Jump to content
gottaplan

The Trump Presidency

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Sir2geez said:

^A real patriot. 

 

And I got criticized for saying Trump supporters are anti-American.  WTF does being American even mean if you proudly support someone who casually undermines our very democracy? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now can we throw this POS in a locked room and throw away the room? Please??

 

 


"Save the planet. Move to the city." -- The Downtowner podcast

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am curious how Ram and EVD excuse the behavior of el presidente.  He looks up to dictators all over the world because they can kill people at the snap of their fingers. Then he has no problem taking information from a foreign government which was the whole point of the Mueller investigation!!  He and the white house obstructed so much that mueller could not prove conspiracy. Yesterday he said he would be against the CIA spying on Kim Jong Un. Today he said he would be ok with getting oppo research no matter if it came from Russia or Norway. How is any of this the slightest bit patriotic or considered being a good american?  Why do you want a dishonorable person being president?!?  This is the most damning and flabbergasting admission from trump.  Hopefully they lock up Don Jr for perjury if it comes to that. 

 

  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, KJP said:

Now can we throw this POS in a locked room and throw away the room? Please??

 

 

 

 

Well, he already got away with it once. He figures what the hell, why not do it again? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, audidave said:

I am curious how Ram and EVD excuse the behavior of el presidente.  

 

You're only curious because you think rationally.  Cultists do not and therefore, their behavior and thoughts and will not make sense.


Very Stable Genius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, DarkandStormy said:

"Why yes, I would collude with a hostile foreign power in 2020 to win reelection."

 

 

Obama and Clinton already set the precedent on this in 2016 when they accepted the Steele Dossier. That was information on the Democrats' opponent that originated with a foreign figure. If a similar situation arose in 2020, why should we expect Trump not to accept the information?

 

Personally, I'm always for transparency. If there's information to be known about someone who is attempting to help run the free world, I'd like to know about it before casting my vote. I don't know why Democrats are so afraid of this hypothetical information. It's like they're already laying the groundwork for their eventual denial of whatever dirt inevitably comes out about Biden (or whomever).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Ram23 said:

Obama and Clinton already set the precedent on this in 2016 when they accepted the Steele Dossier. That was information on the Democrats' opponent that originated with a foreign figure. If a similar situation arose in 2020, why should we expect Trump not to accept the information?

 

That's funny, I don't remember the details about the Steele Dossier being part of the campaign.


Very Stable Genius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Ram23 said:

 

Obama and Clinton already set the precedent on this in 2016 when they accepted the Steele Dossier. That was information on the Democrats' opponent that originated with a foreign figure. If a similar situation arose in 2020, why should we expect Trump not to accept the information?

 

Personally, I'm always for transparency. If there's information to be known about someone who is attempting to help run the free world, I'd like to know about it before casting my vote. I don't know why Democrats are so afraid of this hypothetical information. It's like they're already laying the groundwork for their eventual denial of whatever dirt inevitably comes out about Biden (or whomever).

 

giphy.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^^^poor conflating. Steele dossier was a paid for series of memos. That was the campaign doing oppo research and reaching out to understand what Trump has been doing in Russia for the past 30-40 years. So that was NOT the UK government helping Clinton. The guy is a former spy and had a lot of sources still and most of what he sussed out has proved true.  

  Trump actively sought out Russia’s help in multiple ways and multiple meetings with multiple people in his campaign.  The trump campaign was and is in bed with Russia.  That is why he bends over for putin.  The guy needs impeached. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Ram23 said:

 

Obama and Clinton already set the precedent on this in 2016 when they accepted the Steele Dossier. That was information on the Democrats' opponent that originated with a foreign figure. If a similar situation arose in 2020, why should we expect Trump not to accept the information?

 

Personally, I'm always for transparency. If there's information to be known about someone who is attempting to help run the free world, I'd like to know about it before casting my vote. I don't know why Democrats are so afraid of this hypothetical information. It's like they're already laying the groundwork for their eventual denial of whatever dirt inevitably comes out about Biden (or whomever).

 

First, let's remember that Steele was originally hired by Republicans during the primary to investigate Trump's activities in Russia, and once Trump was the nominee they dropped it. 

 

Clinton only continued what the Republicans started.  And investigating an opponent's business activities and hiring consultants to look for dirt on an opponent is something politicians do all the time.  In fact, as you suggested the public interest is served by bringing that information forward before an election. 

 

Second, Steele was not a representative of a foreign government.  That is a very very big distinction that you are overlooking.  Steele had nothing to gain from this report other than his consulting fee.  There was no precedent being set by using a foreign national to do research on a candidate's foreign activities.

 

Third, to say that Clinton and Obama "accepted" the Steele Dossier is misleading and inaccurate.  Steele himself sent the dossier to the FBI, and Clinton notified the FBI when she received it that it raised issues that should be investigated.  I'm really confused about why Republicans wouldn't want an investigation into credible allegations that a candidate might be compromised by a foreign government, particularly when that foreign government is Russia.

 

Fourth, I'm not sure what you think Democrats are afraid of.  Fear is a far more common motivator for Republicans.  The Democrats, unlike the Republicans, are concerned about foreign interference in our elections.  We do not want foreign governments to think that they can buy candidates or run ads in favor of one candidate or another or do anything else to even slightly tip the scales toward a candidate that they favor.  If Russia gets away with it, they may double down.  China may join in.  There's already too much money wasted in this country on politics rather than invested.  We want the unified mantra of the country to all foreign governments -- "keep out of our elections."  Why is that controversial?

 

Fifth, let's also remember that the Steele Dossier is not what started the FBI investigation into Russian interference in the election.  As stated in the Mueller report:

 

"And within a week of the release [of DNC documents by WikiLeaks], a foreign government informed the FBI about its May 2016 interaction with Papadopoulos and his statement that the Russian government could assist the Trump Campaign. On July 31, 2016, based on the foreign government reporting, the FBI opened an investigation into potential coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the Trump Campaign." Volume 1, p.6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ram23 said:

Personally, I'm always for transparency.

 

Make a pledge and don't vote for Trump until he releases his tax returns, then.  Or is that not how "transparency" works for conservatives?

Edited by DarkandStormy

Very Stable Genius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ram23 said:

 

Obama and Clinton already set the precedent on this in 2016 when they accepted the Steele Dossier. That was information on the Democrats' opponent that originated with a foreign figure. If a similar situation arose in 2020, why should we expect Trump not to accept the information?

 

I've seen on Fox News this is the rebuttal talking point for Trump's comments. 


The major difference is, the dossier was paid for via a Washington DC based research company--not a foreign government.   That company just happened to hire an ex-spy Brit.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ram23 said:

Obama and Clinton already set the precedent on this in 2016 when they accepted the Steele Dossier. That was information on the Democrats' opponent that originated with a foreign figure. If a similar situation arose in 2020, why should we expect Trump not to accept the information?

 

Personally, I'm always for transparency. If there's information to be known about someone who is attempting to help run the free world, I'd like to know about it before casting my vote. I don't know why Democrats are so afraid of this hypothetical information. It's like they're already laying the groundwork for their eventual denial of whatever dirt inevitably comes out about Biden (or whomever).

 

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/52/30121

 

"It shall be unlawful for a foreign national, directly or indirectly, to make a contribution or donation of money or other thing of value...in connection with a Federal, State, or local election."

 

You have revoked all privileges to ever talk to us about "law and order" again.


Very Stable Genius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Ram23 said:

 

Obama and Clinton already set the precedent on this in 2016 when they accepted the Steele Dossier. That was information on the Democrats' opponent that originated with a foreign figure. If a similar situation arose in 2020, why should we expect Trump not to accept the information?

 

Personally, I'm always for transparency. If there's information to be known about someone who is attempting to help run the free world, I'd like to know about it before casting my vote. I don't know why Democrats are so afraid of this hypothetical information. It's like they're already laying the groundwork for their eventual denial of whatever dirt inevitably comes out about Biden (or whomever).

 

So f**k American democracy, then?  Traitor.  Sorry, am I being too mean now?  I forget sometimes how PC we have to be with Trump supporters when they're advocating the destruction of American norms "because Hillary" or other BS lies.

Edited by jonoh81

Share this post


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

 

First, let's remember that Steele was originally hired by Republicans during the primary to investigate Trump's activities in Russia, and once Trump was the nominee they dropped it. 

 

Clinton only continued what the Republicans started.  And investigating an opponent's business activities and hiring consultants to look for dirt on an opponent is something politicians do all the time.  In fact, as you suggested the public interest is served by bringing that information forward before an election. 

 

Second, Steele was not a representative of a foreign government.  That is a very very big distinction that you are overlooking.  Steele had nothing to gain from this report other than his consulting fee.  There was no precedent being set by using a foreign national to do research on a candidate's foreign activities.

 

Third, to say that Clinton and Obama "accepted" the Steele Dossier is misleading and inaccurate.  Steele himself sent the dossier to the FBI, and Clinton notified the FBI when she received it that it raised issues that should be investigated.  I'm really confused about why Republicans wouldn't want an investigation into credible allegations that a candidate might be compromised by a foreign government, particularly when that foreign government is Russia.

 

Fourth, I'm not sure what you think Democrats are afraid of.  Fear is a far more common motivator for Republicans.  The Democrats, unlike the Republicans, are concerned about foreign interference in our elections.  We do not want foreign governments to think that they can buy candidates or run ads in favor of one candidate or another or do anything else to even slightly tip the scales toward a candidate that they favor.  If Russia gets away with it, they may double down.  China may join in.  There's already too much money wasted in this country on politics rather than invested.  We want the unified mantra of the country to all foreign governments -- "keep out of our elections."  Why is that controversial?

 

Fifth, let's also remember that the Steele Dossier is not what started the FBI investigation into Russian interference in the election.  As stated in the Mueller report:

 

"And within a week of the release [of DNC documents by WikiLeaks], a foreign government informed the FBI about its May 2016 interaction with Papadopoulos and his statement that the Russian government could assist the Trump Campaign. On July 31, 2016, based on the foreign government reporting, the FBI opened an investigation into potential coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the Trump Campaign." Volume 1, p.6

 

Much better responses than mine, but do you guys really think it matters to take the time to write all this out?  Ram doesn't care what the truth is.  He never has.  None of them do. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, jonoh81 said:

 

Much better responses than mine, but do you guys really think it matters to take the time to write all this out?  Ram doesn't care what the truth is.  He never has.  None of them do. 

 

<insert definition of insanity here>


Very Stable Genius

Share this post


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

 

<insert definition of insanity here>

 

There's still a lot of good intentions, trying to reason, trying to understand, trying to change minds.  I understand and empathize with the desire to reach out, but it's been 3 years.  They're not reaching back. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, eastvillagedon said:

someone refresh my memory: at what point in the 2016 campaign did George Clintonopolous ask Hillary about the Steele Dossier? I did a search and couldn't find anything. 

 

This has been covered ad nauseum in this thread (today, even) and this post either displays a lack of reading comprehension or a refusal to read other people's posts.  Either way, it's blatant trolling to dismiss previous points made so you can write a "gotcha" post.


Very Stable Genius

Share this post


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

I didn't know pointing out hypocrisy and double standards was considered "trolling," not that it really needs be pointed out since it's so blatant, except somehow still fails to register 

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

Engage in literally any post criticizing Trump and I will let it "register."


Very Stable Genius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Ram23 said:

Personally, I'm always for transparency. If there's information to be known about someone who is attempting to help run the free world, I'd like to know about it before casting my vote. I don't know why Democrats are so afraid of this hypothetical information. It's like they're already laying the groundwork for their eventual denial of whatever dirt inevitably comes out about Biden (or whomever).

 

LOL yeah ok. You voted for the guy who hasn't and won't release his tax returns and financial ties abroad. You supported an end to the Mueller investigation before it was wrapped up, convinced it was just a witch hunt. You support a president who wouldn't even sit for an interview with Mueller because his team knew he was literally incapable of not committing perjury in such a situation. You support a president who abuses executive privilege to avoid potentially damning information becoming part of the public record. You don't give a damn about transparency.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, audidave said:

I am curious how Ram and EVD excuse the behavior of el presidente.  He looks up to dictators all over the world because they can kill people at the snap of their fingers. Then he has no problem taking information from a foreign government which was the whole point of the Mueller investigation!!  He and the white house obstructed so much that mueller could not prove conspiracy. Yesterday he said he would be against the CIA spying on Kim Jong Un. Today he said he would be ok with getting oppo research no matter if it came from Russia or Norway. How is any of this the slightest bit patriotic or considered being a good american?  Why do you want a dishonorable person being president?!?  This is the most damning and flabbergasting admission from trump.  Hopefully they lock up Don Jr for perjury if it comes to that. 

 

  

 

audiodave,  Its real simple. As long as his policies negatively affect immigrants, those of color, Muslims, transgender and gays, they don’t care what he does otherwise.

 

That’s  why you never hear their argument as to why they support him. 

Edited by stpats44113

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, edale said:

LOL yeah ok. You voted for the guy who hasn't and won't release his tax returns and financial ties abroad. You supported an end to the Mueller investigation before it was wrapped up, convinced it was just a witch hunt. You support a president who wouldn't even sit for an interview with Mueller because his team knew he was literally incapable of not committing perjury in such a situation. You support a president who abuses executive privilege to avoid potentially damning information becoming part of the public record. You don't give a damn about transparency.

 

Ram and EVD are like Trump - usually just take the opposite of what they say and you've found the truth.


Very Stable Genius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, eastvillagedon said:

oops!

 

 

You know what, eff it, I'm feeling generous.  I'll engage in good faith even though you have never once on this site done the same.

 

Are you a masochist?  Do you enjoy self-owning?  From your own clip there, at the end:

 

Quote

Schiff: Thank you very much.  We'll be back in touch, through our staff, to make arrangements to obtain these materials for our committee and the FBI.

 


Very Stable Genius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/448323-10-cities-say-trump-owes-them-money-from-rally-security

 

Quote

Ten U.S. cities claim President Trump’s campaign committee has not yet reimbursed them for public-safety costs associated with his presidential and campaign rallies, according to the Center for Public Integrity (CPI).

 

The cities, which include Mesa, Ariz., Erie, Pa., and Green Bay, Wis., have submitted a total of $841,219, with some of the invoices dating back to before his election in 2016.

 

Wonder if our dumba** "business" president made his "fortune" by simply not paying people for their services.  Hmmm.


Very Stable Genius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sanders out. Normally, I'd be happy about something like this, but the depressing reality is that there is clearly an even bigger lickspittle lined up.

Edited by roman totale XVII

And they reckon that the last thing she saw in her life was
Sting, singing on the roof of the Barbican

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, roman totale XVII said:

Sanders out. Normally, I'd be happy about something like this, but the depressing reality is that there is clearly an even bigger lickspittle lined up.

 

Trump thinks he's been President for 3 1/2 years according to his tweet.

 

His brain is mush.


Very Stable Genius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...