TrumpPutingate III: the beginning of the end

#326
#326
Look, everyone knows the fix was in.
The establishment didn’t want a disrupter outsider in D.C.
What, he got maybe 5% of the votes in D.C? The place is a sesspool of biased clumps of fecies, come on man!
Now they have no desire to see his administration succeed.
The anti Trumperz could care a less about the truth, if it goes against their narrative.
Pew Research, 95% negative media coverage in Year 1 !

It’s a no brainer, the fix was in over multiple facets and avenues, and it continues still today.
 
#327
#327
37L1 said:
How do you know? You know nothing about them do you?

Ask the families of those who had relatives killed by Fast and Furious or those harmed by the IRS, they might just have a different opinion then you do and theirs is informed.
Click to expand...

Which leads me to conclude they were not huge scandals.

Watergate, Iran/Contra, Whitewater, Lewinsky, Russian collusion - big scandals

Benghazi, emails - the right almost made these in to big scandals

I imagine the families of the four killed in Niger think it's a big deal. That's an idiotic way to assess if something is scandalous.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#328
#328
luthervol said:
Which leads me to conclude they were not huge scandals.

Watergate, Iran/Contra, Whitewater, Lewinsky, Russian collusion - big scandals

Benghazi, emails - the right almost made these in to big scandals

I imagine the families of the four killed in Niger think it's a big deal. That's an idiotic way to assess if something is scandalous.
Click to expand...

When you shove your head in the sand to hide from facts you’re not going to hear much.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#329
#329
luthervol said:
Which leads me to conclude they were not huge scandals.

Watergate, Iran/Contra, Whitewater, Lewinsky, Russian collusion - big scandals

Benghazi, emails - the right almost made these in to big scandals

I imagine the families of the four killed in Niger think it's a big deal. That's an idiotic way to assess if something is scandalous.
Click to expand...
Clicked on the CNN link yet luther?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#331
#331
Mick said:
If the truth comes out it shouldn't matter where it comes from. Willful ignorance would be lets say: since they used a foreign source to obtain fisa warrants to prove or disprove the truthfulness of the unverified information that it is untrue since it came from a foreign source and it was illegal for them to seek the truth.

Bravo.
Click to expand...

The problem is legality and constitutionality.

The bigger problem is if they haven't found anything per Russian collusion and just use it as an opportunity to entrap people into crimes they wouldn't otherwise have committed (such as supposed perjury), or dig and dig and dig for just anything they can find in a long life.

The government doesn't get to make crap up to create a doorway to search and seize its citizens' background until they see fit to stop.

Just because you hate Trump doesn't mean it's a good idea to throw the constitution out any more than it would be smart for conservatives to throw due process out for spite of Obama and Hillary.
 
#333
#333
Orange_Crush said:
The problem is legality and constitutionality.

The bigger problem is if they haven't found anything per Russian collusion and just use it as an opportunity to entrap people into crimes they wouldn't otherwise have committed (such as supposed perjury), or dig and dig and dig for just anything they can find in a long life.

The government doesn't get to make crap up to create a doorway to search and seize its citizens' background until they see fit to stop.

Just because you hate Trump doesn't mean it's a good idea to throw the constitution out any more than it would be smart for conservatives to throw due process out for spite of Obama and Hillary.
Click to expand...


Yep.

Would you want the Trump administration to be able to run an spying, entrapment sting op on their next opponent? Now this may have not happened, but doesn’t the truth deserve to come out regardless of the consequences? That’s the question...

This effects all Americans, it’s a bipartisan issue.
 
Last edited:
#334
#334
Read it all. Don't see any real implication for Obama.

Similar operation used in 2006 under Bush.
Operation Fast and Furious was not the ATF's first "gun walking" investigation, which allowed illegally purchased firearms to "walk" out of gun shops. It was preceded by Operation Wide Receiver, which began in 2006. (Under Bush)

I like holding people in contempt for not turning over documents even when the president claims executive privilege. (hope that continues)

June 20, 2012 - Republicans on the House Oversight Committee recommend that Holder be cited for contempt of Congress for failing to turn over documents relating to Fast and Furious. They make the recommendation after President Barack Obama asserts executive privilege over some documents sought by the committee.
June 28, 2012 - The House of Representatives votes 255-67 to hold Holder in criminal contempt of Congress. This is the first time in American history that the head of the Justice Department has been held in contempt by Congress.

Seems like a plan with proper intent but poor execution. Also the investigation and attempt to make it a "major scandal" seems to have been pretty partisan.

Confirms what I thought.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#335
#335
luthervol said:
Go get your daily does of right wing propaganda. The very definition of "willfully ignorant" I use is anyone who gets there news exclusively from right wing sources and then assumes they are well informed.

Carry on. Go outside and play now. Go back to your mom's basement. (pick your favorite juvenile and condesending way to end a post.
Click to expand...

