Will Trump win again???

[radsisrad]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

Respect your opinion, but if you think Trump is a very good president, then your wrong because the economy is one factor out of many more that make a president successful. Also if you look at the facts, most democrats did not support impeachment until Ukraine.

The thing that does it for me is just imagining Obama doing/saying even 2 or 3 things out of the 100's of controversies, gaffes, racist statements, scandals, illegal activity- or him having several member of his camp being arrested on corruption. Obama would've been more viciously attacked than Trump is by the left.
If you dont believe me, remember the birther, Michelle's sleeves, and the most disgusting of political scandals since watergate-

"A nightmare" "Shocking to a lot of people" "A sign to enemies he's a wimp": @ChrislHayes remembers the days when presidential scandals involved conservatives freaking out about Obama's tan suit. https://on.msnbc.com/328AgpE

Your post is borderline incoherent. I never mentioned the economy, as it's not my top priority, but yes - Trump's general bullishness has been a booster for the economy (i.e., market psychology).

This absurdity about Ukraine is a national joke. Even if Trump did all of which he's being accused, he still did nothing wrong. If he sees a potentially corrupt milieu toward which our money is being channeled, it's perfectly within his duties to examine it. Slapping a latin moniker onto that doesn't make it any more objectively ominous. And that's apart from the clowncar of "witnesses" assembled by Schiff.

LOL at the Obama line of argument. I do remember his having described his grandmother as a "typical white person." Try saying that with the word "black" substituted for "white." Speaking of illegal activity, the Dream Act was unconstitutional: "Under our Constitution, Congress has plenary authority over immigration. The president only has the authority delegated to him by Congress – and Congress has never given the president the power to provide a pseudo-amnesty and government benefits to illegal aliens."

And guilt by association is not an argument.

 

[Dr.J.D]

Your post is borderline incoherent. I never mentioned the economy, as it's not my top priority, but yes - Trump's general bullishness has been a booster for the economy (i.e., market psychology).

This absurdity about Ukraine is a national joke. Even if Trump did all of which he's being accused, he still did nothing wrong. If he sees a potentially corrupt milieu toward which our money is being channeled, it's perfectly within his duties to examine it. Slapping a latin moniker onto that doesn't make it any more objectively ominous. And that's apart from the clowncar of "witnesses" assembled by Schiff.

LOL at the Obama line of argument. I do remember his having described his grandmother as a "typical white person." Try saying that with the word "black" substituted for "white." Speaking of illegal activity, the Dream Act was unconstitutional: "Under our Constitution, Congress has plenary authority over immigration. The president only has the authority delegated to him by Congress – and Congress has never given the president the power to provide a pseudo-amnesty and government benefits to illegal aliens."

And guilt by association is not an argument.

There is a stigma around being black, NOT one around being white. You sound like the loser who thing saying black lives matter is racist. That is the truth in general but that doesn't even apply here because you utterly failed to put the context- “Barack Obama said specifically that he didn’t believe his grandmother harbored any racial animosity, but that her fears were understandable and typical of those often shared by her generation,” Yes older generations in the U.S. have a history with discrimination. . That is a far cry from sh**-hole nation, not to mention dozens more racist, racially insensitive comments. Next time when trying something like that put the context. Not to mention- Trump’s World Still Faces 16 Known Criminal Probes

Also the constiution does give power to the president to enforce the laws, and does not explicitly state that the president is barred from making decisions regarding immigration. The executive is allowed to make executive decisions.

Try to guess who made this order-
"Border Security and Immigration Enforcement Improvements"

im really sorry, but Obama is going to go down as a much more popular president than trump in the coming decades. Heck Bill Clinton will, and maybe, just maybe Bush too.

 

[radsisrad]

A. Is English your first language?

B. Your laundry-list style of argumentation reeks of desperation.

C. There are countries that are absolutely ****holes relative to this one, and people who've lived both there and here don't deny that in the slightest.

 

[Dr.J.D]

A. Is English your first language?

B. Your laundry-list style of argumentation reeks of desperation.

C. There are countries that are absolutely ****holes relative to this one, and people who've lived both there and here don't deny that in the slightest.

