Jump to content


DOJ Initial Russia Hearings


Recommended Posts

11 minutes ago, Moiraine said:

 

 

Nunes hasn’t told anyone (other than Republicans I suppose) who the referrals are for. And he says Comey spied on Trump by taking notes on their encounter and leaking it to the NYT.

That's why "if" an actual investigation happens, I hope it is out in the open for everyone to see.  If the Mueller investigation was illegal and spawned from disgusting partisanship, I'd like to know.  And if Nunes referring people to the DOJ is a ridiculous partisan stunt, I'd like to know.  

 

I'm a fan of the saying "s#!t or get off the pot".  If the Mueller report proves you're innocent, release it already.  If you have proof the democrats led an illegal investigation, refer them already.  I don't mean to say investigation should be public as they are being conducted, I understand they take time and can be sensitive to who knows what and when they know it.  But Mueller is done.  And Nunes doesn't have to tell the public, but according to the article posted by @Danny Bateman Barr still doesn't have the names.  Nunes has been talking about it for weeks.

 

If they want to talk about things to sway the public, I'd like them to be willing to actually share things with the public.  It's like the vague Facebook posts, "man, the day i've had.....I don't really want to talk about it...." 

  • Plus1 3
Link to comment

34 minutes ago, funhusker said:

That's why "if" an actual investigation happens, I hope it is out in the open for everyone to see.  If the Mueller investigation was illegal and spawned from disgusting partisanship, I'd like to know.  And if Nunes referring people to the DOJ is a ridiculous partisan stunt, I'd like to know.  

 

I'm a fan of the saying "s#!t or get off the pot".  If the Mueller report proves you're innocent, release it already.  If you have proof the democrats led an illegal investigation, refer them already.  I don't mean to say investigation should be public as they are being conducted, I understand they take time and can be sensitive to who knows what and when they know it.  But Mueller is done.  And Nunes doesn't have to tell the public, but according to the article posted by @Danny Bateman Barr still doesn't have the names.  Nunes has been talking about it for weeks.

 

If they want to talk about things to sway the public, I'd like them to be willing to actually share things with the public.  It's like the vague Facebook posts, "man, the day i've had.....I don't really want to talk about it...." 

Exactly. We need to see everything. If more investigations are needed fine. 

 

But, we need to see it. 

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment
5 hours ago, Notre Dame Joe said:

Long before there was a Benghazi or an email server, some meh celebrity commented on the 2008 DNC primary in a way that stuck with me.  He said 'all politicians lie, the Clintons just do it so naturally that it doesn't even feel like lying.'  That pretty much defines Robo-Hilary.  I suspect a conventional lie detector test would get the same reading on her regardless of what was on the script that day.  

Question, why do Trump supporters constantly bring up Hillary in conversations with people who don’t support Hillary?

 

and, it’s interssting that they act like Hillary lying is horrible while fully supporting a guy who constantly lies. AND....they try to act like his lying is a good thing. 

 

Thats just wierd. 

  • Plus1 2
Link to comment
1 hour ago, Danny Bateman said:

 

And then there's this.

 

 

 

Anybody conspiring with Mr. I'm Suing an Internet Cow Because They Hurt my Fee-fees probably should be looked at pretty skeptically.

 

I tried to give Barr the benefit of the doubt as an evenhanded, non-partisan operator, but especially since the "spying" comment, it's increasingly clear he's not that at all. He's less non-partisan than Sessions, if you can believe that. He's a Republican foot soldier carrying water for the GOP and trying to protect Trump using whatever means necessary.

Shoot, Sessions is looking like a pretty level headed, decent AG vs what Barr is doing.

Link to comment

34 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

Question, why do Trump supporters constantly bring up Hillary in conversations with people who don’t support Hillary? 

  

and, it’s interssting that they act like Hillary lying is horrible while fully supporting a guy who constantly lies. AND....they try to act like his lying is a good thing.  

 

Thats just wierd. 

