The Trump Whistleblower Extravaganza Thread

[∞∞∞]

So Mulvaney straight up admits the administration withheld money in order to investigate Democrats.

This President and his staff are the stupidest in American history.

[css75]

So Mulvaney straight up admits the administration withheld money in order to investigate Democrats.

This President and his staff are the stupidest in American history.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[kalm]

So Mulvaney straight up admits the administration withheld money in order to investigate Democrats.

This President and his staff are the stupidest in American history.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

So then why don’t we see you argue that what they have admitted to is legal?

[css75]

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

So then why don’t we see you argue that what they have admitted to is legal?

The results of the last 3 years of flailing around speak for itself.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[SeattleGriz]

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

So then why don’t we see you argue that what they have admitted to is legal?

Don't we have some sort of an agreement we will work with Ukraine to uncover corruption?

[kalm]

So then why don’t we see you argue that what they have admitted to is legal?

Don't we have some sort of an agreement we will work with Ukraine to uncover corruption?

Ok that’s a start and at least an effort over what css75 efforted.

So go on. What are the legal precedents regarding election tampering?

[SeattleGriz]

Don't we have some sort of an agreement we will work with Ukraine to uncover corruption?

Ok that’s a start and at least an effort over what css75 efforted.

So go on. What are the legal precedents regarding election tampering?

Are we starting with the Trump election tampering?

[kalm]

Ok that’s a start and at least an effort over what css75 efforted.

So go on. What are the legal precedents regarding election tampering?

Are we starting with the Trump election tampering?

Well that’s the matter at hand. If you’d like to go back and find others who the Republicans failed to investigate, knock yourself out. They should be prosecuted too if they broke the law.

But first, answer the Trump question or else you’re just obfuscating.

[SeattleGriz]

Are we starting with the Trump election tampering?

Well that’s the matter at hand. If you’d like to go back and find others who the Republicans failed to investigate, knock yourself out. They should be prosecuted too if they broke the law.

But first, answer the Trump question or else you’re just obfuscating.

Read for yourself.

https://www.politico.com/story/2017/01/ ... ire-233446

Trumps trying to get to the bottom of the 2016 election interference.

We'll see how it plays out.

[kalm]

Well that’s the matter at hand. If you’d like to go back and find others who the Republicans failed to investigate, knock yourself out. They should be prosecuted too if they broke the law.

But first, answer the Trump question or else you’re just obfuscating.

Read for yourself.

https://www.politico.com/story/2017/01/ ... ire-233446

Trumps trying to get to the bottom of the 2016 election interference.

We'll see how it plays out.

Like I said.

[SeattleGriz]

Read for yourself.

https://www.politico.com/story/2017/01/ ... ire-233446

Trumps trying to get to the bottom of the 2016 election interference.

We'll see how it plays out.

Like I said.

Oh, you have proof of some other Ukraine interference, because that was the Ukrainian government admitting to helping Hillary?

[css75]

Read for yourself.

https://www.politico.com/story/2017/01/ ... ire-233446

Trumps trying to get to the bottom of the 2016 election interference.

We'll see how it plays out.

Like I said.

Can’t prove a negative.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[kalm]

Like I said.

Oh, you have proof of some other Ukraine interference, because that was the Ukrainian government admitting to helping Hillary?

Yes. Trump and Mulvaney told me about it.

[kalm]

Like I said.

Can’t prove a negative.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Jesus fucking Christ on a brush hog.

[∞∞∞]

Can’t prove a negative.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Jesus fucking Christ on a brush hog.

What's the point anymore? Trump can stomp a puppy and they'll say it attacked him.



History will look down horrendously at these people.

[kalm]

Jesus fucking Christ on a brush hog.

What's the point anymore? Trump can stomp a puppy and they'll say it attacked him.

When it’s all said and done, what’s the percentage that will admit ‘oof...I really got that one wrong’?

It will literally be a whole demographic of crazy uncles.

[∞∞∞]

When it’s all said and done, what’s the percentage that will admit ‘oof...I really got that one wrong’?

It will literally be a whole demographic of crazy uncles.

I fear Trump opened up the Pandora's Box of hate and stupidity and we'll suffer the social, political, and judicial consequences for decades, even as the nation continuously gets more progressive. Unless structural changes occur, the tyranny of the minority and crazy old uncles like AZ will be felt for a while.

I mean look at css75...Mulvaney publicly announces, "we're corrupt, get over it," and he doesn't give one sh*t. How do you even reach someone like that at this point?

[kalm]

Trump is hard on the case...



https://theintercept.com/2019/10/17/mue ... lD81ucK4B0

[UNI88]

When it’s all said and done, what’s the percentage that will admit ‘oof...I really got that one wrong’?

It will literally be a whole demographic of crazy uncles.

I fear Trump opened up the Pandora's Box of hate and stupidity and we'll suffer the social, political, and judicial consequences for decades, even as the nation continuously gets more progressive. Unless structural changes occur, the tyranny of the minority and crazy old uncles like AZ will be felt for a while.

I mean look at css75...Mulvaney publicly announces, "we're corrupt, get over it," and he doesn't give one sh*t. How do you even reach someone like that at this point?

Did they get it wrong? I didn't vote for him but I still think Trump was a better choice than Hillary. Who is responsible for putting forward a worse candidate than Trump?

What's really more damaging? Trump's bungling, public corruption or Hillary's more competent, covert corruption?



Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

[kalm]

I fear Trump opened up the Pandora's Box of hate and stupidity and we'll suffer the social, political, and judicial consequences for decades, even as the nation continuously gets more progressive. Unless structural changes occur, the tyranny of the minority and crazy old uncles like AZ will be felt for a while.

I mean look at css75...Mulvaney publicly announces, "we're corrupt, get over it," and he doesn't give one sh*t. How do you even reach someone like that at this point?

Did they get it wrong? I didn't vote for him but I still think Trump was a better choice than Hillary. Who is responsible for putting forward a worse candidate than Trump?

What's really more damaging? Trump's bungling, public corruption or Hillary's more competent, covert corruption?



Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

I’m referring to those still in denial and/or defending Trump today. Not who voted for him. I have equal fun trolling friends and family who supported Hillary and the Dem establishment in general. I thank them for bringing us Trump and it’s typically met with anger, silence, or angry silence.

Hillary is simply a kinder, gentler form of corruption. Less damaging in some ways. The wildcard going forward is whether we address corruption BECAUSE of Trump. He’ll deserve some unwitting credit if that’s the case.

[UNI88]

Did they get it wrong? I didn't vote for him but I still think Trump was a better choice than Hillary. Who is responsible for putting forward a worse candidate than Trump?

What's really more damaging? Trump's bungling, public corruption or Hillary's more competent, covert corruption?



Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

I’m referring to those still in denial and/or defending Trump today. Not who voted for him. I have equal fun trolling friends and family who supported Hillary and the Dem establishment in general. I thank them for bringing us Trump and it’s typically met with anger, silence, or angry silence.

Hillary is simply a kinder, gentler form of corruption. Less damaging in some ways. The wildcard going forward is whether we address corruption BECAUSE of Trump. He’ll deserve some unwitting credit if that’s the case.

My point is that the people who selected Hillary as their candidate have some responsibility for Trump. She was an unlikeable person who talked down to people and ignored/alienated blue collar working Democrats and that hurt in Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, etc. Warren could end up being a similar candidate. (AOC could be helping further alienate them by targeting moderate Donks like Lipinski for primary battles)

I don't think Hillary's corruption was kinder and more gentle. I think it was sinister and more damaging. It was/is a cancer.

Trump is and always been a clownish, snake oil salesmen but in 2016 I thought he was a slightly better choice. I've been pleasantly surprised by the good things he's done so that gap is even wider now.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

[kalm]

I’m referring to those still in denial and/or defending Trump today. Not who voted for him. I have equal fun trolling friends and family who supported Hillary and the Dem establishment in general. I thank them for bringing us Trump and it’s typically met with anger, silence, or angry silence.