A. No, but schooled you to the point where you couldn't respond to my arguments.

B. No not really, but kinda refuted everything you said.

C. He said why are people coming here from ****hole countries and not Norway.
“Why do we need more Haitians, take them out,” he said, according to sources. Someone else in the room responded: “Because if you do, it will be obvious why.”
Yeahyuh, pretty friggin obvious the difference between Haiti and those "nice Scandinavian countries"

 

[Dr.J.D]

says I have a laundry list then gives A. B. C.
unintelligent and reeks of desperation.

 

[deleted87051]

It's not mistaken, you are comparing apples to dog sh|t. Your example of Al Franken resigning is one of damage control so the DNC can maximize their chances of retaining/gaining power, not an example of giving up power due to a misdeed, quite the opposite... In fact, when he resigned he was replaced with another democrat senator, not a republican. It's more akin to Trump immediately firing Flynn when it came to light he had engaged in misdeeds and lied about it. Oh wow, does that now make Trump very moral and righteous just like the DNC for forcing out Franken? Or is it just damage control so that he has a better chance at retaining power? Come back to me when the democrats willfully throw a presidential election because their candidate is dishonest or corrupt. It won't happen. Hillary Clinton is one of the most corrupt and dishonest politicians in US history and not only received the backing of her party, but received more votes in the election than Trump did. Your darling democrats aren't as morally steadfast as you'd delusionally like to believe.



The fact that the vast majority of successful people and successful companies (including many companies that always back DNC candidates) hate their policies does not mean they must be good candidates... it's more like a red flag that their policies are not conducive to personal or economic success.

Also Warren's whole career was leveraged on a flagrant lie about her heritage, she also just recently got caught lying at a rally about her kids only attending public schools. It later came to light her son went to Kirby Hall, a private school. This is your best example of an honest democrat?



Really? This is one of the most absurd claims I've heard in a long time. So let's see here... One of the biggest complaints about the democratic party is that they are just too ethical and moral? I follow politics extremely closely and have NEVER heard such an absurdly out of touch claim being made by anyone, yet you're saying this is one of biggest and most common complaints about the party?! Lol, please. When asked at a job interview what your biggest weakness is I'm guessing you're the guy who responds with "well I guess sometimes I just work too hard and am too loyal and devoted to my employer". Excuse me while I suppress my gag reflex. First of all there is no universe where a widely cited weakness of a politician is "being too honest and moral". Those are like the elusive unicorn traits of politics where every voter wants it but no politicians have it. Secondly, the democrats are very far from honest or moral (as are the republicans and politicians in general) and would certainly not have such a problem of just being "too damn ethical". Thirdly, just wow dude.

HRC was a highly unpopular candidate in 2016 even among Democrats and many Democrats stayed home on Election Day because they thought there was no way Trump could win. That won’t be the case in 2020.

Regarding Warren, she is a member of the ruling class. There is a larger divide between the ruling class and the worker bees than there is between republicans and democrats. Their kids will always go to private school.

 

[Dr.J.D]

HRC was a highly unpopular candidate in 2016 even among Democrats and many Democrats stayed home on Election Day because they thought there was no way Trump could win. That won’t be the case in 2020.

Regarding Warren, she is a member of the ruling class. There is a larger divide between the ruling class and the worker bees than there is between republicans and democrats. Their kids will always go to private school.

If your looking to go progressive, Bernie is the popular choice. Moderate, probably Biden or maybe Kamala. I think it will come down to Biden and Bernie kind of like last except for the baggage that came with HRC. Biden just needs to get his head in the game like he did in 2012 in debates with Paul Ryan, and Bernie would do well against Trump I think.

 

[deleted87051]

10 Things Most Americans Don't Know About America

Despite living in one of the wealthiest and most advanced socieities in history, Americans know very little about themselves and the rest of the world.

getpocket.com

“In fact, economic mobility is lower in the US than almost every other developed country, and somewhere on par with Slovenia and Chile — not exactly the gold standards of economic opportunity in the world (no offense to my Slovenian and Chilean readers). And other Anglo countries such as Australia and Canada have far more economic mobility, as well as those icky socialist countries like Denmark, Sweden, and Finland.

