America under President Trump

[scribblet]

On 8/22/2018 at 3:22 PM, Queenmandy85 said:

Back to POTUS, I don't know which concerns me more, President Trump not being impeached or being impeached. I am reluctant to speculate on the politics of another country, but the US has a great impact on the rest of us.

The Vice President scares me more than Mr. Trump and I worry about the reaction to Mr. Trump's removal by his supporters. My hope is that they would respect the process, but I do feel uneasy. 

I would hope they would respect the process too even though the Democrats have not respected their election process.

[paxamericana]

3 hours ago, Queenmandy85 said:

I am going out on a limb here. I have not seen anything that meets the threshold for conviction in an impeachment process. My understanding is the high crime or misdemeanour must constitute a threat to the democratic institutions of the republic, not a run of the mill felony.

 

Actually impeachment was meant to be broadly used, even for political reason. It serves as a referendum on sitting president who do not control house and senate popularity. Will it be used successfully?  That is a different matter but as far as the law is concern it is completely up to congress to impeach. 

The following is from a report written and released by the Judiciary Committee in 1974 in the aftermath of the Watergate crisis.

"Section 4 of Article Two of the United States Constitution: "The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.""High Crimes and Misdemeanors" has traditionally been considered a "term of art," like such other constitutional phrases as "levying war" and "due process." The Supreme Court has held that such phrases must be construed, not according to modern usage, but according to what the farmers meant when they adopted them."

Benjamin Franklin asserted that the power of impeachment and removal was necessary for those times when the Executive "rendered himself obnoxious," and the Constitution should provide for the "regular punishment of the Executive when his conduct should deserve it, and for his honorable acquittal when he should be unjustly accused." James Madison said, "...impeachment... was indispensable" to defend the community against "the incapacity, negligence or perfidy of the chief Magistrate." With a single executive, Madison argued, unlike a legislature whose collective nature provided security, "loss of capacity or corruption was more within the compass of probable events, and either of them might be fatal to the Republic."[6]

Alexander Hamilton said, "...those offences which proceed from the misconduct of public men, or, in other words, from the abuse or violation of some public trust. They are of a nature which may with peculiar propriety be denominated political, as they relate chiefly to injuries done immediately to the society itself."[7]

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_crimes_and_misdemeanors

https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/clinton/stories/watergatedoc_3.htm?noredirect=on

Edited August 23, 2018 by paxamericana

[Michael Hardner]

11 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

1) Define comedy of errors. I could say anything is a comedy of errors but that doesn't make it so.

2) You don't like the low unemployment? The record tax haul that the government is raking in?

3) The fact that Trump bombed Putin's ally twice and made Putin and Assad look like stupid war criminals that got their knuckles rapped? The fact that Trump ended the Korean war? The fact that manufacturing jobs are coming back to the US in droves less than 2 years after Oblahblah said they were gone forever? What's bugging you MH? Pipe up with some facts.

4) Think about the fact that the FBI is giving someone a "get out of jail 56 years early if you rat on the President for a non-crime" card. If you think that democracy is important you should be mad about that.

5) Let me explain to you that it's not illegal, it's not a campaign finance violation, for the President to get his mistresses to sign NDAs. Cohen pleaded guilty to two non-crimes MH. 

6) This is all pretty easy to follow. Anyone that pretends to not understand what's happening here is just being a useful idiot.

1) It's an opinion: saying that something is funny is subjective, so ... There are some objective aspects to it, like the revolving door of advisors and confederates, the leaks, the general cluelessness.  Sessions going after him today was another unprecedented attack, at least nothing we have seen in our lifetimes.

2) Every graph I have seen shows a steady turnaround under Obama - who was handed a recession and turned it around - leading to Trump getting this economy as a present.

3) I have lots of facts but I am not a demagogue so I will acknowledge that he has succeeded in some ways due to his, let's say unconventional approach. Korea and the Middle East are not solved, though.

4) That's usually how it works.  They even have that as a basic component of TV shows: you get the lessor felon to testify against the big kahuna in exchange for reduced sentence.  Why would I be "mad" about a real crook like Trump getting justice ?  That makes no sense.

5) The campaign contribution is the illegal part.  Parroting Trump's insane narrative paints you as another blind Trump follower.  Did you not mention that he lied about it and continues to lie ?  That he's trying to kill investigations into himself by intimidating Sessions ?  

6) Anybody who just parrots Trumps' insane lies is, as far as I can tell, new to politics but not new to fake wrestling and likely confuses the two.

