  replied to  cms5 @1.1.14    2 months ago
It is mind boggling to believe that belittling, name calling, stomping feet and calling Trump a buffoon would suddenly change the minds of Republicans and make them want to vote for a Democrat.

At this juncture most of us have made up our minds regarding Mr. Trump one way or another. While I myself do not care for him, I would find it counter productive to dwell on and opine upon him on a daily basis.

As you pointed out, for many folks it is not that they are particularly enamored with Mr. Trump but felt he was a better choice than the alternative. If the economy continues to chug along and we do not end up in another war the voters will need a good reason to dump Mr. Trump in my opinion.  

 
 
 
cms5
1.1.27  cms5  replied to  luther28 @1.1.26    2 months ago
At this juncture most of us have made up our minds regarding Mr. Trump one way or another. While I myself do not care for him, I would find it counter productive to dwell on and opine upon him on a daily basis.

Agreed. I'm hoping that once the Dems choose their candidate...more rational conversations can be held. A 'Dump Trump' campaign doesn't exactly give many a warm and fuzzy feeling about this Nation's future....even if most don't care for him now.

 
 
 
Jack_TX
1.1.28  Jack_TX  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.4    2 months ago
I am not here trying to convince trolls

No, you're being one.

People don't vote for Trump because they like him.

They vote for him because they hate the endless stream of bullshit gushing from safe spaces full of entitled liberal children complaining about the state of their pumpkin spice lattes and how horribly unfair it is that they should actually have to pay their own bills and pay off their own loans and also how terrifying garbage disposals are.

Trump simply gives voice to their hatred.

You personally are contributing to the problem you want to solve with your endless and neurotically repetitive posts about Trump.

 
 
 
Jack_TX
1.1.29  Jack_TX  replied to  TᵢG @1.1.8    2 months ago
Attacking those who do not favor Trump because they are insufficiently obsessed per your standards is illogical and counterproductive.

Full warning, I intend to plagiarize the phrase "insufficiently obsessed" in regular conversation.  It is outstanding.  

 
 
 
JohnRussell
1.1.30  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  luther28 @1.1.26    2 months ago
While I myself do not care for him, I would find it counter productive to dwell on and opine upon him on a daily basis.

That and a dollar will get you half a cup of coffee.  What is more important to "dwell" on", in the political realm, than the most unqualified president in US history?

"Independents" are badly letting this country down. Normalize Donald Trump and "Trumpism"  and we will regret it for decades in this country, if not forever.

 
 
 
MonsterMash
1.1.31  MonsterMash  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.24    2 months ago
You post non-stop unbalanced seeds

 
 
 
JohnRussell
1.1.32  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Jack_TX @1.1.28    2 months ago
People don't vote for Trump because they like him. They vote for him because they hate the endless stream of bullshit gushing from safe spaces full of entitled liberal children complaining about the state of their pumpkin spice lattes and how horribly unfair it is that they should actually have to pay their own bills and pay off their own loans and also how terrifying garbage disposals are.

Your priorities are way out of whack. 'Political correctness' doesnt harm you in any way shape or form. Personally, I don't even think about it. It means next to nothing.

 
 
 
Drakkonis
1.1.33  Drakkonis  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.4    2 months ago
I am not here trying to convince trolls on an internet forum to vote against Trump. From what I've seen, there is not a single Trump supporter on this site that will abandon him because he is a piece of shit human being.

Then one wonders what your purpose is in posting here? Just to get your mad out? Create an echo chamber?

To say it's not Trump's fault, it's not the Trump voters fault, it's the political opposition's fault for not properly offering an alternative is a cop out of the highest degree.

I didn't say anything about what is and isn't Trumps fault. What I was addressing was your persistent pattern of missing why so many support Trump. Typical of the left, you blame it on racism, bigotry and a lack of education. Apparently, you feel that if they weren't racist, bigoted or were educated, they would all somehow magically be democrats. That's a bit insane, don't you think? All you are saying is that if you don't see things my way, you are a racist, bigot and your uneducated. Doesn't matter that those things are demonstrably untrue in most cases. All that matters is that they disagree with you. 

You probably think Trump shouldn't be held to account for his transgressions in the Mueller report because that would only rile his voters up.

If he's done something criminal, I'd like to see him pay, but since you are sort of asking, I'll tell you that I think the media, on all sides, have spun this thing so bad and so hard that there's no chance of an average person like me ever knowing what the truth really is. 

If people like you had spoke out against him a long time ago we probably wouldn't be in this mess.

Maybe we'd just be in a different mess. Ever think of that? 

That will probably need to be taken off the table in the 2020 election because Trump is still president and the Democrats can't afford to take any chances. Hopefully Biden will take Trump apart.

I'm willing to look at Biden and see what he is offering. If I think the policies he claims to support make sense, I'll consider voting for him. I'll have to see. But if he doesn't have a reasonable border policy, supports AOC's green new deal (which I don't think he does, but that could change), talks about reparations and goes on and on about the overinflated racism problem, probably not. 

So, you go ahead with your Trump hate fest if it makes you happy, but I can tell you in all honesty, you're only pushing people further into his corner. You just come across as extreme left, unreasonable and obsessed. 

 
 
 
tomwcraig
1.1.34  tomwcraig  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.11    2 months ago

Trump won, because Hillary took Wisconsin and Michigan for granted and only campaigned between those states ONCE.  Trump did not.  Are you calling all of the Democrats in Wisconsin and Michigan white racists?  Remember, those two states have been reliably Democratic in Presidential elections since Reagan.  The last time Michigan voted Republican in the Presidential election was 1988 when George H. W. Bush was elected.  And, Wisconsin last voted Republican in the Presidential election in 1984, when Reagan was re-elected.

So, your entire point is calling Wisconsin and Michigan nothing but white racists as those two states, along with PA, which has been a swing-state ever since Reagan, put Trump into office.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
1.1.35  Sean Treacy  replied to  tomwcraig @1.1.34    2 months ago

His argument is premised on calling white Obama voters who voted against Hillary racists.  I guess he gets points for inventiveness. 

 
 
 
livefreeordie
1.1.36  livefreeordie  replied to  Drakkonis @1.1.33    2 months ago

Biden is a nonstarter

pro abortion

pro homosexual behavior 

loves progressive taxation 

loves govt regulation

supports and is owned by the banking and credit card industries 

loves statist government

those few points alone make him a terrible candidate and he’s the least offensive Democrat of those running

 
 
 
Jack_TX
1.1.37  Jack_TX  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.32    2 months ago
Your priorities are way out of whack.

You're learning what irony is.  Well done.

'Political correctness' doesnt harm you in any way shape or form.

Sure.  And political incorrectness doesn't harm you in any way shape or form.  None of which has anything to do with this topic or my post.

Personally, I don't even think about it. It means next to nothing.

I'm not sure how you're missing the idea that it isn't about what you think about.  You're not a Trump supporter.  This is about what THEY think about, and most of them are really unhappy with the constant bleating of bratty young liberals who know less about the real world than the emotional support dogs they pretend they need on airplanes.

 
 
 
Fireryone
1.1.38  Fireryone  replied to  cms5 @1.1.14    2 months ago
Clinton was an unacceptable ALTERNATIVE.

She was the ONLY alternative to Trump that had a chance to prevent him becoming potus.

 
 
 
Fireryone
1.1.39  Fireryone  replied to  livefreeordie @1.1.36    2 months ago

How does being opposed to homosexuality, abortion, regulation exactly make you a person who supports freedom?

Just curious. 

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
1.1.40  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  livefreeordie @1.1.36    2 months ago
Biden is a nonstarter

He's pro-choice (no one is pro-abortion)

pro equality regardless of sexual orientation (you don't have to be for something to not be against it)

hates regressive taxation

believes government regulation can help eliminate disparities and protect minorities

supports our nations federal banking system and relies on it to keep the dollar strong as we all do

hates fascism, communism and authoritarianism

Your false branding of Biden won't stick, you can call all of us on the left "statists" or socialists" all day long, it won't make it any less false.

 
 
 
luther28
1.1.41  luther28  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.30    2 months ago

I in no way attempt to normalize Mr. Trump, I have just excepted him for what he is. The sooner we arrive at 2020 the happier I will be, the voters will decide and that will finally be the end of it.

 
 
 
cms5
1.1.42  cms5  replied to  Fireryone @1.1.38    2 months ago
She was the ONLY alternative to Trump that had a chance to prevent him becoming potus.

She was an UNACCEPTABLE alternative.

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
1.1.43  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  Fireryone @1.1.38    2 months ago

And she still lost, didn't she?

 
 
 
livefreeordie
1.1.44  livefreeordie  replied to  Fireryone @1.1.39    2 months ago

I oppose homosexual behavior on moral grounds, not as a matter of law

i oppose abortion as murder on moral grounds, not as a matter of law

i don’t oppose ALL regulation but 90% of federal regulation is either usurping state authority, unconstitutional, or duplicating overkill

 
 
 
Sparty On
1.1.45  Sparty On  replied to  Dean Moriarty @1.1.16    2 months ago

Lol ..... there is no path!   Trump will lose.

Hilarious!

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
1.1.46  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  livefreeordie @1.1.36    2 months ago
Biden is a nonstarter

For you maybe, and I am not surprised. But I am looking at him seriously as an alternative to Trump. I really don't want another election where I am voting third party.

 
 
 
Snuffy
1.1.47  Snuffy  replied to  livefreeordie @1.1.44    2 months ago
I oppose homosexual behavior on moral grounds, not as a matter of law

i oppose abortion as murder on moral grounds, not as a matter of law

i don’t oppose ALL regulation but 90% of federal regulation is either usurping state authority, unconstitutional, or duplicating overkill

Shouldn't this be a personal choice on how you live your life?  I mean, I'm not a fan of the Catholic Church but that only should mean that I don't attend one.  Nothing in my dislike should be used to shut down the Catholic Church.  For the record I don't like homosexual behavior either so I won't participate in such behavior. But I'm not out there looking to make it illegal for someone else to engage in it. Moral grounds are fine, but they are there for you and your behavior and not to control others.

 
 
 
Fireryone
1.1.48  Fireryone  replied to  cms5 @1.1.42    2 months ago

That's your opinion...of which I could care less. . the fact is she received 3M more votes than did he.  

That shows more people wanted her to be Potus than him.

 
 
 
Fireryone
1.1.49  Fireryone  replied to  livefreeordie @1.1.44    2 months ago
I oppose homosexual behavior on moral grounds, not as a matter of law

i oppose abortion as murder on moral grounds, not as a matter of law

i don’t oppose ALL regulation but 90% of federal regulation is either usurping state authority, unconstitutional, or duplicating overkill

So you only advocate for freedom for those like you.  That's just peachy...and makes your contributions to those issues irrelevant to any discussion we would have.  

 
 
 
cms5
1.1.50  cms5  replied to  Fireryone @1.1.48    2 months ago
That's your opinion...of which I could care less. . the fact is she received 3M more votes than did he.   That shows more people wanted her to be Potus than him.

The election for President isn't based on popular vote...for a reason. All states do have a say in who runs this Nation.

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
1.1.51  XXJefferson#51  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.1    2 months ago

What a flat out stupid article.  

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
1.1.52  XXJefferson#51  replied to  cms5 @1.1.50    2 months ago

I openly mock my fellow California residents daily for expecting their individual votes to mean anything at all beyond determining who got our states electoral votes.  Clinton won that vote, she got all of our electoral votes.  Case closed. 

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
1.1.53  XXJefferson#51  replied to  Fireryone @1.1.48    2 months ago

The fact is that the combined less than 100,000 votes Trump won Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin by are worth more than the 4 million she won California by.  Pile on votes in big urban areas were meant by our founding fathers to be less than worthless and now we see it to be for good reason.  

 
 
 
Fireryone
1.1.54  Fireryone  replied to  cms5 @1.1.50    2 months ago

Why do you restate the obvious?

That isn't and wasn't ever the point. 

 
 
 
Don Overton
1.1.55  Don Overton  replied to  Drakkonis @1.1.2    2 months ago

You don't even comprehend socialism and how it's applied to the U.S.

 
 
 
Don Overton
1.1.56  Don Overton  replied to  Greg Jones @1.1.7    2 months ago

Very few people support your disturbed views about Trump and his supporters.

More make believe Greg!  Put facts where your made up stuff is

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
1.2  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  JohnRussell @1    2 months ago

The biggest mistake so many on the left make is that they confuse all conservatives as being Trump supporters when in fact we are not. Many of us just do not care for the politics of the left.

 
 
 
Fireryone
1.2.1  Fireryone  replied to  Ed-NavDoc @1.2    2 months ago
Many of us just do not care for the politics of the left.

Fine...Trump is corrupt through and through.  That's a better alternative?

Just asking. 

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
1.2.2  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  Fireryone @1.2.1    2 months ago

Once again, HRC still lost so obviously he was the better alternative to voters.

 
 
 
tomwcraig
1.2.3  tomwcraig  replied to  Fireryone @1.2.1    2 months ago

How is Trump corrupt?

He is a massive bloviator, but I haven't really seen any evidence that he is corrupt.

 
 
 
lib50
1.2.4  lib50  replied to  tomwcraig @1.2.3    2 months ago

Lol, why the hell do you think he's trying to hide everything?  If there was anything at all to help Trump they'd be released in a NY minute.  Everything that does come out proves he's a big fat liar.  Trump corruption happens in plain sight as well as under the surface.  

https://www.washingtonian.com/2019/03/27/trumps-dc-hotel-yanks-white-house-images-from-its-merchandise/

Earlier this week, Walter Shaub, the former director of the Office of Government Ethics, blasted the hotel’s DC-centric line on Twitter, accusing Trump of “monetizing the presidency.”

Our corrupt President’s hotel, in which he retains a conflicting financial interest, is selling products with the image of the White House on it. I’d say he’s monetizing the presidency again, but it’s a continuous effort so “again” wouldn’t make sense. https://t.co/BgBfaQKNy2

— Walter Shaub (@waltshaub) March 21, 2019

Trump is already facing a legal headache from a lawsuit filed by the attorneys general of Maryland and the District of Columbia that claims the president violates the Constitution’s emoluments clauses, which bar the President from receiving payments from foreign governments. (Though a recent federal appeals court hearing did not go well for the plaintiffs.) The Trump Organization also waded into hot water by ordering replicas of the Presidential seal, apparently with the intention of  placing them by tee markers at some of his golf clubs, Katherine Sullivan reported recently.

https://www.npr.org/2019/01/10/683638056/shutdown-shutters-many-d-c-tourist-attractions-but-not-the-one-in-trumps-hotel

A lawsuit making its way through the courts alleges that Trump is violating anti-corruption clauses of the Constitution whenever the hotel does business with foreign and state governments. Lobbyists and political allies frequently hold events at the hotel. And there are questions about whether Trump personally intervened in plans to replace the FBI headquarters, which sits across the street from the hotel, in order to protect his business interests. For Democrats and ethics watchdogs, the clock tower's continued operation during a government shutdown has raised new questions about whether Trump's business interests are getting an unfair boost from the government he sits atop of.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2018/08/30/donald-trump-republicans-corruption-problem-drain-swamp-column/1112746002/

It should come as no surprise that this crisis of confidence has worsened under the Trump administration. Just consider a small sample of their many suspicious and unscrupulous actions that have been performed by Trump’s allies since he entered the White House: Rep. Chris Collins, the first member of Congress to endorse Trump for president, was recently arrested for allegedly perpetrating an insider trading scheme while on the board of a foreign pharmaceutical company. Rep. Duncan Hunter of California, the second congressman to endorse Trump, was indicted last week for illegally using campaign funds for personal enrichment.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/mar/31/trump-russia-collusion-mueller-corruption

For legal scholars, the question of what to make of these gross conflicts of interest is a technical one: do they violate the constitution’s so-called emoluments clause, barring presidents from accepting “any present, emolument, office, or title” from foreign states? Constitutional originalists argue that emoluments, as the framers envisioned, had a narrow definition that do not include licensing fees for fashion companies and hotel-casinos, which is as tautological a defense as the fact that Trump has not been named a duke of the Habsburg Empire.

But there’s a simpler term for this: public corruption. It’s broader than hacking, and it’s well documented, if not nearly as breathlessly discussed on cable news.

The activist group Public Citizen collected records of over $15m Trump raked in from government agencies and political organizations such as the Pentagon, National Security Council, Republican National Committee and taxpayer dollars, which were spent money on everything from Trump restaurants to golf carts at Mar-a-Lago. Trump’s hotels have become an easy conduit for money from lobbyists both foreign and domestic. The Trump family business has earned a quarter million dollars in hotel fees from the Saudi government alone, another state Trump railed against on the campaign trail and made nice with once in office.

The big money comes from commercial tenants in Trump properties, which Forbes has estimated earns the president $175m a year, and include a Chinese state bank which rents a $2m office space in New York’s Trump Tower. Despite a much-hyped trade war with China, Trump is famously indebted to Chinese state banks, and two days after the Trump Organization received a $500m loan from the Chinese government, Trump announced he would lift sanctions against a Chinese telecom business. His tariffs also selectively excluded the country’s apparel industry, from which his daughter’s company imports its clothes.

Perhaps what has made these ongoing grifts so easy to overlook is that they are so unimaginative. There’s no grand conspiracy, no chalkboard linking spymasters to sleeper agents. What made Russiagate so seductive as the alpha and omega of Trump’s malfeasance was its promise that his very presence in office was illegitimate, that his misdeeds could be blamed on shadowy foreign forces rather than the country’s existing prejudices and mistrusts they exploited.

The Trump campaign’s defense was one of uncharacteristic humility: that it was too disorganized to carry out a conspiracy of the ages, and it’s a plausible argument. Real malfeasance is boring and obvious: sleaze your way into power and line your pockets while you have it. The Trump family is perfectly capable of that. It sees the presidency simply as a vehicle to extract maximum rents. If there is a silver lining to Russiagate’s anticlimactic conclusion, it should be to free up some attention for the real fleecing that’s going on, one that Congress has, until recently, been too distracted to stop.
 
 
 
tomwcraig
1.2.5  tomwcraig  replied to  lib50 @1.2.4    2 months ago

Oh, you mean the underlying evidence that Mueller used to say there was absolutely no collusion by ANY American regarding Russia?  You mean the underlying evidence that Mueller used to say that there was no way of proving obstruction of justice as there are multiple explanations for what Trump said and that nothing actually occurred that prevented a full investigation?  You do realize that the stuff that wasn't in the report was 90% covered by Rule 6(e) which prevents any release of Grand Jury testimony to anyone not actively involved in the investigation or in the Justice department and that the DC Circuit has ruled that it cannot be ordered to be released by the courts?  The very same LAW that Nadler is trying to force Barr to violate by releasing everything to Congress, since Congress is NOT an exception of the Rule.  Heck, if you want to bring up Holder's contempt, I believe a Congresswoman has stated that it took over 255 days before Congress brought contempt charges against him, Barr is being charged with contempt only 19 days after the report was released in redacted form.  If that is not an abuse of power by Nadler, I don't know what is.

Now, as to your link about Hunter and Collins has no bearing on Trump as the same can be said about many Democrats violating the laws and rules to personally enrich themselves.  Heck, just look at Hillary, Bill, and Barack.  They all got rich while in public office.  I know you are going to say "Book deals", but that is enriching oneself from one's office.  But, the argument in favor of Barack, Bill, and Hillary is that it was normal business, which is the same regarding Trump and his hotels, which means the Emoluments clause is actually a non-starter here since foreigners would still be staying at his hotels regardless of whether he was President or not.

