The (many) indictments of Donald Trump

#5,076
#5,076
AM64 said:
As soon as someone opened a drain to the swamp, some swamp creature would stuff an alligator in the hole. You can't fix it on the fly; you'd have to burn the place down and restart.
Click to expand...

I don’t think you’re wrong about that. I do think you’re wrong about believing trump has a genuine desire to “drain the swap” vs just create his own swamp. He seems to lack any real values
 
  • Like
Reactions: DuckInAPen
#5,077
#5,077
Vol8188 said:
I don’t think you’re wrong about that. I do think you’re wrong about believing trump has a genuine desire to “drain the swap” vs just create his own swamp. He seems to lack any real values
Click to expand...

IMO Trump didn't expect to win the election and never had a transition plan so he was scrambling, taking bad advice and hiring people who didn't have the same goals. He was literally the dog that caught the car and didn't know what to do with it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GroverCleveland, NorthDallas40, K-town Vol Fan and 6 others
#5,078
#5,078
hog88 said:
IMO Trump didn't expect to win the election and never had a transition plan so he was scrambling, taking bad advice and hiring people who didn't have the same goals. He was literally the dog that caught the car and didn't know what to do with it.
Click to expand...

I think the last sentence describes the Trump presidency better than any description I've ever heard. Pretty much a perfect analysis.
 
  • Like
Reactions: davethevol, GroverCleveland, Gandalf and 1 other person
#5,079
#5,079
Vol8188 said:
I don’t think you’re wrong about that. I do think you’re wrong about believing trump has a genuine desire to “drain the swap” vs just create his own swamp. He seems to lack any real values
Click to expand...

Trump always seemed to prove that with enough money, bluster, and arrogance anyone can succeed ... to a degree. A lot of it has to do with nonsense and corruption surrounding real estate speculation and corporate law shielding the people running the show. With better and especially more honest legislators, we'd have fewer Trumps. I've always wondered how many people remember when the real estate market went bust years ago that NY bailed Trump out ... because he was "too big to fail"; and how many times we've heard the same argument used since then. Some things never change - at least not for the better.
 
#5,080
#5,080
AM64 said:
Trump always seemed to prove that with enough money, bluster, and arrogance anyone can succeed ... to a degree. A lot of it has to do with nonsense and corruption surrounding real estate speculation and corporate law shielding the people running the show. With better and especially more honest legislators, we'd have fewer Trumps. I've always wondered how many people remember when the real estate market went bust years ago that NY bailed Trump out ... because he was "too big to fail"; and how many times we've heard the same argument used since then. Some things never change - at least not for the better.
Click to expand...

What simply gobsmacks me is that the Dems are stuck with this obvious made up process crime, pee tape lies BS because in all these past 7 years they could not find something substantial in all of Trumps empire to hang him with. I thought for SURE they would have had him within a year or two.

Meanwhile Biden the basement dwelling hair sniffer has evidence pouring in day by day he has been selling his influence to our enemies for years. I mean, whore loving coked out artist son Hunter actually providing entire hard drives worth. Tom Clancy could not have written this, nobody would have believed it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: davethevol, red butler, Orangeburst and 3 others
#5,081
#5,081
Gandalf said:
What simply gobsmacks me is that the Dems are stuck with this obvious made up process crime, pee tape lies BS because in all these past 7 years they could not find something substantial in all of Trumps empire to hang him with. I thought for SURE they would have had him within a year or two.

Meanwhile Biden the basement dwelling hair sniffer has evidence pouring in day by day he has been selling his influence to our enemies for years. I mean, whore loving coked out artist son Hunter actually providing entire hard drives worth. Tom Clancy could not have written this, nobody would have believed it.
Click to expand...

One of the most ironic parts is that the dems helped write and pass the corporate and tax laws and loopholes that protect people like Trump ... and then have the gall to want people to believe dems are for the people and don't take a dime from business. It's obscenely funny watching them try and try to nail Trump and be disappointed while they ignore what's not ignorable with the Bidens.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Orangeburst and W.TN.Orange Blood
#5,083
#5,083
RockyTop85 said:
I separated this into two paragraphs and the first one is something I’ve thought about.

The XO says that, in order to be classified, information has to be related to the national defense. (Paraphrasing).

I haven’t looked to see if it’s identical language to what’s in the charging statute, but it is similar. More importantly it is definitely not consistent with the definition of a personal record.

So it kind of creates a situation where the “president is the ultimate authority over classified material” could work against him. “Courts don’t second guess national security decisions of the executive, and here we don’t have to because by classifying this record the executive told us that it is related to national security and therefore it cannot be a personal record under the PRA…”

I think congress could do what you suggest in the second paragraph by writing it into the PRA. That’s probably a good idea. And therefore it will never happen.
Click to expand...

The thing is - deciding what is "personal" vs otherwise is an executive branch decision and while he is in office, the President is decider in chief of the executive branch. So in a way it makes sense - there is no one higher to make that decision unless we get into separation of powers (which we do if it goes to court). But it NARA by definition reports TO the President, not the other way around.

I mean, to some degree this is the problem we are running into with the Biden corruption and the Dems would say we had with Trump. How can an AG charge the President he works for? I mean, Nixon resigned before impeachment after an investigation by the house. It was political. Once the guy is no longer President then he doesnt have the authority anymore of course but Im not sure there is really a proper function to question a decision he made while empowered with the office. And if he took the docs before the other guy was sworn in, guess what? he decided they were personal.

That's the gist of the argument and I think it is logically compelling, even if I am not sure I like it (for Trump or any other President). I think it will be difficult for SCOTUS to do anything but reaffirm this understanding without creating huge new issues. But I think dem strategists are anticipating that and don't care, they will have already gotten what they wanted from the case by then.

Btw - @BowlBrother85 @RockyTop85 I very much appreciate your attempt to address the topic at hand in a erudite fashion that helps elucidate the thread, even if I may not be persuaded by your arguments. Much better than ad hominem attacks being bandied about.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GroverCleveland, AM64 and BowlBrother85
#5,084
#5,084
BowlBrother85 said:
It is very rare for those media outlets to publish reports which are provably false. That is not the case with outlets such as Info Wars, The Gateway Pundit, and Leading Report ... whose entire purpose is to spread disinformation.

You should not need someone to explain the difference between The Washington Post and The Gateway Pundit to you.
Click to expand...
Dude, come on. How many times have they all lied about what Grump said regarding Charlottesville alone? And that’s just one story that ran over and over and they still repeat that lie to this day when the transcript leaves no doubt that it’s a lie. There are tons of examples where CNN, MSNBC and others run with stories that are probably false.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64, OrangeBoro and whodeycin85
#5,085
#5,085
BowlBrother85 said:
LOL.

That you think the Steele Dossier received comparable news coverage with Obama's birth certificate and the 2020 Presidential Election fraud claims (which Fox News paid $787 million to settle a defamation suit over), is typical right-wing lunacy and idiocy.

You people are unsophisticated, poorly read, irrational and void of reason. This is a redneck haven.
Click to expand...
It’s hilarious you fancy yourself an intellect.
 
#5,088
#5,088
hog88 said:
IMO Trump didn't expect to win the election and never had a transition plan so he was scrambling, taking bad advice and hiring people who didn't have the same goals. He was literally the dog that caught the car and didn't know what to do with it.
Click to expand...
This is exactly the angle that South Park took with it and it was hilarious.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BowlBrother85
#5,089
#5,089
BowlBrother85 said:
It is very rare for those media outlets to publish reports which are provably false.

Rare has a new meaning after watching and listening to 7 years of daily lies about RUSSIARUSSIA

what a simp
 
#5,091
#5,091
BowlBrother85 said:
Name some then.

.... and your Charlottesville claim is pure spin on some really dumb things Trump said in defense of racist, white trash losers.
Click to expand...
It’s not pure spin when the transcript shows he plainly said he wasn’t talking about Neo-nazis and your precious MSNBC omits that part and claims Trump said Neo-nazis are fine people. How is that spin? Any hope you have of appearing objective goes out the window when you claim that’s “spin”. You can argue his intent all you want and maybe he was just covering his true feelings. Neither you nor I know. All we know is what he said isn’t what CNN, MSNBC and others claim he said. The only spin is coming from your favorite news sources.

There was the whole Nick Sandman thing. There was a gun range in KY they tried to pass off as a war overseas. The entire Russian collusion BS. And more. You just don’t want to see it because you believe it’s all true.
 
  • Like
Reactions: OrangeBoro, davethevol and AM64
#5,094
#5,094
RockyTop85 said:
I separated this into two paragraphs and the first one is something I’ve thought about.

The XO says that, in order to be classified, information has to be related to the national defense. (Paraphrasing).

I haven’t looked to see if it’s identical language to what’s in the charging statute, but it is similar. More importantly it is definitely not consistent with the definition of a personal record.

So it kind of creates a situation where the “president is the ultimate authority over classified material” could work against him. “Courts don’t second guess national security decisions of the executive, and here we don’t have to because by classifying this record the executive told us that it is related to national security and therefore it cannot be a personal record under the PRA…”

I think congress could do what you suggest in the second paragraph by writing it into the PRA. That’s probably a good idea. And therefore it will never happen.
Click to expand...
The yearly security training that I’ve now gotten via two employers since I’m contracting back where I used to work has a similar phrase clearly stating that all classified information remains the property of the United States. No other office, entity, or person is mentioned.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#5,095
#5,095
BowlBrother85 said:
Name some then.

.... and your Charlottesville claim is pure spin on some really dumb things Trump said in defense of racist, white trash losers.
Click to expand...

Wasn't Charlottesville where the "white trash losers" had a permit to protest? They had the floor so to speak when some trashy anarchists and leftists showed up to counter protest and made things turn ugly ... that Charlotte? Seems like the original group of "white trash losers" showed up to protest removal of historic statues, and the other trashy losers had already won the battle and could have simply sat home smirking. What is it with leftist losers that they are for free speech when it's theirs and not when they disagree with the message - and violently block the speech of others? Do leftist losers ever bother with permits or just yell "we're coming; get the hell out of the way"? Anyway, I'm sure both groups had "some fine people"; the Tiki torches did add an air of sophistication unmatched by all back garb and masks ... and umbrellas maybe.
 
#5,096
#5,096
BowlBrother85 said:
South Park did multiple shows concerning Trump, and they depicted his egotistical nature very well.
Click to expand...

That's a pretty simple gig. Just draw a body and put the selected politician's head on it. The for effect just throw in a few memorable phrases. We aren't talking creative genius in this case. All politicians are egotistical by nature and generally not that intelligent.
 
#5,099
#5,099
BowlBrother85 said:
Name some then.

.... and your Charlottesville claim is pure spin on some really dumb things Trump said in defense of racist, white trash losers.
Click to expand...

Ferguson, MO, "Hands up don't shoot"
Hunter biden's laptop was based on Russian dis-information
The fake mom who was supposedly evicted from her home
The Lincoln Project fake white supremacists against Youngkin
Ivermectin overdose in Oklahoma hospitals
Border agents whipping migrants
CRT not taught in schools
Donald trump was a secret Russian agent
Russian oligarchs were co-signers for trump loans with Deutsche bank
Jussie Smollett
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vol since 77, AM64, OrangeBoro and 3 others
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top