Sign in to follow this  
Bus Driver

What will the Faithful do....

Recommended Posts

....when it all blows up with the release of Mueller's report? 

Will they disappear (à la Jack and his "cruises"), only to reappear with a new ID and deny their previous ID (à la Jack and his slew of them)?

Will they soldier and continue to defend?

Will they deny ever having supported or defended their Messiah (à la Peter and Jesus)?

Something else?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Bus Driver said:

....when it all blows up with the release of Mueller's report? 

Will they disappear (à la Jack and his "cruises"), only to reappear with a new ID and deny their previous ID (à la Jack and his slew of them)?

Will they soldier and continue to defend?

Will they deny ever having supported or defended their Messiah (à la Peter and Jesus)?

Something else?

They'll say that Hilary used email and that Obama was worse.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Lifted Tack said:

They'll say that Hilary used email and that Obama was worse.

Don't forget BENGHAZI!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Bus Driver said:

....when it all blows up with the release of Mueller's report? 

Will they disappear (à la Jack and his "cruises"), only to reappear with a new ID and deny their previous ID (à la Jack and his slew of them)?

Will they soldier and continue to defend?

Will they deny ever having supported or defended their Messiah (à la Peter and Jesus)?

Something else?

After Watergate, Conservatives rallied around Nixon, refused to believe the liberal press, and wanted revenge for what they considered was a partisan action. The same could happen now, and I think the best way to handle this is not through impeachment, but charges in a criminal court. A person found guilty through a jury deliberation would put this whole episode to bed and help put an end to future bad actors entering politics. A jury conviction in Watergate would have eliminated Iran Contra, Bush II, and waterboarding, phony intelligence, and Donald Trump.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In regard to Trump's defense, so far here I've seen the same tactic as Trump uses himself.  Complete denial of reality.  The defense will continue in a repeat of Trump's narrative. Whatever is determined by the investigation, claim the opposite.  Whatever charges are filed, claim the opposite.  Whatever outcome of trials, claim the opposite. Trump has been doing this his entire public life.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@badlatitude, and anybody lose who remembers.    What happened with Nixon that led his party to abandon him for country?   They usually didn’t say much in history class, except the basic facts with no political overtones.   They wouldn’t even mention Nixon was affiliated with a political party.   The first I heard of supporters was when the Republicans tried to rehabilitate him in the popular media just before his death.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bus Driver said:

....when it all blows up with the release of Mueller's report? 

Will they disappear (à la Jack and his "cruises"), only to reappear with a new ID and deny their previous ID (à la Jack and his slew of them)?

Will they soldier and continue to defend?

Will they deny ever having supported or defended their Messiah (à la Peter and Jesus)?

Something else?

 

What happens if the only indictment is of the 'pay off the hooker' variety and there's no indictment on colluding with the Russians?  Is that good enough for the faithful?  I see so many echo's of Clinton in all this.  Whitewater no, lying to a grand jury yes.  Colluding with Russia no, violating campaign law and trying to cover up an affair yes.

We'll see what happens but I'm betting the report does nothing to change the hard fault lines.  There might be some movement in the middle but I think it'll be more of the 'throw them all out' variety.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, cmilliken said:

What happens if the only indictment is of the 'pay off the hooker' variety and there's no indictment on colluding with the Russians?  Is that good enough for the faithful?  I see so many echo's of Clinton in all this.  Whitewater no, lying to a grand jury yes.  Colluding with Russia no, violating campaign law and trying to cover up an affair yes.

Other than - they actually talk about collusion in the sentencing documents - sure you, are right. I get it - you don't actually want to read any of this stuff, and you just want stuff to confirm your "duopolys suck, I'm a libertarian and so much better" bias - but you are actually showing you are worse.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Lark said:

@badlatitude, and anybody lose who remembers.    What happened with Nixon that led his party to abandon him for country?   They usually didn’t say much in history class, except the basic facts with no political overtones.   They wouldn’t even mention Nixon was affiliated with a political party.   The first I heard of supporters was when the Republicans tried to rehabilitate him in the popular media just before his death.   

Except that his shitty treatment of his wife in public kind of made him look like a dickhead, and his bizarre third-person self-congratulations every time he got in front a microphone, kind of made a heck of a lot of people wonder why they ever voted for him.