 
 
 
Tessylo
1.2.6  Tessylo  replied to  tomwcraig @1.2.3    2 months ago
'but I haven't really seen any evidence that he is corrupt.'  jrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gif

Well then you haven't been looking very hard, or at all.  

 
 
 
lib50
1.2.7  lib50  replied to  tomwcraig @1.2.5    2 months ago

You are believing Trump lies.  I don't know if there is anything I can do for you.  But its why every conspiracy scandal the right tries to concoct turns out to be a big nothingberder.  Its not the reality, its the bullshit they want the herd to believe.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
1.2.8  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  tomwcraig @1.2.3    2 months ago
He is a massive bloviator, but I haven't really seen any evidence that he is corrupt.

Donald Trump settled , for 25 million dollars that he had to pay out, a personal fraud case against him. That is corruption. He also cheated on his taxes for many years. That is corruption.

You really slug down the kool aid, dont you?

 
 
 
tomwcraig
1.2.9  tomwcraig  replied to  JohnRussell @1.2.8    2 months ago

He settled out of court for personal fraud, okay where is your source?  And, what proof do you have he cheated on his taxes?  So far, we have claims of it, but no real evidence and the tax returns that have been publicly leaked are decades old and filed under much different tax codes than today.

 
 
 
tomwcraig
1.2.10  tomwcraig  replied to  lib50 @1.2.7    2 months ago

Have you bothered to read Rule 6(e)?

Here let me help you:

(e) Recording and Disclosing the Proceedings.

(1) Recording the Proceedings. Except while the grand jury is deliberating or voting, all proceedings must be recorded by a court reporter or by a suitable recording device. But the validity of a prosecution is not affected by the unintentional failure to make a recording. Unless the court orders otherwise, an attorney for the government will retain control of the recording, the reporter's notes, and any transcript prepared from those notes.

(2) Secrecy.

(A) No obligation of secrecy may be imposed on any person except in accordance with Rule 6(e)(2)(B).

(B) Unless these rules provide otherwise, the following persons must not disclose a matter occurring before the grand jury:

(i) a grand juror;

(ii) an interpreter;

(iii) a court reporter;

(iv) an operator of a recording device;

(v) a person who transcribes recorded testimony;

(vi) an attorney for the government; or

(vii) a person to whom disclosure is made under Rule 6(e)(3)(A)(ii) or (iii).

(3) Exceptions.

(A) Disclosure of a grand-jury matter—other than the grand jury's deliberations or any grand juror's vote—may be made to:

(i) an attorney for the government for use in performing that attorney's duty;

(ii) any government personnel—including those of a state, state subdivision, Indian tribe, or foreign government—that an attorney for the government considers necessary to assist in performing that attorney's duty to enforce federal criminal law; or

(iii) a person authorized by 18 U.S.C. §3322.

(B) A person to whom information is disclosed under Rule 6(e)(3)(A)(ii) may use that information only to assist an attorney for the government in performing that attorney's duty to enforce federal criminal law. An attorney for the government must promptly provide the court that impaneled the grand jury with the names of all persons to whom a disclosure has been made, and must certify that the attorney has advised those persons of their obligation of secrecy under this rule.

(C) An attorney for the government may disclose any grand-jury matter to another federal grand jury.

(D) An attorney for the government may disclose any grand-jury matter involving foreign intelligence, counterintelligence (as defined in 50 U.S.C. §401a3003), or foreign intelligence information (as defined in Rule 6(e)(3)(D)(iii)) to any federal law enforcement, intelligence, protective, immigration, national defense, or national security official to assist the official receiving the information in the performance of that official's duties. An attorney for the government may also disclose any grand-jury matter involving, within the United States or elsewhere, a threat of attack or other grave hostile acts of a foreign power or its agent, a threat of domestic or international sabotage or terrorism, or clandestine intelligence gathering activities by an intelligence service or network of a foreign power or by its agent, to any appropriate federal, state, state subdivision, Indian tribal, or foreign government official, for the purpose of preventing or responding to such threat or activities.

(i) Any official who receives information under Rule 6(e)(3)(D) may use the information only as necessary in the conduct of that person's official duties subject to any limitations on the unauthorized disclosure of such information. Any state, state subdivision, Indian tribal, or foreign government official who receives information under Rule 6(e)(3)(D) may use the information only in a manner consistent with any guidelines issued by the Attorney General and the Director of National Intelligence.

(ii) Within a reasonable time after disclosure is made underRule 6(e)(3)(D), an attorney for the government must file, under seal, a notice with the court in the district where the grand jury convened stating that such information was disclosed and the departments, agencies, or entities to which the disclosure was made.

(iii) As used in Rule 6(e)(3)(D), the term “foreign intelligence information” means:

(a) information, whether or not it concerns a United States person, that relates to the ability of the United States to protect against—

• actual or potential attack or other grave hostile acts of a foreign power or its agent;

• sabotage or international terrorism by a foreign power or its agent; or

• clandestine intelligence activities by an intelligence service or network of a foreign power or by its agent; or

(b) information, whether or not it concerns a United States person, with respect to a foreign power or foreign territory that relates to—

• the national defense or the security of the United States; or

• the conduct of the foreign affairs of the United States.

(E) The court may authorize disclosure—at a time, in a manner, and subject to any other conditions that it directs—of a grand-jury matter:

(i) preliminarily to or in connection with a judicial proceeding;

(ii) at the request of a defendant who shows that a ground may exist to dismiss the indictment because of a matter that occurred before the grand jury;

(iii) at the request of the government, when sought by a foreign court or prosecutor for use in an official criminal investigation;

(iv) at the request of the government if it shows that the matter may disclose a violation of State, Indian tribal, or foreign criminal law, as long as the disclosure is to an appropriate state, state-subdivision, Indian tribal, or foreign government official for the purpose of enforcing that law; or

(v) at the request of the government if it shows that the matter may disclose a violation of military criminal law under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, as long as the disclosure is to an appropriate military official for the purpose of enforcing that law.

(F) A petition to disclose a grand-jury matter under Rule 6(e)(3)(E)(i) must be filed in the district where the grand jury convened. Unless the hearing is ex parte—as it may be when the government is the petitioner—the petitioner must serve the petition on, and the court must afford a reasonable opportunity to appear and be heard to:

(i) an attorney for the government;

(ii) the parties to the judicial proceeding; and

(iii) any other person whom the court may designate.

(G) If the petition to disclose arises out of a judicial proceeding in another district, the petitioned court must transfer the petition to the other court unless the petitioned court can reasonably determine whether disclosure is proper. If the petitioned court decides to transfer, it must send to the transferee court the material sought to be disclosed, if feasible, and a written evaluation of the need for continued grand-jury secrecy. The transferee court must afford those persons identified in Rule 6(e)(3)(F) a reasonable opportunity to appear and be heard.

(4) Sealed Indictment. The magistrate judge to whom an indictment is returned may direct that the indictment be kept secret until the defendant is in custody or has been released pending trial. The clerk must then seal the indictment, and no person may disclose the indictment's existence except as necessary to issue or execute a warrant or summons.

(5) Closed Hearing. Subject to any right to an open hearing in a contempt proceeding, the court must close any hearing to the extent necessary to prevent disclosure of a matter occurring before a grand jury.

(6) Sealed Records. Records, orders, and subpoenas relating to grand-jury proceedings must be kept under seal to the extent and as long as necessary to prevent the unauthorized disclosure of a matter occurring before a grand jury.

(7) Contempt. A knowing violation of Rule 6, or of any guidelines jointly issued by the Attorney General and the Director of National Intelligence under Rule 6, may be punished as a contempt of court.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcrmp/rule_6

Nowhere is Congress mentioned.  Nadler and the Democrats on the House Judicial Committee are holding Barr in Contempt of Congress for not committing Contempt of Court.  Read the last part and it bears repeating:

(7) Contempt. A knowing violation of Rule 6, or of any guidelines jointly issued by the Attorney General and the Director of National Intelligence under Rule 6, may be punished as a contempt of court.
 
 
 
JohnRussell
1.2.11  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  tomwcraig @1.2.9    2 months ago

You are a kool aid drinker for Trump.

I really wouldnt wish that on my worst enemy.

I don't repetitively give links to Trump fans any more. The info about his settlement of the Trump U fraud charge is online.

================================================

What did the October investigation reveal?

The New York Times’ investigation last October reached back to the 1980s, uncovering that Donald Trump and his family members filed tax returns for valuations for their properties far below what independent estimates would suggest. Fred and Mary Trump, the president’s parents, passed down over $1 billion in wealth to their children, for which they paid only $52.2 million in taxes – despite the fact that the 55 percent tax rate on gifts and inheritances of that size would have racked up a tax bill of at least $550 million.

As the Times’ pointed out, the line between legal tax avoidance and illegal tax evasion is blurry. But the practices detailed in the report go beyond the average filer’s exploitation of loopholes. In 1992, Fred Trump set up a company called All County Building Supply & Maintenance, whose main purpose was to make large cash gifts to the Trump children without incurring the 55 percent tax, by disguising the gifts as business transactions.

Along with Fred’s nephew John Walter, the Trump children co-owned All County. Beginning in 1992, All County started to deal with billing and invoices between Fred Trump’s empire and the many vendors and crews he paid to supply maintenance and services to his many properties, such as superintendents, boilers and kitchen supplies. Vendors Fred Trump had done business with for decades began receiving their checks from All County, and they were paid whatever price they’d agreed to with Fred. But when it came time for All County to bill Fred Trump’s empire for the checks it had written to vendors, the company generated invoices with the money Fred owed marked up 20 to 50 percent, or even more. The extra 20 to 50 percent from Fred wasn’t going to the vendors, but to the co-owners of All County: Donald, Maryanne, Elizabeth and Robert Trump, and John Walter.

This scheme also affected Fred Trump’s rent-stabilized buildings in New York. An owner of a rent-stabilized building needs state approval to raise rents beyond government-set annual increases, and something like capital improvements could be used to get that approval. The Times found that the Trumps also used padded All County invoices to increase rents in some of these buildings, claiming more than $30 million in major capital improvements.