The intergenerational correlation of wealth between fathers and son’s shows how closely a male’s wealth matches his father’s wealth and is used as a measure of economic mobility. Note that the higher the intergenerational correlation, the lower the economic mobility. Source: Economic Policy Institute”

 

[Apollyon]

I was gonna respond to a bunch of nonsense in your post but I’m gonna save my breath. The fact that you think Al Franken could’ve been president and that HRC wasn’t corrupt [emoji23][emoji23][emoji23][emoji23] make this post too laughable to give a credible response.

Ya know, someone recently on the radio opined interestingly about liberals and summed it up nicely when they said “leftists/liberals don’t have any understanding that they are partisan, they merely think they are right and everyone else is clueless.” You think me and Mikkel and others live in some conservative clueless bubble and you simply espouse normal, correct, and moral thinking. I think the true reality is that you live in a leftist bubble, it’s just such a big bubble you aren’t aware your in it.

Happy Saturday Vec Man [emoji57]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You are SUCH a deplorable!!

/sarcasm

 

[vector2]

Ya know, someone recently on the radio opined interestingly about liberals.........it’s just such a big bubble you aren’t aware your in it.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If only you were mentally capable of realizing the irony of your post.

Also, it's spelled "you're"

 

[BoolaHI]

Want to know why MM, MP or Rudy will NOT testify even though they have first hand testimony to provide and could totally correct the previously given record - because they would commit perjury.

About 100 pages of newly released State Department documents show Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and President Trump's personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani had at least two phone conversations in the weeks before a U.S. ambassador in Ukraine was removed from her post.

Additionally, the files show a White House aide played a role in connecting Giuliani's team with officials at the State Department so that Giuliani could get on Pompeo's official call schedule in late March.

The conversations between Pompeo and Giuliani took place around the time Giuliani and two of his associates were working to push U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch from office. She was recalled from her post in Kyiv in May.

 

[Mikkel]

Want to know why MM, MP or Rudy will NOT testify even though they have first hand testimony to provide and could totally correct the previously given record - because they would commit perjury.

About 100 pages of newly released State Department documents show Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and President Trump's personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani had at least two phone conversations in the weeks before a U.S. ambassador in Ukraine was removed from her post.

Additionally, the files show a White House aide played a role in connecting Giuliani's team with officials at the State Department so that Giuliani could get on Pompeo's official call schedule in late March.

The conversations between Pompeo and Giuliani took place around the time Giuliani and two of his associates were working to push U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch from office. She was recalled from her post in Kyiv in May.

I feel sorry for you.

 

[BoolaHI]

I feel sorry for you.

Why? Im big black and beautiful. And I got the truth.....what u got?

 

[radsisrad]

I feel sorry for you.

All of these complex schemes and hallucinations employed as coping mechanisms to deal with the fact that the Left is so insane that Trump is, indeed, preferable to Democrat candidates.

 

[Leon'sMom]

"Jack Biden and Jill Schiff went up the hill to fetch a pail of water (US tax payer money) Jack Biden fell down and broke his crown, and Jill Schiff came tumbling after."

What is that? A NY Knicks logo with...? Interesting.

 

[ShockIndex]

If your looking to go progressive, Bernie is the popular choice. Moderate, probably Biden or maybe Kamala. I think it will come down to Biden and Bernie kind of like last except for the baggage that came with HRC. Biden just needs to get his head in the game like he did in 2012 in debates with Paul Ryan, and Bernie would do well against Trump I think.

Perhaps his handlers will get the Aricept dose right.

 

[Mikkel]

All of these complex schemes and hallucinations employed as coping mechanisms to deal with the fact that the Left is so insane that Trump is, indeed, preferable to Democrat candidates.

They didn't learn their lesson after the Russian collusion hoax, and instead are doubling down on their insane rantings. We literally just finished two weeks of Schiff making his case, but with absolutely zero evidence of any crime committed.

It's really sad.

 

[vector2]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Lol, potus nakedly promoting his shtty resort and then wondering why people thought he would profit even if done at cost (whatever that it). Looks like trump got his iPhone back and is tweeting from the toilet this morning.

 

[radsisrad]

They didn't learn their lesson after the Russian collusion hoax, and instead are doubling down on their insane rantings. We literally just finished two weeks of Schiff making his case, but with absolutely zero evidence of any crime committed.

It's really sad.

To be fair, the Democrats managed to create the most expensive game of telephone in history. Records in stupidity are still records, eh?

 

[radsisrad]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Lol, potus nakedly promoting his shtty resort and then wondering why people thought he would profit even if done at cost (whatever that it). Looks like trump got his iPhone back and is tweeting from the toilet this morning.

Alternatively, pointing out that the resort would have been a fine place to host the summit, and reiterating the point that it (ostensibly) would have saved the country money.

 

[vector2]

This has been a great page to see a bunch of people circle jerking each other about evidence when Rudy, Bolton, Pompeo, nor Trump have testified, and they continue to block the release of pertinent documents from State and the WH.

I'm sure you won't, but try to keep your likely future hypocrisy in mind the next time there's a dem scandal and all the main players stonewall Congress instead of testifying for 11 hrs like hrc did.

 

[vector2]

Alternatively, pointing out that the resort would have been a fine place to host the summit, and reiterating the point that it (ostensibly) would have saved the country money.

Alternatively alternatively, no one should host a G7 at a shtty bedbud infested resort in MIAMI in JUNE. Furthermore, Trump has never released detailed financial information about anything and I'm sure none of you hacks would care if he ever released information proving the event was done at cost. Even at cost, the financial value from the publicity and advertising from having 7 world leaders and their entourages stay at your resort is tremendous.

And let's not forget that there was never any vetting done on any other resort but Doral because no one in the administration could state a single other potential candidate lol.

 

[Matty44]

If only you were mentally capable of realizing the irony of your post.

Also, it's spelled "you're"

Really? You’ve dropped to the level of typo-Nazi now?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Matty44]

Alternatively alternatively, no one should host a G7 at a shtty bedbud infested resort in MIAMI in JUNE. Furthermore, Trump has never released detailed financial information about anything and I'm sure none of you hacks would care if he ever released information proving the event was done at cost. Even at cost, the financial value from the publicity and advertising from having 7 world leaders and their entourages stay at your resort is tremendous.

And let's not forget that there was never any vetting done on any other resort but Doral because no one in the administration could state a single other potential candidate lol.

LOLOLOLOL. HE SAID BED BUDS!!!!!!!!

OMG OMG OMG OMG
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[emoji23][emoji28][emoji23][emoji28][emoji23][emoji28][emoji23][emoji28][emoji23][emoji28][emoji23][emoji28][emoji23][emoji23][emoji23]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[radsisrad]

Alternatively alternatively, no one should host a G7 at a shtty bedbud infested resort in MIAMI in JUNE. Furthermore, Trump has never released detailed financial information about anything and I'm sure none of you hacks would care if he ever released information proving the event was done at cost. Even at cost, the financial value from the publicity and advertising from having 7 world leaders and their entourages stay at your resort is tremendous.

And let's not forget that there was never any vetting done on any other resort but Doral because no one in the administration could state a single other potential candidate lol.

You're whinging about the details. I'm not debating the specifics of which venue would have been a better overall deal; I'm pointing out that what you view as promotion of his resort could just as well be viewed as an e-poke of those who made it impossible for an ostensibly-cost-saving option to be used.

 

[vector2]

 

[radsisrad]

LOLOLOLOL. HE SAID BED BUDS!!!!!!!!

OMG OMG OMG OMG
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[emoji23][emoji28][emoji23][emoji28][emoji23][emoji28][emoji23][emoji28][emoji23][emoji28][emoji23][emoji28][emoji23][emoji23][emoji23]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

>One person sues for bedbug bites

>vector: "shtty bedbug infested [sic] resort"

 

[vector2]

You're whinging about the details. I'm not debating the specifics of which venue would have been a better overall deal; I'm pointing out that what you view as promotion of his resort could just as well be viewed as an e-poke of those who made it impossible for an ostensibly-cost-saving option to be used.

I don't care if Trump did it for negative cost- this goes to the heart of the issue of what conflict of interest is and what corruption is, and you guys are so deep into the personality cult that you will never, ever understand why Mitt Romney put his assets in a blind trust, or why Carter sold his peanut farm.


Presumably you're all smart enough to understand why a radiologist shouldn't self-refer another pain doc's patient to his own group for an interventional procedure, but apparently your brains just turn off whenever it's anything Trump.

 

[Mikkel]

This has been a great page to see a bunch of people circle jerking each other about evidence

Did you watch Sondleins's testimony? He said he presumed.

Sounds to me like a bunch of diplomats talking amongst themselves and making s*** up as they went along.

 

[BoolaHI]

They didn't learn their lesson after the Russian collusion hoax, and instead are doubling down on their insane rantings. We literally just finished two weeks of Schiff making his case, but with absolutely zero evidence of any crime committed.

It's really sad.

Hey doofus, it is political proceeding not a criminal one, future the House, by the very instruction of the constitution and subsequent Supreme Court cases has the both legal autonomy and jurisdiction to create their own rules of the proceeding.

Maybe a basic 7th grade civics class can help you in this most basic understanding or maybe don’t comment on things in which you obviously have
no knowledge.

 

[Mikkel]

I don't care if Trump did it for negative cost- this goes to the heart of the issue of what conflict of interest is and what corruption is, and you guys are so deep into the personality cult that you will never, ever understand why Mitt Romney put his assets in a blind trust, or why Carter sold his peanut farm.

If he hosted it at the White House, you'd say it was a conflict of interest because it increases the value of the Trump brand.

Funny how Pelosi got rich off her power...

 

[Leon'sMom]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Mikkel]

Hey doofus, it is political proceeding not a criminal one, future the House, by the very instruction of the constitution and subsequent Supreme Court cases has the both legal autonomy and jurisdiction to create their own rules of the proceeding.

Maybe a basic 7th grade civics class can help you in this most basic understanding or maybe don’t comment on things in which you obviously have
no knowledge.

Have fun with a Senate trial with both Bidens testifying to their corruption schemes during the Obama administration.

 

[Matty44]

Did you watch Sondleins's testimony? He said he presumed.

Sounds to me like a bunch of diplomats talking amongst themselves and making s*** up as they went along.

Didn’t you see Mr Boo’s professional opinion on presumption? It’s just as good as facts if I recall his analysis correctly [emoji3166]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[radsisrad]

This has been a great page to see a bunch of people circle jerking each other about evidence when Rudy, Bolton, Pompeo, nor Trump have testified, and they continue to block the release of pertinent documents from State and the WH.

I'm sure you won't, but try to keep your likely future hypocrisy in mind the next time there's a dem scandal and all the main players stonewall Congress instead of testifying for 11 hrs like hrc did.

They also blocked witnesses Republicans wanted to call, from what I understand.

It doesn't matter. Regardless of what happened, there's nothing wrong with Trump investigating potential corruption where there are signs of it, and in politics, there's always give-and-take ("quid pro quo", if you want to be like a lawyer and use Latin to make yourself sound more intelligent than you really are).

The entire premise of the impeachment hearings is a sham, and though it's funny when one observes the clownshow on TV, things become a lot darker on consideration of the dynamics at play. The same liars and *****ic politicians who brought us the Russia hoax, the hookers-peeing-on-Trump fantasy, the 25th Amendment scheme, and the supposed constitutional challenges to Trump's travel restrictions (which were proven to be hogwash, as Trump has every authority to enforce the bans) know that they can sell a massive pile a manure to Americans with the support of media that drum the propaganda into our ears day and night.

 

[BoolaHI]

Have fun with a Senate trial with both Bidens testifying to their corruption schemes during the Obama administration.

A large point of critical observation from Rs is the lack of first hand testimony (albeit that indictments can be typically advanced on hearsay) - so why are the Rs that can provide first hand testimony refusing - perjury!

 

[vector2]

They also blocked witnesses Republicans wanted to call, from what I understand.

Rudy, Bolton, Pompeo, and Trump are under lawful Congressional subpoena. They are ignoring these subpoenas, which is essentially something unprecedented, as all of the players in the Nixon saga testified, everyone in the Clinton saga including Clinton himself testified, hrc testified for Benghazi. STFU about no evidence if you're going to block the physical evidence and the testimony from people who were in the room.

It doesn't matter. Regardless of what happened, there's nothing wrong with Trump investigating potential corruption where there are signs of it, and in politics, there's always give-and-take

Except there is no evidence that this is what Trump was doing. Trump released what he thought was an exonerating earlier rough transcript of an April call between himself and Z.

---------
The rough transcript of the April 21 call differs significantly from the way the White House had initially described the conversation on the day that it happened.

"President Trump underscored the unwavering support of the United States for Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity – within its internationally recognized borders – and expressed his commitment to work together with President-elect Zelenskyy and the Ukrainian people to implement reforms that strengthen democracy, increase prosperity, and root out corruption," the press statement said.


But in the rough transcript, Trump mentions neither U.S. support for Ukraine in its fight over territory with Russia, nor Ukraine's effort to address corruption.

White House Releases Rough Transcript Of Trump's First Call With Zelenskiy

The White House released a rough transcript of a phone call Trump made to Ukraine's just-elected leader in April. It differs in key areas from how the White House described the call at the time.

www.npr.org

----------------------------

He's so worried about corruption that he doesn't mention it at all in the April call??? Yeah, OK chief. And then when he finally does want to "talk about corruption," it's only one obscure company in the Ukraine that Rudy put him onto, that just coincidentally Hunter Biden happens to be involved in?

Try to be less credulous, cause your current level is embarrassing.

 

[vector2]

POTUS is currently best friends with MBS, Kim Jong Un, Vladimir Putin, Rodrigo Duterte, Recep Erdogan and Viktor Orban. He is also well-tied with Roy Cohn, Roger Stone, and Paul Manafort.


But please, do go on about how much Trump cares about corruption. 🙄

 

[BoolaHI]

Didn’t you see Mr Boo’s professional opinion on presumption? It’s just as good as facts if I recall his analysis correctly [emoji3166]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Didn’t you see Mr Boo’s professional opinion on presumption? It’s just as good as facts if I recall his analysis correctly

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You obviously have nary any understanding of the law. And you misquoted me— this is what I said: presumption as applied to the law of evidence, can be made without the aid of proof in some situations. Raising a presumption shifts the burden of proof from one party to the opposing party. Hence, an example of presumption without basic facts is presumption of innocence.

Like I said, maybe you should start studying for the LSAT so you don’t sound like a complete dolt in these inherent legal matters.

 

[Leon'sMom]

They also blocked witnesses Republicans wanted to call, from what I understand.

It doesn't matter. Regardless of what happened, there's nothing wrong with Trump investigating potential corruption where there are signs of it, and in politics, there's always give-and-take ("quid pro quo", if you want to be like a lawyer and use Latin to make yourself sound more intelligent than you really are).

The entire premise of the impeachment hearings is a sham, and though it's funny when one observes the clownshow on TV, things become a lot darker on consideration of the dynamics at play. The same liars and *****ic politicians who brought us the Russia hoax, the hookers-peeing-on-Trump fantasy, the 25th Amendment scheme, and the supposed constitutional challenges to Trump's travel restrictions (which were proven to be hogwash, as Trump has every authority to enforce the bans) know that they can sell a massive pile a manure to Americans with the support of media that drum the propaganda into our ears day and night.

It is ALL a big sham---a big, EXPENSIVE sham. Think of all of the time and US tax payer money that has been utterly wasted on this BS. What was it? 2.5 years and 40 million for the Mueller Russia sham? Now this Ukraine sham? How much is this costing you and me? What does Schiff and company care about how much time and focus is on this BS sham? They're getting paid, regardless of what they do or do not accomplish for the American people.

What about the opportunity cost of the things that are not getting done by Congress? How much is delaying USMCA and RX drug pricing legislation costing the American people? I've seen people here cry over the poor American farmers who are losing money due to China sanctions, but they don't seem to understand that a lack of USMCA passage is also hurting the farmers. Where's the outrage? I've seen people here cry about how healthcare costs are hurting people, and here we have a chance to lower RX prices, and no outrage?

