Trump Ends 2017 Residing Rent Free in His Enemie's Head

[MAGAnificent]

Try reading my comments, you know the ones you have been responding to, and you’ll see. Laziness has become the mantra of the right.

That's a non answer. Try again.

 

[MAGAnificent]

yes - many of them were tea party folk who went to rallies in public places like parks and town squares waving signs that demanded the government get out of their lives and then drove home on public roads paid for by public taxes and on the way stopped at the bank to withdraw funds from their monthly Social Security check.

Obamacare is going away. Deal with it.

 

[eohrnberger]

But the investigation can not stop right now...they clearly have serious, damning information of major crimes on someone.

I do believe that this is little more than speculation. We won't know until the charges are filed or the investigation is declared closed.

I guess you just don’t want to know about criminal actions unless the prosecutors and investigators are hard line Republicans.

Oh, wait. Mueller *is* a Republican, and was roundly praised by Conservatives earlier this year because of his reputation.

Mueller staffing his team with Clintonites who can't keep their personal political views separate from performing their sworn government duties in an unbiased manner sure damaged both his reputation and his investigation.

I guess when he finds actual evidence of criminal activity though, you guys cut and run.

Classy.

Fail. I'm not as partisan as you, even if you try to paint me that way, it's just not the case.

 

[Praxas]

That's a non answer. Try again.

Try reading, the answer was there. You fail again.

 

[Praxas]

I do believe that this is little more than speculation. We won't know until the charges are filed or the investigation is declared closed.



Mueller staffing his team with Clintonites who can't keep their personal political views separate from performing their sworn government duties in an unbiased manner sure damaged both his reputation and his investigation.



Fail. I'm not as partisan as you, even if you try to paint me that way, it's just not the case.

You’re one of the biggest partisans here and mueller staffing was bipartisan which would is something you know nothing about. Try having another failburger.

 

[Threegoofs]

I do believe that this is little more than speculation. We won't know until the charges are filed or the investigation is declared closed.



Mueller staffing his team with Clintonites who can't keep their personal political views separate from performing their sworn government duties in an unbiased manner sure damaged both his reputation and his investigation.



Fail. I'm not as partisan as you, even if you try to paint me that way, it's just not the case.

Speculation?

They have two guys pleading guilty to lesser felonies!


Nope. You’re not partisan at all! LOL

 

[eohrnberger]

You’re one of the biggest partisans here and mueller staffing was bipartisan which would is something you know nothing about. Try having another failburger.

Riiiightt. That's why there's so many with conflict of interests and a distinct inability to perform their duties in an unbiased manner.

• Six of the 15 lawyers have not made campaign contributions to any political campaigns at the federal level.

• Among the lawyers who did make contributions, a total of $62,043 went to Democrats and $2,750 to Republicans, according to the special counsel’s office.

• In terms of Clinton specifically, election filings indicate that three lawyers gave her 2016 presidential campaign a total of $700; and three gave a total of $18,100 to either her 2016 campaign or her 2008 run for the presidential nomination.

How many 'Democrat campaign donors' on special counsel team probing Trump campaign-Russia ties? | PolitiFact Wisconsin

16 - 6 = 9. 9 team members have contributed to DNC and / or Hillary and / or Obama.

Yet another member of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia investigative team is facing questions over potential bias after it emerged that she used to represent ex-Obama aide Ben Rhodes and the Clinton Foundation.


Jeannie Rhee is a former partner at WilmerHale—the high-profile law firm where Mueller worked prior to taking on the special counsel role. She is one of at least two attorneys who followed Mueller from WilmerHale.
Top Mueller investigator's Democratic ties raise new bias questions | Fox News

So in tight and deep with Democrats and Hillary. Yeah, this is a conflict of interest to a level that she should have recused herself to maintain the integrity of the investigation.

Yet another with clear conflict of interest.

An attorney for special counsel Robert Mueller attended Hillary Clinton’s election night party in New York City, The Wall Street Journal reported Friday.
Andrew Weissmann’s attendance at the party is one of many signs pointing to a troubling bias from the attorney. Weissmann has been described by The New York Times as Mueller’s “lieutenant” and “pit bull.”
Mueller 'Pit Bull' Went To Hillary | The Daily Caller

The next question is how many more have these conflicts of interest discovered?

