45timesbetterthanemptysuit Posted March 26, 2019 Share Posted March 26, 2019 7 minutes ago, Guy Chamberlin said: Imagine Barack Obama telling the world that he'd fallen in love with Kim Jung Un, that he believed Vladimir Putin over all his U.S. intelligence advisors, and that FEMA would pay for The Wall. Your standards seem pretty flexible themselves, chief. Imagine Obama telling a Russian operative to inform Putin that he will be more flexible after the election. 1 1 Link to comment
Guy Chamberlin Posted March 26, 2019 Share Posted March 26, 2019 1 hour ago, 45timesbetterthanemptysuit said: It’s like some people don’t believe in the presumption of innocence. Gosh, imagine if people like that could start an investigation in search of a crime? It happens a thousand times a day. Evidence of a crime is presented, an investigation takes place, and a judicial system must decide if there's enough to pursue specified charges. Sometimes innocent people are being hounded. Sometimes less innocent people are skating on technicalities and loopholes. Since this two year "exonerating" process actually indicted several people close to the President, and got others to cop plea deals, smart money leans to the latter. Now that Trump has declared his pursuers treasonous and evil and recommended legal revenge, I'm sure you will grant them the presumption of innocence. 2 Link to comment
funhusker Posted March 26, 2019 Share Posted March 26, 2019 1 minute ago, 45timesbetterthanemptysuit said: Imagine Obama telling a Russian operative to inform Putin that he will be more flexible after the election. Give Obama some credit. It was the outgoing Russian president, not some "operative".... 1 Link to comment
Guy Chamberlin Posted March 26, 2019 Share Posted March 26, 2019 6 minutes ago, 45timesbetterthanemptysuit said: The payoffs done since mr peanut stepped in for Bill are a disgrace. Trump is the first to move the Norks in a positive direction English, dude. Need you to use better words. Also: make more sense. 1 Link to comment
45timesbetterthanemptysuit Posted March 26, 2019 Share Posted March 26, 2019 10 minutes ago, funhusker said: Give Obama some credit. It was the outgoing Russian president, not some "operative".... He was a Putin puppet. Link to comment
funhusker Posted March 26, 2019 Share Posted March 26, 2019 Just now, 45timesbetterthanemptysuit said: He was a Putin puppet. Medvedev or Obama? And does it matter to your point? Link to comment
45timesbetterthanemptysuit Posted March 26, 2019 Share Posted March 26, 2019 9 minutes ago, Guy Chamberlin said: English, dude. Need you to use better words. Also: make more sense. I could try to up the propaganda and hyperbole but you have set the bar too high. 1 Link to comment
Guy Chamberlin Posted March 26, 2019 Share Posted March 26, 2019 And just when you think you've got this presumption of innocence and guilt thing finally down, some stories take yet another bizarre turn: https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/all-charges-dropped-jussie-smollett-lawyers-say-1197068 Link to comment
45timesbetterthanemptysuit Posted March 26, 2019 Share Posted March 26, 2019 Just now, funhusker said: Medvedev or Obama? And does it matter to your point? Medvedev. I have no Idea exactly what Obama wanted flexibility for that he thought would adversely affect his chances in the election. Oddly, nobody seemed concerned enough to look into it. 1 Link to comment
45timesbetterthanemptysuit Posted March 26, 2019 Share Posted March 26, 2019 1 minute ago, Guy Chamberlin said: And just when you think you've got this presumption of innocence and guilt thing finally down, some stories take yet another bizarre turn: https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/all-charges-dropped-jussie-smollett-lawyers-say-1197068 Interested in the reasoning behind this. Had a couple innocents been somehow implicated I would guess Smollet would have let them be prosecuted. I hope he faces federal charges. 2 Link to comment
45timesbetterthanemptysuit Posted March 26, 2019 Share Posted March 26, 2019 8 minutes ago, Guy Chamberlin said: And just when you think you've got this presumption of innocence and guilt thing finally down, some stories take yet another bizarre turn: https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/all-charges-dropped-jussie-smollett-lawyers-say-1197068 https://www.google.com/amp/s/chicago.suntimes.com/news/records-former-michelle-obama-aide-smollett-relative-reached-out-to-kim-foxx/amp/ well this explains why the charges were dropped. I thought I had heard he mailed a powder to himself. 1 Link to comment
funhusker Posted March 26, 2019 Share Posted March 26, 2019 8 minutes ago, 45timesbetterthanemptysuit said: Medvedev. I have no Idea exactly what Obama wanted flexibility for that he thought would adversely affect his chances in the election. Oddly, nobody seemed concerned enough to look into it. They did. It was about European missile defense. The Russians were worried the new programs in Eastern Europe would negate their nuclear deterrence. It was a bad look for Obama, he played it off like he was talking about just having more time after the election to discuss the concerns with Putin. But really no "crime" to look into. Just a politician being political. 1 Link to comment
45timesbetterthanemptysuit Posted March 26, 2019 Share Posted March 26, 2019 3 minutes ago, funhusker said: They did. It was about European missile defense. The Russians were worried the new programs in Eastern Europe would negate their nuclear deterrence. It was a bad look for Obama, he played it off like he was talking about just having more time after the election to discuss the concerns with Putin. But really no "crime" to look into. Just a politician being political. Then the press got distracted with the “mom pants” issue. Link to comment
funhusker Posted March 26, 2019 Share Posted March 26, 2019 Just now, 45timesbetterthanemptysuit said: Then the press got distracted with the “mom pants” issue. I did a Google search a few minutes ago to refresh my memory. I found articles from Reuters, Politico, Washington Post, The Telegraph, and even Snopes, among many others. They most likely moved on, because after Obama gave his excuse there was really nothing more to report. He said what he said, and they reported it. There wasn't a scandal to hunt down... Link to comment
Moiraine Posted March 26, 2019 Share Posted March 26, 2019 27 minutes ago, funhusker said: I did a Google search a few minutes ago to refresh my memory. I found articles from Reuters, Politico, Washington Post, The Telegraph, and even Snopes, among many others. They most likely moved on, because after Obama gave his excuse there was really nothing more to report. He said what he said, and they reported it. There wasn't a scandal to hunt down... At least it wasn’t a meeting behind closed doors where we have no idea wtf went on. 1 Link to comment
Recommended Posts