 

42 minutes ago, cmilliken said:

 

What happens if the only indictment is of the 'pay off the hooker' variety and there's no indictment on colluding with the Russians?  Is that good enough for the faithful?  I see so many echo's of Clinton in all this.  Whitewater no, lying to a grand jury yes.  Colluding with Russia no, violating campaign law and trying to cover up an affair yes.

We'll see what happens but I'm betting the report does nothing to change the hard fault lines.  There might be some movement in the middle but I think it'll be more of the 'throw them all out' variety.

Well, there's already a lot more corroborating details on "collusion" than you apparently want to admit. Will there be charges based on this? Hard to say, but there is already a desk full of sealed indictments waiting.

One of the things that bothers me so much about the "No Collusion" mindset is the overlooking so many obvious and widely-known facts. Trump's hollering that he "had no business in Russia" when it was common public knowledge that he had a LOT of business in/with Russia.... why the absurd denial? Why did Kushner want to set up a secret line to the Kremlin? Why did President Trump, very soon after being inaugurated, have a meeting with Putin IN THE WHITE HOUSE with no American other than his translator present? Etc etc etc.

Unless a person is the hate-filled spiteful dittohead type, who'd rather be ruled by Russia than governed by Democrats, it really doesn't make sense to me why that person overlooks so much.

-DSK

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

Well, there's already a lot more corroborating details on "collusion" than you apparently want to admit. Will there be charges based on this? Hard to say, but there is already a desk full of sealed indictments waiting.

One of the things that bothers me so much about the "No Collusion" mindset is the overlooking so many obvious and widely-known facts. Trump's hollering that he "had no business in Russia" when it was common public knowledge that he had a LOT of business in/with Russia.... why the absurd denial? Why did Kushner want to set up a secret line to the Kremlin? Why did President Trump, very soon after being inaugurated, have a meeting with Putin IN THE WHITE HOUSE with no American other than his translator present? Etc etc etc.

Unless a person is the hate-filled spiteful dittohead type, who'd rather be ruled by Russia than governed by Democrats, it really doesn't make sense to me why that person overlooks so much.

-DSK

@Dog is hanging his hat on that word and the tense used.  It seems, in his mind, that if President Trump didn't have (present tense) any business in Russia at the time he said "I have no business in Russia", that is enough.  Turn away, nothing to see here. 

Pay no attention to his son saying they get most of their cash from Russia. 

Pay no attention to the condos he sold to oligarch who, likely, were looking for some money to be laundered. 

Pay no attention to that business deal in which President Trump sold a Florida estate to a Russian oligarch for 2.5x what he paid 4 years earlier, despite that not being anywhere indicative of housing price increases.

President Trump had no business with Russia AT THAT PRECISE MOMENT, so we should all just move along.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's two different courts.  Mueller is responding to the legal hurdle and that's the issue to which I thought this thread was aimed.  I think Muller's got the campaign finance indictment sewn up.  He's got Trumps admissions of payment, Daniels admission of payment, testimony of the lawyer who handled the payment, and a law that pretty clearly says 'you can't do that'.  Hence my reply.  But, in an actual court, does Muller have the evidence to convict on collusion.  I'm still waiting to see what he's got before I do my armchair legal drivel.

In the court of public opinion - what I think you've introduced with the 'widely-known facts' reference  - is one which Trump will most certainly face in 23 months.  So far, Trump has been pretty weak and ineffective as a leader but has benefited from the Nat. Gas boom and untold billions of dollars in free advertising.  It's incredible to think of the free airtime he gets every week.  I think all the democrats have to do in 2020 is not nominate Hillary and the status quo is once more, comfortably re-established.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, cmilliken said:

But, in an actual court, does Muller have the evidence to convict on collusion

There is no crime of collusion. Of course he doesn't have the evidence to convict on collusion.

He already has evidence - detailed in court filings - of the Trump family, and the Trump org, contacting Russia on multiple occasions and Russia dangling incentives to the Trump org. The Russian government offering "political synergy". He has clear evidence of multiple Trump org members lying about these contacts. People affiliated with the Trump campaign regularly contacted what we shall now call a Russian front (wikileaks) in regards to leaks of opposition documents.