When the Times published this report, Donald Trump’s lawyer, Charles Harder, vehemently denied the allegations, calling them 100% false.

So why haven’t New York prosecutors charged Trump over those findings?

These bombshell findings seemed to present an opportunity for New York prosecutors, including Vance and James, to open investigations into the Trump Organization, the president and other members of his family that could result in criminal charges. But at least one large hurdle stands in the way of that happening. “The problem with charging Trump is that none of the information is current,” said Danshera Cords, a tax law professor at Albany Law School. “There's a statute of limitations on how far back they can go in charging criminal tax fraud. And so all of the information that The New York Times has found that it's made public is outside of the criminal statute of limitations, which precludes the state of New York or the city of New York from charging criminal tax fraud.”

The statute of limitations for criminal tax fraud and evasion tends to depend on the specific charge, but in New York state, the statute of limitations only goes up to five years. For federal offenses, the statute of limitations is three to six years. Even if Vance and James wanted to pursue criminal charges, they’d be out of luck.

When the allegations first came out last year, the New York Department of Taxation and Finance said that it was reviewing the allegations and “vigorously pursuing all appropriate avenues of investigation.” As attorney general, even James would need a referral from the state’s taxation department to pursue criminal charges. A spokesman for the department said that they do not comment on investigations.

 
 
 
tomwcraig
1.2.12  tomwcraig  replied to  JohnRussell @1.2.11    2 months ago

So, you have an accusation about what his FATHER did and project it as if Trump did it himself.  Your article states that the company was created by Fred Trump, not Donald Trump.  And, just because someone is a co-owner doesn't mean that they are involved in running the business every day, otherwise EVERY SINGLE INVESTOR in WorldCom, including myself, would be in jail for owning stock at the time they collapsed due to fraud by the executives.

 
 
 
Jack_TX
1.2.13  Jack_TX  replied to  JohnRussell @1.2.11    2 months ago
You are a kool aid drinker

The outrageous irony....

 
 
 
Tessylo
1.2.14  Tessylo  replied to  tomwcraig @1.2.12    2 months ago

The turd didn't fall far from his father's anus.

The whole family is corrupt.  

America's crime family.  

 
 
 
lib50
1.2.15  lib50  replied to  tomwcraig @1.2.10    2 months ago

I don't know why you expend so much time trying to protect the truth from coming out.  We are now hearing about Michael Flynn's testimony and it seems like there is definitely a THERE THERE with obstruction and contacts with Russia.  I don't need a tutorial on anything,  and there are procedures in place to obtain access to that information when warranted.  Congress has a constitutional duty to oversee the executive branch.

 
 
 
Fireryone
1.2.16  Fireryone  replied to  tomwcraig @1.2.3    2 months ago
How is Trump corrupt?

In every way possible.  You're fine with his campaign finance violations, pay out for the fraud of Trump U? 

He's cheated on every woman he's been married to...He lies all the time and thinks he is above the law.  How can you honestly ask that ridiculous  question? 

 
 
 
tomwcraig
1.2.17  tomwcraig  replied to  Fireryone @1.2.16    2 months ago

And, why should we worry about that when Bill Clinton did all of those things and more?  Remember Charlie Trie, Paula Jones, Juanita Broaddrick, Monica Lewinsky, etc?  By defending him and not voting to remove him from office, Democrats set the table for Trump to be elected and for Republicans to really say "What is good for the goose is good for the gander."  So, in reality, by defending Bill Clinton, Democrats really are to blame for Trump being elected.  You're just ticked off that we have finally said, "Screw personal character, we'll vote based on policy only as the Democrats have been doing since JFK."

 
 
 
Fireryone
1.2.18  Fireryone  replied to  tomwcraig @1.2.17    2 months ago

If you supported his impeachment over that, and you don't think what trump has done is as bad if not worse, then you are a blind partisan. 

I'm not ticked off by that. I'm ticked off at the hypocrisy of it. All Clinton did is lie about a blowjob. Trump obstructed justice, as indicated in the Mueller report.  Yet we have seen people like Graham twist their views completely and proclaim nothing to see here.  That's wrong. There's plenty in that report that points to impeachable offenses. 

He needs to be impeached.

 
 
 
tomwcraig
1.2.19  tomwcraig  replied to  Fireryone @1.2.18    2 months ago

Actually, Bill Clinton lied under oath and obstructed justice.  He actually ordered and convinced others to lie to investigators and the grand jury.  They actually had HARD evidence of that.  Mueller didn't have hard evidence of obstruction of justice only instances that could be INTERPRETED EITHER WAY, since he posted both the arguments for and against obstruction of justice.  I'll take Bruce Fein's interpretation over your interpretation of both Bill Clinton and Donald Trump's special counsels' reports.  And, Bruce Fein stated that the entire second half of the Mueller report should never have been published since Trump was not charged or actually accused of obstruction of justice and in particular since the first part of the report found no collusion by any American at all.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bruce_Fein

 
 
 
Jack_TX
1.2.20  Jack_TX  replied to  Fireryone @1.2.18    2 months ago
If you supported his impeachment over that, and you don't think what trump has done is as bad if not worse, then you are a blind partisan. 

I didn't, actually.  His removal would have been pointlessly disruptive.  Which is one reason I don't support it now.

I'm not ticked off by that. I'm ticked off at the hypocrisy of it. All Clinton did is lie about a blowjob. Trump obstructed justice, as indicated in the Mueller report. 

"The hypocrisy of it all".  Right.   Clinton committed perjury and obstructed justice.  It doesn't matter what it was about.  Saying his was OK while Trump's isn't is demonstrating "the hypocrisy of it all".

Yet we have seen people like Graham twist their views completely and proclaim nothing to see here.  That's wrong.

Not as wrong as Robert Jeffers.

There's plenty in that report that points to impeachable offenses.  He needs to be impeached.

Why?  He won't possibly be removed, and even if he was it wouldn't be before the next election.

 
 
 
lib50
1.2.21  lib50  replied to  tomwcraig @1.2.19    2 months ago
Mueller didn't have hard evidence of obstruction of justice only instances that could be INTERPRETED EITHER WAY, since he posted both the arguments for and against obstruction of justice.

I don't know, seems like the more we hear, the worse it gets.  Looks like the (good) rats are thinking about getting off the ship.  I guess once they actually read the report, they can't deny the truth.  No wonder so many republicans don't want to read it and keep spinning off the Barrshit instead.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/18/politics/justin-amash-trump-impeachable-conduct/index.html

Michigan GOP Rep. Justin Amash said Saturday he had concluded President Donald Trump committed "impeachable conduct" and accused Attorney General William Barr of intentionally misleading the public.

Amash is a rare GOP critic of Trump and previously said Trump's conduct in pressuring then-FBI Director James Comey could merit impeachment. In a Twitter thread on Saturday, Amash said he believed "few members of Congress even read" special counsel Robert Mueller's report and that the report itself established "multiple examples" of Trump committing obstruction of justice.
"Contrary to Barr's portrayal, Mueller's report reveals that President Trump engaged in specific actions and a pattern of behavior that meet the threshold for impeachment," Amash said in a string of messages on Twitter.

 
 
 
Sparty On
1.2.22  Sparty On  replied to  lib50 @1.2.21    2 months ago

Yawn ..... really stretching it using that anti trumper.

But I understand, it’s about all you got

 
 
 
tomwcraig
1.2.23  tomwcraig  replied to  lib50 @1.2.21    2 months ago

So?  He even admits he asked for other people's opinions rather than forming his own.  And, I wonder how he could have watched key testimony as that is the underlying evidence and HAS NOT BEEN released.

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
1.2.24  XXJefferson#51  replied to  Fireryone @1.2.1    2 months ago

Compared to the ideas of the secular progressive left from Obama, Bernie, Hillary, and the advocates of that ideology here, Trump is by far a better alternative even if we don’t care for everything about him. Inflicting Trump on the left membership here and watching their reaction for an extra four years is enough reason to vote for him now...

 
 
 
JohnRussell
1.2.25  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  tomwcraig @1.2.12    2 months ago
So, you have an accusation about what his FATHER did and project it as if Trump did it himself.  Your article states that the company was created by Fred Trump, not Donald Trump.  And, just because someone is a co-owner doesn't mean that they are involved in running the business every day, otherwise EVERY SINGLE INVESTOR in WorldCom, including myself, would be in jail for owning stock at the time they collapsed due to fraud by the executives.

Your comment is pathetic.   If you read the NYT article you will see Donald Trump's personal involvement. 

 
 
 
lib50
1.2.26  lib50  replied to  Sparty On @1.2.22    2 months ago

Pathetic calling everyone who doesn't bow to the naked emperor an  anti-Trumper, especially all those republicans who see the truth and damage.   I keep bringing up examples and links to prove Trump is corrupt and obstructs and all get dismissed. And he READ the report, while the Trump protectors stick to the Barrshit. 

 
 
 
Sparty On
1.2.27  Sparty On  replied to  lib50 @1.2.26    2 months ago

Nah but what is truly pathetic is trying to characterize a duly elected POTUS as an emperor.

Sad .... will the resist butthurt never end?    Apparently not.

 
 
 
MrFrost
1.2.28  MrFrost  replied to  Sparty On @1.2.27    2 months ago

Sparty, for 8 years we heard the right call Obama everything BUT "president". Are you suggesting that it was all because the right was, "butt hurt"? 

 
 
 
Sparty On
1.2.29  Sparty On  replied to  MrFrost @1.2.28    2 months ago

Are you seriously trying to compare the last three years, to Obama's eight years, in that regard?

Seriously?

 
 
 
Fireryone
1.2.30  Fireryone  replied to  Jack_TX @1.2.20    2 months ago
I didn't, actually.  His removal would have been pointlessly disruptive.  Which is one reason I don't support it now.

I was responding to Tom.  

"The hypocrisy of it all".  Right.   Clinton committed perjury and obstructed justice.  It doesn't matter what it was about.  Saying his was OK while Trump's isn't is demonstrating "the hypocrisy of it all".

That's the point.  Trump has lied repeatedly and obstructed justice.  I'm not saying it was ok when Clinton did it. I'm saying it's hypocritical support Clinton's impeachment but not trumps.  I don't care if he gets removed by the senate, the process will reveal more facts about what went on.  

Barr committed perjury, shouldn't he face consequences too?  

I'm not one who sits here and cheers on my side for corruption.  It is a stain on our country to do nothing to stop corruption. 

 
 
 
Fireryone
1.2.31  Fireryone  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @1.2.24    2 months ago

Trump is by far a better alternative even if we don’t care for everything about him.

You're giving him a pass for his blatant corruption and obstruction of justice. 

Inflicting Trump on the left membership here and watching their reaction for an extra four years is enough reason to vote for him now...

This is the bullshit that is destroying this country.  That is an ugly vile attitude to have.  You should be ashamed, but I know you're not remotely remorseful. 

 
 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
1.2.32  The Magic Eight Ball  replied to  Fireryone @1.2.31    2 months ago
is destroying this country

trump is restoring our country after the attempted destruction of our country.

things like open borders will turn our country into a 3rd world shit-hole and will destroy our country

we simply ain't having that/

cheers :)

 
 
 
Fireryone
1.2.33  Fireryone  replied to  tomwcraig @1.2.19    2 months ago
He actually ordered and convinced others to lie to investigators and the grand jury.  They actually had HARD evidence of that.  Mueller didn't have hard evidence of obstruction of justice only instances that could be INTERPRETED EITHER WAY, since he posted both the arguments for and against obstruction of justice.  I'll take Bruce Fein's interpretation over your interpretation of both Bill Clinton and Donald Trump's special counsels' reports.  And, Bruce Fein stated that the entire second half of the Mueller report should never have been published since Trump was not charged or actually accused of obstruction of justice and in particular since the first part of the report found no collusion by any American at all.

Sure...of course you're going to believe anything that supports your point of view and nothing that goes against it.  No facts get through. 

He should be charged with obstruction, there's actual evidence he did exactly what you claim Clinton did. 

 
 
 
Fireryone
1.2.34  Fireryone  replied to  The Magic Eight Ball @1.2.32    2 months ago
but yepp, as long as the left is pissed off we know the country is heading in the right direction.

That is an ugly vile attitude to have.  You should be ashamed, but I know you're not remotely remorseful. 

The center is pretty disgusted by him too. 

 
 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
1.2.35  The Magic Eight Ball  replied to  Fireryone @1.2.34    2 months ago
You should be ashamed

restoring our country and ignoring the left is nothing to be ashamed about.

we will not let the left shit-hole our country.

we will always stand in their way.

crushing the lefts plans for things like open borders is the only sane thing to do.

  • obama put millions on food stamps
  • trump took them off food stamps and gave millions jobs

we made the right choice.

cheers :)

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
1.2.36  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  The Magic Eight Ball @1.2.35    2 months ago
restoring our country and ignoring the left is nothing to be ashamed about.

Restoring it to when? 1952 before Brown v Board of Education? Before the 1964 civil rights act or the 1965 voting rights act were signed into law?

"we will not let the left shit-hole our country"

We were arguably shittier back when we had segregation and Jim Crow laws and bans on interracial and gay marriage. We've made a lot of progress since then, virtually all of it liberal progress away from bigots of all stripes. Only now with Trump in office have we seen any shift in reverse with all sorts of bigots coming out of the woodwork to support him, from wannabe Nazi's, white nationalists, anti-Semites and the KKK.

"crushing the lefts plans for things like open borders is the only sane thing to do."

Well it would be if the left were for open borders (defined as no border protection), which we're not. We're against stupid things like contiguous border walls, and so is everyone on the right when you ask them if they want to spend their tax dollars on a northern border wall. So Republicans are as much for "open borders" as I am.

Lying about an opponents platform and then lighting it on fire may be an effective "Straw Man" for half wits, toothless sister fornicators and choreographed wrestling fans with CTE, but it's an argument that wouldn't stand up to even the least bit of scrutiny.

 
 
 
Fireryone
1.2.37  Fireryone  replied to  The Magic Eight Ball @1.2.35    2 months ago
estoring our country and ignoring the left is nothing to be ashamed about.

we will not let the left shit-hole our country.

we will always stand in their way.

crushing the lefts plans for things like open borders is the only sane thing to do.

  • obama put millions on food stamps
  • trump took them off food stamps and gave millions jobs

we made the right choice.

cheers

This country isn't just yours.  Obama didn't put millions on food stamps, the economic collapse did that.

Trump didn't take them off food stamps, the economic recovery that started under Obama did that.

The left has never promoted open borders.  Stop buying partisan lies.   You're entitled to representation just as the rest of us. Stop pretending this country belongs to the right.  It doesn't.  

Period.  

If you continue in this manner, do me a favor and just ignore me. 

 
 
 
Jack_TX
1.2.38  Jack_TX  replied to  Fireryone @1.2.30    2 months ago
That's the point.  Trump has lied repeatedly and obstructed justice.

Point of order...there is a gargantuan difference between lying and committing perjury.

  I'm not saying it was ok when Clinton did it. I'm saying it's hypocritical support Clinton's impeachment but not trumps.

I'll agree with that, as long as supporting Trump's but opposing Clinton's is also hypocritical.

  I don't care if he gets removed by the senate, the process will reveal more facts about what went on. 

Meh.  Maybe.  The real question is why?  Nobody is going to change their mind over it.  One of the best investigators in America with an unassailable character spent 2 years on this project and didn't recommend obstruction charges.  How long are we going to beat this horse?

Barr committed perjury, shouldn't he face consequences too?  

That's a stretch.  Even people who call his job performance "catastrophic" say it didn't cross the line for perjury.

https://www.wgbh.org/news/politics/2019/05/03/chuck-todd-william-barr-didnt-cross-the-perjury-line

https://www.lawfareblog.com/there-perjury-case-against-barr

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/05/bill-barrs-performance-was-catastrophic/588574/

I'm not one who sits here and cheers on my side for corruption.  It is a stain on our country to do nothing to stop corruption. 

You've already said you agree he won't be removed from office.  So what is it that you think more investigation will "do"?

 
 
 
Fireryone
1.2.39  Fireryone  replied to  Jack_TX @1.2.38    2 months ago
Meh.  Maybe.  The real question is why?  Nobody is going to change their mind over it.  One of the best investigators in America with an unassailable character spent 2 years on this project and didn't recommend obstruction charges.  How long are we going to beat this horse?

Until the entire report is made available to Congress. Anything less is not acceptable. BTW, did you miss how many of the GOP Senators and Trump did assail his character.  Mueller went with department policy and recommended congress do it's part. 

That's a stretch.  Even people who call his job performance "catastrophic" say it didn't cross the line for perjury.

It wasn't a stretch at all. I watched his act and it was pretty apparent that he did cross the line to this layperson.  Others agree that he did cross the line. 

You've already said you agree he won't be removed from office.  So what is it that you think more investigation will "do"?

Remove confusion about the findings in the Mueller report.  Too many who say there's nothing there haven't even read it. 

 
 
 
Jack_TX
1.2.40  Jack_TX  replied to  Fireryone @1.2.39    2 months ago
Until the entire report is made available to Congress.

Why?  So Corey Booker can leak it and we can have angry liberals studying every comma and participle like religious nutters on a crusade?  

Anything less is not acceptable.

"Acceptable" in what sense of the word?  What power do you think you have to enforce this declaration?

BTW, did you miss how many of the GOP Senators and Trump did assail his character. 

Of course they did.  Why would anyone believe those guys?  They have every reason to talk shit about him and none to support him.   I'm not sure how it's not obvious that people with a vested interest at stake who say implausible things should be disregarded.  

Mueller went with department policy and recommended congress do it's part. 

Which is why he's unassailable.  He understands the responsibility he was given, and he understands the limitations on that responsibility.  

He's a responsible adult.  There are so few of them left in public life that we've all forgotten what they look like.

Remove confusion about the findings in the Mueller report.  Too many who say there's nothing there haven't even read it. 

There isn't confusion.  The only confusion is among liberals who cannot imagine how there is anything on earth Trump isn't guilty of.  They're all doing a repeat of the "confusion"  about the election...  looking at each other asking "how did this happen"?

Mueller report recap....Trump is greasy as fuck but didn't actually collude with Russia.  There.  Confusion ended.

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
1.2.41  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  Jack_TX @1.2.40    2 months ago
Mueller report recap....Trump is greasy as fuck but didn't actually collude with Russia.  There.  Confusion ended.

The only confusion I still have is how reasonable, responsible, educated Americans might see the greasy fornicator for what he is, but pretend he's pure as the driven snow. I can only conclude that those persons claiming to be reasonable, responsible and educated are either not reasonable, responsible and educated or they're intentionally ignoring reason to support a slippery adulterous con-man for their own selfish reasons, like just hating liberals so much they'd elect an apartment store mannequin President if they knew it would piss liberals off.

 
 
 
Fireryone
1.2.42  Fireryone  replied to  Jack_TX @1.2.40    2 months ago
Why?  

Because they have oversight responsibilities.  

So Corey Booker can leak it and we can have angry liberals studying every comma and participle like religious nutters on a crusade?

Stupid comment not worthy of being addressed. 

"Acceptable" in what sense of the word? 

It's not acceptable to the rule of law. 

What power do you think you have to enforce this declaration?

The exact same power every other citizen has to enforce their views. 

There isn't confusion.  The only confusion is among liberals who cannot imagine how there is anything on earth Trump isn't guilty of.  They're all doing a repeat of the "confusion"  about the election...  looking at each other asking "how did this happen"?

Yes there is confusion. You and Barr seem very confused that there isn't evidence of collusion. There is evidence, there was obstruction.  This needs to be made public. 

Mueller report recap....Trump is greasy as fuck but didn't actually collude with Russia.  There.  Confusion ended.

He fully accepted the help and used the information provided by Russia to benefit his campaign and harm Clinton.  That is clear in the report.  This isn't over and won't be over until there is something done to ensure Russia can't do what they've done again. 

That seems to be ignored.  That's why this isn't over and won't be until we have assurances that our elections are secure and fair. 

 
 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
1.2.43  The Magic Eight Ball  replied to  Fireryone @1.2.37    2 months ago
This country isn't just yours.

actually, it is.

we took it back from the leftwing open border globalists and we will be keeping it.

but for clarification,  above, I said "OUR COUNTRY" 

the paradigm has shifted. we are not going down the road of open borders built by the left.

simply not happening.

cheers :)

 
 
 
Jack_TX
1.2.44  Jack_TX  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @1.2.41    2 months ago
The only confusion I still have is how reasonable, responsible, educated Americans might see the greasy fornicator for what he is, but pretend he's pure as the driven snow.

Who pretends he's pure as driven snow?  

I can only conclude that those persons claiming to be reasonable, responsible and educated are either not reasonable, responsible and educated or they're intentionally ignoring reason to support a slippery adulterous con-man for their own selfish reasons, like just hating liberals so much they'd elect an apartment store mannequin President if they knew it would piss liberals off.

It wasn't about pissing liberals off.  They were already pissed off.  They don't call them "angry liberals" for nothing.

But it was definitely about telling the more offensive liberals to fuck off, along with their superiority complexes and safe spaces.  And in many cases they weren't wrong.  "Flyover state"...fuck off.  "Voting against their own interests"....double fuck off.  Snooty $350k degree in Women's Studies from GWU, but can't come up with $600 to pay the plumber when the toilet backs up?... but  think the student loans are the problem???  

Yeah....they're not wrong.

 
 
 
Jack_TX
1.2.45  Jack_TX  replied to  Fireryone @1.2.42    2 months ago
Stupid comment not worthy of being addressed. 

Absolutely going to happen and you know it.

The exact same power every other citizen has to enforce their views. 

OK, so pretty much "stamp your feet, shake your fists and write your congressman".  Promises to be about as effective as it is on every other issue.  

Yes there is confusion. You and Barr seem very confused that there isn't evidence of collusion. There is evidence, there was obstruction.  This needs to be made public. 

Any new indictments recommended?  No?  OK then.  The rest is just emotion. 

That seems to be ignored. 

What's being ignored is that Bob didn't think it was criminal activity.  He's an expert, BTW.  

This isn't over and won't be over until there is something done to ensure Russia can't do what they've done again. 

So raking Trump over the coals is somehow going to make Russia less likely to hack email servers in the future?  I'm not sure how that works, exactly.

 
 
 
Don Overton
1.2.46  Don Overton  replied to  tomwcraig @1.2.3    2 months ago
Instead of ignoring the truth Tom you might increase your knowledge with the real facts.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/05/20/evidence-trumps-corruption-just-keeps-growing/?utm_term=.f728f6eda3ac

 
 
 
Fireryone
1.2.47  Fireryone  replied to  Jack_TX @1.2.45    2 months ago
Absolutely going to happen and you know it.

How do I know it? I've never heard any accusations of Booker leaking information.  

OK, so pretty much "stamp your feet, shake your fists and write your congressman".  Promises to be about as effective as it is on every other issue.  

Stamp my feet? I'm an adult. I don't stamp my feet, I don't fly off handles.  Stop characterizing my reactions, you've never once gotten it right.  It makes you insufferable to converse with. 

So raking Trump over the coals is somehow going to make Russia less likely to hack email servers in the future?  I'm not sure how that works, exactly.

Seriously...we should just ignore what they did? Is that how you really feel?  Trump is trump, he will always be vile. The integrity of our elections isn't a partisan issue. But thanks for pretending that I'm being partisan. 

 

 
 
 
Fireryone
1.2.48  Fireryone  replied to  Jack_TX @1.2.45    2 months ago
What's being ignored is that Bob didn't think it was criminal activity.  He's an expert, BTW.  

he's an expert who didn't tell the truth, misrepresented Muellers findings and did not read the report, nor review the underlying evidence.

How do I know?  He said so during the hearing.

 
 
 
Fireryone
1.2.49  Fireryone  replied to  The Magic Eight Ball @1.2.43    2 months ago
the paradigm has shifted. we are not going down the road of open borders built by the l

Well, since the left never wanted open borders, you're correct, we aren't going down that road.

Are you quite through now that we agree there won't be open borders?

 
 
 
 
Freedom Warrior
1.2.51  Freedom Warrior  replied to  Fireryone @1.2.49    2 months ago

 We already have open borders thanks to the Dems it’s called catch and release.  The cartels hand you a card to read to the apprehending officer and your off to a sanctuary city for state benefits. Million times better than playing the lottery.

 
 
 
Jack_TX
1.2.52  Jack_TX  replied to  Fireryone @1.2.48    2 months ago
he's an expert who didn't tell the truth,

No dear... Meuller is the expert.  "Bob" being Robert Meuller.  Who recommended no further indictments.

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
1.2.53  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  Jack_TX @1.2.44    2 months ago
It wasn't about pissing liberals off.

You say it wasn't about pissing liberals off, then you go into a lengthy tirade about why it was all about pissing off liberals.

"it was definitely about telling the more offensive liberals to fuck off"

Boy, that's constructive and shows a real effort to bring Americans together... /s

"along with their superiority complexes and safe spaces."

I'm not superior, I just applied myself, work hard, am honest and try to keep an open mind. Those with "superiority complexes" are the pieces of useless garbage who fret about some imaginary disappearing "white culture". As for safe spaces, I thought that was the intent of a society, to create safe spaces for its citizens to live, work, raise kids and thrive free of abuse both physical and verbal.

"Flyover state"...fuck off."

I live in a State you can fly over, as far as I know all States are. If you feel like your state is in the middle of bum-fuck nowhere and take offense to the term "flyover" because you're seething with hatred towards anyone who managed to escape your hell hole of a town, then that's your problem.

"Voting against their own interests"....double fuck off."

It's sad, but happens often to the poorly educated and easily fooled religious conservatives. If they want to angrily lash out when they realize how fucking stupid they were by supporting the dumb ass in chief whose tariffs just ruined their soybean farm, that's their choice.

"Snooty $350k degree in Women's Studies from GWU, but can't come up with $600 to pay the plumber when the toilet backs up?... but  think the student loans are the problem???"

"Snooty"? Why not use the old favorite "uppity" too? And please do tell us how useless learning about the role half the humans on earth have played throughout history and their current role as strong capable people who can even be plumbers if they want to and can fix their own damn toilet really is.

Religious conservatives have no more right to this nation than any progressive or liberal, so anytime they're voting just to say "Fuck Off!" to those they despise for no other reason than that progressives and liberals reject their ideology and do whatever the fuck we want while they jealously watch just shows how selfish and childish they really are.

 
 
 
tomwcraig
1.2.54  tomwcraig  replied to  Fireryone @1.2.30    2 months ago

Okay, when did Trump lie under oath and order people to lie to investigators or under oath?  When you show me actual evidence of that, as we had with Bill Clinton's Articles of Impeachment, then I might support impeaching Trump.  However, it had better be much more concrete than what Mueller put out there as it doesn't meet the necessary threshold since he gave both the why it could be considered obstruction and why it could not be considered obstruction.  We did not have that with Trump, and remember, your word doesn't hold as much weight as Bruce Fein's.

Where and when did Barr commit perjury?

 
 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
1.2.55  The Magic Eight Ball  replied to  Fireryone @1.2.49    2 months ago
Well, since the left never wanted open borders,

BS.

 
 
 
Jack_TX
1.2.56  Jack_TX  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @1.2.53    2 months ago
You say it wasn't about pissing liberals off, then you go into a lengthy tirade about why it was all about pissing off liberals.

So objecting to their insults and not letting them have their way is now some sort of personal affront.   Fascinating.

"it was definitely about telling the more offensive liberals to fuck off" Boy, that's constructive and shows a real effort to bring Americans together... /s

When you have a group of very vocal people declaring that you don't know what's best for you....togetherness isn't exactly on the horizon.  

I'm not superior, I just applied myself,

I wasn't actually talking about you....unless you think you're a better human than your fellow Americans.  

As for safe spaces, I thought that was the intent of a society, to create safe spaces for its citizens to live, work, raise kids and thrive free of abuse both physical and verbal.

That does not include places where they don't have to hear ideas they may not like.

If you feel like your state is in the middle of bum-fuck nowhere and take offense to the term "flyover" because you're seething with hatred towards anyone who managed to escape your hell hole of a town, then that's your problem.

"Flyover state" is a term used to indicate that non-coastal are insignificant and don't matter.  But you knew that.  I'm not sure why you pretend you didn't.  

It's sad, but happens often to the poorly educated and easily fooled religious conservatives.

The shitheaded arrogance required to make the "voting against their own interests" claim is astonishing.... to the point that even Donald Trump would need to become significantly more shitheadedly arrogant to begin to approach it....which you wouldn't think was possible...until some shithead says "voting against their own interests".

The fact that the people who make such a claim don't recognize that arrogance is a bit ironic, because anyone too stupid to see the level of shitheadedness built into that statement is definitely not smart enough to be making decisions for other people. 

If someone told you that you were too stupid to make your own decisions, you would quickly tell them to fuck off, and rightfully so.  Yet you defend this idea just because other people don't agree with you.  Giving you the benefit of the doubt, I'm going to presume that you just don't recognize how offensive and un-American this idea is.

And please do tell us how useless learning about the role half the humans on earth have played throughout history and their current role as strong capable people who can even be plumbers if they want to and can fix their own damn toilet really is.

"Even" be plumbers??  Wow. Well, gee...someday, if we get enough people with women's studies degrees, women might "even"  be able to become doctors.  Good grief.  1940 called and wants it's sexism back. 

How useful is that degree?  It's much less useful than learning to be a plumber.    

for no other reason than that progressives and liberals reject their ideology

You mean...other than the reasons you've already talked about in your post.  

 
 
 
Jack_TX
1.2.57  Jack_TX  replied to  Fireryone @1.2.47    2 months ago
How do I know it? I've never heard any accusations of Booker leaking information. 

He said he was "willing to break Senate rules" to disclose confidential documents on Brett Kavanaugh.

Seriously...we should just ignore what they did? 

You have yet to answer the question..."what, exactly, do you believe you can actually do?"  You object to "stamp your feet", but your lack of alternative concrete action items is conspicuous.  You can vote.  Next November.  Which didn't actually help much in 2016.  Other than that...what does "unacceptable" really mean if you can't actually DO anything about it.

Is that how you really feel?

How if "feel" about it doesn't matter.  Nobody gives a single iota of a molecule of a tinker's damn.  (Welcome to "Dad life", where people pay so little attention to your feelings they forget you have them.)  

But the one single thing we can control in any situation is our feelings.  I choose not to get worked up about stuff I can't influence.

  Trump is trump, he will always be vile.

And always has been.  People forget he's been a raving asshole since the 1970s.  Remembering that helps one manage expectations.

The integrity of our elections isn't a partisan issue. But thanks for pretending that I'm being partisan. 

I do think you're being partisan, and you're still in denial.  You cling to the belief that Donald Trump is now president because Russian email hacking or Facebook ads or some other external force swayed the outcome of the election.  You still refuse to accept how terrible a presidential candidate Hillary Clinton was. 

Russia didn't somehow win the election.  Hillary LOST it.  It had nothing to do with Russia or Facebook or any other extraneous bullshit.   Hillary has never been able to hide her disdain bordering on contempt for blue-collar, flag-waving, church-going, lunch-bucket, honky-tonk, less-sophisticated "regular" Americans..and especially the housewives.  She believes them to be lesser people, and she shows it.  She's been that way publicly since 1990, at least. And then she says deplorable??  Are you kidding me??  Did she not learn from Mitt Romney's "48%" remark?

People blathering about Russian involvement is like the Dallas Cowboys losing to UTD (who doesn't have a football team) and blaming the crowd noise.  It should never have been close.  It should have rivaled Reagan 84 for historic landslides.  Trying to hide her astonishing ineptitude behind "collusion" after a 2 year investigation fails to prove it...that is 100% partisan denial.  

 
 
 
Fireryone
1.2.58  Fireryone  replied to  Jack_TX @1.2.44    2 months ago
Who pretends he's pure as driven snow?  

Well, look who's pretending that isn't happening.  Everyone who is helping him obstruct justice for starters. 

 
 
 
Fireryone
1.2.59  Fireryone  replied to  Jack_TX @1.2.52    2 months ago
No dear... Meuller is the expert.

Thanks for the correction. Next time do it without the condescension. 

 
 
 
Jack_TX
1.2.60  Jack_TX  replied to  Fireryone @1.2.58    2 months ago
Well, look who's pretending that isn't happening.

I'm not sure I follow.  Pretending what isn't happening?

  Everyone who is helping him obstruct justice for starters.

Who's helping him?  

 
 
 
Jack_TX
1.2.61  Jack_TX  replied to  Fireryone @1.2.59    2 months ago
Next time do it without the condescension. 

Next time don't mistake a term of positive sentiment for condescension.

 
 
 
Fireryone
1.2.62  Fireryone  replied to  Jack_TX @1.2.57    2 months ago
You have yet to answer the question..."what, exactly, do you believe you can actually do?

I currently don't need to do anything other than sit back and watch just like you.  "Things" are being done in Congress and the courts.  

He said he was "willing to break Senate rules" to disclose confidential documents on Brett Kavanaugh.

FFS, is that what you're blathering on about. Haha, rhetoric.  That's all that was. 

Welcome to "Dad life", where people pay so little attention to your feelings they forget you have them.

Awww, poor baby.  It's so hard being a dad. 

I do think you're being partisan, and you're still in denial.  You cling to the belief that Donald Trump is now president because Russian email hacking or Facebook ads or some other external force swayed the outcome of the election.  You still refuse to accept how terrible a presidential candidate Hillary Clinton was. 

I think you're the one being partisan. You project a whole lot into my comments that just isn't there.  I'm not in denial nor clinging onto anything.  It doesn't matter how bad hillary was, trump is worse, that has always been my and the opinion of the majority of voters in 2016. 

Hillary LOST it. 

No shit.

It had nothing to do with Russia or Facebook or any other extraneous bullshit. 

Interesting. Prove it. If you can do that, then you should have been the one running the investigation. That you seem to ignore some simple facts.  Trump was given and accepted assistance from Russia.  Trump and his campaign staff repeatedly lied about their contacts with Russians and they acted in concert to cover it all up.  All of that is in the Mueller report.  Trump encouraged and continues to encourage people to lie and obstruct.  All of that points to guilt.  Innocent people don't lie and obstruct. 

 
 
 
Fireryone
1.2.63  Fireryone  replied to  Jack_TX @1.2.60    2 months ago
Who's helping him?  

You're being absurd. Did you read the article? 

You know damn well who's helping him.  If you don't, why are you here on this particular discussion?

 
 
 
Fireryone
1.2.64  Fireryone  replied to  Jack_TX @1.2.61    2 months ago
Next time don't mistake a term of positive sentiment for condescension.

I'm not your "dear".  It was condescending.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
2  seeder  JohnRussell    2 months ago

One day conservatives will wake up with a "hangover" , look in the mirror, and say "what have I done?"

The sooner the better.

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
2.1  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  JohnRussell @2    2 months ago
One day conservatives will wake up with a "hangover" , look in the mirror, and say "what have I done?"

One of these days Trumps going to show them who he really is, stab them in the back and laugh and they'll end up slumped in the shower sobbing like the Crying Game.

 
 
 
TᵢG
2.1.1  TᵢG  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @2.1    2 months ago
One of these days Trumps going to show them who he really is, stab them in the back and laugh and they'll end up slumped in the shower sobbing like the Crying Game.

Backstabbing is indeed Trump's modus operandi.    A practice that encourages naive sycophants and dissuades genuine talent.

 
 
 
Fireryone
2.1.2  Fireryone  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @2.1    2 months ago

He already has shown them who he is. They voted for him anyway. 

 
 
 
livefreeordie
2.2  livefreeordie  replied to  JohnRussell @2    2 months ago

Nonsense

taxcuts

deregulation

originalist Justices and judges

pulling out of Paris accords

pipelines and expanding oil and gas

standing up to China

standing up to terrorist Iran

demolishing ISIS

US Embassy to Jerusalem

hardline stance against abortion

no love affair with homosexuals like Obama

bible studies and prayer in the White House

standing up to the deep state fbi, dea, atf, DOJ which are anti American totalitarian enforcers

those of us who support the president are thrilled by his actions 

lastly we look at what would likely occur if any of the Dems running should actually be president and have a Democrat Congress

 
 
 
JohnRussell
2.2.1  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  livefreeordie @2.2    2 months ago
– Thanks to Trump, conservatives have lost the moral high ground on virtually every possible issue of character in the public debate. Other than murder, it is impossible to conceive of what those who supported Trump through all of this could legitimately claim is a disqualifier to hold high federal office in the future. – Trump has diminished the negative impact for having been caught in a lie, or being a hypocrite, down to literally nothing. This used to be one of the best weapons of attack for conservatives, and it has now been permanently disarmed.
 
 
 
Tessylo
2.2.2  Tessylo  replied to  livefreeordie @2.2    2 months ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
Ronin2
2.2.3  Ronin2  replied to  JohnRussell @2.2.1    2 months ago

Funny thing is you think the Democrats have gained the high ground. Not even close. The Dems have sunk to Trumps level, and then gone even lower. 

Better still the left has piled on anyone who didn't vote for Trump or Hillary; as if we are somehow the problem.

Nice try on Hillary being the lesser of two evils.  They are both evil, period. Anyone that could vote for either of them is part of the problem with this country; and why the two major parties have nothing to fear about ever losing power.

 
 
 
Fireryone
2.2.4  Fireryone  replied to  livefreeordie @2.2    2 months ago
bible studies and prayer in the White House

That should be offensive to every American. There should be no religion in politics at all.  NONE.

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
2.3  XXJefferson#51  replied to  JohnRussell @2    2 months ago

No.  We are now here to give you another four year hang over.  That what have we done wil be good enough.  

 
 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
3  The Magic Eight Ball    2 months ago

why would we want to side with losers?

 
 
 
bbl-1
4  bbl-1    2 months ago

A historical perspective could be made that the 'creation of Trump's Trumpism' was spawned by the Newt Gingrich 'Contract for ( on ) America, the ensuing Citizens United court decision, and the deception of The TEA Party.

As to why the current GOP has become the 'Muppets for Trump',-------------perhaps we are witnessing the once Grand Old Party in its death throes.



 
 
 
Krishna
5  Krishna    2 months ago

Actually the biggest reason of all is the possibility that Trump may be impeached. And if that happens, the reputation of Republicans who had previously been strong Trump supporters will not be too good....

 
 
 
bbl-1
5.1  bbl-1  replied to  Krishna @5    2 months ago

Perhaps not.  the Trump recently said the Military, Police and Bikers were at the ready to defend him.  Of course---it is the Trump, you know.

 
 
 
Greg Jones
5.2  Greg Jones  replied to  Krishna @5    2 months ago

And if the democrats try to impeach Trump, they will fail and what's left of their reputations will be lost forever. The Republicans will win again.

 
 
 
bbl-1
5.2.1  bbl-1  replied to  Greg Jones @5.2    2 months ago

What will the republicans win?

 
 
 
Fireryone
5.2.2  Fireryone  replied to  Greg Jones @5.2    2 months ago
And if the democrats try to impeach Trump, they will fail and what's left of their reputations will be lost forever.

If they DON"T then they are weak and feckless. 

 
 
 
Don Overton
5.2.3  Don Overton  replied to  Greg Jones @5.2    2 months ago

Not the smartest comment in the world

 
 
 
PJ
6  PJ    2 months ago

The problem is and never has been Trump.  The problem is his supporters and his supporter's enablers.  

Trump supporters are not conservative, moderate or independent no matter how many times they look themselves in the mirror and tell themselves they are.  

My favorite posts are from those who claim they don't like Trump as a person but........(fill in the blank).   jrSmiley_80_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Texan1211
6.1  Texan1211  replied to  PJ @6    2 months ago
Trump supporters are not conservative, moderate or independent no matter how many times they look themselves in the mirror and tell themselves they are.

So what are you telling them they are then?

 
 
 
bbl-1
6.1.1  bbl-1  replied to  Texan1211 @6.1    2 months ago

deplorable?

 
 
 
Texan1211
6.1.2  Texan1211  replied to  bbl-1 @6.1.1    2 months ago
deplorable?

I didn't see that in the post. Did you?

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
6.1.3  XXJefferson#51  replied to  Texan1211 @6.1.2    2 months ago

No but it’s a badge of honor we will wear with pride as we support this President and re elect him.   

 
 
 
Don Overton
6.1.4  Don Overton  replied to  Texan1211 @6.1    2 months ago

Mostly brainless idiots who haven't a clue what's going on

 
 
 
Don Overton
6.1.5  Don Overton  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @6.1.3    2 months ago

I feel sorry for you  if that's all you think of this country.  Oh, Jefferson will never be a state.

 
 
 
Sparty On
6.2  Sparty On  replied to  PJ @6    2 months ago
The problem is his supporters and his supporter's enablers.  

Lol .... yep, thats me.

Been supporting/enabling Presidents and local/state/federal congress members since 1980

I love it.    Think i'll get buttons and bumper stickers made with that.

 
 
 
PJ
6.2.1  PJ  replied to  Sparty On @6.2    2 months ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
Sparty On
6.2.2  Sparty On  replied to  PJ @6.2.1    2 months ago

Lol ... hugs and kisses to you as well ....

 
 
 
Texan1211
6.2.3  Texan1211  replied to  Sparty On @6.2.2    2 months ago

Some just can't help but make it personal, I see.

 
 
 
Sparty On
6.2.4  Sparty On  replied to  Texan1211 @6.2.3    2 months ago

SOSDD .....  can always count on a nice little slice of hate here on NT.

Good times!

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
6.2.5  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Sparty On @6.2.4    2 months ago

There are slices of hate flying both ways here on NT, that I could live without. It only seems to bother people when it flys in their direction. 

 
 
 
Sparty On
6.2.6  Sparty On  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @6.2.5    2 months ago

We all could learn to take ourselves less seriously.

Some more than others.  jrSmiley_9_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
PJ
6.2.7  PJ  replied to  Sparty On @6.2.2    2 months ago

I’m glad you saw the value in my comment.  

Looks like this site is still not worth the effort.  

 
 
 
†hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh
6.2.8  †hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh  replied to  PJ @6.2.7    2 months ago

It's only worth the effort the member puts forth.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
6.2.9  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  PJ @6.2.7    2 months ago

PJ,

All I am asking for is a discussion. I think that is totally reasonable.

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
6.2.10  XXJefferson#51  replied to  PJ @6.2.7    2 months ago

I’m beginning to agree with you on that point...

 
 
 
PJ
6.2.11  PJ  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @6.2.10    2 months ago

Don't give up X.  Nothing seems to bother you or deter you.   You have to be the most resilient member on here.   Me.....not so much anymore. 

 
 
 
pat wilson
6.2.12  pat wilson  replied to  Sparty On @6.2.6    2 months ago
We all could learn to take ourselves less seriously.

Couldn't agree more with that.

 
 
 
Freedom Warrior
6.3  Freedom Warrior  replied to  PJ @6    2 months ago

 Just because you hate Trump doesn’t make him or them wrong.

 
 
 
PJ
6.3.1  PJ  replied to  Freedom Warrior @6.3    2 months ago

Thanks for your generic and wrong talking point.  I don't hate Donald Trump.  He's like a mentally challenged child and will do whatever his base allows him to do.  It's the supporters and enablers that I despise.  They are the problem.  They are the true danger to America.   

 
 
 
Freedom Warrior
6.3.2  Freedom Warrior  replied to  PJ @6.3.1    2 months ago

Okay Just because you hate his supporters doesn't make them or him wrong.  Now maybe you won't feel such a slave to your myopic views.

.

 
 
 
Don Overton
6.3.3  Don Overton  replied to  Freedom Warrior @6.3    2 months ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
freepress
7  freepress    2 months ago

I have said it all along, once people saw what was going to happen to middle class taxes and policies they will change their tune on Trump.

Next years taxes will be even worse and the year after that worse still. We already see the fiasco of farmers who are turning against Trump for his ridiculous trade wars.

Even people in the red state of Kentucky are waking up to how they have been scammed by Republicans for years over jobs and development. Coal is not coming back, steel is not coming back, Trump and Republicans are looking to partner with Russia over steel and aluminum. Trump hires immigrants at his own properties rather than put his money where his big loud mouth is.

The overall economy may look better but jobs are still being lost, American companies are still outsourcing or moving overseas, and the stagnant wages of American workers is still bleak.

The cost of prescription drugs is still exorbitant, no matter now many false promises Republicans make. Nothing has actually been done to help Americans afford medication. 

Healthcare costs still skyrocket and medical bankruptcies are the primary cause of Americans who have jobs lose everything.

All Republicans are doing is talking, creating chaos in the media to distract and the problems we face get worse with a crash looming in the distance.

In spite of the harm to the American people on taxes, on trade wars, on outsourcing and job losses, we see his administration march forward with horrific foreign policy putting Americans at risk for another war.

All of this while king Trump, like "Nero" fiddles away the kingdom.

There is no transparency as this administration blocks all information requests, and they are rolling back hard won freedoms for everyone by the day.

After watching all the Republican hoopla over "support our troops" during the Bush administration, they cut Veterans dental benefits and their underming food assistance, and healthcare seriously affects our Veterans who cannot work, may be disabled after their service, or cannot find work and need a variety of programs to keep them and their families going.

If Republican supporters were willing to vote for Trump based on knowing little at the time, forget the Russiagate thing, forget his underhanded business practices, forget his sexual history, and just look at exactly what has been done to undermine the American worker and the America middle class. 

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
7.1  XXJefferson#51  replied to  freepress @7    2 months ago

some it seems still think today’s great economy is actually that of early 2009 instead.  

 
 
 
Freedom Warrior
7.2  Freedom Warrior  replied to  freepress @7    2 months ago

The facts don’t support your claim about middle-class taxation.  I can’t even bother to get into the rest after that. 

 
 
 
†hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh
8  †hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh    2 months ago

I wake up every day unhappy. You see the propoganda media promised me with garbage poll after garbage poll that she would win. Never mind the audacious decision to skip campaigning in the key swing states, she was the most qualified candidate ever ever in the history of the world. 

After the election I simply began experiencing significant mental illness disturbances, I wore a genital hat and marched around with known antisemites to prove I was not a bigot like Trump and I damaged personal property in the juvenile riots we call the resistance movement. Then I started subscribing to the fake news that He was an agent of Russia, never mind the long term consequences economically and politically of such insanity but Trump.

Now I demand Perrie make it all go away. I can't handle those who disagree with me. They are obviously bad bad bad people. Give me an echo chamber so I can shelter my soul and save money on psychiatric care.

Sincerely,

Too sensitive in Austin for the internet.

P.S. can't we just elect normal people, I mean Beto get's haircuts.....

 
 
 
JohnRussell
8.1  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  †hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh @8    2 months ago

You have been obsessed with the Democrats since the day you landed on this site.

Very odd for a so called non partisan, but the intelligent people here never fell for your bs to begin with.

I wonder what kind of person repeatedly comments on Beto O'Rourke's hair cut.

And you really should never be allowed to talk about fake news. It is insulting to those who know.

 
 
 
†hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh
8.1.1  †hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh  replied to  JohnRussell @8.1    2 months ago

If only she won, then I could be truly happy. Until it changes I am going to be sad and angry and share it with everyone everyday until then.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
8.1.2  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  †hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh @8.1.1    2 months ago

pretty good description of trolling

 
 
 
†hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh
8.1.3  †hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh  replied to  JohnRussell @8.1.2    2 months ago

Yes it is, it's very different than seeding the same vitriol daily. It's ok though, but Trump. I mean he told 10,000 lies. America is now a dictatorship. Constitutional crisis!

 
 
 
Sparty On
8.1.4  Sparty On  replied to  †hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh @8.1.1    2 months ago

I'm afraid until you move out of that van down by the river, it's doubtful your outlook will improve much.

Maybe if the Bern gets elected he can get you into one of those surplus FEMA trailers.   I hear they are saaahweet!

 
 
 
†hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh
8.1.5  †hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh  replied to  Sparty On @8.1.4    2 months ago
I hear they are saaahweet!

Good to hear....lol

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
8.1.6  XXJefferson#51  replied to  Sparty On @8.1.4    2 months ago

Well we aren’t bringing back either Barrack or Hillary....

 
 
 
Don Overton
8.1.7  Don Overton  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @8.1.6    2 months ago

Why not they are 10 times better than that piece of trash you bow down to

 
 
 
Don Overton
8.1.8  Don Overton  replied to  †hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh @8.1.5    2 months ago

Just keep goading people on Fish.  Just what a moderator should do.

 
 
Loading...
Loading...

Who is online

lib50
tomwcraig
devangelical
ArkansasHermit-too


50 visitors