kalm wrote: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?
as opposed to your politicians, who pretend to NOT be corrupt and act all morally superior and dipshits like you buy it hook, line and sinker...
"Ah fuck. You are right." KYJelly, 11/6/12
"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam." Barack Obama, 9/25/12
∞∞∞ wrote:
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?
as opposed to your politicians, who pretend to NOT be corrupt and act all morally superior and dipshits like you buy it hook, line and sinker...
Trumps DoJ has been actively investigating Hillary for 2 years...
so really anything by now would be nice...
Q: Name something that offends Republicans?
A: The actual teachings of Jesus
AZGrizFan wrote:
as opposed to your politicians, who pretend to NOT be corrupt and act all morally superior and dipshits like you buy it hook, line and sinker...
Trumps DoJ has been actively investigating Hillary for 2 years...
so really anything by now would be nice...
If you want to enrich yourself with high office, you've got to do it the legal way, like taking millions of dollars to give speeches to Wall street banks as thanks for ensuring regulations will hurt small banks and credit unions and not TBTF behemoths. Doing petty things like holding the G7 at a resort you own on the other hand is a clear emoluments violation.
kalm wrote:
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
The administration literally told Zelensky he could only meet face to face with Trump IF he PUBLICLY announced a investigation into Biden. Didn’t he also ask the Chinese to look into Warren and Biden.
Orange Man superhero extraordinaire! Fighting corruption from Kiev to Shanghai!!!
SeattleGriz wrote:
Zelensky says he felt no quid pro or the fact the transcript speaks differently than your version. Orange man bad though. Lol
The administration literally told Zelensky he could only meet face to face with Trump IF he PUBLICLY announced a investigation into Biden. Didn’t he also ask the Chinese to look into Warren and Biden.
Orange Man superhero extraordinaire! Fighting corruption from Kiev to Shanghai!!!
kalm wrote:
The administration literally told Zelensky he could only meet face to face with Trump IF he PUBLICLY announced a investigation into Biden. Didn’t he also ask the Chinese to look into Warren and Biden.
Orange Man superhero extraordinaire! Fighting corruption from Kiev to Shanghai!!!
You got a link for that tidbit?
Text messages released by House committees late Thursday revealed that Trump administration officials sought to use a White House meeting between Mr. Trump and his Ukrainian counterpart as leverage to press the Ukrainian government to pursue an investigation into Mr. Biden and other matters. The messages indicate that U.S. officials coordinated with aides to the Ukrainian president and Rudy Giuliani, Mr. Trump’s private lawyer, on a draft statement in which Kyiv would announce an investigation into Mr. Biden and the 2016 U.S. election—at the same time as announcing a visit by the Ukrainian president to the White House.
Skjellyfetti wrote:No, the difference is you've got to do it after you leave office.
If you're accepting millions of dollars to give Wall Street speeches while you hold a high office it's corruption.
I don't think Trump would have a lot of pull to host G7 at one of his resorts when he's no longer POTUS.
Why not? Do you really think the Clinton Foundation was an entirely non-political humanitarian enterprise? After seeing all of this I want to know who's not crooked in government right now. It will certainly be a quicker conversation.
Legality would be for a lawyer and judge to decide. My non-law school guess would be that just taking a millions for giving Wall Street speeches would not be illegal unless there were strings attached (explicit or implicit).
And, there's a Constitutional distinction as well - as the emoluments clause could apply to receiving $$ from foreign governments, but not to US corporations. Whether the emoluments clause applies to Trump hosting the G7 at his resort is opinion either way. SCOTUS hasn't ruled much on it.
"The unmasking thing was all created by Devin Nunes"
- Richard Burr, (R-NC)
kalm wrote:
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.
I seem to recall the Republicans doing a bit of that to Obama.
Chizzang wrote:
Trumps DoJ has been actively investigating Hillary for 2 years...
so really anything by now would be nice...
If you want to enrich yourself with high office, you've got to do it the legal way, like taking millions of dollars to give speeches to Wall street banks as thanks for ensuring regulations will hurt small banks and credit unions and not TBTF behemoths. Doing petty things like holding the G7 at a resort you own on the other hand is a clear emoluments violation.
Whats your point..?
I'm sure you have a point of some kind
Q: Name something that offends Republicans?
A: The actual teachings of Jesus
SeattleGriz wrote:
You got a link for that tidbit?
Text messages released by House committees late Thursday revealed that Trump administration officials sought to use a White House meeting between Mr. Trump and his Ukrainian counterpart as leverage to press the Ukrainian government to pursue an investigation into Mr. Biden and other matters. The messages indicate that U.S. officials coordinated with aides to the Ukrainian president and Rudy Giuliani, Mr. Trump’s private lawyer, on a draft statement in which Kyiv would announce an investigation into Mr. Biden and the 2016 U.S. election—at the same time as announcing a visit by the Ukrainian president to the White House.
Tried incognito and couldn't get past pay wall. Who's text messages?
Didn't the Ukrainians reach out to Guiliani before Trumps call, because their attempts at reaching the US were being blocked. Wanted to talk about Bidens shakedown long before Trump's call.
Tried incognito and couldn't get past pay wall. Who's text messages?
Volker with Sondland and others.
SeattleGriz wrote:
Didn't the Ukrainians reach out to Guiliani before Trumps call, because their attempts at reaching the US were being blocked. Wanted to talk about Bidens shakedown long before Trump's call.
No. Link?
Why would the Ukrainian initiate this with fucking Guiliani of all people? And he blocked it?
Sounds like conservativetreehouse BS.
"The unmasking thing was all created by Devin Nunes"
- Richard Burr, (R-NC)
SeattleGriz wrote:
Tried incognito and couldn't get past pay wall. Who's text messages?
Volker with Sondland and others.
SeattleGriz wrote:
Didn't the Ukrainians reach out to Guiliani before Trumps call, because their attempts at reaching the US were being blocked. Wanted to talk about Bidens shakedown long before Trump's call.
No. Link?
Why would the Ukrainian initiate this with fucking Guiliani of all people? And he blocked it?
Sounds like conservativetreehouse BS.
Because Yovanovitch supposedly wouldn't grant visas and then the DOJ wouldn't meet with them. The Ukrainians then reached out to Guiliani saying they had information they wanted to give over. Rudy told this story on TV.
Skjellyfetti wrote:
Volker with Sondland and others.
No. Link?
Why would the Ukrainian initiate this with fucking Guiliani of all people? And he blocked it?
Sounds like conservativetreehouse BS.
Because Yovanovitch supposedly wouldn't grant visas and then the DOJ wouldn't meet with them. The Ukrainians then reached out to Guiliani saying they had information they wanted to give over. Rudy told this story on TV.
Yeah...saddle up to Rudy...
I still think you’re trolling but sometimes I wonder...
kalm wrote: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?
There's the regressive Trip we've known for the past 3 years...
UNI88 wrote:
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 wrote:
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.
What’s the body count up to now?
..peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard..
..But you have to go home now. We have to have peace…
..I know how you feel, but go home, and go home in peace.
JMU Football: 2022 & 2023 Sun Belt East Champions.