Anyone remember that time Luther told us that he won't accept things as potentially true if they offend his feelz? Anyone?

Anyone remember that?

(And your most appropriate way to end that post would have been to use a closing parenthesis.)
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#336
#336
Orange_Crush said:
The problem is legality and constitutionality.

The bigger problem is if they haven't found anything per Russian collusion and just use it as an opportunity to entrap people into crimes they wouldn't otherwise have committed (such as supposed perjury), or dig and dig and dig for just anything they can find in a long life.

The government doesn't get to make crap up to create a doorway to search and seize its citizens' background until they see fit to stop.

Just because you hate Trump doesn't mean it's a good idea to throw the constitution out any more than it would be smart for conservatives to throw due process out for spite of Obama and Hillary.
Click to expand...

The Trump Tower meeting never happened. Don't bastardize the truth to fit your beliefs. Great example of willful ignorance.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#338
#338
Orange_Crush said:
Anyone remember that time Luther told us that he won't accept things as potentially true if they offend his feelz? Anyone?

Anyone remember that?

(And your most appropriate way to end that post would have been to use a closing parenthesis.)
Click to expand...

I've got to admit, you really got me good with that one.

I'm just glad there is no type of impeachment in the PF because you would certainly have me up for a vote.
 
#342
#342
luthervol said:
Read it all. Don't see any real implication for Obama.

Similar operation used in 2006 under Bush.
Operation Fast and Furious was not the ATF's first "gun walking" investigation, which allowed illegally purchased firearms to "walk" out of gun shops. It was preceded by Operation Wide Receiver, which began in 2006. (Under Bush)

I like holding people in contempt for not turning over documents even when the president claims executive privilege. (hope that continues)

June 20, 2012 - Republicans on the House Oversight Committee recommend that Holder be cited for contempt of Congress for failing to turn over documents relating to Fast and Furious. They make the recommendation after President Barack Obama asserts executive privilege over some documents sought by the committee.
June 28, 2012 - The House of Representatives votes 255-67 to hold Holder in criminal contempt of Congress. This is the first time in American history that the head of the Justice Department has been held in contempt by Congress.

Seems like a plan with proper intent but poor execution. Also the investigation and attempt to make it a "major scandal" seems to have been pretty partisan.

Confirms what I thought.
Click to expand...

More than 100 Democrats left the House floor before the vote, but 17 moderate Democrats stayed behind and joined with Republicans in voting for contempt, robbing the Obama administration and congressional Democrats of its main argument that the vote was a blatant partisan maneuver to discredit Holder and the White House in an election year.

Executive privilege to withhold the truth. How's that truth seeking working out for you?

For an administration that was so anti-gun they sure were fast and loose with allowing their sale now weren't they.
 
Last edited:
#343
#343
37L1 said:
More than 100 Democrats left the House floor before the vote, but 17 moderate Democrats stayed behind and joined with Republicans in voting for contempt, robbing the Obama administration and congressional Democrats of its main argument that the vote was a blatant partisan maneuver to discredit Holder and the White House in an election year.

Executive privilege to withhold the truth. How's that truth seeking working out for you?
Click to expand...

I'm guessing they were all up for re-election in red-leaning districts. It was partisan. It was not a major scandal. It was also done under the Bush administration. But it did show that documents can be demanded even when a president claims executive privileged and failure to provide the documents can lead to a conviction of contempt. So there's that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#344
#344
Twenty-one Democrats voted yes — with all Republicans — on the Holder civil contempt charge:

Altmire

Ron Barber (D-Ariz.)

Barrow

Boren

Boswell

Chandler

Critz

Peter DeFazio (D-Ore.)

Donnelly

Hochul

Kind

Kissell

Matheson

McIntyre

Michael Michaud (D-Maine)*

Brad Miller (D-N.C.)*

Owens

Peterson

Rahall

Ross

Walz

17 Democrats voted yes — with most Republicans — to hold Holder in criminal contempt.

Jason Altmire (D-Pa.) *

John Barrow (D-Ga.)*

Dan Boren (D-Okla.) *

Leonard Boswell (D-Iowa) *

Ben Chandler (D-Ky.) *

Mark Critz (D-Pa.) *

Joe Donnelly (D-Ind.) *

Kathleen Hochul (D-N.Y.)

Ron Kind (D-Wis.) *

Larry Kissell (D-N.C.) *

Jim Matheson (D-Utah) *

Mike McIntyre (D-N.C.) *

William Owens (D-N.Y.) *

Collin Peterson (D-Minn.) *

Nick Rahall (D-W. Va.) *

Mike Ross (D-Ark.) *

Timothy Walz (D-Minn.)*
 
#347
#347
Great numbers 37.

Was the senate vote last night partisan?

There was a higher percentage of crossover votes last night than what you are giving me.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top