Hillary is simply a kinder, gentler form of corruption. Less damaging in some ways. The wildcard going forward is whether we address corruption BECAUSE of Trump. He’ll deserve some unwitting credit if that’s the case.

My point is that the people who selected Hillary as their candidate have some responsibility for Trump. She was an unlikeable person who talked down to people and ignored/alienated blue collar working Democrats and that hurt in Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, etc. Warren could end up being a similar candidate. (AOC could be helping further alienate them by targeting moderate Donks like Lipinski for primary battles)

I don't think Hillary's corruption was kinder and more gentle. I think it was sinister and more damaging. It was/is a cancer.

Trump is and always been a clownish, snake oil salesmen but in 2016 I thought he was a slightly better choice. I've been pleasantly surprised by the good things he's done so that gap is even wider now.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

1). I was saying the same thing as your first sentence.

2). Corruption is nothing new. I suppose you could make a case for Hillary’s corruption being more sinister or damaging. Perhaps more deceptive is the right word?

3). I agree with Trump on immigration (not the tactics, but the need) and I like playing hardball on trade. But neither has produced convincing results yet.

What else has he accomplished?

I’d like to think you can accomplish positive things without being crooked and milking the system for personal gain. That’s why I didn’t support Hillary. Maybe I’m wrong.

[GannonFan]

Yikes, I just read that article and I'm in fear of the banana republic coming into play tomorrow or the day after.



I think he nails it on the head with this premise early on. Trump is absolutely abhorrent, and I wouldn't vote for him for any elected position. no matter how inconsequential, and certainly not something as consequential as the Presidency. But there's a lot of truth to the idea that the Resistance is far more dangerous than anything Trump can do. We investigated a political campaign of a rival party during an election, we then passed a slew of dubious information about that candidate throughout government on the way out to ensure that it would be there and shared publicly once he takes office, as Taibbi points out the intelligence agencies made sure the President knew this was out there, and we've spent every waking moment of the current Presidency attempting to remove that President from office. I don't see how any of that is good, especially if it sets the precedent of this happening over and over again in future presidencies. The TDS thing and the Resistance are funny to a point, but when they spill over into irrational and maniacal obsession with removing a President at all costs, that's where I think it is more worrisome than a morally and intellectually devoid person being President. We vote on him next November - that's when the voters can impeach and remove him from office, if they so choose. And we don't need to make up stuff or inflate stuff to do it.

Question: If the Resistance is "far more dangerous than anything Trump can do" why would you not vote for him, given that his opponent will most decidedly be from said Resistance?

In good conscience. I couldn't vote for Hillary because of her rank corruption. I won't vote for Trump because of his personal abhorrence and his rank corruption. I don't know who his opponent is yet. If I don't like them I'm throwing my vote away again. I'm not going to vote for a bad candidate just because I only have a choice between two bad candidates. Not every Democrat I see so far would fall under the umbrella of The Resistance lunacy. I'll wait to see who makes it out of the nomination process.

[SeattleGriz]

Oh, you have proof of some other Ukraine interference, because that was the Ukrainian government admitting to helping Hillary?

Yes. Trump and Mulvaney told me about it.

Zelensky says he felt no quid pro or the fact the transcript speaks differently than your version. Orange man bad though. Lol

[AZGrizFan]

1). I was saying the same thing as your first sentence.

2). Corruption is nothing new. I suppose you could make a case for Hillary’s corruption being more sinister or damaging. Perhaps more deceptive is the right word?

3). I agree with Trump on immigration (not the tactics, but the need) and I like playing hardball on trade. But neither has produced convincing results yet.

What else has he accomplished?

I’d like to think you can accomplish positive things without being crooked and milking the system for personal gain. That’s why I didn’t support Hillary. Maybe I’m wrong.

How is he to "produce convincing results" when he's being fought tooth and nail at every turn? He's spent the entirety of his presidency fighting for the legitimacy of his presidency. And every idea...even the good ones that donks USED to support...is viewed as "the devil" because he supports it.