What the hell are you arguing for? It'll never be enough to convince the faithful. Or apparently you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, cmilliken said:

There's two different courts.  Mueller is responding to the legal hurdle and that's the issue to which I thought this thread was aimed.  I think Muller's got the campaign finance indictment sewn up.  He's got Trumps admissions of payment, Daniels admission of payment, testimony of the lawyer who handled the payment, and a law that pretty clearly says 'you can't do that'.  Hence my reply. 

bimbo payments are not illegal

the law says 'you have to disclose that'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, hermetic said:

bimbo payments are not illegal

the law says 'you have to disclose that'

Right, sort of like getting a blow job is not illegal..... well, actually a man getting a blowjob from anyone other than his wife is illegal here in NC, in fact I'm not sure if oral sex is illegal in itself, but that's wandering a bit far from the track.......

"Bimbo payments are not illegal" but lying about them under oath, is very definitely illegal.

Personally, I believe (based on what I've read from a wide variety of sources) that President Trump's transgressions go far far beyond this. But it gets down to, what can be PROVEN beyond any possible shadow of a doubt (except to the faithful, who will belief Trump's statements and tweets above what they see with their own eyes).

-DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Steam Flyer said:

Right, sort of like getting a blow job is not illegal..... well, actually a man getting a blowjob from anyone other than his wife is illegal here in NC, in fact I'm not sure if oral sex is illegal in itself, but that's wandering a bit far from the track.......

Those dirty liberals on the Supreme Court struck down sodomy laws in 2003 (Lawrence vs. Texas). Our good "freedom defenders" Scalia, Thomas & Rehnquist stuck up for the states right to ban private sexual conduct between consenting adults.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But, but, but Russian collusion!  The lefty choir has been ADAMANT from the jump that the Trump campaign colluded with the Russians. If the Mueller report concludes there was no Russian collusion, will the lefty choir admit they were wrong?

NFW!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

Those dirty liberals on the Supreme Court struck down sodomy laws in 2003 (Lawrence vs. Texas). Our good "freedom defenders" Scalia, Thomas & Rehnquist stuck up for the states right to ban private sexual conduct between consenting adults.

Stite's Rats!  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, hermetic said:

bimbo payments are not illegal

the law says 'you have to disclose that'

Truth.  I was sloppy in my representation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Bus Driver said:

@Dog is hanging his hat on that word and the tense used.  It seems, in his mind, that if President Trump didn't have (present tense) any business in Russia at the time he said "I have no business in Russia", that is enough.  Turn away, nothing to see here. 

Pay no attention to his son saying they get most of their cash from Russia. 

Pay no attention to the condos he sold to oligarch who, likely, were looking for some money to be laundered. 

Pay no attention to that business deal in which President Trump sold a Florida estate to a Russian oligarch for 2.5x what he paid 4 years earlier, despite that not being anywhere indicative of housing price increases.

President Trump had no business with Russia AT THAT PRECISE MOMENT, so we should all just move along.

Hang my hat? There's nothing to hang my hat about, you have no crime. I'll consider the merits of a criminal charge if and when it comes. Untill then you're peeing into the wind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:
25 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

Right, sort of like getting a blow job is not illegal..... well, actually a man getting a blowjob from anyone other than his wife is illegal here in NC, in fact I'm not sure if oral sex is illegal in itself, but that's wandering a bit far from the track.......

Those dirty liberals on the Supreme Court struck down sodomy laws in 2003 (Lawrence vs. Texas). Our good "freedom defenders" Scalia, Thomas & Rehnquist stuck up for the states right to ban private sexual conduct between consenting adults.

The NC legislature does not have to follow the Supreme Court

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/8/29/17795920/2018-midterms-north-carolina-gerrymandering-case-supreme-court

They did get rid of the 1890s law that any motorized vehicle on public roads in NC had to fire off flares when approaching an intersection, but there's a long list of stupid outdated ones. A very old law that I agree should remain on the books, alienation of affection

http://www.dumblaws.com/laws/united-states/north-carolina

-DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, badlatitude said:

 A jury conviction in Watergate would have eliminated Iran Contra, Bush II, and waterboarding, phony intelligence, and Donald Trump.

No it wouldn't.

Ford was right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

Those dirty liberals on the Supreme Court struck down sodomy laws in 2003 (Lawrence vs. Texas). Our good "freedom defenders" Scalia, Thomas & Rehnquist stuck up for the states right to ban private sexual conduct between consenting adults.

Was it Scalia's job to change the government to his liking or interpret the Constitution?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bimbo payments are illegal if they can be shown to be unreported 

campaign spending. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, AJ Oliver said:

Bimbo payments are illegal if they can be shown to be unreported 

campaign spending. 

Only if the payment was necessary for campaign related reasons. If the bimbo payment was necessary anyway for other reasons (like keeping the wife ignorant) they may not have to be reported.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, badlatitude said:

After Watergate, Conservatives rallied around Nixon, refused to believe the liberal press, and wanted revenge for what they considered was a partisan action. The same could happen now, and I think the best way to handle this is not through impeachment, but charges in a criminal court. A person found guilty through a jury deliberation would put this whole episode to bed and help put an end to future bad actors entering politics. A jury conviction in Watergate would have eliminated Iran Contra, Bush II, and waterboarding, phony intelligence, and Donald Trump.

Except my understanding is that a sitting president cannot be tried in a criminal jury court unless he/she has been first impeached and convicted/removed by the Senate.  I am happy to be corrected if I am wrong.  

But I think impeachment is your only recourse if you want him out before 2024.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Dog said:

Only if the payment was necessary for campaign related reasons. If the bimbo payment was necessary anyway for other reasons (like keeping the wife ignorant) they may not have to be reported.

Please cite the authority for that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Olsonist said:

Well, the bitch is burning down. So it's all good. In fact, we should be thankful.

I am.  We have been in dire need of a "bitch burning" for a while.  

I am very hopeful that Trump gets impeached.  It will be the cleansing fire the GOP has needed for a while.  What this country has needed for a while in fact.  IMHO, the best thing for the GOP would be for the R led Senate to convict him.  If they don't I think it will collapse.

And if that does happen^^, I'm hopeful that the GOP will rebuild itself stronger once they clear up the ashes of the current bitch.  It will either rebuild or die.  And if it dies, I hope it is replaced with something much better.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

What the hell are you arguing for? It'll never be enough to convince the faithful. Or apparently you.

Whatever you say, razr.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Dog said:

Only if the payment was necessary for campaign related reasons. If the bimbo payment was necessary anyway for other reasons (like keeping the wife ignorant) they may not have to be reported.

Has the President responded truthfully to questions regarding the payments?

If Mr. Mueller asked, and the President was not.....whoopsies. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Shootist Jeff said:

And if that does happen^^, I'm hopeful that the GOP will rebuild itself stronger once they clear up the ashes of the current bitch.  It will either rebuild or die.  And if it dies, I hope it is replaced with something much better.  

nah, the national GOP will end up like the california GOP, a rump party of rural failures, embittered and doubling down on stupid. so, not much different than now. they'll sit around culture warring about liberals... pretty much what you do now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Shootist Jeff said:

I am.  We have been in dire need of a "bitch burning" for a while.  

I am very hopeful that Trump gets impeached.  It will be the cleansing fire the GOP has needed for a while.  What this country has needed for a while in fact.  IMHO, the best thing for the GOP would be for the R led Senate to convict him.  If they don't I think it will collapse.

And if that does happen^^, I'm hopeful that the GOP will rebuild itself stronger once they clear up the ashes of the current bitch.  It will either rebuild or die.  And if it dies, I hope it is replaced with something much better.  

 

How's that hopey, changey thing been going for you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Dog said:

Only if the payment was necessary for campaign related reasons. If the bimbo payment was necessary anyway for other reasons (like keeping the wife ignorant) they may not have to be reported.

Minimize

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Shootist Jeff said:

Except my understanding is that a sitting president cannot be tried in a criminal jury court unless he/she has been first impeached and convicted/removed by the Senate.  I am happy to be corrected if I am wrong.  

But I think impeachment is your only recourse if you want him out before 2024.  

The argument that a sitting President cannot be indicted is both wrong and untested. I would enjoy seeing how the Supreme Court would rule on something like that; I'm sure we would see pitchforks on the court steps. That said, the Office of Legal Counsel has always served the interests of the President. In Watergate we couldn't indict, In Clinton, we could, In Bush, torture was okay, In Trump, we can't indict. It's all conjecture.

We are being pushed along to impeachment, and it will be interesting to see Republicans squirm when forced to decide a decision that will affect the 2020 race. If Mueller hits a home run, Republicans will have a quandary for the ages.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Christie Says Prosecutors Have Evidence Trump Broke Law

December 9, 2018 

Former New Jersey Governor Chris Christie (R) told ABC News that the language federal prosecutors are using to refer to President Trump in an indictment against Michael Cohen makes it sound as if they might have corroborating evidence that Trump violated campaign finance law. 

Said Christie: “The language in the sentencing memo is different from what we’ve heard before. The only thing that would concern me if I was the president’s team this morning about this sentencing memo is the language.” 

He added: “The language sounds very definite. And what I’d be concerned about is, what corroboration do they have?” 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:
8 minutes ago, Shootist Jeff said:

Whatever you say, razr.

On the path you are going now Jeffreaux it's only a month or two before you start being one of those Q-Anon Q-berts.

Look Mitch..... I get the desire for a sock to be able to express your "other" more angry side.  I really do.  I dabbled with a sock years ago and found it was hard to keep up the firewall between the two.  So now that we've found out @Raz'r = @Mismoyled Jiblet., you don't need to keep up the charade any more.  Pick a persona and go with it.

But just a friendly word of advice, the raz'r one was usually calmer  -so I would stick with that one if I were you.  Although raz'r has lately picked up a bit of MJ's anger tendencies.  Just saying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, SloopJonB said:

How's that hopey, changey thing been going for you?

Actually, really well so far.  Mueller's been better than expected.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Shootist Jeff said:

Look Mitch..... I get the desire for a sock to be able to express your "other" more angry side.  I really do.  I dabbled with a sock years ago and found it was hard to keep up the firewall between the two.  So now that we've found out @Raz'r = @Mismoyled Jiblet., you don't need to keep up the charade any more.  Pick a persona and go with it.

But just a friendly word of advice, the raz'r one was usually calmer  -so I would stick with that one if I were you.  Although raz'r has lately picked up a bit of MJ's anger tendencies.  Just saying.

Bullshitting because you've got fucking nothing. Just an old dumbfuck, believing what other nutjob conspiracy old dumbfucks say, on your way to dumbfucklandia.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, badlatitude said:

The argument that a sitting President cannot be indicted is both wrong and untested.

Re read that statement again a few times and tell us if you can spot the irony.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:
4 minutes ago, Shootist Jeff said:

Look Mitch..... I get the desire for a sock to be able to express your "other" more angry side.  I really do.  I dabbled with a sock years ago and found it was hard to keep up the firewall between the two.  So now that we've found out @Raz'r = @Mismoyled Jiblet., you don't need to keep up the charade any more.  Pick a persona and go with it.

But just a friendly word of advice, the raz'r one was usually calmer  -so I would stick with that one if I were you.  Although raz'r has lately picked up a bit of MJ's anger tendencies.  Just saying.

Bullshitting because you've got fucking nothing.

Would you be willing to let a mod arbitrate whether it is BS or not?  I'm happy to apologize if I'm wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Shootist Jeff said:

Would you be willing to let a mod arbitrate whether it is BS or not?  I'm happy to apologize if I'm wrong.

Why would either of us want an apology from a piece of shit like you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Shootist Jeff said:

I am.  We have been in dire need of a "bitch burning" for a while.  

I am very hopeful that Trump gets impeached.  It will be the cleansing fire the GOP has needed for a while.  What this country has needed for a while in fact.  IMHO, the best thing for the GOP would be for the R led Senate to convict him.  If they don't I think it will collapse.

And if that does happen^^, I'm hopeful that the GOP will rebuild itself stronger once they clear up the ashes of the current bitch.  It will either rebuild or die.  And if it dies, I hope it is replaced with something much better.  

 

So let’s say the bitch gets burned down.  While the bitch gets rebuilt, we’ll have the Democrat Party in control of the House, Senate and the WH, the result of which will be spending like we’ve never seen before and tax increases on the producers.  In addition, Democrats will be taking steps to lock in their majority permanently.  By the time the bitch is rebuilt, the interest on the national debt will be the largest item in the Fed budget.  No one knows at what point the ND becomes an unsustainable burden, but I fear we’ll find out before too long after the Democrats regain power.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:
7 minutes ago, Shootist Jeff said:

Would you be willing to let a mod arbitrate whether it is BS or not?  I'm happy to apologize if I'm wrong.

Why would either of us want an apology from a piece of shit like you?

That's pretty much the answer I expected from you @Raz'r

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, J28 said:

So let’s say the bitch gets burned down.  While the bitch gets rebuilt, we’ll have the Democrat Party in control of the House, Senate and the WH, the result of which will be spending like we’ve never seen before and tax increases on the producers.  In addition, Democrats will be taking steps to lock in their majority permanently.  By the time the bitch is rebuilt, the interest on the national debt will be the largest item in the Fed budget.  No one knows at what point the ND becomes an unsustainable burden, but I fear we’ll find out before too long after the Democrats regain power.

Except historically, it is the Republican Party who has surrendered the mantle of fiscal responsibility and the Democrats who have had to rebuild the economy. You haven't been paying attention, or just listening to old memes to guide your thoughts about debt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, J28 said:

So let’s say the bitch gets burned down.  While the bitch gets rebuilt, we’ll have the Democrat Party in control of the House, Senate and the WH, the result of which will be spending like we’ve never seen before and tax increases on the producers.  In addition, Democrats will be taking steps to lock in their majority permanently.  By the time the bitch is rebuilt, the interest on the national debt will be the largest item in the Fed budget.  No one knows at what point the ND becomes an unsustainable burden, but I fear we’ll find out before too long after the Democrats regain power.

Well, that is the risk you take when you allow your party to become utterly morally corrupt, allow the bible thumpers to take over, and elect a buffoon like the orangeman we have now.  

Meh.  It will sort itself out eventually.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Shootist Jeff said:

Well, that is the risk you take when you allow your party to become utterly morally corrupt, allow the bible thumpers to take over, and elect a buffoon like the orangeman we have now.  

Meh.  It will sort itself out eventually.

they've got to pander to racist trash like you Jeff, what can they do?

ask the mods if I'm a sock, do, I'm sure you'll spin the "jeffs a stupid fuck" statement you get back to your favor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Best headline of the day.

Schiff: Trump may face 'real prospect of jail time'

Source: The Hill

Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) on Sunday said that President Trump might "face the real prospect of jail time" after prosecutors indicated last week that he directed illegal payments during his 2016 presidential campaign. 

"There’s a very real prospect that on the day Donald Trump leaves office, the Justice Department may indict him. That he may be the first president in quite some time to face the real prospect of jail time," he said on CBS's "Face the Nation." 

@AdamSchiff on the Russia Investigation: "My takeaway is there's a very real prospect that on the day Donald Trump leaves office the justice department may indict him. That he may be the first president in quite some time to face the real prospect of jail time." 



Read more: https://thehill.com/homenews/sunday-talk-shows/420450-schiff-trump-may-face-real-prospect-of-jail-time

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:
2 minutes ago, Shootist Jeff said:

Well, that is the risk you take when you allow your party to become utterly morally corrupt, allow the bible thumpers to take over, and elect a buffoon like the orangeman we have now.  

Meh.  It will sort itself out eventually.

they've got to pander to racist trash like you Jeff, what can they do?

@Raz'r, when you find yourself at the bottom of a hole.... stop digging.  Just saying.

images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSL4LiNOGhaZ4C4qgwg5bd

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Shootist Jeff said:

Well, that is the risk you take when you allow your party to become utterly morally corrupt, allow the bible thumpers to take over, and elect a buffoon like the orangeman we have now.  

Meh.  It will sort itself out eventually.

I doubt there’ll be much left worth sorting out by then.  I’ll be gone, but I sure worry about the country we left for my children and grandchildren.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, badlatitude said:

Best headline of the day.

Schiff: Trump may face 'real prospect of jail time'

Source: The Hill

Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) on Sunday said that President Trump might "face the real prospect of jail time" after prosecutors indicated last week that he directed illegal payments during his 2016 presidential campaign. 

"There’s a very real prospect that on the day Donald Trump leaves office, the Justice Department may indict him. That he may be the first president in quite some time to face the real prospect of jail time," he said on CBS's "Face the Nation." 

@AdamSchiff on the Russia Investigation: "My takeaway is there's a very real prospect that on the day Donald Trump leaves office the justice department may indict him. That he may be the first president in quite some time to face the real prospect of jail time." 



Read more: https://thehill.com/homenews/sunday-talk-shows/420450-schiff-trump-may-face-real-prospect-of-jail-time

Buh, buh, butt I thought you said a sitting president could be indicted?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Shootist Jeff said:

I am.  We have been in dire need of a "bitch burning" for a while.  

I am very hopeful that Trump gets impeached.  It will be the cleansing fire the GOP has needed for a while.  What this country has needed for a while in fact.  IMHO, the best thing for the GOP would be for the R led Senate to convict him.  If they don't I think it will collapse.

And if that does happen^^, I'm hopeful that the GOP will rebuild itself stronger once they clear up the ashes of the current bitch.  It will either rebuild or die.  And if it dies, I hope it is replaced with something much better.  

Where to even start?

Republicans have resented Nixon being forced from office for 44 years. Next year it will be 45. That was what Bork, Starr and Kavenaugh were all about, payback for Nixon. That was why they/you hated Hillary so much. Moreover, Shitstain isn't going to get impeached convicted by Republicans when he polls 89% among them. That's not even wrong. That's just silly.

Will Republicans actually learn anything from this? Do you have any evidence that Republicans have so far? Are Republicans even capable? After Birthers, Benghazi and Shitstain, the answer is no.

Republicans sold out the country. Wake up and smell the treason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, J28 said:
8 minutes ago, Shootist Jeff said:

Well, that is the risk you take when you allow your party to become utterly morally corrupt, allow the bible thumpers to take over, and elect a buffoon like the orangeman we have now.  

Meh.  It will sort itself out eventually.

I doubt there’ll be much left worth sorting out by then.  I’ll be gone, but I sure worry about the country we left for my children and grandchildren.

What about the country you're leaving for them now?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Shootist Jeff said:

Buh, buh, butt I thought you said a sitting president could be indicted?

Some people like Schiff, need to find out things the hard way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

@Shootist Jeff doesn't understand irony.

@Shootist Jeff is just being a trolling dickwad

@Shootist Jeff will get a pass on this from @A guy in the Chesapeake because @Shootist Jeff gets a pass for being a raging cunt.

Hey dude, I'm not the one being a raging cunt here.  You should try this:

main-qimg-8415b690d53779f0195ff03983bde1

Maybe Mike has some emergency Stairwell locations in the Berkeley area he can send you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Shootist Jeff said:

What about the country you're leaving for them now?

The ND is a hanging like a noose over them, but I have more faith In divided govt keeping it from getting MUCH worse (which IMHO will occur if the bitch gets torched.)

Other than that, from my perspective, things have gotten better since the election of 2016.  So if you are suggesting the country is heading in the wrong direction, what would you list as the top 3 problems in the country right now?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, J28 said:

The ND is a hanging like a noose over them, but I have more faith In divided govt keeping it from getting MUCH worse (which IMHO will occur if the bitch gets torched.)

Other than that, from my perspective, things have gotten better since the election of 2016.  So if you are suggesting the country is heading in the wrong direction, what would you list as the top 3 problems in the country right now?

You misunderstand.  I've never said the GOP's issues started in 2016.  The "fiscal conservative" GOP have been spending like drunken sailors on shore leave for quite a while now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, J28 said:

So if you are suggesting the country is heading in the wrong direction, what would you list as the top 3 problems in the country right now?

President Trump.

Tax cuts we can’t afford. 

GOP that is ignoring the dumpster fire. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dog said:

Only if the payment was necessary for campaign related reasons. If the bimbo payment was necessary anyway for other reasons (like keeping the wife ignorant) they may not have to be reported.

it's too late for that - trump already listed the payment in a fec filing.  which is probably why mueller kicked the case down to sdny

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, hermetic said:

it's too late for that - trump already listed the payment in a fec filing.  which is probably why mueller kicked the case down to sdny

Dog’s not interested in the type of facts that get in the way of his defense (but, not support) of President Trump. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SloopJonB said:

No it wouldn't.

Ford was right.

Ford was wrong, he issued a pardon to the person who had appointed him. He took Nixon off the hook for a crime against the country.

He put Richard Nixon above the law. His lazy view of the law was a complete lack of faith in America and its institutions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Shootist Jeff said:

Meh.  It will sort itself out eventually.

Don't be too sure of that.

The shitstain is, or at least could be a game changer. He's doing a lot of very long term damage. Even Nixon kept his damage in-house, he didn't wreck long standing international relationships. The world economy was very different then too - Europe had barely recovered fully from the war and China was a backward, peasant nation.

What Trump is doing internationally is not dissimilar to a spouse cheating - some relationships survive it but things are never the same again.

Once trust is lost it's virtually impossible to regain it and the USA has already lost the worlds trust because of the shitstain..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the case were to go to trial, the NY prosecutors would have to put Cohen on the stand to testify that Trump directed him to make the payments and how to do it.  Cohen is a known liar and Trump’s attorneys will use that fact to  tear him a new one.  No way they will get a conviction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, badlatitude said:

Ford was wrong, he issued a pardon to the person who had appointed him. He took Nixon off the hook for a crime against the country.

He put Richard Nixon above the law. His lazy view of the law was a complete lack of faith in America and its institutions.

Bullshit - he did it because he knew the country would be torn apart for at least a decade if it dragged through the courts. It was the statesmanlike thing to do - he knew it would kill any future chance he had in an election.

Charging Nixon would have been vengeance, nothing else. They couldn't do anything worse to him than forcing him out and ruining his reputation for posterity.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, SloopJonB said:

Bullshit - he did it because he knew the country would be torn apart for at least a decade if it dragged through the courts. It was the statesmanlike thing to do - he knew it would kill any future chance he had in an election.

Charging Nixon would have been vengeance, nothing else. They couldn't do anything worse to him than forcing him out and ruining his reputation for posterity.

Charging Nixon, who committed an offense against the country would have been proper and called for. He obstructed and hid evidence, he used hush money, he suborned perjury, he promised clemency, he interfered with investigations, he abused power, he mislead the public, he belonged in an impeachment, he should have been removed.

The country was still mad decades later, justice should have been served.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, J28 said:

If the case were to go to trial, the NY prosecutors would have to put Cohen on the stand to testify that Trump directed him to make the payments and how to do it.  Cohen is a known liar and Trump’s attorneys will use that fact to  tear him a new one.  No way they will get a conviction.

If it were based entirely on Cohen’s word, maybe. 

I guess you’d better hope Cohen has no corroborating evidence. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Bus Driver said:

If it were based entirely on Cohen’s word, maybe. 

I guess you’d better hope Cohen has no corroborating evidence. 

Cohen has tape discussing the payment with Individual-1. This was in the sentencing documents. This is just the reich wing morons bullshitting, it's all they can do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

Cohen has tape discussing the payment with Individual-1. This was in the sentencing documents. This is just the reich wing morons bullshitting, it's all they can do.

I know.

Was just hoping @J28 would hold forth he didn’t. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Shootist Jeff said:

You misunderstand.  I've never said the GOP's issues started in 2016.  The "fiscal conservative" GOP have been spending like drunken sailors on shore leave for quite a while now.

No argument there.  There was this facrtion within the R party - the Tea Party - you may remember them.  The remnants of the TP are now the Freedom Caucus.  They are trying to hold the line on spending but without much success.  Can you point to any other group of elected officials in Washington that is for fiscal responsibility?

Trump has paid at least lip service to controlling the deficit, but he caved to the Ds on domestic spending in the budget negotiations in order to get the money he wanted for the Pentagon.  Should he not have done that?

My point is, as bad as Trump and Rs are, they are the lesser of the two evils we have in DC at this time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, J28 said:

the Freedom Caucus.  They are trying to hold the line on spending but without much success.  Can you point to any other group of elected officials in Washington that is for fiscal responsibility?

Are you really that clueless or are you just a bullshit artist?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Bus Driver said:

I know.

Was just hoping @J28 would hold forth he didn’t. 

He answered your question though. Like the White House the faithful are just going to go on bullshitting like nothing has happened at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:
12 minutes ago, J28 said:

Trump has paid at least lip service to controlling the deficit

:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

Even for J28 that is colossally stupid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, SloopJonB said:

Even for J28 that is colossally stupid.

Took the words right out of my mouth. Breathtakingly asinine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Bus Driver said:

Has the President responded truthfully to questions regarding the payments?

If Mr. Mueller asked, and the President was not.....whoopsies. 

I don't know...Has he?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Dog said:

I don't know...Has he?

Based on his past history, extremely unlikely. Truth is not part of Donnie's life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bus Driver said:

President Trump.

Tax cuts we can’t afford. 

GOP that is ignoring the dumpster fire. 

It's true that the GOP is ignoring the dumpster fire....Just like the Democrats.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Ishmael said:

Based on his past history, extremely unlikely. Truth is not part of Donnie's life.

Yes...but in this case he had a team of lawyers crafting his responses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Dog said:

It's true that the GOP is ignoring the dumpster fire....Just like the Democrats.

What? You're deluded.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Dog said:

Yes...but in this case he had a team of lawyers crafting his responses.

He said he wrote them himself. Are you saying he lied?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Ishmael said:

He said he wrote them himself. Are you saying he lied?

Yeah....If what he said was he had no help from his lawyers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites