Trump/Russia Collusion Insanity

23-11-2019 2:12pm

wildeside wrote: »

This investigation is another giant waste of time

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5tvE8Zb5fSk

It will come to nothing. Like Russia-gate. It's sad.

Not the way 'totally unbiased' RTE have been reporting on it. According to them and BBC its a question of when Trump will be found guilty :rolleyes:

25-11-2019 2:10pm

wildeside wrote: »

Can someone please tell me who in the Trump administration was actually convicted of collusion with the Russian government in trying to get Trump elected?

And I mean convicted of this specific crime, as in the whole point of the investigation?

Honestly, I may have missed it.

Mueller Report wrote:

“Collusion is not a specific offense or theory of liability found in the United States Code, nor is it a term of art in federal criminal law,” “For those reasons, the Office’s focus in analyzing questions of joint criminal liability was on conspiracy as defined in federal law.”

"Collusion" itself is not a crime, and therefore impossible to convict someone of it. Conspiracy and a few other related crimes that come about as a result of collusion are actually crimes though. List of those convicted as a result of the investigation, and why:

Those convicted, as of November 2015:

Roger Stone: Convicted of obstruction, giving false statements to a House committee and witness tampering. He also lied to Congress about his efforts to learn more about when WikiLeaks would publish damaging emails about 2016 Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.
Former Trump 2016 campaign chairman Paul Manafort: Sentenced to 7.5 years in prison this March for bank and tax fraud and crimes related to his work as a political consultant in Ukraine.

Trump's former personal attorney Michael Cohen: Received a three-year prison sentence in Dec. 2018 for tax evasion, bank fraud, lying to Congress and campaign finance violations.

Former Trump campaign adviser George Papadopoulos: Convicted of lying to investigators about about Russian contacts. He served 12 days in prison and in October, filed to run for former Rep. Katie Hill's California seat.

Pleaded guilty:
Ex-Trump campaign deputy chairman Rick Gates: Pleaded guilty in Feb. 2018 to conspiracy and lying to the FBI. His sentencing was delayed several times as he cooperated with ongoing investigations such as Stone's. His sentencing date is scheduled for Dec. 17, NBC News reports.

Former national security adviser Michael Flynn: The retired three-star general pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI in Dec. 2017, and he is still awaiting sentencing.

Sentences of note:
Richard Pinedo: The Californian was sentenced to six months in prison in Oct. 2018 for selling bank account numbers to Russians who engaged in election interference.

Dutch attorney Alex van der Zwaan: Pleaded guilty to lying to federal investigators about his work for law firm Skadden, Arps, Meagher, & Flom LLP and Affiliates in 2012. He was sentenced to 30 days in prison and a $20,000 fine.

That's ignoring the multiple investigations which are still ongoing, as well as the glaring fact that Mueller and co didn't even "investigate whether the president committed a crime" because of the Department of Justice memo which states:

The indictment or criminal prosecution of a sitting President would unconstitutionally undermine the capacity of the executive branch to perform its constitutionally assigned functions.

notobtuse · 25-11-2019 4:28pm

A question for those on the Left... If it was legitimate for President Obama to authorize spying on candidate Trump’s campaign in 2016 because of concerns about Russian interference, is it not equally legitimate for President Trump to ask for an investigation into Ukraine’s role in the same election?

ohnonotgmail · 25-11-2019 4:31pm

notobtuse wrote: »

A question for those on the Left... If it was legitimate for President Obama to authorize spying on candidate Trump’s campaign in 2016 because of concerns about Russian interference, is it not equally legitimate for President Trump to ask for an investigation into Ukraine’s role in the same election?

Trump was asking for an investigation in Biden and his son for corruption that took place in Ukraine (not that there is any actual evidence of same) and he wanted the ukranians to call a press conference announcing such an investigation. he had no interest in the outcome of that investigation. he simply wanted to smear Biden for his own personal befnefit. the same way Hilary was smeared when the new york field office of the FBI opened an investigation into her just before the election.

notobtuse · 25-11-2019 4:39pm

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

Trump was asking for an investigation in Biden and his son for corruption that took place in Ukraine (not that there is any actual evidence of same) and he wanted the ukranians to call a press conference announcing such an investigation. he had no interest in the outcome of that investigation. he simply wanted to smear Biden for his own personal befnefit. the same way Hilary was smeared when the new york field office of the FBI opened an investigation into her just before the election.

Wrong again. In the phone call Trump was most interested in Ukraine's unsavory involvement in the last election. It's pretty apparent if you bother to read the transcript that the Hunter Biden thing was an afterthought.

But don't you agree an investigation into Ukraine's involvement in the last election warrants investigation as they worked in Hillary's favor against Trump.

Overheal · 25-11-2019 4:43pm

notobtuse wrote: »

A question for those on the Left... If it was legitimate for President Obama to authorize spying on candidate Trump’s campaign in 2016 because of concerns about Russian interference, is it not equally legitimate for President Trump to ask for an investigation into Ukraine’s role in the same election?

What role did Obama play, specifically? Horowitz report by all indications will verify that the FISA investigation was justified. Specifically, they were spying on Paul Manafort weren’t they, who is now in jail for his crimes. That he was a manager in Trumps campaign is incidental, Obama didn’t wake up one morning and order the cabinet to initiate a spy campaign on Donald Trump.

25-11-2019 4:48pm

Overheal wrote: »

That he was a manager in Trumps campaign is incidental, Obama didn’t wake up one morning and order the cabinet to initiate a spy campaign on Donald Trump with neither the threat of withdrawal of aid nor the express intent of damaging Trump's election prospects hanging in the balance.

ohnonotgmail · 25-11-2019 4:48pm

notobtuse wrote: »

Wrong again. In the phone call Trump was most interested in Ukraine's unsavory involvement in the last election. It's pretty apparent if you bother to read the transcript that the Hunter Biden thing was an afterthought.

bollocks is all i can say to that. Even the people working for trump dont believe that.

notobtuse · 25-11-2019 4:54pm

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

bollocks is all i can say to that. Even the people working for trump dont believe that.

You were there?

ohnonotgmail · 25-11-2019 4:54pm

notobtuse wrote: »

You were there?

we have had public hearings or did you close your ears and go lalala like the rest of the republicans?

Overheal · 25-11-2019 4:59pm

notobtuse wrote: »

You were there?

The ol’ “the jury can’t convict you unless they personally were in the room witnessing the murder go down” defense

notobtuse · 25-11-2019 5:00pm

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

we have had public hearings or did you close your ears and go lalala like the rest of the republicans?

I did watch quite a bit of it. Those who support what you claim all admitted that what they felt happened was all based on hearsay, assumptions and presumptions. Seems, bottom line, they were all pissed that the President gets to dictate foreign policy and not them. Why they were even classified as ‘witnesses’ boggles the mind.

ohnonotgmail · 25-11-2019 5:02pm

notobtuse wrote: »

I did watch quite a bit of it. Those who support what you claim all admitted that what they felt happened was all based on hearsay, assumptions and presumptions. Seems, bottom line, they were all pissed that the President gets to dictate foreign policy and not them. Why they were even classified as ‘witnesses’ boggles the mind.

some of the witnesses were trump associates who knew him well.

Overheal · 25-11-2019 5:03pm

notobtuse wrote: »

I did watch quite a bit of it. Those who support what you claim all admitted that what they felt happened was all based on hearsay, assumptions and presumptions. Seems, bottom line, they were all pissed that the President gets to dictate foreign policy and not them. Why they were even classified as ‘witnesses’ boggles the mind.

Love how you can dismiss their sworn testimony as “feelings, hearsay, assumptions, presumptions” then you go straight into what “seems” to you. Which by the way is wrong.

The President sets interagency policy. The agencies execute the policies set out by the executive. The problem is that the interagency policy which was set forth by the president was being countered by his personal “irregular channel” policy that he sought to actively shroud from the interagency.

notobtuse · 25-11-2019 5:07pm

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

some of the witnesses were trump associates who knew him well.

Are you saying Trump told them there was a quid pro quo? These sources of yours I've gotta see. I might be wrong but I believe they all said what they believed happened was based on hearsay, assumptions or presumptions. But I'm sure if you have hard evidence to the contrary you will be forthcoming with it lickety split.

ohnonotgmail · 25-11-2019 5:10pm

notobtuse wrote: »

Are you saying Trump told them there was a quid pro quo? These sources of yours I've gotta see. I might be wrong but I believe they all said what they believed happened was based on hearsay, assumptions or presumptions. But I'm sure if you have hard evidence to the contrary you will be forthcoming with it lickety split.

Listen, it is clear you spent the last week with your fingers in your ears. I'm not digging through hours of testimony when you will just ignore it anyway. enjoy life as part of Putins puppet state.

Overheal · 25-11-2019 5:13pm

notobtuse wrote: »

Are you saying Trump told them there was a quid pro quo? These sources of yours I've gotta see. I might be wrong but I believe they all said what they believed happened was based on hearsay, assumptions or presumptions. But I'm sure if you have hard evidence to the contrary you will be forthcoming with it lickety split.

Yes.

He ordered a freeze on aid with the sole intent of getting Ze to announce investigations.

But sure whatever you’re in the MAGA hat and the only thing good enough for you would be a press conference where Trump tells the camera “I committed high crimes and misdemeanors.”

Hell even then you’d ask if he was sure about that. Just admit there is no bar or threshold for you: there are no circumstances where you’d support impeaching Trump.

suicide_circus · 25-11-2019 7:11pm

i doubt there is a president in history who has been more despised. No president people have wanted to impeach so badly since they day he was elected.

why is he still standing? given that he is also a moron?

Overheal · 25-11-2019 7:13pm

suicide_circus wrote: »

i doubt there is a president in history who has been more despised. No president people have wanted to impeach so badly since they day he was elected.

why is he still standing? given that he is also a moron?

Read some responses in this thread and it becomes clear.

notobtuse · 25-11-2019 7:16pm

suicide_circus wrote: »

i doubt there is a president in history who has been more despised. No president people have wanted to impeach so badly since they day he was elected.

why is he still standing? given that he is also a moron?

Trump will go down in history as one of the greatest US presidents, ever. Obama, as one of the worst... That is if historians are honest. Trump remains in power, and will win the 2020 election, because of the economy, jobs, lower taxes, stock market, lesser regulations, and he's working hard to accomplish his campaign promises. If any democrat president accomplished in 8 years half of what Trump has done 3 years we'd have added another face to Mount Rushmore.

Overheal · 25-11-2019 7:28pm

notobtuse wrote: »

Trump will go down in history as one of the greatest US presidents, ever. Obama, as one of the worst... That is if historians are honest. Trump remains in power, and will win the 2020 election, because of the economy, jobs, lower taxes, stock market, lesser regulations, and he's working hard to accomplish his campaign promises. If any democrat president accomplished in 8 years half of what Trump has done 3 years we'd have added another face to Mount Rushmore.

You see, suicide_circus? Every line a talking point of an occult.

wildeside · 25-11-2019 8:34pm

Deleted User wrote: »

"Collusion" itself is not a crime, and therefore impossible to convict someone of it. Conspiracy and a few other related crimes that come about as a result of collusion are actually crimes though. List of those convicted as a result of the investigation, and why:

That's ignoring the multiple investigations which are still ongoing, as well as the glaring fact that Mueller and co didn't even "investigate whether the president committed a crime" because of the Department of Justice memo which states:

Interesting that collusion isn't a crime per-se. But I guess it's semantics really as if someone says "colluding with" or "conspiring with" a foreign government I think we would probably be thinking they're pretty much the same thing. But I get there's a difference in legal speak.

Anyway, in terms of conspiracy then, who in that list was charged with conspiring with the Russians to help Trump win the election?

The only person I see who comes close to such a crime is Richard Pinedo. So I googled his name and got this

https://www.vox.com/2018/10/10/17959244/mueller-richard-pinedo-trump-russia

I think you'll agree, this guy doesn't count at all.

So a lot of shady characters were convicted of shady things

But who was convicted of conspiring/colluding with the Russians?

relax carry on · 25-11-2019 9:25pm

Overheal wrote: »

You see, suicide_circus? Every line a talking point of an occult.

There's just no point. When you view the world in high definition tangerine tinted Trumpovision as Trump said "I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn’t lose any voters"

notobtuse · 25-11-2019 9:27pm

wildeside wrote: »

Interesting that collusion isn't a crime per-se. But I guess it's semantics really as if someone says "colluding with" or "conspiring with" a foreign government I think we would probably be thinking they're pretty much the same thing. But I get there's a difference in legal speak.

Anyway, in terms of conspiracy then, who in that list was charged with conspiring with the Russians to help Trump win the election?

The only person I see who comes close to such a crime is Richard Pinedo. So I googled his name and got this

https://www.vox.com/2018/10/10/17959244/mueller-richard-pinedo-trump-russia

I think you'll agree, this guy doesn't count at all.

So a lot of shady characters were convicted of shady things

But who was convicted of conspiring/colluding with the Russians?

The answer to your question is NO ONE!

It’s all too evident the Democrats will only impeach Trump if they have a death wish. It would make more sense politically if they just dropped the whole impeachment nonsense and keep their fingers crossed hoping they’ve hurt Trump enough that one of their terrible candidates squeaks out the election win for POTUS.

If the Democrats do impeach Trump in the House it then goes to the Senate which will be presided over by Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts. And the Senate, unlike the House witch-hunt run by Democrats, will follow more closely the rule of law and allow no hearsay testimony as direct evidence. Plus, Trump’s attorneys would be able to call witnesses like Joe and Hunter Biden (were payments to Hunter Biden aimed at buying Democrats’ silence over Ukrainian corruption). They could also call Hillary Clinton and question her on Ukraine’s roll in helping her and hurting trump and their huge millions of dollars in donations to the Clinton foundation, the whistleblower and his sources who might have broken the law. In addition, his links to Democrats could also undermine his assertions about Trump as indicate simple hatred and aiding in the Democrats soft coup as his real motivation.

Pelosi would be crazy to hurt her fellow Democrats by having an impeachment trial in the Senate, let alone having most of the top candidates running for POTUS have to leave the campaign trail and sit in on the Senate trial. But Pelosi seems to be exhibiting early signs of Alzheimer’s and her judgement might be suspect. Then again it seems The Squad seems to be calling many of the shots behind the scenes because they appeal to the most rabid of the party who are the most politically active.

suicide_circus · 25-11-2019 9:29pm

Overheal wrote: »

You see, suicide_circus? Every line a talking point of an occult.

yeah but forget about about the fanboys for a minute.

if he is

A. neck deep in conspiracy, collusion, corruption

AND

B. an idiot

how has he not been scuppered?

notobtuse · 25-11-2019 9:31pm

suicide_circus wrote: »

yeah but forget about about the fanboys for a minute.

if he is

A. neck deep in conspiracy, collusion, corruption

AND

B. an idiot

how has he not been scuppered?

Simple... A & B are untrue.

wampyrus77 · 25-11-2019 9:36pm

Donald Trump always tells everyone lies to con usa believing iraq is still a threat after Obama made peace with them in 2008 . including Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya, Yemen, Somalia and Pakistan. Because Donald Trump always hated Obama and would betray USA and destroyed Obama peace threaty. So Usa can go war these countries

suicide_circus · 25-11-2019 9:39pm

notobtuse wrote: »

Simple... A & B are untrue.

it seems to me that he can either be an idiot who is innocent of the many charges against him or a fairly sophisticated operator who is guilty but has managed to escape justice.

i dont think he can be both stupid and guilty.

Overheal · 25-11-2019 9:40pm

suicide_circus wrote: »

yeah but forget about about the fanboys for a minute.

if he is

A. neck deep in conspiracy, collusion, corruption

AND

B. an idiot

how has he not been scuppered?

Because Republican voters are enamored with him, and so the GOP’s political destiny is tied to him. The alternative is to self-report and hand their seats over to Democrats - whom they’ve vilified for untold decades. When you spend for example 8 years saying the President wasn’t an American and was the antichrist and was destroying the country from the inside, it really doesn’t matter who you vote in next, since you’ve already set the bar below the imaginary level; you’d vote for the most corrupt mogul in America as long as you thought he wasn’t a Muslim Antichrist, and anything he does is going to look less offensive than anything Obama did - doesn’t matter if he denigrates the military, runs up the debt, or asks a foreign country to investigate his rival, because to his supporters there’s no way any of that could be worse than Obama. And you’ve heard it here too.

wampyrus77 · 25-11-2019 10:05pm

Donald trump used his followers to hack in the election and with help from russians he change votes to his favour to win the election in 2016, and that is again rules of democracy and Hillary should have won the presidency for winning fariness and without cheating.

rossie1977 · 25-11-2019 10:07pm

notobtuse wrote: »

Trump will go down in history as one of the greatest US presidents, ever. Obama, as one of the worst... That is if historians are honest. Trump remains in power, and will win the 2020 election, because of the economy, jobs, lower taxes, stock market, lesser regulations, and he's working hard to accomplish his campaign promises. If any democrat president accomplished in 8 years half of what Trump has done 3 years we'd have added another face to Mount Rushmore.

When Obama took office the US was losing 800,000 jobs a month, Dow was spiralling towards 6,000 (having topped 14,000+ only a year or so earlier) and the most wanted man in US was still on the loose nearly a decade after he masterminded 9/11.

During Obama's two terms we had 75 months of consecutive job growth, the Dow saw 165% increase (to put that into perspective if similar growth were to occur between 2017-2024 the Dow would have to top 52,000+) and Bin Laden was killed. Obama carried out his 8 years as president without a single member of his team even receiving a criminal indictment.

A tax cut will not be something that gains favour with historians. Since 1980 Reagan, Bush Jr and Trump have all introduced massive tax cut policies. Clinton, Bush Sr and Obama have all at some point extended their predecessors cuts. Over same period we have also seen a huge shift of wealth towards the top 0.1% of society. In fact not since the 1930s has the bottom 90% of US society combined owned such a small share of the overall wealth.

Cutting regulations won't be something historians look upon as a positive either. Lack of regulation was the primary reason for the last financial crisis. Corporations are unwilling to police themselves (that's clearly evident from current issues with giant social media providers) and cutting regulations especially environmental ones at a time when environmental issues across the world are to the forefront of everyone's minds is a really bad idea long term and will be seen as a negative for the person who implemented them.

As far as campaign promises go Trump has fulfilled 17 and come to agreement on 11 more. That's equates to 27% of campaign promises kept. On the flip side 18 of his promises he has broken and another 28 stalled beyond any chance of keeping. In real terms 45% of his campaign promises he won't be able to accomplish.

notobtuse · 25-11-2019 10:10pm

wampyrus77 wrote: »

Donald trump used his followers to hack in the election and with help from russians he change votes to his favour to win the election in 2016, and that is again rules of democracy and Hillary should have won the presidency for winning fariness and without cheating.

Lordy... Mueller should have forgotten his 16 mostly Trump hating high priced lawyers, not spent millions of taxpayer dollars, nor taken thousands of depositions, and put the country through 2 years of misery only to come up empty-handed... He should just have just called you!

notobtuse · 25-11-2019 10:14pm

rossie1977 wrote: »

When Obama took office the US was losing 800,000 jobs a month, Dow was spiralling towards 6,000 (having topped 14,000+ only a year or so earlier) and the most wanted man in US was still on the loose nearly a decade after he masterminded 9/11.

During Obama's two terms we had 75 months of consecutive job growth, the Dow saw 165% increase (to put that into perspective if similar growth were to occur between 2017-2024 the Dow would have to top 52,000+) and Bin Laden was killed. Obama carried out his 8 years as president without a single member of his team even receiving a criminal indictment.

A tax cut will not be something that gains favour with historians. Since 1980 Reagan, Bush Jr and Trump have all introduced massive tax cut policies. Clinton, Bush Sr and Obama have all at some point extended their predecessors cuts. Over same period we have also seen a huge shift of wealth towards the top 0.1% of society. In fact not since the 1930s has the bottom 90% of US society combined owned such a small share of the overall wealth.

Cutting regulations won't be something historians look upon as a positive either. Lack of regulation was the primary reason for the last financial crisis. Corporations are unwilling to police themselves (that's clearly evident from current issues with giant social media providers) and cutting regulations especially environmental ones at a time when environmental issues across the world are to the forefront of everyone's minds is a really bad idea long term and will be seen as a negative for the person who implemented them.

As far as campaign promises go Trump has fulfilled 17 and come to agreement on 11 more. That's equates to 27% of campaign promises kept. On the flip side 18 of his promises he has broken and another 28 stalled beyond any chance of keeping. In real terms 45% of his campaign promises he won't be able to accomplish.

Sorry but facts can be pesky things. Trump is responsible for the recovery of the US economy... not Obama.

https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/obama-trump-booming-economy/

Timberrrrrrrr · 25-11-2019 10:23pm

notobtuse wrote: »

Sorry but facts can be pesky things. Trump is responsible for the recovery of the US economy... not Obama.

https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/obama-trump-booming-economy/

No No No No No, you couldn't be more wrong if you tried.

relax carry on · 25-11-2019 10:38pm

notobtuse wrote: »

Sorry but facts can be pesky things. Trump is responsible for the recovery of the US economy... not Obama.

https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/obama-trump-booming-economy/

An editorial from a very right leaning website??

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/investors-business-daily/

wildeside · 25-11-2019 10:42pm

rossie1977 wrote: »

Obama carried out his 8 years as president without a single member of his team even receiving a criminal indictment.

I'm not one to defend Trump so don't interpret my attacking Obama as defending the orange idiot.

So none of Obama's team received a criminal indictment. Ok, but I think there's a fair chance that if someone was to dig even a just a teeny-weeny bit someone on Obama's Citigroup mandated administration

https://newrepublic.com/article/137798/important-wikileaks-revelation-isnt-hillary-clinton

might turn out to be less than an honest, wholesome example to the rest of us. The fact that Citigroup appointed his administration should be enough to make anyone deeply suspicious of the man and at least question his character and motives.

And herein lies the problem. People defend Republicans and others defend the Democrats. When in fact they're the same bought and paid for puppet party.

It amazes me how people still don't see this and continue with their petty "my party's better than yours!" pointless infighting that only serves both parties and their corporate pay masters in maintaining the status quo.

And maybe to drive home the point how these parties are now one and the same Obama straight out admits the Democrats have shifted right and are more or less Republicans in their policy stance

Skip to 3:20 in this video

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qeyESTwub5Q

Unless people would argue Republicans have shifted left? Doubt anyone would make that claim.

I'm not having a go at you but I'm just pointing out the futility of taking either side of the two-headed monster that is the Red/Blue two-party false dichotomy.

People need to wake up and stop defending either of them....unless you're supporting Bernie or Tulsi that is, but watch them get destroyed by the establishment.

Billy Mays · 25-11-2019 10:46pm

I'd just like to congratulate President Trump on being singlehandedly responsible for the recovery of the American economy. What makes it even more impressive is the recovery began 6 years before he even took office

A truly amazing human being

rossie1977 · 25-11-2019 11:07pm

wildeside wrote: »

And herein lies the problem. People defend Republicans and others defend the Democrats. When in fact they're the same bought and paid for puppet party.

Doesn't dispute the point I made and tons of people including me have bemoaned the fact the Democrats have corporate masters.

The Democrats however have shown they are far more willing to vote as they see appropriate than their Republicans colleagues https://www.reddit.com/r/technology/comments/8xt55v/comment/e25uz0g

And maybe to drive home the point how these parties are now one and the same Obama straight out admits the Democrats have shifted right and are more or less Republicans in their policy stance

Democrats shifted to the right in the early 90s with the election of Bill Clinton. Fiscally Clinton is probably most conservative president the US has had in an century. However this also caused the war between Republicans and Democrats we now find ourselves still in. Prior to 92 corporation between Dems and Republicans was normal enough but Clinton's election changed everything.

Unless people would argue Republicans have shifted left? Doubt anyone would make that claim.

Nobody makes this claim. In fact Republicans have gone further right.

Dems since about 2010 have started to shift move towards centre and with progressive outside candidates like Sanders and AOC could see a movement towards more left politics in years to come. Of course that would require change of leadership and movement away from the likes of Pelosi and Schumer.

People need to wake up and stop defending either of them....unless you're supporting Bernie or Tulsi that is, but watch them get destroyed by the establishment.

Gabbard isn't left. She would be more to the right than Hillary, Biden or Obama.

She is also supposedly anti war yet critical of Obama for not bombing Al-Qaeda

https://mobile.twitter.com/tulsigabbard/status/649615636088365058?lang=en

ohnonotgmail · 25-11-2019 11:35pm

Billy Mays wrote: »

I'd just like to congratulate President Trump on being singlehandedly responsible for the recovery of the American economy. What makes it even more impressive is the recovery began 6 years before he even took office

A truly amazing human being

the bigliest recovery

notobtuse · 26-11-2019 3:16pm

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

the bigliest recovery

Trump's economic recovery was most definitely HUUUUUUGE!

wildeside · 26-11-2019 8:52pm

rossie1977 wrote: »

Doesn't dispute the point I made and tons of people including me have bemoaned the fact the Democrats have corporate masters.

The Democrats however have shown they are far more willing to vote as they see appropriate than their Republicans colleagues https://www.reddit.com/r/technology/comments/8xt55v/comment/e25uz0g

I can't believe anyone would defend Obama knowing what we know about him now. He promised hope and change and delivered neither.

He's is/was an establishment guy. It's easy for this establishment guy to now talk about not being 'too progressive' when it costs 35,000!!! dollars to take a picture with him (you read that right)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H6JM7dKRWX8

I mean really, how can he or his record be defended? I just don't have any time for the defense of this sellout and I can't believe anyone would defend him knowing what we know now.

Gabbard isn't left. She would be more to the right than Hillary, Biden or Obama.

She is also supposedly anti war yet critical of Obama for not bombing Al-Qaeda

https://mobile.twitter.com/tulsigabbard/status/649615636088365058?lang=en

That's interesting about Gabbard, I didn't know about that tweet.

But every time I've heard her speak she's made a point about ending regime change wars. She seems consistent on that.

It would be interesting to see her challenged on that tweet to clarify her position.

As for being more right than the war-monger Hillary, I really haven't seen any evidence for that but am open to new evidence.

wildeside · 05-12-2019 10:45pm

Just for the record, after all the contributions to this thread nobody could name a single person in the Trump campaign that was convicted of colluding/conspiring with the Russians to help Donald Trump win the last election. That's because there wasn't anybody convicted of that charge.

In some people's estimation the investigation was probably still worth it because it picked up some collateral damage along the way in the form on convictions for Trump associates not related to collusion/conspiracy.

Sadly the end result will only serve to help Trump get elected in 2020. But it was great for corporate MSM media ratings/profits so who cares, right? Now Trump just has to yell "fake news" at everyone and he'll actually kind of have a point.

I'm going to nail my flag to the post and say Trump will win in 2020 (unfortunately). The only hope for real change at this stage is Bernie.

Donald Trump · 06-12-2019 3:09am

Billy Mays wrote: »

I'd just like to congratulate President Trump on being singlehandedly responsible for the recovery of the American economy. What makes it even more impressive is the recovery began 6 years before he even took office

A truly amazing human being

Thanks Billy Mays. Almost as good as your own Lazarus recovery. I thought you were brown bread!

notobtuse · 06-12-2019 3:25pm

I think the Russia-Russia-Russia obsession has been cause for the frying of far too many brain cells. I would be willing to donate some if it would bring someone back to reality.

Trump/Russia Collusion Insanity

Comments