I dunno. Doesn't look good. Doesn't look as good and unbiased and as impartial and as conflict of interest free as one could hope for.

Meanwhile, what is the FBI doing thwarting appropriate congressional oversight?

Exclusive - House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes is blasting the Department of Justice and the FBI for its “failure to fully produce” documents related to an anti-Trump dossier, saying “at this point it seems the DOJ and FBI need to be investigating themselves.”
In a Thursday letter to Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein obtained by Fox News, Nunes expressed frustration that information and witnesses subpoenaed by the committee in August related to the so-called Steele dossier had not yet been turned over. The salacious dossier includes unverified allegations about President Trump's connections with Russia that he has denied.
“Unfortunately, DOJ/FBI's intransigence with respect to the August 24 subpoenas is part of a broader pattern of behavior that can no longer be tolerated,” the California Republican wrote to Rosenstein.

“As a result of the numerous delays and discrepancies that have hampered the process of subpoena compliance, the committee no longer credits the representations made by DOJ and/or the FBI regarding these matters,” Nunes said.

He called the DOJ’s initial response to the subpoenas “disingenuous at best.”

Nunes said the DOJ informed the House Intelligence Committee several weeks ago that the “basic investigatory documents demanded by the subpoenas…did not exist.”

“As it turns out, not only did documents exist that were directly responsive to the committee’s subpoenas, but they involved senior DOJ and FBI officials who were swiftly reassigned when their roles in matters under the committee’s investigation were brought to light,” Nunes wrote.
https://tinyurl.com/y9bvhw6t

I have no illusions. What going to happen is gong to happen regardless of how I feel about it.

Just because I'm not left, just because I have the temerity to disagree with the left, doesn't mean that I'm partisan.

 

[eohrnberger]

Speculation?

But the investigation can not stop right now...they clearly have serious, damning information of major crimes on someone.

Yes, speculation. Speculation that "they clearly have serious, damning information of major crimes on someone"
Which someone? The people charged? Or the people yet to be charged? Yet to be charged is speculation, which is how I read it. Of the ones charged, I believe Manafort is the only major, and it related back to his activities before his association with the campaign, so unlikely to lead to the campaign.

They have two guys pleading guilty to lesser felonies!


Nope. You’re not partisan at all! LOL

Partisan? Not me. Manafort broke the law, and he'll be judged by his peers and either convicted or not by a jury, and if so, sentenced, all in accordance with applicable law, as is appropriate.

 

[Threegoofs]

Yes, speculation. Speculation that "they clearly have serious, damning information of major crimes on someone"
Which someone? The people charged? Or the people yet to be charged? Yet to be charged is speculation, which is how I read it. Of the ones charged, I believe Manafort is the only major, and it related back to his activities before his association with the campaign, so unlikely to lead to the campaign.



Partisan? Not me. Manafort broke the law, and he'll be judged by his peers and either convicted or not by a jury, and if so, sentenced, all in accordance with applicable law, as is appropriate.

So you think the former National Security Advisor pleading guilty to a felony isn’t ‘major’? And specifically lying about Russian contacts isn’t significant?

Nope. Non-partisan. Totally! LOL.

 

[ludin]

This is a bizarre position to take. It’s almost like rationality has been bound and gagged so you can think freely.

Two felonies, three cooperating witnesses, and that’s just what we know of...

Yet nothing to do with trump interesting.

 

[eohrnberger]

So you think the former National Security Advisor pleading guilty to a felony isn’t ‘major’? And specifically lying about Russian contacts isn’t significant?

Nope. Non-partisan. Totally! LOL.

Meh. Flynn broke the law, pleaded guilty, is going to have to comply with his sentence.

Another instance, far worse if you ask me, a DNI director falsely testified before congress, and it this no big deal.

And I am the partisan? Hypocrisy much?

I've already resigned myself to whatever's gonna happen it's gonna happen, regardless of how I feel or what I think about it.
Is this what partisans typically do? I think not.

 

[ludin]

Yes, speculation. Speculation that "they clearly have serious, damning information of major crimes on someone"
Which someone? The people charged? Or the people yet to be charged? Yet to be charged is speculation, which is how I read it. Of the ones charged, I believe Manafort is the only major, and it related back to his activities before his association with the campaign, so unlikely to lead to the campaign.