Trump's going to tank the stock market!...WRONG.
Trump's going to get us into a war with North Korea!...WRONG.
Trump's going to get us into a war with Iran!...WRONG.
Trump's.....blah, blah, blah....WRONG, WRONG, WRONG.

When somebody LIES to you CONSTANTLY, why would you believe them?! The media is complicit in all of this. And there will be evidence to prove their involvement. People need to wake up!

 

[deleted171991]

When somebody LIES to you CONSTANTLY, why would you believe them?! The media is complicit in all of this. And there will be evidence to prove their involvement. People need to wake up!

Are you talking about Trump and Fox News?

 

[vector2]

---------------------
Trump grants clemency to troops in three controversial war crimes cases

President Donald Trump on Friday granted clemency to three controversial military figures embroiled in charges of war crimes, arguing the moves will give troops “the confidence to fight” without worrying about potential legal overreach.

Army 1st Lt. Clint Lorance, convicted of second degree murder in the death of two Afghans, was given a full pardon from president for the crimes. Army Maj. Mathew Golsteyn, who faced murder charges next year for a similar crime, was also given a full pardon for those alleged offenses.

Special Warfare Operator Chief Edward Gallagher, who earlier this fall was acquitted of a string of alleged war crimes, had his rank restored to Chief Petty Officer by the president.
...
While Gallagher was acquitted of murder and obstruction of justice charges in July, a panel of his peers recommended he be reduced in grade for posing with the body of a detainee, a crime he never denied.

Lorance’s case dates back to a 2012 deployment to Afghanistan, when he ordered his soldiers to fire on three unarmed men riding a motorcycle near their patrol. Members of his platoon testified against him at a court-martial trial, describing Lorance as over-zealous and the Afghans as posing no real threat.

He was sentenced to 19 years in prison at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas. In recent years, Lorance and his family had waged a long campaign against his sentence, and found a receptive ear in Trump.

Golsteyn’s case had not yet been decided. He was scheduled for a December trial on charges he murdered an alleged Taliban bomb maker, and burned his remains in a trash pit during a 2010 deployment with 3rd Special Forces Group. Trump’s action effectively puts an end to that legal case before any verdicts were rendered.

Trump grants clemency to troops in three controversial war crimes cases

POTUS intervenes in the cases of two Army officers and a Navy SEAL.

www.militarytimes.com

---------------------

These people committed clear-cut crimes, were reported by their fellow soldiers, convicted by a jury of their fellow soldiers in a trial overseen by a military judge, and Trump is overturning these convictions for purely political reasons. Absolutely shameful. What kind of precedent does this set vis a vis the chain of command? One can now violate any part of the Uniform Code of Military Justice as long as you think the president will rule in your favor?


It's just one more piece of evidence that Trump doesn't give a **** about the law, be it civilian or military.

 

[BoolaHI]

And Trump is so loved and supported within his own party — not.

Who’s in Charge Here? | National Review

Trump is supposed to be, but it is far from obvious that he is.

www.nationalreview.com

 

[radsisrad]

Are you talking about Trump and Fox News?

Trump's not asking his supporters to believe him. He's there to do a job and let the results speak for themselves.

So far, I'd give him a B+/A-, and I suspect that I'd be giving him an A+ if he hadn't faced the obstruction he has for the past three years.

 

[Dr.J.D]

They didn't learn their lesson after the Russian collusion hoax, and instead are doubling down on their insane rantings. We literally just finished two weeks of Schiff making his case, but with absolutely zero evidence of any crime committed.

It's really sad.

Whats really sad is Quid Pro Quo was proven several times during the hearings

 

[Dr.J.D]

Trump's not asking his supporters to believe him. He's there to do a job and let the results speak for themselves.

So far, I'd give him a B+/A-, and I suspect that I'd be giving him an A+ if he hadn't faced the obstruction he has for the past three years.

That doesnt even make sense. How does your grade of him go down because you think Democrats are out to get him. Zero rationale. Thats like me saying Obamas grade went down because the GOP since day one tried to delegitimize his presidency with conspiracies.
big oof

 

[vector2]

That doesnt even make sense. How does your grade of him go down because you think Democrats are out to get him. Zero rationale. Thats like me saying Obamas grade went down because the GOP since day one tried to delegitimize his presidency with conspiracies.
big oof

They're in a cult, man. Look at this:

------
Building the wall
Mexico paying for it
Repealing obamacare
Replacing obamacare
Lowering healthcare prices / % of GDP
Prescription drug prices
Bringing back coal jobs
Making China bow down in fear by labeling them a currency manipulator
Helping instead of hurting midwest farmers
Replacing NAFTA (USMCA is signed but has still not been ratified yet by all the countries)
Stopping the opioid problem
Tax break helping the middle class and not mostly rich ppl
Implementing a $1T infrastructure plan


As far as DRAIN THE SWAMP:

Azar- Eli Lilly
Mnuchin - Goldman
Cohn - Goldman
Kudlow - Wall St
Ross - Private equity
Esper - Raytheon
McMahon - WWE
DeVos - Amway/Private equity
Tillerson - Exxon

Manafort - jail
Cohen - jail
Flynn - jail
Gates - jail
Papadopoulos - jail
Price - insider trading
Zinke - graft
Pruitt - graft
Giuliani - under investigation, his two goons - indicted
Pompeo- lied on national tv
Mulvaney- lied on national tv
Perry - dumb as a brick, resigned immediately when Ukraine scandal broke
----

You have to be a hardcore, braindead top 5% MAGA'er to look at that list of broken promises and swamp creatures and come up with B+/A-. Let's also not forget that the GOP controlled Congress between 2016 and 2018.

 

[radsisrad]

That doesnt even make sense. How does your grade of him go down because you think Democrats are out to get him. Zero rationale. Thats like me saying Obamas grade went down because the GOP since day one tried to delegitimize his presidency with conspiracies.
big oof

You're not very bright, but I'll indulge you anyway.

I'm grading his performance mostly regarding what he's actually done. There's a whole lot that he hasn't accomplished or even tried, due to his America-First agenda being thwarted by traitors on both the Republican and the Democrat sides, and my suspicion is that if his frankly moderate visions had been worked with civilly, he'd be at >90% approval. But since we don't have E-Verify, slashing of legal immigration to 50-100k/year limited to people who are financially secure, deportation of all illegals, and a physical barrier supplemented with drone technology, I can't give him an A+.

 

[Dr.J.D]

You're not very bright, but I'll indulge you anyway.

I'm grading his performance mostly regarding what he's actually done. There's a whole lot that he hasn't accomplished or even tried, due to his America-First agenda being thwarted by traitors on both the Republican and the Democrat sides, and my suspicion is that if his frankly moderate visions had been worked with civilly, he'd be at >90% approval. But since we don't have E-Verify, slashing of legal immigration to 50-100k/year limited to people who are financially secure, deportation of all illegals, and a physical barrier supplemented with drone technology, I can't give him an A+.

Just because people don't believe in your policies, doesn't mean they are traitors. Furthermore, his immigration policy is not moderate. Also it is laughable that you think his approval rating would be >90%, when it hasn't been that high in modern political history. P.S. Ad homs dont make you look smart

 

[Matty44]

You obviously have nary any understanding of the law. And you misquoted me— this is what I said: presumption as applied to the law of evidence, can be made without the aid of proof in some situations. Raising a presumption shifts the burden of proof from one party to the opposing party. Hence, an example of presumption without basic facts is presumption of innocence.

Like I said, maybe you should start studying for the LSAT so you don’t sound like a complete dolt in these inherent legal matters.

You can fancy legal talk to us small uneducated folks all you want, but that doesn’t change the fact that, as you’ve mentioned numerous times, this isn’t a criminal trial. It’s a political trial and a trial in the eyes of the public. And everyone who sees a witness like Sondland say “oh yeah, I just presumed what Trump wanted” knows it is WAY different than him saying “Trump told me he wanted this.”

Legal talk yourself all you want, but you just sound like a partisan hack when you try to make it seem like Sondland’s presumptions mean anything substantial. Even shifty Schiff knows it was worthless.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk