TrumPutinGate

#28,851
#28,851
0nelilreb said:
Now tell them about the inner cities and all those Trump people living there that’s attracted to him . I can just as easily go west from me , less than 2 miles , in the depressed and poor housing, dominated by blacks , and find all the less educated , liberal attracted , people I want to find . I love it when you people tell half the story .
Click to expand...
I was specifically speaking of this region. My point was that particular demographic has moved over to the Republican party. Before Trump, they were more likely to vote Democratic.

Get it now? Sorry to ruin your "gotcha" narrative with me
 
#28,852
#28,852
hUTch2002 said:
How is their ample evidence when the investigators actually said there is no actual evidence? They suspect it happened but don’t know for sure. Or are you talking about spending a whopping $300K on social media? There is zero evidence that a single vote was changed due to Russian interference. Even Obama said it was impossible, until of course the opposite stance was of benefit to him. Typical politician.
Click to expand...
You're confused
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mick
#28,853
#28,853
USAFgolferVol said:
I was specifically speaking of this region. My point was that particular demographic has moved over to the Republican party. Before Trump, they were more likely to vote Democratic.

Get it now? Sorry to ruin your "gotcha" narrative with me
Click to expand...

I got some bad news for you , it’s the progressive liberals that are causing a move not just fans of Trump . I didn’t have a gotcha ready I just know what’s around me , I don’t have to go around to small towns to find any and all manner of people .
 
#28,855
#28,855
Sandman 423 said:
With Clinton they were fishing and he should never have been put in the position to lie. They should never been allowed to ask him that question. I believe that is wrong.

Pacs should be done away with and the Candidate should be legally responsible for what their they oppo research and surrogates do. Maybe you don't send them to jail, just make them ineligible to be in public office.
Click to expand...
I disagree. His own actions put him in a position to be asked. Once asked in that setting he had a duty to answer truthfully.

Doing away with pacs is a first amendment issue. I’m not sure that would be constitutional.
 
#28,857
#28,857
Sandman 423 said:
With Clinton they were fishing and he should never have been put in the position to lie. They should never been allowed to ask him that question. I believe that is wrong.

Pacs should be done away with and the Candidate should be legally responsible for what their they oppo research and surrogates do. Maybe you don't send them to jail, just make them ineligible to be in public office.
Click to expand...
You think asking a man about his sexual activities with subordinate employees, during a deposition about sexually harassing a state employee while being governor, is not relevant questioning?
 
#28,859
#28,859
volfanhill said:
You think asking a man about his sexual activities with subordinate employees, during a deposition about sexually harassing a state employee while being governor, is not relevant questioning?
Click to expand...
Was that during the white water investigation? Wait sorry, wrong hook.

I remember when it all went down and it wasn’t as cut and dry as a sexual harassment case. The republicans were after him like the democrats are after Trump and it got us Freddie and Fannie.
 
#28,860
#28,860
Sandman 423 said:
Was that during the white water investigation? Wait sorry, wrong hook.

I remember when it all went down and it wasn’t as cut and dry as a sexual harassment case. The republicans were after him like the democrats are after Trump and it got us Freddie and Fannie.
Click to expand...
The republicans were after him. Long and short of it is Clinton was found to have lied during a deposition regarding Paula Jones lawsuit. That’s what he was impeached for. He never lied to Congress. He lied about sex with a subordinate, Monica, while being under oath in a deposition about sexually harassing Paula Jones, while she was a state employee, and he was Governor. I think we can both agree that’s a perfectly appropriate question. So really the question is do you think a POTUS should be removed from office if they are caught lying under oath.
 
#28,861
#28,861
volfanhill said:
The republicans were after him. Long and short of it is Clinton was found to have lied during a deposition regarding Paula Jones lawsuit. That’s what he was impeached for. He never lied to Congress. He lied about sex with a subordinate, Monica, while being under oath in a deposition about sexually harassing Paula Jones, while she was a state employee, and he was Governor. I think we can both agree that’s a perfectly appropriate question. So really the question is do you think a POTUS should be removed from office if they are caught lying under oath.
Click to expand...
I think he should not have answered. Once he lied he committed a crime, however I don’t think it was to the level that you remove a sitting president.
 
#28,868
#28,868
Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny 'poisoned'

Russian opposition figure Alexei Navalny is unconscious in hospital with suspected poisoning, his spokeswoman has said.

The anti-corruption campaigner fell ill during a flight and the plane made an emergency landing in Omsk, Kira Yarmysh said on Twitter.

She said they suspect that Mr Navalny was poisoned by something mixed into his tea.

Mr Navalny is a staunch critic of President Vladimir Putin.
Click to expand...
 
#28,870
#28,870
lawgator1 said:
Bipartisan Senate Intel report details Trump campaign contacts with Russia in 2016, adding to Mueller findings - CNNPolitics

Key takeaways:






The GOP is in denial. Manaforte should be tried for treason. Trump should be ousted from office immediately. He was also a Russian spy, or is so incompetent he cannot be trusted with any sensitive or classified information. Either way, he needs to be gone. Now.
Click to expand...

Wow...that is some scandal cooperating with a “known Russian spy” as you allege.

Which makes it all the more curious that Dems didn’t impeach over it instead of the ludicrous Ukraine construct. I think it’s termed lack of evidence.

Even more puzzling how Mueller couldn’t produce evidence to support that conclusion given the vastly superior tools and his disposal than anything the Senate has. Reckon that’s why a Fed judge involved in Muelllers muckraking chided him for making that allusion with no proof: Paul Manafort confidant Konstantin Kilimnik not proven to be Russian spy, says judge

But you know the most curious thing? Is how Kilimnik can be neck deep in the Obama administration as a trusted “sensitive source”, having State sharing all manner of Ukraine and Russia info with him, and his name redacted in documents and cables to protect this valuable source. And gee! - will you look at this: the Obama WH even frequently used Manafort as a facilitator with Ukraine and everyone was aware that he and Kilimnik were business partners. Ukrainian flagged as intel danger to Trump had extensive contact with Obama officials, memos show

But - magically - he and Manafort become Putin insiders and “Russian spies” when Trump takes office.

My, my, isn’t that the most curious thing? It’s almost as if there was a Carter Page blueprint (take a guy with known dealings with Russia and then smear the **** out him to try and get to Trump with perjury traps) and just slapped that game plan on anyone who even had borscht for dinner once. And all because of a fake ass dossier of baseless Russian propaganda Fabricated by a washed up former agent of UK intelligence with an ax to grind over Trump.

Aside from not electing a senile, China appeasing fool, this is the primary reason to re-elect Trump. So that corrupt Democrats and corrupt unelected bureaucrats can’t fire Barr and memory hole the greatest abuse by deep state actors in American hiStory; the perpetual coup of a duly elected president. If they can get away with this nobody in this country is safe. How’s that for a “key takeaway”?

If you’re in law, I feel sorry for the schmucks that are your clients.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: hjeagle1vol and 37L1
#28,871
#28,871
Sandman 423 said:
I think he should not have answered. Once he lied he committed a crime, however I don’t think it was to the level that you remove a sitting president.
Click to expand...

But that wasn’t his only crime; let’s not forget the multiple incidents of obstruction of justice by hiding evidence, asking others to destroy evidence, and asking others to perjure themselves. His attempt to hide a rather innocuous crime was compounded.

The left’s whitewashing of the incident has been so thoroughly effective that people actually believe Clinton was impeached for nothing more than lying about blow jobs.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top