Did you believe the Nunes memo? If not, then why would you believe the Democratic memo? Keep in mind that neither of them actually presented evidence. But that's not all you're saying. You're saying he's guilty but to wait. I'm saying to be patient and not render judgment.
A. I thought the Nunes memo had portions of accuracy but seemed to take some significant liberties. Our President, his lackeys and eager folks in St. Petersberg seemed to think it "totally vindicated Trump". I expect that the memo from the left would serve as a "re-direct". I just think it odd that the same adamant "release the memo!" folks are very quiet now... B. Good point. I guess I can't take him on some of his word. Where does one start. 1. 19 women accuse him of some form of sexual battery and there's recorded audio of him essentially admitting to what many of them say. 2. Obama golf's too much. He spent more in his first year on travel than Obama did in 8 years. 3. There was no coordination or even communication with anyone from Russia. Until it comes out that there was SIGNIFICANT communication including a meeting at Trump Tower (DJT was in the building) with RUSSIANS. 4. His attorney paid off a porn actress out of the goodness of his heart from his personal accounts with no assistance from any funds related to Trump or his inauguration funds. So, yeah, I'd say that he's guilty of the **** that he claims to be innocent of until it's proven that he's not. He's gone out and earned that right.
So your argument is: 1-Fifty million people made a mistake by voting for Trump after hearing the bimbo eruption just before the election. 2-Trump probably was in the building when a Russian talked to someone in the same building. 3-Trump plays too much golf. 4-Trump screwed a porn “star” Yawn. Anything else?
1. Correct. 2. He was in the building unless he left via a tunnel. Although at first the campaign reported that he was in Florida yet he wasn't as he had a campaign event in the NYC area that night and there was video of him entering the building that morning. Was he in the meeting? I don't know. 3. Duh. 4. I didn't say she was a star. His kid had just been born. It's funny to me that the evangelicals cover for this disgusting behavior.
Again.....yawn. Did you see the tax cut, economic growth, employment figures, real income increases, reduced regulations, capital investment announcements, and new SCOTUS member. That’s something to talk about.
The news that he watches/reads doesn't mention any of the important, positive things that you just mentioned. He just parrots what he hears on a daily basis.
Tax Cut. Cool. Everyone got a can of beans. Billionaires got new vacation homes. And, to top it off we added to the national debt that was sacred from 1/20/2009 - 1/19/2017. Employment figures: We're believing those now? They were mythical from 1/20/2009 - 1/19/2017. Even so, https://www.forbes.com/sites/chuckj...president-obamas-last-six-years/#2e4289c625ab Reduced regulations: Ok. Like the ones where Trump loosened restrictions on mentally ill people and their access to handguns? New SCOTUS: That was a stolen seat.
Bubba, not a single thing you posted here is true except the employment figures and it's only correct because the author cherry picked the info.
Debt: https://www.forbes.com/sites/stanco...nd-national-debt-are-on-the-way/#6733242650da Regulations: Did Trump not sign the bill last year loosening the ability for mentally ill to have firearms? http://fortune.com/2018/02/15/trump-shooting-mental-illness/ Gorsuch's seat was purposely held vacant by McConnell in a manner that was unprecedented. To be honest, I think that had more impact on the Presidential election than anything. It was craven and horrible as far as the workings of the Senate go, but, it was shrewdly played. Side note: I didn't know that Forbes and Fortune were such liberal rags....
We showed a surplus in January, Bubba. The tax cut has not increased the debt but perhaps Trump's spending will. The mentally ill thing has already been proven to be fake news a hundred times over. Forbes and Fortune are not liberal rags but they have plenty of libs on their staffs. The left would have done the same exact as the right did when it came to the vacant seat. The only difference is that you'd be applauding it if the left had done it.