 

Because always falling back on the argument "Hillary would have been worse!" allows them to excuse anything out of hand.

  • Plus1 2
Link to comment
9 hours ago, Notre Dame Joe said:

Trump uses the full bag of tricks but he's always Trump, Mr Bigshot.  So far he's the loud guy fighting for the little man against the establishment (like every politician pretends)

 

 

He's kind of fighting against the establishment, but he's fighting against the established expertise and competency and I'm sorry to tell you he's not doing it for the little man. He's doing it for him. And he's suckered you into helping him get more for himself.

  • Plus1 2
Link to comment
10 hours ago, Notre Dame Joe said:

 

Trump uses the full bag of tricks but he's always Trump, Mr Bigshot.  So far he's the loud guy fighting for the little man against the establishment (like every politician pretends). But he hasn't betrayed any of his principles.  If he does he might have the credos to convince us he actually has changed.  Nit picking his sound bytes is beside the point because Trump always has played the game the way it is.  (If you reviewed the transcript of Saint Lou Holtz's entire life you could probably decide he's honest or dishonest.  And probably the same for any other legendary HC).  

 

Yesterday's daily drivel was Trump saying we should move all the illegal migrants to the jurisdictions of the politicians who want open borders and sanctuary cities.   Get it?  If you mentally added it to the list of 'broken promises' then no, you don't get it.  The lie is those who call for more immigration while they live far away in affluent sanctuaries.  Trump one upped everyone by making himself the border security candidate and he's fighting hard for us.  If Trump has a conversion and adopts the Pelosi position on unrestricted immigration with immediate voting rights then I will be the first one to call him out.

 

Long before there was a Benghazi or an email server, some meh celebrity commented on the 2008 DNC primary in a way that stuck with me.  He said 'all politicians lie, the Clintons just do it so naturally that it doesn't even feel like lying.'  That pretty much defines Robo-Hilary.  I suspect a conventional lie detector test would get the same reading on her regardless of what was on the script that day.  

 

sincerely, 

 

red-spotty-bowtie.jpg

 

 

 

I’m sorry you’ve been fooled into thinking Trump does anything for the little man. Hopefully not enough others have been similarly fooled.

  • Plus1 2
Link to comment
14 hours ago, NM11046 said:

I'm sure that you're aware of this (not) but here are the "AFFLUENT" sanctuary cities:

 

Not sure if you're good with maps and know your way around the US, but these are not all "affluent" areas.

Screen Shot 2019-04-13 at 6.54.02 AM.png

 

If you prefer to see the cities listed by state and county, you can see them here:  https://cis.org/Map-Sanctuary-Cities-Counties-and-States

I said just "sanctuaries."  Pelosi doesn't have to step over needles and poop to enter her house which literally looks down on the rest of San Francisco.  Also I doubt illegals do much more than show up at dawn  and leave at 5 from her Napa Valley estate where she actually spends her free time.  Read yourself some Victor Davis Hanson to see how the loudest open border advocates do not live the way they advocate for others.  

 

12 hours ago, Danny Bateman said:

 

I tried to give Barr the benefit of the doubt as an evenhanded, non-partisan operator, but especially since the "spying" comment, it's increasingly clear he's not that at all. He's less non-partisan than Sessions, if you can believe that. He's a Republican foot soldier carrying water for the GOP and trying to protect Trump using whatever means necessary.

 

Did anyone say R-Nunes was non-partisan?  (I assume someone made a vague compliment about his judgment for which that Politifact et al is screaming LIAR).  After two years of Mueller Ds have no business whining about politically motivated investigations.  BTW Nunes is only making a referral to the DOJ who will have the unpleasant task of investigating their former colleagues. I will roll my eyes if the perps, who have already had years to prep their defense, get off with a stern lecture

7 hours ago, Landlord said:

 

 

He's kind of fighting against the establishment, but he's fighting against the established expertise and competency and I'm sorry to tell you he's not doing it for the little man. He's doing it for him. And he's suckered you into helping him get more for himself.