Partisan? Not me. Manafort broke the law, and he'll be judged by his peers and either convicted or not by a jury, and if so, sentenced, all in accordance with applicable law, as is appropriate.

Yournposting facts again.

 

[eohrnberger]

Yournposting facts again.

I know. Gets me in trouble every time with this lot.

 

[Threegoofs]

Meh. Flynn broke the law, pleaded guilty, is going to have to comply with his sentence.

Another instance, far worse if you ask me, a DNI director falsely testified before congress, and it this no big deal.

And I am the partisan? Hypocrisy much?

I've already resigned myself to whatever's gonna happen it's gonna happen, regardless of how I feel or what I think about it.
Is this what partisans typically do? I think not.

You really don’t have a choice. Not sure how being partisan would change that.

But you know (actually, you might not, given how the RW news machine doesn’t discuss it), that Flynn is also seemingly involved with working for Turkey at the same time as the Trump campaign and transition, and is working with the Mueller team, bargaining a lesser charge in exchange for testimony.

It’s pretty clear his testimony won’t be to help charge some minor figures- that’s not how it works.

Flynn sold someone out. We shall see who sometime soon.

 

[eohrnberger]

You really don’t have a choice. Not sure how being partisan would change that.

Seems to me that a partisan would be bitching about how this or that isn't legit, unfair, or whatever. Nothing like that from me, so not a partisan, by that definition.

Not even Trumpster. I don't buy for a minute that Trump is playing 3D chess. I have stated before that I only give Turmp a 5 or 6 out of 10, and that if he were a bit more disciplined WRT messaging he could further the agenda that elected him much further. So if you want to call me something you can call me an agenda supporter, but then, when it comes to politics, who isn't? Everyone has their favored agenda they'd like to see furthered.

But you know (actually, you might not, given how the RW news machine doesn’t discuss it), that Flynn is also seemingly involved with working for Turkey at the same time as the Trump campaign and transition, and is working with the Mueller team, bargaining a lesser charge in exchange for testimony.

It’s pretty clear his testimony won’t be to help charge some minor figures- that’s not how it works.

Flynn sold someone out. We shall see who sometime soon.

Sold someone out about what?

That a presidential transition team would want to contact what appears to be the appropriate Russian ambassador about what a Trump administration may or may not do WRT US / Russian relations? Seems that presidential transition teams and presidential campaigns, for that matter, have been doing this since time immemorial.

Sorry, but I'm not seeing what all the hub bub is all about, at least not yet.

 

[Threegoofs]

Seems to me that a partisan would be bitching about how this or that isn't legit, unfair, or whatever. Nothing like that from me, so not a partisan, by that definition.

Not even Trumpster. I don't buy for a minute that Trump is playing 3D chess. I have stated before that I only give Turmp a 5 or 6 out of 10, and that if he were a bit more disciplined WRT messaging he could further the agenda that elected him much further. So if you want to call me something you can call me an agenda supporter, but then, when it comes to politics, who isn't? Everyone has their favored agenda they'd like to see furthered.



Sold someone out about what?

That a presidential transition team would want to contact what appears to be the appropriate Russian ambassador about what a Trump administration may or may not do WRT US / Russian relations? Seems that presidential transition teams and presidential campaigns, for that matter, have been doing this since time immemorial.

Sorry, but I'm not seeing what all the hub bub is all about, at least not yet.

LOL.

Complains how the investigation is unfair and politically motivated.

States he’s not a partisan.

Clarifies that a partisan would be someone who calls the investigation unfair and politically motivated.

Wow.

 

[eohrnberger]

LOL.

Complains how the investigation is unfair and politically motivated.

States he’s not a partisan.

Clarifies that a partisan would be someone who calls the investigation unfair and politically motivated.

Wow.

I think you are confusing "Complains how the investigation is unfair and politically motivated." with calling out obvious conflicts of interest and past and present biased behavior.

They are most certainly not the same thing. Consult a dictionary as needed.

 

[Threegoofs]

I think you are confusing "Complains how the investigation is unfair and politically motivated." with calling out obvious conflicts of interest and past and present biased behavior.

