Monoxide

The Trump Presidency (take 2)

141,269 posts in this topic

9 minutes ago, mdrake34 said:

We'll never see it.  The only question is will it be ****ing enough for GOP senators to consider impeachment.  Nothing in the past two years has shown me they'll do that, so Trump can only be voted out of office in 2020.

I want them to impeach him if Mueller had something. But you and I both know that's not the case for those of us with common sense have followed the evidence that has leaked out 

Year's from now you'll see this was more of an elaborate cover-up to protect Hillary and the Obama administration 

It was never about what Trump did, but what they could potentially pin on Trump and his campaign.

In the process  we ruined several people's lives with process crimes because you know the D and R thing.

When will McCabe get his 5am no knock raid from the FBI? Or Comey? I'll stop there because you know the rest of the names.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, mdrake34 said:

 

Attorney General William Barr is preparing to announce as early as next week the completion of Robert Mueller's Russia investigation, with plans for Barr to submit to Congress soon after a summary of Mueller's confidential report.

WTAF is this?

Barr will provide a SUMMARY of the report to Congress?

Why do I not have much confidence in Trump's hand picked, memo-drafting audition- Attorney General providing an accurate summary?

My only hopes is:

Mueller:  "Here's the report!"

Barr:  Is that EVERYTHING?

Mueller:  It SHOULD be.

Barr:  What's that document you just put in your pocket?

Mueller:  Oh . . . that's my last indictment.  I doubt I will need it.

Barr:  Who does it indict?

Mueller:  YOU.  Good luck with that summary.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, HolyMoses said:

Attorney General William Barr is preparing to announce as early as next week the completion of Robert Mueller's Russia investigation, with plans for Barr to submit to Congress soon after a summary of Mueller's confidential report.

WTAF is this?

Barr will provide a SUMMARY of the report to Congress?

Why do I not have much confidence in Trump's hand picked, memo-drafting audition- Attorney General providing an accurate summary?

My only hopes is:

Mueller:  "Here's the report!"

Barr:  Is that EVERYTHING?

Mueller:  It SHOULD be.

Barr:  What's that document you just put in your pocket?

Mueller:  Oh . . . that's my last indictment.  I doubt I will need it.

Barr:  Who does it indict?

Mueller:  YOU.  Good luck with that summary.

 

 

 

Assuming he's in front of a senate committee, and not a house committee, I suspect they will ask him what it contains, he responds

6d851f39cecbb8747fee8a020a7f4d1ea801c47e

 

They say "great, thanks!" and adjourn the hearing.

Big_Dog and HolyMoses like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, ♒Sn4tteRBoxXeR♒ said:

I'll take Kamala Harris if it means Trump will be indicted

Trump can't be indicted while in office.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, HolyMoses said:

Attorney General William Barr is preparing to announce as early as next week the completion of Robert Mueller's Russia investigation, with plans for Barr to submit to Congress soon after a summary of Mueller's confidential report.

WTAF is this?

Barr will provide a SUMMARY of the report to Congress?

Why do I not have much confidence in Trump's hand picked, memo-drafting audition- Attorney General providing an accurate summary?

My only hopes is:

Mueller:  "Here's the report!"

Barr:  Is that EVERYTHING?

Mueller:  It SHOULD be.

Barr:  What's that document you just put in your pocket?

Mueller:  Oh . . . that's my last indictment.  I doubt I will need it.

Barr:  Who does it indict?

Mueller:  YOU.  Good luck with that summary.

 

 

 

End result...Trump 2020

Hopefully, we never have to go through a farce like this again

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, WhenFalconsWin said:

End result...Trump 2020

Hopefully, we never have to go through a farce like this again

 

Which part is the farce?  Please be specific.  

How do you know?

Have you seen Mueller's report?

Let me ask you something:  Did you believe Clinton or Loretta Lynch when they said their tarmac conversation was about "golf and grandchildren"?  

Why would I believe Barr's summary of Mueller's report.

Finally, did ANYONE here, including Democrats, think that we should take Clinton and Lynch's word on their discussion?

 

Leon Troutsky likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, JayOzOne said:

When you say "Russian hookers", are you referring to the Congressional GOPee?

 

One of those old nimrods will leak the tape.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, WhenFalconsWin said:

 

That's rich. Fairfax said he didn't assault the women and Trump said he did. Don't recall you being as interested his indiscretions as you are in Fairfax's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, HolyMoses said:

Which part is the farce?  Please be specific.  

How do you know?

Have you seen Mueller's report?

Let me ask you something:  Did you believe Clinton or Loretta Lynch when they said their tarmac conversation was about "golf and grandchildren"?  

Why would I believe Barr's summary of Mueller's report.

Finally, did ANYONE here, including Democrats, think that we should take Clinton and Lynch's word on their discussion?

 

When we see the leaks from the report in the next few weeks I would appreciate an apology from you or at least an acknowledgement from you saying @WhenFalconsWin was right all along.

In the process I've been elaborating the entire time why I've thought this and you know it 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, WhenFalconsWin said:

When we see the leaks from the report in the next few weeks I would appreciate an apology from you or at least an acknowledgement from you saying @WhenFalconsWin was right all along.

In the process I've been elaborating the entire time why I've thought this and you know it 

This is why I don't engage with this guy.  And why I will probably put him back on ignore.  

I have no idea what he is talking about, and he dodges good faith questions.

The truth is:  No one know what is in the Mueller report.  All we KNOW is that he has guilty pleas, convictions, and indictments on the people at the highest level of his campaign for LYING ABOUT RUSSIA.  

 

Leon Troutsky likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, JayOzOne said:

That's rich. Fairfax said he didn't assault the women and Trump said he did. Don't recall you being as interested his indiscretions as you are in Fairfax's.

Kavanaugh?

I said early on Fairfax should have due process.

What is rich is the fake/scm disappearing on blackface/rape/blackface.

You won't be honest but, if this was the GOP IN Virginia this would be a 24/7 story for the fake/scm.

Don't deny that or we can just stop right here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, mdrake34 said:

Do you think it's a large enough, or at least loud enough, marginalized group to make a grassroots effort to get him to revisit his stance? 

Not being as educated as you on this particular topic, I don't know how the fact that this legislation was marketed at eradicating human trafficking, which I imagine everyone would agree is a laudable goal, masks the side effects on sex workers vs a more straight up draconian law aimed directly at criminalizing sex work without the broader goal of combating "human trafficking."  I think that makes this a very complicated situation, hence my reluctance to demonize any sponsors or even senators who just voted yes. 

Yes, the laws are intentionally written in such a way that if someone votes against them, those backing the bill can say "Look, this person supports human trafficking!" So it takes balls to do the right thing and vote against it.

The best way to address FOSTA-SESTA is through the courts. Trump's own Justice Department raised concerns about the bill before it passed. The ACLU hasn't been as proactive as I'd like on this and if that continues I will consider adjusting my donations downward. First, it's a clear violation of the 1st Amendment that impacts the entire internet, not just sex workers. Second, the ACLU claims to be a proponent of the decriminalization of sex work, as seen in these tweets from 2016 & 2017 and this Instagram post from last month's Women's March. The Women's March included repealing FOSTA-SESTA in their agenda:

7l0KUcM.jpg

 

vH0896Q.jpg

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Billy Ocean said:

The best way to address FOSTA-SESTA is through the courts.

IIRC, I think I asked if this was a possibility when you first started discussing it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, mdrake34 said:

IIRC, I think I asked if this was a possibility when you first started discussing it.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation (****) filed a federal lawsuit last summer, a judge from the District Court for the District of Columbia who was appointed by George W. Bush dismissed the ****'s constitutional challenge for lack of standing. As of January, 2019, the **** is appealing the dismissal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.