Trump didn't sucker me into noticing everyone's life is better than it was on January 2016.  Even TDS people worry that good times will get him reelected. 

  • Plus1 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
3 hours ago, Notre Dame Joe said:

I said just "sanctuaries."  Pelosi doesn't have to step over needles and poop to enter her house which literally looks down on the rest of San Francisco.  Also I doubt illegals do much more than show up at dawn  and leave at 5 from her Napa Valley estate where she actually spends her free time.  Read yourself some Victor Davis Hanson to see how the loudest open border advocates do not live the way they advocate for others.  

 

  

Did anyone say R-Nunes was non-partisan?  (I assume someone made a vague compliment about his judgment for which that Politifact et al is screaming LIAR).  After two years of Mueller Ds have no business whining about politically motivated investigations.  BTW Nunes is only making a referral to the DOJ who will have the unpleasant task of investigating their former colleagues. I will roll my eyes if the perps, who have already had years to prep their defense, get off with a stern lecture 

Trump didn't sucker me into noticing everyone's life is better than it was on January 2016.  Even TDS people worry that good times will get him reelected. 

 

It's been repeatedly stated on this board no mainstream Democrat, not Pelosi nor anyone else, supports open borders, but you keep coming back with that same tired line. Please stop. It's a lazy argument that is not based in reality. We do not live in a universe where everyone who isn't Trump is an advocate of open borders.

 

Better is subjective my dude. Roughly 3/5 of the country disagrees with you, FWIW.

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment

3 hours ago, Danny Bateman said:

 

It's been repeatedly stated on this board no mainstream Democrat, not Pelosi nor anyone else, supports open borders, but you keep coming back with that same tired line. Please stop. It's a lazy argument that is not based in reality. We do not live in a universe where everyone who isn't Trump is an advocate of open borders.

 

Better is subjective my dude. Roughly 3/5 of the country disagrees with you, FWIW.

 

Just like they don't support illegal voting, socialized medicine, gun registration, higher taxes, invasions of privacy etc. until they do.  The usual suspects have done everything they can to keep the immigrant faucet open because they vote overwhelmingly D.  A simple political calculation where they benefit and the costs are born by someone else. 

 

The objective measures all say that USA is better now then before Trump.  Even the sector's that have a pathological hatred of all things Trump are prospering under his watch.

  • Plus1 3
Link to comment

Can we all just admit that all articles are capable of having facts?  Conservative Tree House may have verifiable facts in articles, CNN may have verifiable facts in their articles, Politico may have verifiable facts in their articles.  If people in these threads would focus more on the "verifiable" facts within the articles instead of throwing the baby out with the bathwater we'd all be much better off.

 

I'm tired of this never ending pissing match of "my source is better than yours".  It is taking this off-topic discussion nowhere.

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment
4 hours ago, Notre Dame Joe said:

 

Just like they don't support illegal voting, socialized medicine, gun registration, higher taxes, invasions of privacy etc. until they do.  The usual suspects have done everything they can to keep the immigrant faucet open because they vote overwhelmingly D.  A simple political calculation where they benefit and the costs are born by someone else.  

 

The objective measures all say that USA is better now then before Trump.  Even the sector's that have a pathological hatred of all things Trump are prospering under his watch. 

 

So your argument is that even though Democrats don't support those things now, they will in the future because it would benefit them? That's pretty weak, IMO. It seems like you're arguing against what you're afraid the Democratic Party is or will become rather than what it actually is.

 

If you haven't noticed, we already utilize socialized medicine via Medicare/Medicaid and it works great. Re: invasions of privacy, who passed the Patriot Act?

 

Illegal immigrants don't vote, so please don't join the hordes of paranoid Republicans clamoring about voter fraud and busfuls of illegals.

 

Objectively the U.S. improves under all presidents. It's just a matter of what metrics for success you choose and who that makes winners and losers. For instance, very little of what Trump has done has substantively improved my life, and consequently I'm not going to vote for him next year.

 

 

Link to comment
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...