They are most certainly not the same thing. Consult a dictionary as needed.

Oh yeah.

Big difference.

Because biased investigations are fair. And Your enumeration of political donations of investigators is clearly not ‘politically motivated’!

If you could only hear yourself!

 

[eohrnberger]

Oh yeah.

Big difference.

Because biased investigations are fair.

Exactly my point, they are not fair.

And Your enumeration of political donations of investigators is clearly not ‘politically motivated’!

Potential conflict of interest, especially considering the biased behavior of others on the team, causing, quite rightly, greater scrutiny of the entire team.

If you could only hear yourself!

One should at least be able to expect consistency from an organization as professional as the FBI, right? You know. For fairness sake?

Consider the following point, made well by Congressman Gowdy.

"If you have made the decision not to charge someone in May of 2016 before you have interviewed two dozen witnesses, before you have interviewed the target of the investigation, then you're going to have to explain how you reached that decision not to charge," he said, adding that he believes the FBI and DOJ are "big enough to withstand those questions."
Gowdy: 'Almost Everything' Was Done Differently in Hillary Clinton Email Probe

But that's not what happened is it?

So you are telling me that you are just fine with liberals when they get to walk away from their crimes, but everyone else does not? Seriously? Seriously partisan is what I call it.

No, there's something really wrong going on at the FBI, and since the FBI is doing the investigation work for the Mueller's investigation, the same applies by extension.

I've made it pretty clear in previous posts, 'may the chips fall where they may', but may the chips fall fairly, is all I ask.

So all these accusations of partisanship where none exists, you can go stuff it. Your claims are vacuous and unsubstantiated.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

America continues to be lead by the least amongst it.

And the fact so many open their hearts to the man is troubling for the future of the country.

For if so many could support such a man, should we make it through his presidency in one piece, imagine who they could elect next.

---Exactly. He's not the problem, he's the symptom and the personification of the problem, he is the problem's Enabler-in-Chief, he is the problem's Magnum Opus.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

Greetings, ataraxia. :2wave:

I thought that the only part removed was the mandate - which didn't apply to them. Have I missed something important here that meant they could lose Obamacare?

The smaller the risk pool, the higher the premiums. That is WHY the insurance companies DEMANDED a mandate in the first place. They have to have a large risk pool in order for the premiums to be affordable. Eliminating the mandate is the cut to the jugular that starts the ACA hemorrhage.
Please tell me that you understand why eliminating the mandate was so important to Republicans.
It had nothing to do with "freedom" or it's redneck cousin, "freedumb" and everything to do with sabotaging the entire program.

 

[Threegoofs]

Exactly my point, they are not fair.



Potential conflict of interest, especially considering the biased behavior of others on the team, causing, quite rightly, greater scrutiny of the entire team.



One should at least be able to expect consistency from an organization as professional as the FBI, right? You know. For fairness sake?

Consider the following point, made well by Congressman Gowdy.



But that's not what happened is it?

So you are telling me that you are just fine with liberals when they get to walk away from their crimes, but everyone else does not? Seriously? Seriously partisan is what I call it.

No, there's something really wrong going on at the FBI, and since the FBI is doing the investigation work for the Mueller's investigation, the same applies by extension.

I've made it pretty clear in previous posts, 'may the chips fall where they may', but may the chips fall fairly, is all I ask.

So all these accusations of partisanship where none exists, you can go stuff it. Your claims are vacuous and unsubstantiated.

Hilarious.

So it’s not fair.

Guess you just outed yourself as a partisan, by your own definition!


I kinda figured it out early, tbh.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

They voted for a guy who campaigned on the promise that he would get rid of Obamacare his first day in office. And now they are afraid they might lose their Obamacare. You can't make this stuff up.

That damn government better keep their hands off my Medicare!

 

[eohrnberger]

Hilarious.

So it’s not fair.

Guess you just outed yourself as a partisan, by your own definition!


I kinda figured it out early, tbh.

Says an obvious partisan proponent of a two tired legal system. Well, I'll value that as well as your future posts with this in mind.

 

[Threegoofs]

Says an obvious partisan proponent of a two tired legal system. Well, I'll value that as well as your future posts with this in mind.

*I’m* a partisan?

But I never said the investigation wasn’t fair!