Politics SPECIAL COUNSEL APPOINTED! (1 Viewer)

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
I have no idea if Trump colluded, however I think there is already more than sufficient evidence for articles of impeachment based on trying to interfere with the investigation.
 
Further said:
I have no idea if Trump colluded, however I think there is already more than sufficient evidence for articles of impeachment based on trying to interfere with the investigation.
Click to expand...

Here is the opinion of a Clinton supporter.
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/a...justice-in-firing-james-comey/article/2622875
http://www.newsmax.com/Politics/Dershowitz-Trump-Comey-Flynn/2017/05/20/id/791372/

It's rather disgusting how most of you Trump haters want to ignore the Constitution. Anything to make bad shit happen.
I am beginning to hope to see justice find those showing the phony outrage.

"'Show me the man, I'll give you the crime,'" Dershowitz said. "That's not America."
 
MarAzul said:
Sound like you advocate sedition
Click to expand...
STOP!!!! This accusing citizens of sedition is bs......you by your own standards should convict yourself for sedition against the last president then....double standards Marz......deal with the lack of trust a vast number of people have for Trump ....just imagine he's Obama.....and then try to remember how much support you gave the president then.
 
MarAzul said:
It's rather disgusting how most of you Trump haters want to ignore the Constitution
Click to expand...
BS....it's disgusting how you want to ignore the concerns that not only citizens have but their elected officials have...you voted for Trump, you have to deal with the voice of the people who have lost all trust in his camp...they are weighing in from both sides of the aisle...I'm a taxpaying, voting, war vet who's completely invested in my country....I can say whatever I want....look that up in the Constitution
 
SlyPokerDog said:
You should read the article, there is a great way Jared and Ivanka can fuck up the special council.
Click to expand...
I read this article before...Jared has played good old boys pat each other on the back with the Russians club....Trump said he hadn't had dealings with Russia...he has his lackey's do all the groundwork...
 
Further said:
We don't know, so we can't prove which would have resulted in a larger outcry. I think it's Flynn being pardoned but we can't know. However, we do know from multiple leaks Trump was shocked about how vigorous the reaction was for Firing Comey, a person Trump believed all the Dems hated and wanted to see fired anyways. I think a Flynn firing would have been easier for Trump to predict a backlash from. But this is all speculation.
Click to expand...

I don't know if bigfoot exists, but there's lots of "evidence!" but we can't prove it.

That's how it all sounds to me.

Trump fired people all along in his campaign. It seems to be his management style. Oddly, those he's fired have remained loyal to him, so it wasn't perceived as vindictive by them.

What I heard from Comey in his last testimony is that he is superior in his position to (Obama's) Attorney General - that alone is a firing offense. If I were Trump, I'd have been thinking about how he wouldn't honor Sessions' position as Attorney General, either.

It seems he stewed about that for a week and pulled the trigger.

Trump did say in the NBC interview the next day that firing Comey was best for the American people, no matter how much worse it made things for himself. Doesn't sound shocked to me.
 
I stopped reading the dog's article here:

As the Trump administration’s been sent into a death spiral over the firing of FBI Director James Comey last week — a failed move to curtail the Justice Department investigation into contact between his campaign and the Russian government — Kushner hasn’t been the “adult in the room” urging caution and scrupulousness. To the contrary, he’s been urging aggression and retaliation.​

The constitutional scholar that MarAzul cites has it right.

Death spiral, LOL. Not slanted in the least.
 
Denny Crane said:
Trump fired people all along in his campaign
Click to expand...
He talks real tough on Muslims and Mexicans with extreme vetting but can't hire people without firing them....vetting doesn't seem to exist when it comes to Trump's cabinet positions.
 