Why would you assume that the Democratic memo wouldn't also take significant liberties? The problem with your mentality is that you piss on the Nunes memo for "talking liberties," yet you think the Democratic memo might present a real case of obstruction of justice. (BTW, no offense, but I don't think you know what obstruction of justice is if you think either memo would reflect on the issue. However, that's a side issue.) Like I mentioned earlier, this stuff is all partisan talking points. It's not evidence. I supported releasing the memo because I err on the side of open government, but I never considered it evidence from which you can formally judge the FBI, Trump, or anybody else. The same would be true of the Democratic memo. Who said taking anybody at his word? The purpose of the investigation is to gather evidence that would either disprove or corroborate what Trump says. The whole point is that we're not (and shouldn't) take him at his word. That's why there is an investigation. And hell, you may be right. Mueller may uncover all kinds of dirt, but if your interest is really the discovery of the truth and the pursuit of justice, you'll wait until he's done and then judge the case based on the evidence he finds. Anybody who doesn't do that is an unprincipled partisan. You do realize that 3 out of 4 of these have nothing to do with collusion with Russia, right? And you voted for Hillary Clinton, right? You sound like a stripper complaining about the liquor stores bringing down the neighborhood.
https://www.cnn.com/2018/02/15/politics/trump-gun-legislation-mental-health/index.html Ironically, the White House refused to release the picture of Trump signing the order. NPR found it.
Those are responses to someone else's points. I gave examples of why Trump's not to be trusted. Hell, world leaders have been recorded joking about his lack of trustworthiness. To quote a President, "sad".
Even the ACLU and mental organizations were against this law. You can't take away rights without due process. https://reason.com/blog/2018/02/15/no-trump-did-not-make-it-easier-for-ment
This law prevented people with Asperger's or anorexia from getting a weapon. Is that what you want? This is why I try to get through to you and Husker's thick skulls about believing crapola from the MSM. As usual that CNN article did not tell the complete story.
Bubba, with a few exceptions, any investigation that goes on for years is wrong. The argument of “you did it too” is not justification for the current investigation. Just because you goose step with the libs doesn’t mean others do the same with the Conservatives. I see it as a combination of incompetence and the lawyers increasing their income.
“Billionaires got New vacation homes”. This is your problem, boy. You believe if someone else is more successful than you, they must be punished. Prepare to be disappointed for the remainder of your life. The billionaires are not the problem. The goofy sooner you see in the mirror is the problem.
Because we're waiting for the memo to be released. Of course, since unlike the Nunes memo, it apparently contains a bunch of information that the FBI views as damaging to release, that may take longer. It's funny, you guys were very determined not to release anything that might risk national security until it became a #MeToo moment. This has already been shown to be a lie. But you already knew that, didn't you?
If the homes are being built then someone got a job. I didn't get a can of beans, it's about $175 per month. I actually like that amount of money. In a world of inflation, every little bit helps. It certainly is a step in the right direction. The idea that the tax cut should be mocked because it doesn't materially raise everyone's standard of living isn't credible to me. Everyone struggles to pay their bills except a low percentage of the population. It's a very positive outcome. As for spending, talk to Congress about that too. The Tea Party tried to bring sharp focus to the debt. They were attacked by both parties. Nobody that preceded their emergence has a leg to stand on when it comes to the national debt problem. They are all part of it.
A. I’m not your boy. B. Do the letters f o mean anything to you? C. Listen to this beneficiary of thee plan. http://amp.timeinc.net/time/5039222/tax-plan-millionaires
The tea party was just the first step of the sad populism that trump inflamed. The fact that the same principles that the Ted Cruz’s of the world were all but willing to die for under Obama have been ignored like ice that fell out of the ice chest on a warm summer day is illustrative of the motivations behind that whole mess.
Apparently? Who knows? What’s good for the goose. That reversal increased access to people who might have mental incapcities. If that’s the hill you want to die on like William Wallace then good for you.
That's like tossing in a "your momma's so fat" joke into the discussion. It has no bearing on what we were talking about.
How long an investigation lasts shouldn't be subject to arbitrary limits. If the investigation is yielding evidence, then it should continue. Furthermore, if the investigated parties are dishonest, uncooperative, or destroy evidence, it's going to take longer.
You're definitely not my boy. What other people earn and keep doesn’t hurt you. What hurts you is ignorance, and primarily ignorance of history. Specifically, ignorance of economic history throughout the world. That ignorance is memorialized by your diploma. Clearly, watching television and Buford T. has not helped. I guess it’s unfortunate for you that the economy made a comeback just as Trump became President.