 

 

[bush_cheney2004]

6 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1) It's an opinion: saying that something is funny is subjective, so ... There are some objective aspects to it, like the revolving door of advisors and confederates, the leaks, the general cluelessness.  Sessions going after him today was another unprecedented attack, at least nothing we have seen in our lifetimes.

 

Not true...see Richard Nixon's "Saturday Night Massacre"....(assuming you were alive in 1973).

 

Quote

5) The campaign contribution is the illegal part.  Parroting Trump's insane narrative paints you as another blind Trump follower.  Did you not mention that he lied about it and continues to lie ?  That he's trying to kill investigations into himself by intimidating Sessions ? 

 

Only if the pay offs came from campaign funds as directed by Trump.  

Lying is not a crime, unless it is done under oath (see Impeachment of President Bill Clinton).

All presidents lie...it is part of the job description.

[Michael Hardner]

Just now, bush_cheney2004 said:

1) Not true...see Richard Nixon's "Saturday Night Massacre"....(assuming you were alive in 1973).

2) Only if the pay offs came from campaign funds as directed by Trump.  

3) Lying is not a crime, unless it is done under oath (see Impeachment of President Bill Clinton).

4) All presidents lie...it is part of the job description.

1) Completely different from what I was talking about.  His own toadies and cronies have been fired out the door at a high volume.  

2) Well the story has changed a few times so I would bet that he did something wrong

3) It is not a crime.  Given that this president's supporters pushed him as some kind of moralist it takes a skewed character to accept said lies.

4) The character of the mis-statements has always been similar.  'Plausible deniability' and so on.  Not lying about paying off porn stars from campaign funds, lying to a reality star about firing her.  This guy is an all-star at amorality and failure... I don't actually care, though.  I just won't let rubes lie to me as much as they enjoy lying to themselves...

[bush_cheney2004]

13 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1) Completely different from what I was talking about.  His own toadies and cronies have been fired out the door at a high volume.  

2) Well the story has changed a few times so I would bet that he did something wrong

3) It is not a crime.  Given that this president's supporters pushed him as some kind of moralist it takes a skewed character to accept said lies.

4) The character of the mis-statements has always been similar.  'Plausible deniability' and so on.  Not lying about paying off porn stars from campaign funds, lying to a reality star about firing her.  This guy is an all-star at amorality and failure... I don't actually care, though.  I just won't let rubes lie to me as much as they enjoy lying to themselves...

 

1)  Doesn't matter...other presidents have had similar experiences.   Nixon went through several AGs until he found one who would fire the Special Prosecutor.    VP Spiro Agnew was convicted of tax evasion and resigned his office.    Just because it is Trump today does not make it unique to our lifetimes.    History informs a more balanced perspective.

https://archive.nytimes.com/www.nytimes.com/learning/general/onthisday/big/1010.html

2) Pure speculation on your part...it is not illegal to pay for silence in a private matter.    "Porn Star" !!!...so what ?

3) I don't know anyone who ever thought of Donald Trump as a "moralist"...that is laughable.

4) Sorry, but even your heroes have lied at one time or another.   It happens more often than you want to believe.

 

President Donald Trump is surely a political bastard...but he is our bastard.

 

Edited August 24, 2018 by bush_cheney2004

[Michael Hardner]

2 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

1)  Doesn't matter...other presidents have had similar experiences.   Nixon went through several AGs until he found one who would fire the Special Prosecutor.   

2) Just because it is Trump today does not make it unique to our lifetimes.     

3)  "Porn Star" !!!...so what ?

4) I don't know anyone who ever thought of Donald Trump as a "moralist"...that is laughable.

5) Sorry, but even your heroes have lied at one time or another.   It happens more often than you want to believe.

 

 

1) Ok, well Trump hasn't done that... yet.

2)  No, it's unique because it hasn't happened yet.  Yes Nixon and Clinton did things.  Clinton argued about the definition of "is" kind of like you are arguing about the definition of 'different'.

3) DRAIN THE SWAMP SO WHAT !

4) LOCK HER UP

5) I already explained this.  Sometimes I think you are just replying to my posts as a way of complimenting me.  Well, it's mutual but there's just not much more to say here.

 

 

[bush_cheney2004]

7 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

2)  No, it's unique because it hasn't happened yet.  Yes Nixon and Clinton did things.  Clinton argued about the definition of "is" kind of like you are arguing about the definition of 'different'.

 

What hasn't happened yet ?   

It wasn't just Nixon and Clinton....it was Eisenhower, JFK, LBJ, Carter, Ford, Reagan, Bushes, and Obama as well.  

Trump is just another American president who happens to mock the U.S. politics you apparently held in much higher regard than warranted.

Edited August 24, 2018 by bush_cheney2004

[bush_cheney2004]

Excellent piece from The Federalist by Mollie Hemingway summarizing heavy breathing by The Resistance in the U.S., and like minded sycophants in Canada and elsewhere:

 

Quote

...But it’s also possible that this is yet another example of overreach from an elite establishment out of touch with the American electorate that put Trump in power and that the previous attempts to unseat President Trump from his rightful election will bear poorly on latter-day attempts. Democrats, Never Trump, and some media voices have been calling for impeachment for months, if not years. The details for impeachment are unimportant since the real crime seems to have been winning the 2016 election.

... For many in the media, impeachment is — and always has been — a foregone conclusion. Then again, so was the election of Hillary Clinton.

http://thefederalist.com/2018/08/22/6-takeaways-about-paul-manafort-and-michael-cohens-legal-woes/

 

Edited August 24, 2018 by bush_cheney2004

[Michael Hardner]

9 hours ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

What hasn't happened yet ?   

Any kind of 'Saturday Night massacre'.  I keep saying "we haven't seen this [some situation] before" and you respond with "yes The Saturday Night Massacre".

What does "is" mean ?

[turningrite]

On 8/17/2018 at 9:16 AM, Boges said:

Hopefully not. What Maxime Benier said was racist. DoFo's government has distanced themselves from Bernier's remark as well.

 

Racist? How so? Are Canadians not permitted to question immigration, refugee and multicultural policies even though these things are the subject of political debate in pretty much all democratic jurisdictions. I don't like Trump's style, nor his authoritarian instincts. But Americans who voted for him wanted to shake up their political establishment. They may well have bitten off more than they can chew. For purposes of comparison, Bernier is a moderate conservative.

[WestCanMan]

14 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

1) It's an opinion: saying that something is funny is subjective, so ... There are some objective aspects to it, like the revolving door of advisors and confederates, the leaks, the general cluelessness.  Sessions going after him today was another unprecedented attack, at least nothing we have seen in our lifetimes.

2) Every graph I have seen shows a steady turnaround under Obama - who was handed a recession and turned it around - leading to Trump getting this economy as a present.

3) I have lots of facts but I am not a demagogue so I will acknowledge that he has succeeded in some ways due to his, let's say unconventional approach. Korea and the Middle East are not solved, though.

4) That's usually how it works.  They even have that as a basic component of TV shows: you get the lessor felon to testify against the big kahuna in exchange for reduced sentence.  Why would I be "mad" about a real crook like Trump getting justice ?  That makes no sense.

5) The campaign contribution is the illegal part.  Parroting Trump's insane narrative paints you as another blind Trump follower.  Did you not mention that he lied about it and continues to lie ?  That he's trying to kill investigations into himself by intimidating Sessions ?  

6) Anybody who just parrots Trumps' insane lies is, as far as I can tell, new to politics but not new to fake wrestling and likely confuses the two.

 

 

1) Sessions' complete uselessness is what's unprecedented. He has far less reason to recuse himself than Mueller or Rosenstein yet there he is on the sidelines sucking his thumb.

2) What graph shows you that manufacturing jobs were steadily going down under Obama, and that he even said they were gone forever unless someone had a magic wand? Stop looking at the graphs CNN posts because they don't even pretend to tell the truth. Did you see the graph of the Dow Jones avg? It was tanking when Hillary was about to win the election and when Trump won it went meteoric. 25% higher than it has ever been. That's a measure of confidence in the economy, and the reduction of business-crippling regulations. Honestly your head is stuck in the sand if you believe that Trump's economy isn't demolishing the Obama economy.

3) Honestly when he stepped into the ring as a political newcomer no one was expecting him to run circles around Putin, or to get as far as he did in the Korean Peninsula. He got China to put actual sanctions on NoKo. He eviscerated Islamic State so quickly that it makes you wonder what the hell Obama was really up to. Obama didn't gain any headway at all in any front, Trump has already rocketed past him in only 2 years. You'll hear nary a word on CNN though, they're still talking about Russian collusion, even though their own Von Jones was caught on hidden camera a year ago admitting that it was "just a big nothingburger". Honestly dude you get your news from a source that YOU KNOW is blatanlty lying to you day after day. If you can't spot a CNN lie every two minutes you have to be a complete imbecile.

4) How it "usually works" is that you have to tell the truth to a judge and make all the proper disclosures to the judge to get a FISA warrant, and self-corroboration was considered impossible by definition until now. A "reduced sentence" for ratting out the big kahuna is normal, but no one has even said what "the big kahuna" is being investigated for yet. Russian Collusion is a dispelled myth. Getting mistresses to sign NDAs is normal. So can you tell me what crime the FBI is investigating Trump for? They're not actually allowed to investigate someone for the purpose of finding out if he has ever committed a crime. They're supposed to be fully aware of a crime that someone committed and then gather evidence of it. Once again: what crime is Trump known to have committed to warrant this investigation?

5) Obama had over $2M in illegal campaign contributions. Trump's $280K in contributions aren't actually the crime that CNN would have you believe. It has been tried against others and didn't hold up in court.

6) Who is parroting lies here MH? Do you think that it's normal for 25 people in the FBI to get fired, demoted, or resign within a 2 year period? Do you and CNN ever even acknowledge that there is something underhanded going on? You have to have your head 3 feet under the sand to not notice. The useful idiot comment still stands, 100%, until you can make some sense of the FISA warrant fiasco and the unprecedented level of bias and corruption in the FBI related to this investigation. 

 

 

[bush_cheney2004]

5 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

Any kind of 'Saturday Night massacre'.  I keep saying "we haven't seen this [some situation] before" and you respond with "yes The Saturday Night Massacre".

What does "is" mean ?

 

Well, we certainly have seen the absence of a "Saturday Night Massacre" many times before, so it is still not unique to "our lifetimes".

Trump is just another U.S. president...doing things his way, which means lots of cabinet turnover.

[Michael Hardner]

4 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

1) Sessions' complete uselessness is what's unprecedented. He has far less reason to recuse himself than Mueller or Rosenstein yet there he is on the sidelines sucking his thumb.

2)  Stop looking at the graphs CNN posts because they don't even pretend to tell the truth.  

3) You'll hear nary a word on CNN though, 

4) So can you tell me what crime the FBI is investigating Trump for?

5) Who is parroting lies here MH?  

1) Ok then.

2)  "Stop looking at the graphs CNN posts because they don't even pretend to tell the truth."  Data tend to come from US government sources.  I graphed US GDP 2008 to present.  Obama was elected in 2008.
Link:

https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/gdp

3)  CNN is getting rich carrying the Trump gong show.  But Fox News was the outlet that made it rich slanting the news.  The day that Trump's personal lawyer and former campaign manager were sentenced their propaganda channel didn't even cover it.

4) Collusion with a foreign power to steal the election from the person who won the popular vote.

5) You are parroting Trump's own lies.  How many times will he lie and change his story ?  If you said "Yes he is a liar and a reprobate but I believe he is doing what needs to be done" I could understand that better than defending him.  Even worse people such as evangelicals try to pain him as moral.  Such hypocrisy... 

[Michael Hardner]

4 hours ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

1. Well, we certainly have seen the absence of a "Saturday Night Massacre" many times before, so it is still not unique to "our lifetimes".

2. Trump is just another U.S. president...doing things his way, which means lots of cabinet turnover.

1. Odd but true I suppose.

2. Your mantra... there is nothing new under the sun.   Have you ever been to a protest march ?

[WestCanMan]

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

1) Ok then.

2)  "Stop looking at the graphs CNN posts because they don't even pretend to tell the truth."  Data tend to come from US government sources.  I graphed US GDP 2008 to present.  Obama was elected in 2008.
Link:

https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/gdp

3)  CNN is getting rich carrying the Trump gong show.  But Fox News was the outlet that made it rich slanting the news.  The day that Trump's personal lawyer and former campaign manager were sentenced their propaganda channel didn't even cover it.

4) Collusion with a foreign power to steal the election from the person who won the popular vote.

5) You are parroting Trump's own lies.  How many times will he lie and change his story ?  If you said "Yes he is a liar and a reprobate but I believe he is doing what needs to be done" I could understand that better than defending him.  Even worse people such as evangelicals try to pain him as moral.  Such hypocrisy... 

 

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

1) Ok then.

2)  "Stop looking at the graphs CNN posts because they don't even pretend to tell the truth."  Data tend to come from US government sources.  I graphed US GDP 2008 to present.  Obama was elected in 2008.
Link:

https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/gdp

3)  CNN is getting rich carrying the Trump gong show.  But Fox News was the outlet that made it rich slanting the news.  The day that Trump's personal lawyer and former campaign manager were sentenced their propaganda channel didn't even cover it.

4) Collusion with a foreign power to steal the election from the person who won the popular vote.

5) You are parroting Trump's own lies.  How many times will he lie and change his story ?  If you said "Yes he is a liar and a reprobate but I believe he is doing what needs to be done" I could understand that better than defending him.  Even worse people such as evangelicals try to pain him as moral.  Such hypocrisy... 

2) That's your own graph, and if you do the math you can see that the growth from 2017 ($766B) is substantially higher than any of the 8 years before it, and it was already plateauing when it hit just $504B in 2016. The first quarter of 2018 was over 4%, that's even higher than any quarter of 2017. 2018 will be even better than Trump's first year and far higher than any of the Obama years. So by your graph, Trump's first year was better than any of Obama's 8 years and Trump's second year is even better than his first.

3) CNN gets rich by spinning the news. Any news. They spun all the police killings in the last few years of the Obama presidency as well. When the Ferguson story first came out "Michael Brown was a gentle, well-loved, unarmed teen who was killed by a police officer that just shot him from his car". Even I thought there should be riots. Then when video came out showing what "the gentle giant" was doing just minutes before the police showed up, CNN argued that "video evidence of that crime shouldn't be shown because it makes the victim of the shooting look bad" lol. So funny that video evidence is supposed to carry less weight than CNN's opinion. Then when the dust cleared and we all had a much clearer idea of what happened, CNN was still covering the story as if the original version was accurate. They never apologized, or talked about how different the real story was from their original version. They were making gobs of money covering the riots and every time a fire started in another city CNN made another $50M. It was just pathetic. That's how CNN covers every single story - from the angle that makes them the most money.

"Trump's policy of separating immigrant children from their parents" is another perfect example of an outright lie that they told on CNN and even the CBC. Obama did the exact same thing (there was even an instance when children were put back in the custody of human traffickers while Obama was Potus), so if it's "Trump's policy" to separate families then is it fair to say that "holding an election every 4 years" is Trump's policy too? Just another outright lie that CNN belched out and their stupid viewers gobbled up.

Hillary losing the election because she never bothered to hold rallies in several states wasn't a big story. The Russians helped Trump win was a much more lucrative story. FB ads posted by Russians were found to just post negative things about both sides to sow discord across America, but CNN doesn't talk about that. They are ok with sowing discord themselves as long as they profit from it.

4) The collusion narrative is already long past dead. There wasn't enough evidence to get it started in the first place, but FBI officials falsely claimed that it was independently corroborated, it was verified, they never bothered to mention how much of it was known to be untrue, they failed to disclose who paid to put it together, and all the connections between the FBI officials and Fusion GPS members who brought it to light in order to get the ball rolling. So...... Russian collusion is a bullshit answer. Von Jones even admitted it was a nothingburger a year ago but on CNN their official story is still "ooh yeah it's the real deal, impeachment is nigh".

5) Dude all you are doing is parroting BS CNN talking points. I've said many times that it's an embarrassment to democracy in general that the American election came down to Trump/Hillary, but Hillary was a far worse person. I knew she was rotten back when she smiled off her husband's admission that he slept with his intern. That was about 2 decades ago. The dumbest storyline I ever saw in my life was "Trump is a misogynist", because Hillary was just as bad if not worse if you consider how she treated all the women her husband raped/abused, etc. Trump slept with a pornstar and a playboy bunny while he was married. I'll admit that makes him a douchebag, but you should admit that 90% of the people you know would make that exact mistake. Give married women the chance to sleep with a Chippendale dancer or Gerard Butler while they're 3,000 miles from their spouse and how many will pass? Let's keep all these "crimes" in perspective. 

[Michael Hardner]

1 hour ago, WestCanMan said:

 

2) That's your own graph, 

3) CNN gets rich by spinning the news. Any news. They spun all the police killings in the last few years of the Obama presidency as well. 

4) The collusion narrative is already long past dead. There wasn't enough evidence to get it started in the first place, but FBI officials falsely claimed that it was independently corroborated, it was verified, they never bothered to mention how much of it was known to be untrue, they failed to disclose who paid to put it together, and all the connections between the FBI officials and Fusion GPS members who brought it to light in order to get the ball rolling. So...... Russian collusion is a bullshit answer. Von Jones even admitted it was a nothingburger a year ago but on CNN their official story is still "ooh yeah it's the real deal, impeachment is nigh".

5) Dude all you are doing is parroting BS CNN talking points.  

2) No, I didn't draw it.  

3) Nice.  You just proved they aren't pro-Obama, just pro-spin.  I agree.  And FOX is pro-Trump and a threat to journalism and truth.

4) Well they are finding some fun stuff along the way for sure.

5) It's not false though.  Those Trumpian a-holes are guilty.  Drain the swamp he said.  Hypocrites...

 

[Michael Hardner]

https://www.cnn.com/2018/08/24/politics/trump-tower-doorman-contract-ami/index.html

Quote

A former Trump World Tower doorman who says he has knowledge of an alleged affair President Donald Trump had with an ex-housekeeper, which resulted in a child, is now able to talk about a contract he entered with American Media Inc. that had prohibited him from discussing the matter with anyone, according to his attorney.  On Friday, Marc Held -- the attorney for Dino Sajudin, the former doorman -- said his client had been released from his contract with AMI, the parent company of the National Enquirer, "recently" after back-and-forth discussions with AMI.

CNN has exclusively obtained a copy of the "source agreement" between Sajudin and AMI, which is owned by David Pecker.

The contract appears to have been signed on Nov. 15, 2015, and states that AMI has exclusive rights to Sajudin's story but does not mention the details of the story itself beyond saying, "Source shall provide AMI with information regarding Donald Trump's illegitimate child..."

Looks like The Enquirer vault is leaking.  First up... Trump's illegitimate child.  One of many to come I am sure, along with all of those abortions that the pro-lifers will defend.  Did I mention hypocrisy ?  I don't mean to be rude but... what recent Democrat president would have done this ?   Oh, right BIll Clinton but he didn't get caught  

I am saving so much on going to movies with all of this ... but eating much more popcorn ...

[WestCanMan]

29 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

2) No, I didn't draw it.  

3) Nice.  You just proved they aren't pro-Obama, just pro-spin.  I agree.  And FOX is pro-Trump and a threat to journalism and truth.

4) Well they are finding some fun stuff along the way for sure.

5) It's not false though.  Those Trumpian a-holes are guilty.  Drain the swamp he said.  Hypocrites...

 

2) haha, but you posted it yourself thinking that it supported your position.

3) CNN is pro-Democrat, and huge on spinning the news in favour of Democrat talking points. Fox is certainly pro-Republican, but also far more accurate. Hillary did destroy subpoenaed evidence, you can check it on snopes, politifact, etc. That should matter to CNN but it doesn't. When Bill met with AG Loretta Lynch at the most crucial time in Hillary's "investigation" by some huge coincidence CNN didn't care, they agreed it was probably a mere discussion about their grandchildren (Bill doesn't have any). CNN doesn't care that at the highest level, FBI members are getting fired and demoted for things like tampering with FBI investigation documents, extreme bias, failure to make important disclosures, etc. It's a pretty big deal, this is the most tumultuous time in the history of the FBI. I also mentioned other specific CNN stories including actual lies. You haven't got anything specific about Fox except for when you mistakenly said that they didn't report on the sentencing stories. 

4) Fun stuff doesn't justify two years worth of (a witch hunt) investigating something that they now know didn't exist.

5) I don't doubt that Manafort is guilty, or that Cohen is guilty of non-Trump related charges, and so I agree with anyone who thinks that they should do their time. But I also think that given all the FBI corruption that was involved in the process leading up to their arrests most people would get out of those charges. Just remember that Mark Fuhrman's comments, unrelated to the Simpson case, were largely responsible for his acquittal. I also think that it was ridiculous that the FBI did a pre-dawn raid, including 17 officers with full body armour and automatic weapons drawn, on a white-collar criminal. The whole process smacks of politicization and malfeasance.

The swamp is chock-full of slime, everyone knows it. Can you blame Trump for using the same campaign finance guy that the Bushes and Reagan used? Get real.

[Michael Hardner]

9 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

2) haha, but you posted it yourself thinking that it supported your position.

3) CNN is pro-Democrat, and huge on spinning the news in favour of Democrat talking points. Fox is certainly pro-Republican, but also far more accurate.

4) Hillary did destroy subpoenaed evidence, you can check it on snopes, politifact, etc. That should matter to CNN but it doesn't.

5) FBI members are getting fired and demoted for things like tampering with FBI investigation documents, extreme bias, failure to make important disclosures, etc.

6) Fun stuff doesn't justify two years worth of (a witch hunt) investigating something that they now know didn't exist.

7) The whole process smacks of politicization and malfeasance.

8) The swamp is chock-full of slime, everyone knows it. Can you blame Trump for using the same campaign finance guy that the Bushes and Reagan used? Get real.

2) Well, yes.  I still think it does.   When you get data it comes from Dept of Commerce and such.  I can see increased growth in 2017 but Trump was handed what happened before.  He was also claiming economic success was his pretty much when he got into office.  You can bet if/when it crashes he will blame others.

3) Yet CNN highlighted BLM strife, which was a problem for Obama.  How do you resolve that ?

4) I did not know that, however I stopped paying attention to her after she lost.  I looked on Snopes here: https://www.snopes.com/tag/clinton-e-mail-controversy/  and I didn't see it.  Can you provide a cite ?

5) Cite ?

6) They haven't found collusion yet but they certainly have found a nest of witches.  It REALLY makes you wonder why Trump never released his tax records.  I think that Russian influence is coming from Russian money and possible laundering.  His a famously shitty businessman, so it would be a smart move for Russians to bribe him.

7)  Maybe so.  It's too bad, but we won't know the truth on the behind the scenes until Trump is gone and disgraced, which will happen - even if it's in 2020 or 2024.

8) He is the slimiest one.  He is either moral or not.  If he's the moral one then what kind of person accuses people of things while doing worse ?  What kind of person goes out of his way to accuse people of lying while lying to his wife on a national stage ?  What kind of people defend him as 'moral' ?  It makes the head spin.

 

[WestCanMan]

2 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

 

4) I did not know that, however I stopped paying attention to her after she lost.  I looked on Snopes here: https://www.snopes.com/tag/clinton-e-mail-controversy/  and I didn't see it.  Can you provide a cite ?

 

 

https://www.factcheck.org/2016/09/the-fbi-files-on-clintons-emails/

Quote

Keilar questioned whether other secretaries of state “used a personal server and while facing a subpoena, deleted emails from them?” Clinton said that Keilar was making false assumptions, saying, “I’ve never had a subpoena.” Rep. Trey Gowdy, the chairman of the Benghazi committee, immediately accused Clinton of lying after the interview, because, of course, Clinton indeed did receive a subpoena.

The Clinton campaign told us at the time that Clinton was specifically responding to Keilar’s question about deleting personal emails “while facing a subpoena.”

The campaign gave us a statement from Clinton spokesman Nick Merrill that said: “She was asked about her decision to not to retain her personal emails after providing all those that were work-related, and the suggestion was made that a subpoena was pending at the time. That was not accurate.”

It turned out that Keilar’s assumption was accurate. The 31,830 personal emails that Keilar asked about were deleted “sometime between March 25-31, 2015,” according to the FBI. That was about three weeks after Clinton received a House subpoena on March 4, 2015.

From the same article:

Quote

In December 2014, after the work-related emails were preserved, Mills told Platte River Networks – which at the time was managing Clinton’s private server – that Clinton “decided she no longer needed access to any of her e-mails older than 60 days.” Mills instructed the PRN employee — who was not identified — “to modify the e-mail retention policy” on Clinton’s server “to reflect this change,” the FBI said.

But the PRN employee mistakenly did not make the retention-policy change and did not delete the old emails until sometime between March 25 and March 31, even though Mills had sent PRN an email on March 9 that mentioned the committee’s request to preserve emails.

The PRN employee who deleted the emails was a recipient of Mills’ message. However, the employee told the FBI that “he had an ‘oh shit’ moment and sometime between March 25-31, 2015 deleted the Clinton archive mailbox from the PRN server and used BleachBit to delete the exported .PST files he had created on the server containing Clinton’s e-mails.”

Basically the dog ate her homework.

[WestCanMan]

2 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

2) Well, yes.  I still think it does.   When you get data it comes from Dept of Commerce and such.  I can see increased growth in 2017 but Trump was handed what happened before.  He was also claiming economic success was his pretty much when he got into office.  You can bet if/when it crashes he will blame others.

3) Yet CNN highlighted BLM strife, which was a problem for Obama.  How do you resolve that ?

4) I did not know that, however I stopped paying attention to her after she lost.  I looked on Snopes here: https://www.snopes.com/tag/clinton-e-mail-controversy/  and I didn't see it.  Can you provide a cite ?

5) Cite ?

6) They haven't found collusion yet but they certainly have found a nest of witches.  It REALLY makes you wonder why Trump never released his tax records.  I think that Russian influence is coming from Russian money and possible laundering.  His a famously shitty businessman, so it would be a smart move for Russians to bribe him.

7)  Maybe so.  It's too bad, but we won't know the truth on the behind the scenes until Trump is gone and disgraced, which will happen - even if it's in 2020 or 2024.

8) He is the slimiest one.  He is either moral or not.  If he's the moral one then what kind of person accuses people of things while doing worse ?  What kind of person goes out of his way to accuse people of lying while lying to his wife on a national stage ?  What kind of people defend him as 'moral' ?  It makes the head spin.

 

2) It supports a theory that the economy was on the upswing when Trump came in, but not at the rate that it is now. 

3) Did you feel like BLM strife was a problem for Obama? I got the feeling that he was supporting it because he never had a bad word to say about them. He did, however, blame the murder of 5 police officers on "centuries of slavery, racism and Jim Crowe laws" which basically made a martyr of their murderer. Obama was a pice of crap.

5) https://themarketswork.com/2018/02/18/resignations-demotions-some-details-complicity-at-the-fbi-doj/ 

6) I agree that Trump is a shitty businessman, he's just a really good PR guy for himself when he isn't saying things that are utterly classless. He still never did anything illegal with Russians though, and his campaign finance violations are the same things that Bill Clinton and Tom Edwards did, and they were ruled to be innocent of campaign finance violations.

7) Trump won't be disgraced by any of this unless he's found guilty of something, which doesn't seem likely to happen now.

If the FBI doesn't find at least some evidence of Russian collusion then they are going to have to run some of their own members up on criminal charges though, because there were too many improprieties during the FISA application process. The FBI can't be seen to be misrepresenting laughable evidence to the courts in order to obtain a warrant against any citizen who was actually innocent, especially a sitting president.

8) Trump is the most crass, but his trucker mouth doesn't make him a criminal. Brennan is the poster boy for slimesters, sitting in front of a camera and saying that Trump is known to be a criminal and to have committed treason, just for the purpose of influencing the mid-term elections in favour of the Demmies, when Brennan knows better than anyone that there's still no evidence of a Trump crime and there likely won't be. Comey and Strzok are slime: lying to Congress, leaking information, exonerating Hillary when they are 100% aware that she committed crimes... McCabe altered official FBI investigation statements. Hillary is known to have colluded with foreign nationals (british and russian) to get this whole investigation started, for the sole purpose of influencing an election. Everyone on earth knows that Bill Clinton had a clandestine tarmac meeting with AG Lynch right before they exonerated her. Do we know why they both just happened to be on that tarmac at the exact same time? What were their itineraries? Why is the FBI trying to find out who leaked the fact that they met up instead of trying to find out if Bill was improperly influencing the outcome of a serious FBI investigation? Adam Schiff has stood in front of cameras and made dozens of declarative statements re: collusion, almost all of which he knew to be incorrect at the time that he made them. CNN never called him on any of it, they just peddle the lies and never issue retractions or clarifications. The list goes on and on. You're calling trump slimy when you can't point to a single thing he did in Washington that's a crime, and ignoring enough subject matter to write a series of novels. When the dust eventually settles on this, the FBI will look like the Democrat party's own personal KGB and Hillary will still be the exact person that I knew she was 20 years ago when she smiled her smug little smile after Bill admitted to his affair. You might ate Trump but the best thing that ever happened to America was when Hillary lost that election. Unfortunately it was Trump that won.

[bush_cheney2004]

17 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

https://www.cnn.com/2018/08/24/politics/trump-tower-doorman-contract-ami/index.html

Looks like The Enquirer vault is leaking.  First up... Trump's illegitimate child. 

 

Seriously ?    "Illegitimate child" (ancient, dog whistle term) is not kryptonite for President Trump, unless he knocked somebody up in the Oval Office on the 4th of July.

All this does is keep the media focus and obsession on Trump, the very thing that won him the election.   Democrats are beginning to figure this out, and are trying to push attention back to "the issues" for Congressional mid-terms.    Otherwise, it will be Trump, Trump, Trump...and more Trump.  

In another nod to the ass kicking that the Democrats suffered in 2016 at the hands of "illigitimate" father Donald Trump, so called "super delegates" will no longer get a first ballot vote to help rig the nomination for the "chosen won".

 

 

Edited August 25, 2018 by bush_cheney2004

[bush_cheney2004]

21 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

2. Your mantra... there is nothing new under the sun.   Have you ever been to a protest march ?

 

2.   Yes...I "marched' to protest for the right-to-work against organized labour in a local strike.    Fortunately, I knew I was not a "progressive" liberal from birth.

[Wilber]

What will probably get Trump is tax evasion or money laundering, not collusion. For starters, pay offs to silence porn stars and playmates then declaring them to be legal expenses could well be tax evasion.

That is what he is probably really worried about with all his cronies getting immunity, because it's pretty clear people don't care that he is a vulgar, lying boor.