Denny Crane said:
Oddly, those he's fired have remained loyal to him
Click to expand...
He's still trying to find the leaks in his camp.....loyalty can be disguised and I don't see any proof that people he's fired have loyalty to him....unless he's just given them another job or they want their corporate tax rates to remain cut in half. I read an article this week about how many in his camp are sending out resume's to get the hell out of his circle. As to bigfoot....if an honest person saw bigfoot and told me...I wouldn't require a carcass to believe that person. It wouldn't have to be on 60 minutes for me to consider the person is telling the truth.
 
riverman said:
He talks real tough on Muslims and Mexicans with extreme vetting but can't hire people without firing them....vetting doesn't seem to exist when it comes to Trump's cabinet positions.
Click to expand...

In my experience, it is valid management style to hire people and fire them when they don't work out. Vetting .... Obama vetted Flynn and he passed.
 
riverman said:
He's still trying to find the leaks in his camp.....loyalty can be disguised and I don't see any proof that people he's fired have loyalty to him....unless he's just given them another job or they want their corporate tax rates to remain cut in half. I read an article this week about how many in his camp are sending out resume's to get the hell out of his circle. As to bigfoot....if an honest person saw bigfoot and told me...I wouldn't require a carcass to believe that person. It wouldn't have to be on 60 minutes for me to consider the person is telling the truth.
Click to expand...

He fired Manafort and Lewandowski. They weren't "leaks in his camp" or even disloyal.
 
Denny Crane said:
They weren't "leaks in his camp" or even disloyal
Click to expand...
As I said, we don't know this....people take high paying positions in govt generally want to keep the good graces of the boss....yet they may not like him at all...they probably do like their paycheck and benefits and perks....sure, I'll wear a red maga hat Donald!
 
riverman said:
As I said, we don't know this....people take high paying positions in govt generally want to keep the good graces of the boss....yet they may not like him at all...they probably do like their paycheck and benefits and perks....sure, I'll wear a red maga hat Donald!
Click to expand...

High paying. What government are you talking about?
 
Denny Crane said:
High paying. What government are you talking about?
Click to expand...
2-300k a year with benefits and perks......I call that a high paying job.....being a paycheck employee sort of takes you out of the CEO pay scale
 
riverman said:
2-300k a year with benefits and perks......I call that a high paying job.....being a paycheck employee sort of takes you out of the CEO pay scale
Click to expand...

These guys make $1M+ in the private sector.
 
Denny Crane said:
These guys make $1M+ in the private sector.
Click to expand...
It's not always about the money....often in DC it's about the resume....after they retire they can cash in on book deals and speaking gigs. I still say 2-300k is a high paying job with perks....some of those perks are about networking...they get to rub elbows with lobbyists and donors and lawmakers.
 
Last edited:
riverman said:
It's not always about the money....often in DC it's about the resume....after they retire they can cash in on book deals and speaking gigs. I still say 2-3k is a high paying job with perks....some of those perks are about networking...they get to rub elbows with lobbyists and donors.
Click to expand...

If these guys are the source of leaks, they don't care about the pay and perks. In fact, they're likely to go to jail, if the law enforcement agencies do their jobs.
 
Denny Crane said:
I stopped reading the dog's article here:

As the Trump administration’s been sent into a death spiral over the firing of FBI Director James Comey last week — a failed move to curtail the Justice Department investigation into contact between his campaign and the Russian government — Kushner hasn’t been the “adult in the room” urging caution and scrupulousness. To the contrary, he’s been urging aggression and retaliation.​

The constitutional scholar that MarAzul cites has it right.

Death spiral, LOL. Not slanted in the least.
Click to expand...
Trump also said to holt that he was thinking about the Russian thing when he decided to fire Comey. And more glaring is that he told the Russians the next day that he had been feeling a lot of pressure about the Russia investigation but then he fired Comey and that pressure is off.

Those two incidents alone are pretty incriminating with regards to purposeful interference in an ongoing investigation. May or may not be illegal but could be sufficient to draw up articles for impeachment if Trump had a little less support amongst republicans.
 
Further said:
Trump also said to holt that he was thinking about the Russian thing when he decided to fire Comey. And more glaring is that he told the Russians the next day that he had been feeling a lot of pressure about the Russia investigation but then he fired Comey and that pressure is off.

Those two incidents alone are pretty incriminating with regards to purposeful interference in an ongoing investigation. May or may not be illegal but could be sufficient to draw up articles for impeachment if Trump had a little less support amongst republicans.
Click to expand...

He also said that he was thinking the firing would deepen and extend the investigation. That didn't deter him from doing the right thing.

You quote on cherry picked sentence, because the media does. There is the whole truth out there, you won't find it on CNN or in the Times/WaPost.
 
Nikolokolus said:
A candidate colluding with a foreign power to try and tip an election in their favor would be pretty much the text book definition of treason.

So, I'm all for an investigation, and if it gets to the bottom of everything and finds out there is no evidence of such collusion and they don't file charges against Trump, then that's a perfectly legitimate outcome.
Click to expand...
Sounds nothing like the definition of Treason unless you can prove Trump wanted to win as a way to HURT America. There has never been one instance of anyone saying Trump didn't think he was the greatest person on Earth.
 
riverman said:
BS....it's disgusting how you want to ignore the concerns that not only citizens have but their elected officials have...you voted for Trump, you have to deal with the voice of the people who have lost all trust in his camp...they are weighing in from both sides of the aisle...I'm a taxpaying, voting, war vet who's completely invested in my country....I can say whatever I want....look that up in the Constitution
Click to expand...

riverman said:
STOP!!!! This accusing citizens of sedition is bs......you by your own standards should convict yourself for sedition against the last president then....double standards Marz......deal with the lack of trust a vast number of people have for Trump ....just imagine he's Obama.....and then try to remember how much support you gave the president then.
Click to expand...

The word, the definition.
Sedition
Inciting resistance to lawful authority and tending to cause the disruption or overthrow of the government

Calling for investigation of no crime known, must be as close as you can get. Calling for impeachment for no crime you can articulate, surely crosses the line.

Obama fucked me and million of others out of their health care by making it legal to do it and used the incentive of a tax to make it happen. Fact, not sedition.
Obama was a Kenyan, by right of descent. This is a fact, and mutually exclusive with Natural Born adjective along with Citizen to qualify for President. Constitution you know.
I could go on, you have heard them before, not sedition, simply facts and actions against the Constitution. Like; shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed..
You might note, the word shall does not leave room for discretion.

I see a very big difference, not double standard.
 
Denny Crane said:
You quote on cherry picked sentence, because the media does.
Click to expand...
This is sort of silly....you give the media more power than it has..people do think for themselves and more often than not....that's the story. You no longer read or trust any content from CNN, Washington Post or New York Times....? You realize they buy stories from freelance journalists as well as publish their own staff's editorials....if you think those 3 news outlets are completely incapable of printing something that's true...well...I don't see news that way. I'll even listen to Fox news or BBC or the radio more often than not....Fox is the sketchiest from my filter...the BBC is no fan of Trump in tone either...I tend to agree with their slant pretty often
 
MarAzul said:
Inciting resistance to lawful authority and tending to cause the disruption or overthrow of the government
Click to expand...
fuck that....nobody is inciting a govt overthrow around here....nobody is breaking a law....the disruptions didn't come from the populace...they came from fucking twitter ...you don't get to accuse me of sedition without getting called out on it..period..it's divisive as you can get and I don't think it's healthy at all to use the term in a political forum
 
riverman said:
He's still trying to find the leaks in his camp.....loyalty can be disguised and I don't see any proof that people he's fired have loyalty to him....unless he's just given them another job or they want their corporate tax rates to remain cut in half. I read an article this week about how many in his camp are sending out resume's to get the hell out of his circle. As to bigfoot....if an honest person saw bigfoot and told me...I wouldn't require a carcass to believe that person. It wouldn't have to be on 60 minutes for me to consider the person is telling the truth.
Click to expand...
If an honest person saw bigfoot and believed it I'd recommend a checkup. Or consider that it was a hoax and he honestly believed it to be real.

Apparently some guy said so is all the proof you need, same with impeachable offenses.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top